Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: More Fake News about Rado

  1. #21
    Administrator frankberry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Midland, Michigan
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by WPPCProductions View Post
    Of course I train APB to let ads on Forums like this to support the forums and other sites I support.
    Thank you so much, WPPCProductions.

    Frank

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post

    $1 million a month (the alleged expenditure) does not buy much in media reach and frequency today, particularly if your target is every person in the US of voting age.
    The target was not every person in the US of voting age, though. It was maybe a couple million people of voting age, primarily in rural portions of the Great Lakes states. I'm willing to bet that, even using traditional media, $12 million would buy a lot of ad time in Green Bay/Appleton, WI and Traverse City/Cadillac, MI and Harrisburg, PA.
    "Its music what makes a radio station, and at Live FM, we play the last music around."
    After receiving that copy, I quit the VO industry.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post
    Slate has an article with the title of "Bring Back the Golden Age of Broadcast Regulation"

    https://slate.com/technology/2019/06...ation-how.html

    As is so common now, the article bases its contention that regulation of Facebook and Twitter and the rest of the social media gang should be based on decades old principles, now discarded, of radio regulation. Specifically it names the Fairness Doctrine. And it says .
    Couple of thoughts...

    1.) Of late, every time a newspaper or magazine writes about a subject I know much about, I never fail to find a mistake somewhere these days.

    2.) I am a big believer that "he who frames the debate, wins the argument".

    The "Fairness Doctrine" sounds so perfect, doesn't it? Who would be against fairness!

    I remember there was a bill that went through congress called the "Civil Rights Restoration Act". Who could possibly vote against that? Who would dare? (Even though it was a flaw-filled and poorly crafted bill to be made into law.)

    Once "Planned Parenthood" chose their name, they won the debate. Also, people who claim to be "Pro-Choice"...who would be against planned parenthood? Who is against choices? Choices are good., aren't they?

    I think this applies to the "Fairness Doctrine". The name implies Fairness!?! Who would dare want to do away with Fairness? ;-)

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

     
Useful Contacts
Community


123