(misterfact) wrote in message ...
I'll post about 50 of them here in the next few weeks.

The purpose of these posts is to expose most of the whole lot as a
bunch of pathological liars. Those few who don't lie are reluctant to
publically point fingers at the liars and expose those hosts do. I'm
talking about those who continually commit FCC broadcast law
violations. (Like lying about consumer products for personal profit
and dispensing false medical "information" , thus making people sick
or even die!) These guys (and a few women) are members of a "good-ole
boys talk show host club" who adhere to an unwritten code- to not step
on each others toes. Frankly, those few who don't use their broadcast
pulput to expose the lies of their fellow broadcasters-have no spine
or credibility in my view!

I'll post about 50 of them here in the next few weeks.
Post a follow-up to this message

Message 2 in thread
From: David Eduardo )
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-08 13:33:01 PST


"misterfact" wrote in message
...
I'll post about 50 of them here in the next few weeks.

Why not now?
Post a follow-up to this message

Message 3 in thread
From: ab1 )
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-08 15:03:01 PST


"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

"misterfact" wrote in message
...
I'll post about 50 of them here in the next few weeks.

Why not now?



He's waiting for some station in his market to pick up Err America?

ab1
Post a follow-up to this message

Message 4 in thread
From:
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-09 08:53:02 PST


"ab1" wrote in message ...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

"misterfact" wrote in message
...
I'll post about 50 of them here in the next few weeks.

Why not now?



He's waiting for some station in his market to pick up Err America?

ab1

O.K. here we go:

l. "Styrofoam is bio-degradable" (Said by a national talk show host
in "rebuttal" to those who call for a ban on the use of styrofoam
packaging because the stuff ends up along the roadside and in peoples'
yards- mainly because the industry refuses to take meaningful steps to
promote recycling.) The host may have been paid for promoting the use
of styrofoam by lying about its properties.

2. "Dioxin is NOT a health hazzard!" (Yeh, sure! Neither is
breathing asbestos!)

3. In defense of S.U.Vs: "Detroit is now making fuel-efficient
S.U.V.s" (Yeh, sure! )

4. Just after the Rhode Island night club fire that killed all those
people-in reply to a caller: "Sir, that night club HAD MET ALL LOCAL
FIRE SAFETY CODES!"

5. "There is nothing that you or I eat that is on the endangered
species list!" (Yeh, sure- except Cutthroat trout, sturgeon, sockeye
salmon, key deer, oyster mussel and a few hundred others!)

6. "50% of our oil comes from Saudi Arabia." (The correct answer is
17%)

7. "Half the price you pay for a new car from Detroit goes to pay for
the health care plan of auto workers!" (yeh, sure!)

LOTS MORE TO COME. Talk radio is saturated with lies!
Post a follow-up to this message

Message 5 in thread
From: David Eduardo )
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-09 19:13:01 PST


"misterfact" wrote in message
...

l. "Styrofoam is bio-degradable" (Said by a national talk show host
in "rebuttal" to those who call for a ban on the use of styrofoam
packaging because the stuff ends up along the roadside and in peoples'
yards- mainly because the industry refuses to take meaningful steps to
promote recycling.) The host may have been paid for promoting the use
of styrofoam by lying about its properties.

Or, he simply may be stupid or just uninformed. I have not seen much
of a
styrofoam lobby out there.

2. "Dioxin is NOT a health hazzard!" (Yeh, sure! Neither is
breathing asbestos!)

Stupid. Talk hosts are hired for entertainment value, not knowledge
(witness
Dr. Laura, a physiotherapist).

3. In defense of S.U.Vs: "Detroit is now making fuel-efficient
S.U.V.s" (Yeh, sure! )

They are. There are several hybrid SUVs in pre-production stages.

4. Just after the Rhode Island night club fire that killed all those
people-in reply to a caller: "Sir, that night club HAD MET ALL LOCAL
FIRE SAFETY CODES!"

As to the building, apparently they had. The issue was with the
pyrotecnics
of the band.

5. "There is nothing that you or I eat that is on the endangered
species list!" (Yeh, sure- except Cutthroat trout, sturgeon, sockeye
salmon, key deer, oyster mussel and a few hundred others!)

None of which have I eaten, now or ever. "You and I" could easily mean
that
very few of us dine on sturtgeoun, venison, etc.

