"Fuller Wrath" wrote:

| 1. The Fairness Doctrine could be resurrected and rewritten to assure a
| balance of voices/opinions are heard on the public airwaves.
| 2. The audience has absolutely no input over what is heard on the airwaves
| (with very limited exceptions). If you try to argue that broadcasters are
| responding to market demands then the I.Q. factor in this country has
| indeed fallen to the low double or even single digit range.
| 3. No, what I would really like to see is an ownership cap of seven to a
| dozen stations per entity with no cross ownership. Then there might
| actually be some creative programming and diversity - you know, like there
| was for the first 75 years or so.... Imagine! stations with different
| studios, different personnel, maybe even different program directors! Then
| they wouldn't sell for over inflated amounts and we wouldn't get stripped
| down, dumbed down voice-tracked generic dog-vomit programming!
| 4. Radio listenership is down by 15-20%. There's a reason for that

Regarding your item number one, who gets to be the arbiter of this
"Fairness?" Government?

Regarding items two through four, I would argue that the problem is,
and always will be, program content. You'd never know this if you
read the industry rags; they are obsessed with digital transmission
methods, but if the monopoly ownership rules aren't attended to, radio
will dwindle and, eventually, die.

73,

--
Steve Lawrence
KAØPMD
Burnsville, Minnesota

"If a man wants his dreams to come true then he must wake up."
- Anonymous


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.775 / Virus Database: 522 - Release Date: 10/9/04