The Rise of Talk Radio and Its Impact on Politics and Public Policy
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Mount Rushmore: The Rise of Talk Radio and Its Impact on Politics and Public Policy Brian Asher Rosenwald Wynnewood, PA Master of Arts, University of Virginia, 2009 Bachelor of Arts, University of Pennsylvania, 2006 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of History University of Virginia August, 2015 !1 © Copyright 2015 by Brian Asher Rosenwald All Rights Reserved August 2015 !2 Acknowledgements I am deeply indebted to the many people without whom this project would not have been possible. First, a huge thank you to the more than two hundred and twenty five people from the radio and political worlds who graciously took time from their busy schedules to answer my questions. Some of them put up with repeated follow ups and nagging emails as I tried to develop an understanding of the business and its political implications. They allowed me to keep most things on the record, and provided me with an understanding that simply would not have been possible without their participation. When I began this project, I never imagined that I would interview anywhere near this many people, but now, almost five years later, I cannot imagine the project without the information gleaned from these invaluable interviews. I have been fortunate enough to receive fellowships from the Fox Leadership Program at the University of Pennsylvania and the Corcoran Department of History at the University of Virginia, which made it far easier to complete this dissertation. I am grateful to be a part of the Fox family, both because of the great work that the program does, but also because of the terrific people who work at Fox. Joe Tierney, Chuck Brutsche, and Laura Thornton have offered help, counsel, and good company over the past three years. They have made Fox an enjoyable place to work. My professors during college and graduate school deserve much credit for all that is good in this dissertation. The fantastic teaching of Rogers Smith, Walter McDougal, Rick Beeman, Tom Childers, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, and the late Sheldon Hackney during my colleges days inspired me to head down a scholarly path. In many ways, this project is the culmination of a journey that began in their classrooms. In graduate school, the tutelage of Mel Leffler and Gary Gallagher (especially on the craft of writing) was invaluable. I had few more demanding teachers, but I am a far better scholar for having studied with Mel and Gary. I also owe a debt of gratitude to the many scholars whose contributions enriched this work. The probing questions and trenchant analysis provided by Bernie Carlson, Sarah Milov and Bruce Williams during my dissertation defense will result in a far better book. David Greenberg and Allison Perlman provided astute comments on conference papers that benefitted the dissertation. Tom Sugrue, Jim Baughman, Matt Levendusky, Alison Dagnes, Dannagal Young, Jim Snyder, and Frank Baumgartner all generously shared advice, insight, and expertise. Without Doug Allen I would not have been able to calculate many of the statistics cited in the pages to follow. I greatly appreciate Doug’s patience and assistance. Over the last five year, I have been fortunate to have students who had real interest in this research, asked fantastic questions, and in several cases, generously used their connections to put me in touch with potential interview subjects. For that I am thankful. The questions asked by Lauren Turek might have occasionally exasperated me in the moment, but all of her pushing made this dissertation far better. Without Lauren, I am not sure that I would have made it through the last seven years. Alyssa MacMillan, Julianne Huegel Potocek, Matt Sklar, Andy Wilkowski, Tom Mullen, Alexandra Lee Sklar, deMauri Mackie, Andy Poenicke, Erin O’Brien, Rich Eisenberg, Stephen Danley, Alec Hickmott and so many other friends must have wondered why it was taking so long for me to finish this !3 dissertation, but they never once asked the question. Instead, they offered good company, reassurance, support, and most importantly, friendship. You guys mean the world to me. I would never have gotten to this point without Brian Balogh. Brian’s suggestion spawned this project and he patiently read draft after draft of each chapter. Brian’s probing questions slowly and steadily shaped and improved the dissertation. Brian provided ample encouragement and sound advice along the way, while still giving me the freedom to explore and experiment. He taught me to see the big picture, encouraged creativity, and truly treated me like a colleague. I am thankful to have had the opportunity to work with Brian. Simply put, no one has ever been a better mentor and sounding board than John DiIulio. Over the last 13 years John has been sage, cheerleader, friend, and