KCSB Sign (Photo: J. Waits)

As part of KCSB‘s 50th anniversary celebration, the college radio station at University of California, Santa Barbara is digging into their archives and re-broadcasting some vintage material. As it turns out, one of their most notarious alums is conservative talk show host Sean Hannity. Yesterday, KCSB aired the program from 1989 that led to Sean Hannity being fired from the station. This particular show has been held up by Hannity as the event that helped kick start his career. According to the KCSB website:

“Sean Hannity has often credited KCSB with launching his media career when the station management removed him from the air in 1989 for making ‘multiple discriminatory statements based on sexual orientation’ on his weekly KCSB radio show in ‘violation of the University of California Nondiscriminatory policy.’ Hannity has always denied that he was homophobic.”

Tune in to the KCSB archive of Revisiting Sean Hannity to hear not only Hannity’s show from 1989, but also interviews and commentary about the incident.

The story quickly built steam this week, with many liberal and left commentators openly wondering if Premiere’s biggest mouths were in fact fielding calls from plants prepped to set them up. Neither Limbaugh nor Hannity took the insinuation lying down. In fact Limbaugh took to the air Tuesday spending 20 minutes on the issue, in part criticizing Premiere Networks for offering the service in the first place. He claimed no knowledge of the service and said, “if somebody had told me we were going to do this, I would put the kibosh on this.” On his program Sean Hannity also denied ever using the service.

Now there has been conjecture for years that many callers to Hannity and Limbaugh were in the pocket, in part just to set up the host for the next rant or joke. Critical listeners on the hunt for a good conspiracy for years have been discussing callers that just seemed to well timed to be true. However, even if this were true, I’m sure Hannity and Limbaugh would still deny it.

Premiere has gone on the record claiming, “The service is not utilized by News/Talk programs or stations.” The target market for the service appears to be morning shows in need of extra schtick. Limbaugh suggested as much on his show, while taking an opportunity to get in a jab at the FCC, saying that making prank phone calls used to be the bread and butter of wacky morning DJs until the evil Commission stepped in to say airing a call without consent was impermissible.

In the big picture, however, I don’t think it really matters whether Hannity’s, Limbaugh’s or any other talk show’s callers are ginned up or not. Anyone who thinks that call-in talk radio is a fair and equal forum for public discourse is living in fantasy-land. Nationally syndicated programs, in particular, receive far more calls than they could ever put on the air and have always used screeners to decide which are most useful and entertaining to put on the air. Sure, plenty of liberals have complained that they aren’t able to get through to debate Limbaugh or Hannity on their programs. I don’t think the picture would be much different if these hosts were using plants instead of just selecting the most ideologically compatible callers.

Now, I’m not defending the Premiere On Call service, nor am I defending Hannity or Limbaugh. I actually doubt that either hosts gin up calls — they don’t need to. I do believe that plenty of third-rate morning shows do take advantage of actors because it’s easier to plan a wacky call than wait on luck to deliver you one. But in the case of the morning shows — which typically don’t have open lines as a feature of the show in the first place — I really don’t see a problem either.

I have to agree with Rush, much of entertainment radio is about the art of the prank, whether it was Bob and Ray staging “man on the street” interviews or Phil Hendrie’s multiple-personalties as guests. At it’s best radio really is the theater of the mind, and what is theater but a big put-on?

I get how lying is still lying, and that it sounds a whole lot worse when programs that pose like they have serious discussion of news and public affairs seem to be taking phony calls. But I guess you have to believe that Limbaugh, Hannity and their ilk are actually serious public affairs shows. Limbaugh himself loves to hide behind the excuse that he’s really just an entertainer, even if he’s in no rush to disclaim any influence he might appear to have over our political landscape.

Callers who can mount a convincing counter argument to these conservative hosts are never going to get on the air, whether or not the other callers are fake or real. So in the end it doesn’t really matter if listeners believe the callers are real or not, either. Only in the case that a fake caller were leveling accusations or making allegations of fact that impact the national debate do I think it would be of particular concern. But there is no reasonable evidence any such thing has occurred.

