The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney: Air America Media Reaction Examined

02 August 2005

Air America Media Reaction Examined

Sitting Out The Scandal

Comparing Coverage: MSM, Talk Radio, Blogosphere

Here's a pop quiz:

If you're running Air America Radio right about now, are you

A) horrified your dirty secrets are being aired by bloggers and others, or

B) thrilled, knowing it will shortly be back to business as usual, since the mainstream media has decided to look the other way at your network's past dirty dealings and recent conflicting statements.

Hate to be so cynical, but I'm afraid the answer was A) a day or two ago, with B) much closer to reality, today.

Air America can say with confidence that Internet attention will soon die down, with no threat of an imminent New York Times, or other major newspaper bombshell.

The day the media's old guard allow bloggers to drive a story, is the day they (insert Helen Thomas joke here).

Time for a look at how Air America's dirty money scandal, where as much as $800,000 in taxpayer funds were diverted from a Bronx-area community center, the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club, is being covered:

Blogosphere, Internet, New Media:

Bloggers jumped on this rapidly, beginning with the Radio Equalizer plus Michelle Malkin, and soon after joined by hundreds of others, from the largest, to the smallest.

Support has been terrific, there seems to be a realization perhaps learned during Rathergate, that bloggers simply cannot back off and allow a major story to die.

Nothing so far from Drudge, Opinion Journal, or one big conservative blog. Perhaps that will soon change. Will Drudge cover something he didn't first expose, or a blogger-led story (he doesn't like blogs very much)?

Talk Radio:

Just a couple of years ago, it would have been talk radio leading the charge, on a subject like this. Now, it's in bad shape, so reactions were varied. Some led, others followed or haven't even mentioned it.

To the Radio Equalizer, it appeared a number of local hosts, such as KSFO's Melanie Morgan, WRKO's Howie Carr, all of KVI's local guys and others were right on top of this from day one. I've been doing radio interviews all over the country, starting with The Rusty Humphries Show.

Has anyone heard Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh mention it yet?

Free Republic poster "libstripper" says this:

Has anyone heard Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh mention it yet?

I called Rush yesterday and got to the screener, who said the matter had been covered on Friday and hung up. Walter E. Williams hosted on Friday and I didn't hear him mention the matter while I was listening.

More important, however, is that the size of the embezzlements has doubled since Friday from about $400,000 then to about $875,000 now. We all ought be calling in to Rush today to keep this going. After all, he didn't just mention the Swiftvets once on his show and then forget them. I don't get Hannity, so I don't know whether he's covered this or not.
08/02/2005 7:43:33 AM PDT by libstripper

A number of hosts are holding back, is it because they don't want to ruffle corporate feathers, they haven't heard about it, or another reason? Some were out last week while this was developing.

Sometimes, it's about ego, if they didn't discover it, they're not inclined to participate in someone else's glory. It's not a constructive approach.

Hosts who are also active bloggers seem to make the most informed, effective combination. Who was more on top of this than Hugh Hewitt? Not only very substantial information on his site, he was very quick to invite me on his program.

Hewitt's blog forces him to always be well-prepped, while some in talk radio phone it in.

Mainstream media:

How do you define it?

Do FOX News, the New York Sun, Post and Washington Times count? I don't think so.

The only real "establishment" media piece came Friday from CNN's Inside Politics program, where this site and others were featured.

Will Air America end up off the hook? It could happen, but it's really up to bloggers to decide how stubborn they want to be, if stamina is high, so too could be the payoff.

What will it take to get the mainstream media to cover this story? Why hasn't it appeared on the AP wire, at the very least?

Please leave comments below with your thoughts.

Michelle Malkin's new post is up this morning, with a second Sun article that gets Franken talking! I'm going to examine that end in my next post.

Are you reading my most recent article? Click here to check.

Update: Rush is addressing the issue now.

City Kid$ graphic by George Adair, MSM by Suzy Rice, AAR Scandal by Steve Wilson. You may use them on your site if you give proper credit to the sources. Your Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, help to defray my upcoming site upgrade costs. Thanks!

