I have found myself in a strange position of late: disagreeing with some of my conservative and libertarian friends about the market for and value of a truly engaging, funny, left-wing offering on talk radio.
I think there could be a viable business in it. I also believe it would be a valuable addition to the public discourse. Most of my colleagues disagree. But on one point, at least, our viewpoints converge. The much-hyped Air America network, which debuted earlier this month on a handful of broadcast outlets and satellite, is unlikely to become a viable enterprise in its current form.
The disclosure Wednesday that two of its three key affiliates had suddenly taken Air America off the air is only the latest evidence for this proposition. Citing a bounced check and breach of contract, the parent company of the two stations, deliciously named MultiCultural Radio Broadcasting, literally locked Air America employees out of the building and reverted to previous programming (Spanish-language, in the case of Chicago). Of course, as this involves “progressives,” a lawsuit has already been filed and motives impugned.
But look past the inevitable cheap shots from the Right over the next few days — OK, “affordable” shots is a better term, since they’ll largely be deserved — and consider the fundamental problem here. Producing compelling radio is hard work. And it is a competitive business. If you don’t do your homework, hire experienced talent, and approach the enterprise as a serious business, you are going to fail.
Air America has been a political cause, not a serious business, and it shows. Not paying its bills may turn out to be an oversight, though with only half a dozen stations the first thing a professional operation would do is make sure it keeps them for more than, say, a couple of weeks. What can’t be spun as a glitch is the network’s core strategy, which has been senseless as well as pathetically derivative.
Check out their web site and you’ll see what I mean. The broadcast day begins with “Morning Sedition” and peaks at noon with “The O’Franken Factor.” Once some smart-alecky 10th grader thought these names up, why wasn’t there a grown-up in the room to say, “Well, we might be able to make a 8-minute bit out of that, but we are not going to name our signature shows after the competition.”
Indeed, descriptions of Air America shows teem with references to other programming, much of it on National Public Radio, as if NPR is the only auditory language its target audience will understand. Actually, there’s something to that — one of Air America’s core problems is that it will inevitably compete with NPR affiliates that already capture a large share of the left-of-center audience that the commercial network needs. Rather than offering something clearly different at key times — “counter-programming” is the term, as this amateur understands it — Air America is trying to identify itself as being like familiar NPR programs such as “Fresh Air” and “This American Life.” Uh, can’t listeners just hit the FM button for that?
Furthermore, in an ironic demonstration of the managerial model that proved such a success behind the Iron Curtain, Air America initially refused to allow stations to choose the programs they wanted. You had to broadcast the entire feed or none of it, said the commissars. That’s one reason why Chapel Hill station WCHL-AM, which seemed a natural affiliate, said no to the network early on. WCHL wasn’t about to boot all of its prized and financially indispensable local programming just for Al Franken. Multiply this mistake times all of the other university markets where left-wing talk might find an audience, and you see the magnitude of Air America’s error. Now, reports are that the network may have changed its tune, at least for WCHL, but if this episode was an accurate sign of its proclivities, the sign doesn’t point towards success.
Perhaps it sounds like I’m expecting too much from leftists. After all, a misunderstanding of competition and a preference for one-size-fits-all planning are integral parts of their psyche, you might say. But many wealthy liberals are quite successful in business, particularly in the media, so I’m not inclined to accept such a simplistic excuse. I think the real problem here is that leftists believe profit-seeking business to be a disreputable enterprise one must grudgingly pursue in order to have enough money to then “do good.” We on the other side of the spectrum believe that one important way (though not the only way) to “do good” is to deliver high-quality goods and services that customers desire and will pay for — which then often, and happily, results in a profit.
Until the folks behind Air America get this, or more generally a clue, it will remain only Air Apparent.
Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation and publisher of Carolina Journal.