I also understand how plenty of folks fed up with Limbaugh’s and Hannity’s whole approach would love to find that gotcha moment to undermine their credibility and possibly foment FCC action. There are plenty of good reasons to have a problem with Limbaugh and Hannity, especially when they’re guilty much more egregious fabrications and racist remarks. But these guys are symptoms of the failed political economy of the radio dial brought on by massive consolidation. As long as Clear Channel owns hundreds of stations in need of cheap programming that draws in large numbers of the dwindling AM radio audience, then we will have Limbaugh and Hannity, or their copycat replacements. It’s a system that needs changing.

Go ahead and attack them and their employer. I just don’t think this particular tempest in a teapot will be an effective weapon.

Sarah Palin: no more "politics as usual."

Ever since John McCain made his disastrous decision to pick Sarah Palin as his running made in ’08, I’ve been saying that the winner of that election was her. It was only a matter of time, I told my circle of friends, before she ducked out of her gig as Alaska’s governor and cashed in on her extraordinary notoriety by taking a job in radio or television.

Well, I’m just speculating here. But today she took one more step towards the media move, announcing that she’s not seeking re-election and stepping down:

“With this announcement  … I’ve determined it’s best to transfer the authority of governor to Lieutenant Governor Parnell; and I am willing to do so, so that this administration – with its positive agenda, its accomplishments, and its successful road to an incredible future – can continue without interruption and with great administrative and legislative success.”

And why is she ducking out? Palin says the media hasn’t given Alaska (and her) enough credit for her efforts to resist the allegedly horrible policies of the Obama administration.

I wish you’d hear MORE from the media of your state’s progress and how we tackle Outside interests – daily – SPECIAL interests that would stymie our state. Even those debt-ridden stimulus dollars that would force the heavy hand of federal government into our communities with an “all-knowing attitude” – I have taken the slings and arrows with that unpopular move to veto because I know being right is better than being popular. Some of those dollars would harm Alaska and harm America – I resisted those dollars because of the obscene national debt we’re forcing our children to pay, because of today’s Big Government spending; it’s immoral and doesn’t even make economic sense!

So what’s Palin going to do now? All she says is this: “no more ‘politics as usual’ and I am taking my fight for what’s right – for Alaska – in a new direction.” I’m guessing that “new direction” is going to be a generously  remunerated job in conservative talk radio, television, or both, where she can answer her own rhetorical questions to her hearts’ content.

And no “gotcha” questions. Take that Katie Couric!

Hal Turner (source: SPLC).

“Let me be the first to say this plainly: These Judges deserve to be killed,” the FBI says Turner declared online after the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a ban on handguns in Chicago.

According to the bureau, the post mentioned a Chicago judge whose husband and mother were murdered four years ago.

“Apparently, the 7th U.S. Circuit court didn’t get the hint after those killings.  It appears another lesson is needed,” it allegedly continued. “Judges official public work addresses and a map of the area are below.  Their home addresses and maps will follow soon.  Behold these devils.”

An all-purpose white supremacist sort of guy, Turner’s certainly got a rep in his home stomping ground of North Bergen, New Jersey. The Jersey Journal refers to him as an “infamous hate blogger,” who may get out on bail today.

Being the blogotunist that I am, I accessed the Federal Communications Commission’s database to see if this Turner fellow has ever filed with the agency. Chances are that he did. One Hal Turner of North Bergen wrote to the FCC last year expressing concern over reports that Comcast was throttling P2P downloads. You can verify this yourself by typing “Hal Turner” in field four here.

“Comcast’s blatant and deceptive blocking of peer-to-peer communications is exactly the problem millions of Americans have warned would occur without Net Neutrality protections,” Turner’s comment begins (it doesn’t get interesting until the end).

“The FCC must take serious and immediate action to put an abrupt end to this harmful practice and prevent other Internet service providers from following Comcast’s example of discriminating against the free flow of online information,” it continues (keep going).

“The Internet is a vital engine for economic growth, civic participation and free speech. We simply can’t allow corporate gatekeepers to smother these democratic communications by discriminating against new technologies, secretly interfering with Internet traffic and stifling innovation” (wait for it).

All this reads like some public interest group’s web form petition, until you get to the customized add-on tacked to the end of the comment.

“They must be owned by a JEW,” Turner concludes.

Oh well. Various bloggers have their takes on the guy, among them Think Progress and Hatewatch.