40 Comments:

d)ignored it for the non story it is.

fox isnt main stream media?are you kidding me?if they are the biggest in the biz and are the lap dogs of the "majority" then how can you say they arent main stream?my god you really need to look into a different biz

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 04:01
How do you tolerate these liberals' hateful comments? Are they capable of adult conversation? Isn't it exhausting to be so angry 24/7?

By Lone Ranger, at 02 August, 2005 06:56
FOX is only main stream irritant, (total audience for news is 2.5 million--MSM has 30 mil), the Washington Times, NY Sun and Post are strictly minor league.

But a big reason for the non-coverage may be the obvious hole in the story which is (are) the dates of these transactions. You have to have a coherent time line and so far there is no indication that the performers knew anything or that the new owners are guilty of anything other than terrible due dilligence (or no due dilligence). If the money was stolen on the prior ownership's watch, then the current owners are liable in the legal sense and will have to pay it back AND sue Cohen to get the money back. Somewhere somehow something has to be shown that the transaction took place under this management. So far there is bubkis, nada, and zilch.

By Howard, at 02 August, 2005 08:01
Cohen was a Republican when it suited him, then a Democrat when he needed to be, and in the end he turned out to be nothing, except a scam artist.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 09:27
As far as the Austion numbers, have you noticed that the station is now airing local morning talent, not AAR talent. I bet this is true in most of the markets that got a bump in the ratings: Less AAR content = Higher Ratings.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 09:48
Once again, Dick Tuck gives half truths to propagate the standard lie that Err Amerika is gaining strength.

While KOKE (local AA-hole station) did go up from .6 to 1.1 and KJCE did go down from 1.5 to 1.3, our braindead buddy Dick ignores the fact that KJCE is the "B-Team" of conservative radio. Rush plays on KLBJ...and JUMPPED from 5.3 to 5.8.

Nice try, Dick. Go back to rubbing your little Al doll and dreaming....

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 09:54
I'm sorry but what is the point of touting horrid ratings jumping to merely terrible ratings? Also pick one market and ignore the languishing results in others? Do you really think that lends any credibility to your point?

By realdebate, at 02 August, 2005 10:37
I don't know why anyone listens to ANY of the trash that is talkradio.

It's all a load of batshit.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 10:41
What is surprising is the evasiveness of apologists for AA. Instead of dealing with the fact that Al Franken is on the record admitting that AA did in fact receive embezzled money from a conflicted board member, some want to to talk about ratings nes that at best are what is called a dead dog bounce: If a dead dog is dropped from high enough, it will bounce. But the dog, like AA, is still dead.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 10:44
Just to put Little Dick's crowing about Err Amerika's Austin numbers into perspective....for every 100 listeners to the two conservative talk stations, about 15 mutants listen to Al Franken-fraud and his band of idiots.

Wow...what a runaway success!

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 10:54
Brian asks: "Will Air America end up off the hook?"

The answer is "yes" if investigators choose not to prosecute, and "no" if they choose to prosecute. You would never know it from reading this blog, but Brian Maloney is neither the DA, judge nor jury in New York.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 11:29
The reason this isn't a big story is because:

A) The MSM is not fascinated by Air America.

B) The facts aren't in about this story anyway. Did Air America even receive any of these funds? If so, did Air America know about the source? (Given that they didn't even have a clue about how much money there was, I doubt they knew the source of the money, either.) The results of the investigation will tell us either way. The MSM seems able to wait till then.

C) It looks like Air America is doing the right thing, regardless, in setting up a plan to make sure the center recovers all its money.

D) The true bad actor appears to be Evan Cohen anyway. Cohen was fired in the first month for misrepresenting funds to Air America, so it hardly seems appropriate to automatically assign blame to Air America for Cohen's misdeeds.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 12:10
James is correct, particularly about his final point. This is a real scandal, but the main actor is a disgraced FORMER executive, not anyone currently with AA. I know this is troublesome for people like Brian who would prefer that AA be burned at the stake, but it simply is the way it is.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 12:14
Austin has a second conservative radio station--1370, which has Laura Ingraham , Sean Hannity, and many more conservative talkers. I think this station also get a fair share of the market.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 12:14
Just reading this page, and Rush is hitting on the Air America story (and how the MSM is ignoring it, while the internet is all over it) even as I type.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 12:15
Rush is running the story about Air America right now, in the context of the lame MSM.

