Talk:WRNO-FM

Fair use rationale for Image:WRNO995.jpg

Image:WRNO995.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

What is the source/evidence that Rush Radio is an "April Fool's Day Stunt"? WRNO lured Rush away from WWL (Entercom) after an 18 year run and this is the first day on the station. I tend to doubt that this is a permanent schedule, but it's in the realm of possibility. Very few stations stream Rush other than during the live hours (Noon-3 Eastern) and rebroacasting the show could generate a significant listenership, especially on the internet, since many potential conservative listeners are employed and not able to listen to the show during the day. It's approaching 6:30 am (Eastern) on April 2nd, and the music is still playing.69.37.43.190 (talk) 10:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Obvious Bias

The latter part of this article is not NPOV, and reads like an anti-Limbaugh diatribe. Someone needs to clean it up. I would do it, but I no longer live in New Orleans, and am not familiar with the station. The specific parts are the last few paragraphs that claim that Rush's viewpoints on global warming are detrimental to New Orleans, and that the station, along with the other Clear Channel stations in the greater New Orleans market, are ignoring local issues. 166.82.171.153 (talk) 04:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and reverted the page back to the June 15, 2008 version just prior to 504crank's edits. The link he provides to what appears to be his personal blog shows nothing but an anti-Limbaugh diatribe. See: http://peoplegetready.jockamofeenanay.com/?cat=77 There is no solid evidence anywhere on that link that supports his claims. 71.71.224.159 (talk) 17:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The statements restored to the history which detail comments made by Rush Limbaugh are not opinion. They are empirically factual. To comment on something Rush Limbaugh says will, by nature, sound like an opinion, because everything Rush Limbaugh says is opinionated. The difference between an objective description of what Rush Limbaugh says, and what Rush Limbaugh does in disparaging climate change science, is that he makes statements which have no basis in fact. Even worse, Rush Limbaugh's statements are made to benefit the interests of one of his advertisers, the American Petroleum Institute, a nefarious front for Exxon and other oil companies to assault the overwhelming, peer-reviewed and respected, scientific evidence of climate change.--504crank (talk) 03:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Added NPOV and dubious statements to the uncited opinions in the history section and the discussion paragraph above is a reflection of bias that's gone far off-topic. What does climate change have to do with this article? Please provide appropriate citations and rewrite the paragraph for NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markbyrn (talk • contribs) 01:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

"What does climate change have to do with this article?" Scientific measurements of sea levels demonstrate empirically that sea levels are rising. Higher storm surges, stronger hurricanes, and more frequent hurricanes, combined with the coastal erosion exacerbated by canals dredged to support the oil and gas industry, all combine to place New Orleans at the leading edge of the climate change crisis. WRNO is a New Orleans radio station. It's absolutley relevant to New Orleans. A programming decision made by corporate executives who don't live in New Orleans forces a valuable broadcast outlet to disparage issues of concern to the survival of the city. Instead, the station is used to insult New Orleans residents. If a discussion of Rush Limbaugh is valid in this forum, then a discussion about whether or not his program is appropriate for the market served by WRNO is valid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 504crank (talk • contribs) 20:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)