6. "50% of our oil comes from Saudi Arabia." (The correct answer is
17%)

Stupidity, not necessarily a lie. Most of the US' oil comes form
domestic
sources, Canada, and Latin America.

7. "Half the price you pay for a new car from Detroit goes to pay for
the health care plan of auto workers!" (yeh, sure!)

Wrong, but not that far off. A huge percentage goes to fund pensions
and
health care for present and past workers.

LOTS MORE TO COME. Talk radio is saturated with lies!

Or, simply, stupid hosts engaged in discussions on subjects they are
not
fully informed on.

You are making too much out of small issues.

Post a follow-up to this message

Message 6 in thread
From: Shawn Mamros )
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-10 08:53:02 PST


David Eduardo wrote:
"misterfact" wrote in message
...

4. Just after the Rhode Island night club fire that killed all
those
people-in reply to a caller: "Sir, that night club HAD MET ALL
LOCAL
FIRE SAFETY CODES!"

As to the building, apparently they had. The issue was with the
pyrotecnics
of the band.

Actually, there were fire code violations. The most important of
these
was that the stage walls had been lined with flammable packing foam as
a cheap form of sound insulation. Definitely against fire code;
problem
is, the local fire inspector didn't notice it on the last inspection
he
did there.

To bring this marginally back on topic... Among the many parties
being sued is a radio station which gave away tickets to the show.
(Never underestimate the ability of lawyers to go fishing after the
deepest pockets they can find...)

-Shawn Mamros
E-mail to: mamros -at- mit dot edu
Post a follow-up to this message

Message 7 in thread
From: Greg and Joan )
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-09 19:13:01 PST


Actually, my most favorite line from the late President Ronald Reagan
=

"Trees pollute."


"misterfact" wrote in message LOTS MORE TO
COME. Talk radio is saturated with lies!

Post a follow-up to this message

Message 8 in thread
From: Scott Dorsey )
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-10 08:53:02 PST


In article , Greg and Joan
wrote:
Actually, my most favorite line from the late President Ronald
Reagan =

"Trees pollute."

I believe it was from James Watt, and it was "Trees cause pollution
too."
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Post a follow-up to this message

Message 9 in thread
From: Mark Jeffries )
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-09 19:13:01 PST


"ab1" wrote in message ...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

"misterfact" wrote in message
...
I'll post about 50 of them here in the next few weeks.

Why not now?



He's waiting for some station in his market to pick up Err America?

Despite your cuteness, in case you haven't read, some independent
interpretations of trends show that Franken is *beating* Limbaugh in
New York and in the Chicago market before AA was pulled by
Multi-Cultural, the audience doubled to a 2.0, which may not be much
compared to WLS but is still better than *either* sports talk station
in town and in the neighborhood of the mid-rank numbers NPR station
WBEZ gets.

It's too early to tell, but Air America may just succeed despite all
of their bumbling.
Post a follow-up to this message

Message 10 in thread
From: Rich Wood )
Subject: Post latest national talk show host LIES- here


View this article only
Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting
Date: 2004-06-10 08:53:02 PST


Despite your cuteness, in case you haven't read, some independent
interpretations of trends show that Franken is *beating* Limbaugh in
New York and in the Chicago market before AA was pulled by
Multi-Cultural, the audience doubled to a 2.0, which may not be much
compared to WLS but is still better than *either* sports talk station
in town and in the neighborhood of the mid-rank numbers NPR station
WBEZ gets.

The only "independent interpretation of trends" that matter are those
that are accepted by ad agencies, especially in the network business.

To my knowledge, there are none, especially ones that break out
hour-by-hour figures.

Rich
Post a follow-up to this message

I'm talking about those who continually commit FCC broadcast law violations.
(Like lying about consumer products for personal profit and dispensing false
medical "information" , thus making people sick or even die!)

Since you're so cock-sure this stuff is against the law, please give an exact
citation of the laws you think these people are breaking.

"Sid Schweiger" wrote in message
...
I'm talking about those who continually commit FCC broadcast law violations.
(Like lying about consumer products for personal profit and dispensing false
medical "information" , thus making people sick or even die!)

Since you're so cock-sure this stuff is against the law, please give an exact
citation of the laws you think these people are breaking.

It's not the FCC, but the Federal Trade Commission, which has jurisdiction. 15 USC
Sec. 52. http://www.ftc.gov/temp/chapter_2.htm#Sec.%2052

The entire section is http://www.ftc.gov/temp/chapter_2.htm, as you might expect.