By rich glasgow, at 02 August, 2005 12:16
I wonder what the story is with Drudge? He hasn't picked up the story.

By Hecla Ma, at 02 August, 2005 12:25
I suspect that the reason we haven't had Rush et al on this subject for a while is that there hasn't been a lot of "there" there yet. At the onset, all we had to work with was the Bronx News article. Now that other papers are fleshing out the story and Al Franken himself has talked about it, there's more to discuss. Likewise, Drudge primarily links to articles written in other sources, and not much has been written as of yet. Give it time.

I'm more than willing to believe that Cohen screwed over Air America and didn't leave behind much of anything in terms of notes or accounting. Air America is an organization founded on ideals, and ideals more often than not <> business sense. I see it all the time in my line of work. I suspect that any MSM articles we see will be through the lens of Cohen's malfesance than anything else.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 12:52
Hey Little Dick:

If you want to crow about Airhead America having 15% of the listeners that conservative radio hosts have IN THE NUMBER 42 radio market....put down the Kool-aid.

And by the way, if you want to make reference to Rush's issue, let's all pull out the videotape of Al Frankin-fraud admitting to being a cokehead while at SNL. Minnesota will never elect Senator Al Cokehead....

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 12:58
1. MSM or mainstream media is shorthand it is not intended to be descriptive. It refers to ABC,NBC,CBS network news, NYT,WP,AP,NPR,CNN whose reporting, world view, political perspective are very close and tend to follow a particular line, i.e the same stream therefore mainstream. Fox follows this stream some of the time but does deviate quite often.

2. The idea that the MSM and others have not picked up this story because it is still unclear or irrelevant to the current management of Air America is ludicrous. Since when have they shown such qualms on stories which hurt conservatives. The standard for reporting liberal scandals is a smoking gun for conservative scandals someone thought they heard someone say they smelt smoke.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 13:16
And another thing: Now the new "parent" company lays this at the feet of Evan Cohen. That's Fantasyland spew.

Any company worth its salt does something called "due diligence" before signing the papers to purchase another company. They get lawyers and accountants and dig through the prospective purchaser's books.

Cokehead Al's new parent company is ADMITTING they are going to pay back the loan. Why would they, if that loan was NOT on the books at close of the purchase? All they had to do was pull out the books, show the loan not being there, and case-closed. No...they are commiting to a repayment plan. Why?

Piquotte/Cokehead Al are repaying the loan because the books showed that outstanding liablity at the time of the purchase from the original company and signed papers at close that assumed liability for outstanding liabilities.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 14:01
So?

So what's the scandal then?

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 14:08
Gee, a concerted cover-up does not qualify for a scandal?

Knowingly taking money, meant for kids and the elderly, and funneling it through your business, and ONLY initiating repayment AFTER the light of day is shed upon it....is not a scandal?

Getting caught, in what appears to be an illegal money laundering operation, is not a scandal?

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 14:16
Piquotte/Cokehead Al are repaying the loan because the books showed that outstanding liablity at the time of the purchase from the original company and signed papers at close that assumed liability for outstanding liabilities.

This is what you wrote.

So where is the cover up? If the loans were on the books then they new they needed to pay the money back. They have a plan to do that. So where is the cover up?

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 14:25
Conspiring with the administrators of the Boys and Girls club to defraud the public by accepting grant money for purposes OTHER than to which they were intended by the grant application? That's one.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 14:30
Conspiring with the administrators of the Boys and Girls club to defraud the public by accepting grant money for purposes OTHER than to which they were intended by the grant application? That's one.

Right. And according to AAR all the transactions in question occurred under the previous ownership and were undertaken by Evan Cohan who with his dual relationship to both organizations had an obvious conflict of interest. A position he clearly used to defraud eveyone else involved.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 14:34
You aren't going to hold AAR responsible for Gloria Wise Clubs misappropriation of Gloria Wise Club grant funds are you?

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 14:35
James: "The results of the investigation will tell us either way. The MSM seems able to wait till then."

Funny, the MSM isn't waiting for the Wilson/Plame investigation to finish. They started calling for Karl Rove's head from Day 1.

The MSM only shuts up for the Left.

