Air America, as was widely expected, declared for bankruptcy on Friday. (The move involved just finances. No word on when the network will declare its ideas bankrupt.) The bankruptcy filing opened up the books on Air America, but I still have some questions. Will Chuck D get Professor Griff to "regulate" if Air America doesn't pay up the $10,749.99 the network owes him? The court documents said nothing of the thousands of dollars that the rarely coherent Randi Rhodes most assuredly pays Air America in exchange for granting her use of its radio waves. Was this a lame attempt to hide income from creditors? Is it because Air America does not pay its taxes that it seeks to make up for it by forcing the rest of us to pay so much more? What about the hundreds of thousands of dollars allegedly diverted from a Bronx Boys and Girls Club to Air America? Will the kids get paid before Al Franken?

Talk radio sucks.

I can't believe its still around in this day and age.

Yes, liberal talk radio sucks. Conservative talk radio is pretty darn good and continues to be a popular and powerful revenue generated business.

I agree, talk radio sucks. The format seems to be 1) take moron caller, 2) berate moron caller, 3) repeat. Nothing ever gets dicussed with any depth. I miss David Brudnoy.

I agree with your quick assessment that, on its surface, talk radio sometimes does cater to the lowest common denominator. But I find that any time the masses can be reached and engaged, no matter what the level of seriousness or depth of the discussion, it is informative and entertaining and directs people to topics that they may not have considered without the exposure.

It should be like anything: take away from it what you can and disregard the static. But at least consider all points of views and enjoy the quick hit for what it is.

"I can't believe its still around in this day and age."

No technological innovation will replace the written and spoken word as media. Talk radio is merely the latter. Whether it is arriving via AM radio or broadband internet, it's not going anywhere.

That Air America failed, then, has nothing to do with trends in media, but everything to do with listeners not wanting to hear liberals whine all day.

Or anyone whine all day, for that matter. ASDF's right, if you can tune out the static there are
a lot of good discussions, and some very good hosts.

Despite the liberal bias, if I am driving for awhile and I don't want to listen to music, I would rather listen to NPR than talk radio.

I don't feel dumber after listening to it.

That being said, I don't think there is anything wrong with Talk radio in principle, it's just 99% of the hosts-- liberal or conservative-- are complete idiots.

NPR is excellent if the listener is sophisticated enough to filter the bias.

Actually, I still enjoy listening to Rush because, although he often makes very foolish comments, he routinely makes insightful observations about political trends and strategies. Today, for example, he had a long segment about how the Foley coverage, together with stories about Bush aides ridiculing religious conservatives, etc. is a deliberate effort by the MSM to depress conservative religious turnout.

Hannity is simply aweful. Ingram has her moments, but she's competing with my favorite sports talk radio show.

Um Ralph podcasts have completly replaced talk radio for my generation.

I don't know anyone who still even uses the radio in their car, its all ipod connected.

There are some great conservative podcasts out there and their format is much different from the LCD of Limbaugh et al. They are the future, not talk radio.

Wrong again. Rush podcasts his show.

Yeah and he has a lot more competetors now on iTunes than he did on the dial.

Your generation my stick to what they know, but conservatives in my generation branch out and try new things.

He doesn't stand a chance against the thousands of smaller, more directed podcasts.

"conservatives in my generation branch out and try new things."

Why does anyone keep responding to HeHe?

Um its true.

The influence of these blowhards is waning amongst the youtube generation.

HeHe is right. Radio, newspaper, television news, are all losing their power to influence opinion among the young.

This is the age of the internet voter.

In opposition to Hehe's anecdotal comments about "his generation," Rush has over 20 million listeners. The notion that his show is fading is absurd.

Hehe is confusing the message with the medium.

Good question, Bruce.

Anyone?

It's a bit like hitting home-runs at a little-league field. It can be enjoyable.

"In opposition to Hehe's anecdotal comments about "his generation," Rush has over 20 million listeners. The notion that his show is fading is absurd." -Ralph

I'm not sure what HeHe means by "his generation" but I am 19, and don't know anybody among my politically active friends who listens to a lot of talk radio, really.

I doubt Rush is going anywhere in the near future, but do you have demographics on those 20 million?

In any event, I think that even in an information age, talk radio certainly has at least the best chance to hang on. Simply because, unlike other mediums, such as print newspapers, big networks, etc, talk radio can be delivered to you while you're driving your car.

What other medium can say that?

Well, I can only respond with other anecdotes. For example, my brother is 22, has nearly 100 GB of itunes tracks on his hard drive, plays them in his car with an ipod and cradle that broadcasts the songs to the radio, and he listens to podcasts of Rush.

The mere fact that Rush offers podcasts, and that the people who listen to podcasts are more likely to be from generation y (or whatever letter we've gotten to), is a good indicator that a significant portion of Rush's audience is from that demographic (it would have to be to justify the service).

There are new statistics for NYC posted on Drudge that list Rush's peak-hour audience over the Summer at 342,000 listeners. If I remember, the 20 million plus figure is the number of listeners that listen to some of the show during the week. I'll see if I can find it.

I think you're right that talk-radio will survive regardless of changes to media because it is the medium that requires the least effort. You can listen while you do other things (driving, working, etc.).

I actualy don't think the Rush has to have a big youth demographic to justify a podcast service.

A podcast is the most inexpenisve distribution method around. You just just take the recording made for the radio and put it online.

Almost everyone does it now. The question is with so much choice out there: is anyone listening?

I can tell you that on the iTunes rankings, Drudge Instapundit, and Cato [sic] all do better than Rush.

And in my opnion, all are far more palatable.

I wouldn't expect a sizable youth demographic for Rush. I think his style and content is more appealing to the middle of the road age group. And as an old timer, I find Rush to be entertaining but not a “must listen to”. He's a smart guy but can be a windbag and is sometimes so enamored with himself that it's hard to listen to him pat himself on the back. Still, he has pretty good guests and his views do reflect my way of thinking so it’s easy to listen especially when you’re getting re-enforcement.

Well, aside from the fact that itunes rankings are easily manipulated (it's like me voting over and over again for Dirk on NBA.com's All-Star ballot by cleaning out my cache after each vote), Rush's podcasts are only available to "24/7" subscribers ($60/year).

But all this is irrelevant. My basic point is this, talk about politics listened to through speakers (e.g., Rush's program) will not disappear because the medium of radio becomes obsolete. Content transcends media. And if the content ever becomes passe, its passing has nothing to do with technology.