booster. John’s belief in me and my work often exceeds my own. I can honestly say that I would never have made it through 7 years of graduate school without John’s support, first from afar, and then the last three years in residence at the Fox Leadership Program. Beyond his support, John has also served as a model of what a scholar, a college professor, and most importantly, a person ought to be. There is no one with a bigger heart than John. I can only hope to reach the high bar that he has set. I owe my parents everything. They deserve the credit for my strengths (and none of the blame for my weaknesses). Without their sacrifices, support and encouragement, none of this would have been possible. They cultivated and nurtured my curiosity and my interest in reading, thinking, and public affairs. They have also patiently tolerated my moodiness, frustration, and all of the other ups and downs of the last seven years, while always remaining my biggest cheerleaders. Mom and Dad, I love you and I hope that this final product makes you proud. Finally, I must note that in spite of the many contributions cited above and my own best efforts, there are inevitably mistakes, errors, and imperfections in the following pages. Those, of course, are my responsibility alone. !4 Table of Contents Introduction 6 1. The Man Who Changed Radio 31 2. The Colossus Rises 43 3. It’s The Money Stupid: The Failure of Liberal Political Talk 109 4. It’s Complicated: Republicans Relationship With Talk Radio 166 5. Hunting RINOs: Talk Radio and Moderare Republicans 229 6. Sleeping With the Enemy: Democrats and Talk Radio 267 7. The Some People’s Voice: Talk Radio and Public Policy 323 8. The Conservative Media Empire 361 9. The Big Picture 368 10. Bibliography 380 !5 Introduction August 1, 1988 marked a monumental change in the radio business and the political world. Yet, on that day, even avid news followers and people in radio or politics likely had no clue that something special had occurred. In fact, only a small audience tuned in1 as a failed disc jockey and former Kansas City Royals executive named Rush Hudson Limbaugh III debuted a nationally syndicated talk radio program on somewhere between 57 and 87 stations.2 Limbaugh’s program was brash, entertaining, controversial, and pushed boundaries. Prior to his national debut, this sort of programming did not exist outside of major cities. In fact, as of 1983, only fifty-nine talk radio stations existed nationwide, and the programming on many of those stations consisted of advice shows and staid interview and caller-focused programs that discussed everything from local issues to abominable snowmen. Most talk radio programming was local, and most of the stars of the industry, such as Larry King and Sally Jessie Rapheal, had left of center views, but rarely aired them. At the time, talk radio had a negligible political impact—in locales with a strong tradition of talk programming, such as Boston, hosts might be able to affect local and statewide policy debates (especially on visceral issues, such as seat belt requirement laws). But talk radio was not a partisan force, nor did it have any national political impact. Additionally, until 1987, a 1 Limbaugh’s average audience in 1988 was 299,000 listeners. 2 Determining the actual number of stations airing Limbaugh’s program at a given time was difficult. Syndicators were known to inflate numbers, and the available evidence offered many different answers. Hennen remembered his station being one of the original 47 stations airing Limbaugh in 1987, whereas Tom Tradup, who picked up Limbaugh’s program for WLS in Chicago in 1989, recalled being the 38th or 39th affiliate. The secondary literature got no more specific than the 57-87 station figure. Limbaugh himself claimed that the show began on 56 affiliates; Colford, Rush Limbaugh Story, 94; 138; Rush Limbaugh, “Ed McLaughlin, Founder of EIB,” August 1, 2008, http:// www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/08/01/ed_mclaughlin_founder_of_eib; Tom Tradup, Interview with Author, November 13, 2012; Scott Hennen, Interview with Author, December 18, 2012. !6 Introduction regulation called the Fairness Doctrine precluded opinion driven programming on controversial issues without offering an array of viewpoints during the broadcasting day. Limbaugh turned the radio business on its head, and, in turn, nurtured a major new political player. Within a decade, the political talk format inaugurated by Limbaugh aired on over 1000 stations, and kept millions company as they commuted, worked, and shouted back at their radios. Over the course of the 1990s, the number of nationally syndicated talk shows rose dramatically and the content of talk radio programs grew increasingly political and conservative. Thus, by the early Nineties this new medium began substantially to influence national politics and public policy.