Would Pacifica be a stronger network if it strictly stayed within politics/public affairs/news? After all, cultural programming is nice as far as it goes, but commercial and college radio cover that ground well enough. Imagine 24/7 political affairs, public service programming, news, and not entertainment.
Would Pacifica grow an larger audience base?
Would Pacifica grow an larger audience base?
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
-
Re: Programming
Tue, July 12, 2005 - 1:04 PMhey!!! my friend does a music show on KPFA....I think they oughta do music programming too!!! it does fill a void!!!
-
Unsu...
Re: Programming
Tue, July 12, 2005 - 1:18 PMOne of the beauties of Pacifica Radio is that it reconnects the societal disconnect. Art, politics, culture, music, poetry, etcetera are artificial subdivisions of the mind. Commercial radio only covers cultural programing such that they can profit from it. Entertainment is not culture. Entertainment is a comodity to sell people who suffer from this socio-economic order. Entertainment soothes over the consciences of those who benefit from this socio-economic order. Pacifica Radio has cultural programing that is not commercialized entertainment. It is connected to the news of the day ... and not all is well in America. -
-
Re: Programming
Wed, July 13, 2005 - 6:47 PMLooked at from another angle: why are there so few public affairs and political programs on Pacifica? Why is cultural information given priority over political information? Might it be because there is a deeper agenda at work in regards to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the hijacking of Pacifica to basically weaken the Left to ineffectiveness? Do not misunderstand me, I am not calling for elimination of cultural programming-I am calling for an examination of how the airwaves are biased in favor of types of programming. One could ask the folks at Hard Knock radio thier opinion and ask Bill Mandel his and see what the two viewpoints have in common.
-