By SkyePuppy, at 02 August, 2005 16:22
You aren't going to hold AAR responsible for Gloria Wise Clubs misappropriation of Gloria Wise Club grant funds are you?

It seems that Brian Maloney will.

I won't. Unless it is shown that someone at AAR, other than Evan Cohen, had any knowledge that something illegal was taking place.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 16:33
Funny, the MSM isn't waiting for the Wilson/Plame investigation to finish. They started calling for Karl Rove's head from Day 1.

You have some examples of course? Of a mainstream media organization calling for the head of Karl Rove over the Plame affair in July of 2003. Or anytime between then and when it became known that, contrary to what the WH press secretary said, Rove did have something to do with the whole thing.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 16:36
Busted. I have engaged in hyperbole.

Let me be more circumspect: Contrary to the way the MSM is doing an excellent job of shutting up over the apparent AA scandal (ie, waiting for the not-yet-visible investigation to finish), they have repeatedly reported on calls for the firing of Karl Rove (CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/07/12/cia.leaks.ap/) (CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/11/opinion/main708115.shtml) and have pursued the search for evidence that Karl Rove was either "the" leaker or "a" leaker of Plame's name (random WH press briefing: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050720-6.html#3). This is while an investigation is still pending.

By SkyePuppy, at 02 August, 2005 16:58
True. But it has been pointed out that no one, outside of the intrepid operators of this site it seems, really gives a crap about AAR. The White House on the other hand, as we learned from 8 years of chasing every rumor and smear against the Clinton administration, holds much more appeal to the MSM than a band of under funded lefties with some microphones and few low powered transmittors.

Personally I stopped watching TV news, cable or otherwise years ago. The whole lot of them aren't interested in anything other than whats going to get them the highest ratings.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 17:06
Mitchell, you're right that nobody gives a crap about AAR. But usually they do care when corporations & other organizations take money from defenseless children. If this was Enron/Haliburton, you can bet your bottom dollar it would be plastered all over the place, probably with calls for a probe into what/when Dick Cheney knew.

By SkyePuppy, at 02 August, 2005 17:12
Which is why I think the NY Sun coverage has been pretty even handed. If sites like this handled the issue with an ounce of professionalism more of the mainstream media might start to report on it. When you come to this site and you see photos of Al Franken with the word scandal stamped across his face and all kinds of conjecture about who knew what and who's trying to cover up what and golly gee they mentioned my name in the Washington Times you just can't expect to be taken seriously. All Brian Maloney seems interested in is innuendo and partisan point scoring.

There is a DOI investigation taking place isn't there? What more could the NY Times call for. As I said Mr. Maloney is deluded if he thinks he is presenting information here that any credible media outlet would want to associate themselves with. The way he writes you'd think there was no investigation taking place until after he broke the story. He comments about the scandal being bigger than we thought. Gee why is that? Because the original anon source got the dollar figures wrong! Duh! Stop the presses. That's some earth shattering revelation. It's comical.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 17:27
Howard, thanks for one of the most coherent and sensible posts from your end of the spectrum. It's refreshing to read. Here's where you, James and Mitchell are missing the point however:

[Howard] But a big reason for the non-coverage may be the obvious hole in the story which is (are) the dates of these transactions. You have to have a coherent time line and so far there is no indication that the performers knew anything or that the new owners are guilty of anything other than terrible due dilligence (or no due dilligence).

Which equals contributory negligence in the defrauding of a public charity and theft of public funds. As to an excuse: I hope no one's pinning their hopes on "ignorance".

Unless Cohen went to extraordinary efforts to conceal the fraud (which, if true, should have been reported by Air America even more urgently), an audit would have revealed the theft. Questions about the company's creditors should have been asked BEFORE the entity was repackaged to exclude him. Otherwise their kind of wanton passivity is bound to defraud creditors, both past and present.

And - in the moral universe that Air America has claimed to represent in their news coverage - that makes Piquant, LLC an Evil Corporation, intentionally or otherwise, that must now Set Things Right. Like driving a 20-ton rig, running a company is NOT a "right", it's a privilege, and one that should be undertaken only by those willing to expend the necessary effort and due diligence. ESPECIALLY when the company exists in the name of the public interest like AAR.