Nonetheless, if claims made in radio advertising are deceptive or false, they are
illegal, so to that that degree the writer is correct..
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
There must always be the appearance of lawfulness....especially when the law's being
broken.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-

It's not the FCC, but the Federal Trade Commission, which has jurisdiction.
15 USC Sec. 52. http://www.ftc.gov/temp/chapter_2.htm#Sec.%2052

I wasn't asking you, I was asking Mr. Know-It-All.

PLEASE DON'T FEEL THE TROLLS!!!!

"Sid Schweiger" wrote in message
...
It's not the FCC, but the Federal Trade Commission, which has jurisdiction.
15 USC Sec. 52. http://www.ftc.gov/temp/chapter_2.htm#Sec.%2052

I wasn't asking you, I was asking Mr. Know-It-All.

PLEASE DON'T FEEL THE TROLLS!!!!

Excuse me, Sid, but as you've asked in a newsgroup, it seems to me that there's
nothing which prevents me from responding.

Further, troll or not, I think this guy has a respectable mission....the amount of
quackery, deception and outright larceny which passes for legitimate advertising
needs to be stopped, whether it's weight-loss pills, invention patent acquirers or
FCC spectrum lottery shares (of course, where is the FTC with the new "Medicare
discount" cards that are being advertised now?).

The only trouble with FTC regs is that a complaint, or several, need be launched
before they'll take action. Not that I would expect otherwise, since a more
agressive effort would be prohibitively expensive, probably treads on free-speech
guarantees, and still wouldn't make much of a difference. It's still up to the
consumer to be at least a little cautious before plunking down money for a dubiously
useful product or service. But I applaud anyone who would make an effort to collect
(and, I would assume, act on) these abuses so as to make fraudulent and deceptive
advertisers more likely to see the scrutiny of the FTC.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there's nothing that offends you in your community, then you know you're not
living in a free society.
Kim Campbell - ex-Canadian Prime Minister - 2004
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-

Excuse me, Sid, but as you've asked in a newsgroup, it seems to me that
there's nothing which prevents me from responding.

No, there isn't, but I wanted Mr. Know-It-All to defend his position. You
didn't need to help him out.

"Sid Schweiger" wrote in message
...
Excuse me, Sid, but as you've asked in a newsgroup, it seems to me that
there's nothing which prevents me from responding.

No, there isn't, but I wanted Mr. Know-It-All to defend his position. You
didn't need to help him out.

Well, okay, but I thought the purpose of newsgroups were, among other goals, to help
each other out. But I now see that the protestor is looking at programming which,
depending on the pitch, isn't covered by FTC mandates....given what passes for
entertainment programming these days, listeners are on their own to determine the
efficacy or prudence in adopting practices or strategies heard on air (a hint,
though.....it's worth every penny paid).
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
There must always be the appearance of lawfulness....especially when the law's being
broken.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-

"misterfact" wrote in message
...
I'm
talking about those who continually commit FCC broadcast law
violations. (Like lying about consumer products for personal profit
and dispensing false medical "information" , thus making people sick
or even die!)

What FCC "laws" would they be violating, please.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message ...
"misterfact" wrote in message
...
I'm
talking about those who continually commit FCC broadcast law
violations. (Like lying about consumer products for personal profit
and dispensing false medical "information" , thus making people sick
or even die!)

What FCC "laws" would they be violating, please.

Well- for instance: The adverse health effects of secondhand
cigarette smoke have been well-documented. (Anyone who wishes take the
position that there is no statistical link between breathing 2nd hand
cigarette smoke and adverse health effects should take their data to
the American Lung Association and argue the point with them. Maybe the
ALA will consider ceasing their national ad campaign pointing out
those dangers)

Anyway- A national talk show host who continually tells his listeners
that "Secondhand smoke is not a health hazard!"- in my view and the
view of experts, is dispensing FALSE medical "information". Similarly,
if the same talk show host continually tells his listeners that
"Styrofoam is bio-degradable!"- he is dispensing false chemical
information regarding polystyrene foam.

