This is premature, because all we are going by is speculation about their new schedule.

And I am as pissed off as anyone about what happened to Malloy and why.

But setting aside the Malloy debacle for a moment, the hints and rumors seem to indicate that AAR may be doing the right things in its new scheduling plans, both commercially and politically.

Both in nuts and bolts and in ability to draw potential listeners, AAR may actually doing more to spread a real liberal and left/progressive message alternative into the mainstream. It could be offering red-meat leftism in a way that is likely to be more palatable to more listeners and picked up by more affiliates.

Why? Because most of the hosts they have been recommitting to -- or upgrading -- are real progressives of the left -- NOT milktoast centrists. Sam Seder, Laura Flanders and Rachael Maddow are the real thing folks. Great radio personalities, who also do NOT water down the liberal and progressive message. (They're not Al Franken or Jerry Springer.)

Mike Malloy is great, but his darkness and ventures into tinhat territory is more likely to preach to the choir than to win many people over to our side....In other words, good niche radio, but not what's needed to bring over the fence straddlers.

1)Putting Sam Seder on in the mid morning slot moves a smart, funny and compelling and fiery leftie into a space where he is more likely to gain listeners and stations. With a sellable show, mid mornings are a good place to convince local stations to carry network programming. He is less likely to be prempted by sports, Lionel and other programming

2)Although it may seem paradoxical, moving Rachel Maddow into a portion of Morning Seditions old slot (and perhaps earlier) also makes it more likely to convince stations to carry her. Although she'd still have to contend with the same competition that Sam is being spared, she's in a better slot than her previous morning spot. Drive Time is when local stations are most likely to want to have their own hosts.

3)Laura Flanders is not as visceral or compelling as Malloy. BUT, she is a diehard progressive, who also has a good radio personality and who puts thiungs in a practical perspective that more people in the "middle" can relate to.

Like I said, this is only based on rumors and heresay. And I am not suggesting that anyone give up on efforts to get Malloy back on the air, or to forgive AAR for the way they treated him.

But it's possible that the end result of this is that more clearly "left" voices may at least be given the chance to surface in the jungle of commercial radio.