That Air America has not been the one to disclose Mr. Cohen's nefarious behavior to the world is especially odious. Aren't we entitled as a public to know what a scumbag Cohen is? (Regardless of whether AAR's downstream legal liability has yet been determined?) To withhold this kind of information from the public - when they've already tacitly admitted there are no "secrecy" rules preventing them from discussing it - may reveal AAR's news operation to be a fraud as well. That's ALSO news.

If the money was stolen on the prior ownership's watch, then the current owners are liable in the legal sense and will have to pay it back AND sue Cohen to get the money back.

Excellent point. Wish more "right-wingers" were talking about this possibility. In fact I was with you, until you unilaterally establish your prerequisites for what counts as a "story":

Somewhere somehow something has to be shown that the transaction took place under this management.
So far there is bubkis, nada, and zilch.

The transaction involved the current owners by definition; where do you think they were they when the "transaction" took place?

The story has expanded beyond the scope of the investigation because there are other issues involved that are newsworthy. AAR's delinquence in reporting the fraud is just one such example.

Granted that, so far, the "news" is more like a stream of facts and speculation; however, as long as falsehoods are not stipulated and propagated, there's nothing wrong or untoward with that. And, since Air America has demonstrated their unwillingness to lead the story on Mr. Cohen, ALL of it will have to be sorted out in the public square.

P.S. Mitchell: Your point about the "Scandal" logos is noted. If this turns out not to be a scandal at all, that sort of thing ought to be expunged retroactively from all "right-wing" web coverage, lest we all reveal our bias. ;)

By RD, at 02 August, 2005 18:09
RD,

Wow. Someone on this site who actually is interested in what other people have to say.

Thanks.

I've said it before, I'm not interested in carrying water for AAR. I think it's boring as hell. People who like to put labels on people would call me a liberal. Whatever. I'm only interested in the truth. I have every expectation that the current investigation will lay blame where it is due. I guess I really shouldn't care because this site doesn't reflect my view point but it pains me to see such infantile behavior from supposed professionals. But hey, if Maloney aspires to be a Drudge clone that's his perogative.

I don't think i have anything more to contribute here. Most seem only interested in flaming people.

Thanks again.

By Anonymous, at 02 August, 2005 22:16
I'd like to see the day that Conrad Black's New York Sun makes a dime profit.

By Anonymous, at 03 August, 2005 00:14
I wonder what we would be hearing if Limbaugh diverted $875,000 from a community center? Would any investigative activities be described as "infantile behavior"? We all know the answer. Headlines would be flying before our eyes and ears hourly. I'm always amazed at the left's quest for the "truth". The left is crumbling. hehehe

By Anonymous, at 04 August, 2005 09:46
Sadly this is believable. We are dealing with individuals who have a strange sense of right and wrong (like Franken) and believe that if they were not direct participants in the overt act (a rubber stamp?) that somehow the incident never occured. We have a generation of Germans who used that line.

A
Saint Louis

By Anonymous, at 05 August, 2005 16:49
Hey Brian - It is great to know that you are alive and well. We miss you in Seattle where you were the perfect counter and foil on KIRO-AM to liberal/progressive scumbags like Mike Webb. For those of you who are not in the know, Brian had a great radio show on KIRO but was given the gate for suggesting that CBS fire Dan Blather for his biased attacks on GWB's national guard service using falsified documentation.

Being a CBS affiliate, this acknowledgement of media bias was too much for KIRO to deal with, and Brian was cashiered for his honesty.

By the way, if I ever meet Mike Webb in person I will re-arrange his face in grotesque fashion for calling supporters of President Bush facists on his late night KIRO radio program.

Webb is allowed to make outlandish statements like that and get away with it, but Brian is fired for calling a spade a spade. Go figure. Another case of network and media bias as far as I am concerned. Keep up the good work, Brian my friend!

Your Seattle admirer,

Uncle Trogdor

By Anonymous, at 06 August, 2005 01:53

The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

02 August 2005

Air America Media Reaction Examined

40 Comments:

Recent Equalizations

Bumping Up The Levels

Syndicated Talkers

Local Hosts

TRE Contributors

Broadcast Scoops

Busy Equalizing

Humour

Ireland

The Radio Equalizer

About Me