Re: Gasp! For broadcast media, patriotism pays

[Chuckigo@att.net]

in the never-ending exchange of ideas on the First Amendment, Dan replied to 
Tony:
>> I find the rhetoric used by the anti-war folks equally offensive.  If the 
protestors were factual and respectful, I might share your anger.  You reap 
what you sow.<<

in deference to all views, i agree with BOTH of you.  if one does not want war, 
great.  just don't make ME late for work by laying across the street.  i didn't 
declare it.  but if you wish to, like the shapely young lady pictured in 
today's Portland Press Herald, wish to remove clothing to express your views, 
then God Bless America!  (sexist, yes... but i am a child of the 60's.  been 
there.  saw that.  liked it.)
 and if you wish to express your view by chanting in some rhythmic pentameter: 
cool.
  and if you wish to put to words and vision in a "Peter Max"-esque fashion, 
great.  (just don't hit me in the head with your anti-war sign, okay)
  on-the-air as an "entertainment format" host, i've tap danced my way around 
this.  matter of fact, i've avoided using the "War" word on the air on my 
Oldies station in Portland.  i have kids.  our listeners have kids.  we're 
trying to offer a "safe haven" from non-stop, wall-to-wall coverage.  but our 
core is adult, so we do run :60 updates twice an hour, with an actual "in X 
minutes" warning for use of the volume/tuning knob.
  i've not heard any truly anti-war rhetoric on-air.  maybe i'm not listening 
close enough.  even David Brudnoy is verbally behind the stated mission of our 
nation's government.  granted: none of us is FOR this type of approach. 


- -Chuck(age 12 spectator in Harvard Square during anti-Vietnam Riots in '70)Igo