Reply #7: what does "successful" mean for AAR...? [View All]

[mike_c]

This is an interesting commentary, but it leaves out some essential information, IMO. Most notably, the author laments that AAR's "success" is effectively blocked by lack of investment but without giving any notion what form its success might take if investment was forthcoming.

Does success mean financial success, i.e. that AAR will begin to generate a large revenue stream for its investors, presumably through syndication and advertising sales? In that respect AAR's success would differ little from, say, Clear Channel's success if that is the eventual intent. Does success mean longevity and scope, i.e. that AAR will be able to hold onto significant market all over the country? Arguably, that would be part of any success, but without discussing any real services provided as part of that widespread dissemination it's hard to accept that "bigness" alone constitutes "success." Might success mean AAR playing a significant role in information distribution? If that's the case, one needs to ask what sort of information it intends to distribute. As the author himself points out, the talk format is not news-- let's be honest, it's entertainment at best and propaganda at worst. Journalism that serves a specific agenda is always suspect, no matter what side of the agenda you stand on, or how much you might agree with the perspective being used to enforce the bias.

Personally, I don't like the talk radio format very much, so I'm not rooting for AAR very strongly. I'd rather see investment in real journalism instead of shrill indignation, whether from the left or the right.