I had two reminders in the last week that it was WBHM‘s (our local listener-supported station’s) fall pledge drive. The first was while I was driving to cover last week’s Design Review Committee (trust me, we did get a couple of things from the meeting, just nothing that we can publish… yet). Driving to the meeting I tuned into NPR’s All Things Considered (it’s a hold over from my days in Savannah – if I’m actually listening to something besides local talk in the morning, it’s ATC).
The second was from a MySpace bulletin sent by a regular reader of the site and someone that I really would like to hang out with some more just to figure out what makes him tick. It was the second reminder that made me begin to think about the power of the wallet.
Everyone is aware of the power of the wallet, or as it’s normally referred to, the “money talks” approach. Now I have heard both sides of the argument about whether or not people should use pledge drives to influence what a station plays, but I’ve never really offered an opinion about it, until now. It’s especially interesting to me as people who frequent the web are still upset about the pending forced shutdown of internet radio stations as we know them and the growing ability to find your “voice” on numerous websites and blogs without relying on a standard being placed before you.
People who have this belief that listener-supported radio can change at will don’t seem to realize that when they send in their contribution during the midday classical music show that they really can’t complain if they really want to hear jazz, or News & Notes, or see more in-depth series like Birmingham: The Urban Divide produced on a more frequent basis. They spoke with their wallet and said that they wanted to listen to classical. And there’s nothing wrong with classical. When you’re typing a story at lunchtime and you know that you want some background noise but realize that a) ESPN will distract you if you’re at home and b) you’ll just start singing along if you listen to just about anything else, you want classical.
I’m also not saying to hold back your contributions to WBHM or any other listener supported station. Trust me, if we were actually making money right now I’d be making my contribution to them either sometime during Marketplace or Tapestry. I just figured that those that say that nobody listens to them about programming options need to realize that the power is in your hands if you ever decide to use it. It will not change if you continue to not say anything.
The same argument could be applied to public television, but my use of the power of the wallet would be different there. I was silly enough to get an HDTV (for an insanely low price) a few years ago, leading to my new obsession over crisp clear pictures and what were incredible shows on the national PBS HD feed. I’m never going to blame APTV for not carrying the signal because the cost was insane and at the time it was only servicing those of us lucky (or crazy) to have paid for or found a good deal on a set. But I will still be upset with them for not getting Charlie Rose, though I guess I can watch it online nowadays, now can’t I?
Thoughts?
André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page.
Should Cooper fade away?
Should Patrick Cooper’s lawsuit against mayor-elect Langford continue?
If there was a chance that he could win in court, I’d be all for him going ahead and seeing what happens. The funny thing is, most lawyers seem to be saying that the changes of Cooper’s contest being successful are quite slim, despite letters of support in Sunday’s Birmingham News. And even if Cooper was successful, Langford would be able to go and register for the race again seeing as how he would be able to claim residency a little easier now.
That or he would be getting written in by the more than 50% that voted for him last time, in addition to some who voted for Cooper that are becoming disenfranchised with him after this demonstration of doing just what he campaigned that he wouldn’t do.
There are many who are regular readers of this site that may disagree with me about the idea of Cooper letting it lie, but I have an interesting situation to lay before you. Let’s say that Cooper had conceded the race the morning after the election, pledging to work with the mayor-elect to move the city forward and truly lead Birmingham towards being the 21st century New South city that both men believe it can become. The two men combined carried nearly 80% of the popular vote on Election Day. Now let’s assume that Governor Riley decided to not make a special appointment to the Jefferson County Commission and that a special election was called to be held in February. Cooper could easily have taken part in the race and probably could have been seen as a contender for winning the position.
Let’s say that Cooper won – you’ve suddenly put two populist-elected officials in two extremely powerful positions in local and regional politics. If the city and region did not move forward then, people would have to answer for it. The people would have spoken not once, but twice, saying that the region must move forward and that they were willing to put their faith in people that were willing to do things outside of the box. (My biggest problem with that phrase is “why is there a box to begin with?”)
This scenario may have played out, though now it may not as many are becoming increasingly impatient with Mr. Cooper as he carries out a personal crusade against the man that promised he wouldn’t run against him for mayor. Well unfortunately for him he did, and he won. Removing Langford from the equation before Election Day would have landed him in a runoff; now it would open up a Pandora’s Box of uncertainty.
Cooper has said that he does not care about his political future, but there are many out there that do, many that decided to vote for you because of wanting a change who are not quite sure what they would have gotten.
The court of public opinion still appears to be out on both men as Birmingham prepares to buckle up for the interesting ride that is a Langford mayoral term and the promise of Patrick Cooper’s name remaining in the public eye, at least for the short term. The only fear that some of Cooper’s staunch supporters may have is his name becoming one of those in the coming months and years that when mentioned evokes comments like “he had so much potential; it’s a shame he acted the way that he did in ’07.”
André Natta is the publisher and managing editor of The Terminal. To submit letters in response to this commentary or to contact for general information, use any of the methods listed on our contact page.
7 Comments
Posted in Alabama, Birmingham, Commentary, Election '07, politics