It seems to me that there ought to reach a point where there is such
a preponderance of false medical and product claims- such an
OVERWHELMING APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY- that we ought to start asking
the question, for instance: "Is this host being paid by A cigarette
company (companies) to promote their product by lying about its health
effects? Does anyone have the guts to say,"It appears the King Has No
Clothes!" You certainly won't find anyone in the talk show business
who will bring this matter to his listeners' attention.
Styrofoam has been under attack by the public (because it litters our
landscape and the polystyrene industry has done little to promote
recycling)- many have proposed legislation to limit its use or require
the industry to recyle all its product: Is this host being paid by the
styrofoam industry to lie about its "bio-degradability"- thus to
promote the throw-a-way styrofoam packaging industry by getting the
public (and possible legislation)off its back?!

How about "Dioxin is not a health hazard!" What industry is paying
this host to spread environmental lies in an effort to encourage the
public to sabotage health studies on dioxins, clean-up efforts, etc?

If this talk show host is not being paid directly- under the table
payments for spreading these false claims- is he receiving advertising
contracts from subsidiary companies- who "appreciate his efforts" on
their behalf.

I am not going to name the talk show host that these specific
statements involve. This isn't limited to one host! You are all free
to hazard a guess. I will tell you that I have these and much more on
audiotape. The FCC knows all about this but refuses to act. The head
of the FCC investigation division, Norman Goldstein, told me on the
phone: "It appears that the host in question may be violating the law,
but we do not have the resources to investigate this matter!"

I will tell you that this FCC officer agreed that there is an
appearance of impropriety- but when I asked his if "resources" meant
the FUNDS to investigate or that his office just lacked the WILL to
investigate- he told me that he "did not want to discuss this any
further".

The fact is: when a talk show host lies- he or she is making an
attempt to inflame passions. He or she is attempting to gather
listeners by inflaming sensibilities. He or she knows that when a lie
is told, his listeners tell their friends, "Did you hear what talk
show host X said yesterday on his show? He said (blah, blah blah)" The
friend replies, "Really, I can't believe anyone would say that! I'm
going to start listening to his show and see if he really knows what
he is talking about!"
Right there is the dirty little secret talk show mechanism. You
gather more listeners and ad contracts - in other words you SELL your
talk show through THE LIE. There is no difference between selling your
talk show by lying- than an advertiser selling his manufactured
product by lying about its attributes. The first is a violation of FCC
law just as the second is a violation of FTC law.

Don't anyone tell us that there are not current and former employees
who are witnesses to statements in the inner offices of talk show
execs and hosts-showing this fraudulent INTENT to gain listenership-
and that they would have someting to contribute to an FCC
investigation into this matter.

The there is no difference between yelling "FIRE" in an auditorium
when there is no such fire and broadcasting on a radio station:
"Folks- from my studio I see there is a fire at the downtown
auditorium!" (also when there is no such fire)

Also- there is no difference between falsely broadcasting the
auditorium fire and knowingly broadcasting false medical "information"
which also has the potential to maim and/or kill. Even if it can not
be proven that the host's intent is to kill or maim-Certainly a talk
show host's REFUSAL TO CORRECT his false medical information lends to
an appearance of impropriety (knowingly disregarding the health of his
listeners- in the interest of promoting his radio show) This intent
needs to be investigated. This is NOT a FREE SPEECH issue!

"misterfact" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...
"misterfact" wrote in message
...
I'm
talking about those who continually commit FCC broadcast law
violations. (Like lying about consumer products for personal profit
and dispensing false medical "information" , thus making people sick
or even die!)

What FCC "laws" would they be violating, please.

Well- for instance: The adverse health effects of secondhand
cigarette smoke have been well-documented.....

(Snip, snip, snip).

The FCC has no rules (the only "law" the FCC has is called "administrative
law" unless I am sorely mistaken) against this. The FCC basically has rules
about technical operation, and the programming "rules" concern indecency,
station IDs, etc. There is just about nothing on content other than
indecency. Other government agencies, ranging from local to Federal, have
jurisdiction on the areas you are mentioning, but not the FCC.

And a lot of what you mention is what, in English, we call "opinion." If a
talk host wants to state he or she does not believe in the "trumped up
figures about second hand smoke" they are well within their constitutionally
_protected_ rights to disagree. Many people disagree with creationism or
evolutionism, despite either Biblical or scientific "proof" and such
disagreement is protected.

I can go on the air and state my belief that the Earth is flat, and that it
is only our societal perception that it is round that makes it so. It's, in
this case, my opinion.

You are basically chasing windmills. And they are the windmills you
constructed based on your belief system. Fortunately, we live in a free
society, and we don't have to agree with you.