Dear Telamon,

I agree with your assessment of MONITORING TIMES magazine. They spend
FAR too much space writing about "digital," "internet," and "computer"
topics than they should, in my opinion. If I want to read about
listening to stations over the internet, I could subscribe to
"Internet Monitoring Times" (if there were such a magazine). When I
pay for MONITORING TIMES I expect to see articles pertaining to RADIO
(listening to signals sent over the air) rather than COMPUTER
(listening to signals sent via WIRE).

There is nothing wrong with having articles about computer-control of
radios but the article should be radio-focused.

That said, in the scheme of things there certainly is, again in my
opinion, a place for "internet radio." As I'm writing this, I am
listening, in the background, to an internet "radio" station playing
classical music. This is a fine and useful adjunct to using a
computer.

But when I want to hear "hard news" or anything else of importance
(even exotic entertainment), I turn on one of my shortwave radios, in
the knowledge that this means of information dissemination CANNOT be
censored by an governmental agency in my own country. Nor can anyone
determine to just what I am listening at any given time, something
than CANNOT be stated with regard to the internet.

You are absolutely correct in stating that there are plenty of
computer magazines out there for people to learn about what is
available for them. I think that MONITORING TIMES should STRICTLY keep
its focus on RADIO.

Regarding "more digital content," I have seen this "cop-out" with a
number of print magazines. Many have cut back their print schedules in
favor of having more content online. Well I, for one, do NOT enjoy
reading magazines online. I could be accused of being old-fashioned,
but I prefer to have something to hold in my hand. There is nothing
wrong with archiving print editions on a CD-ROM (as MONITORING TIMES
does) and selling it; this is nice in that it allows one to save space
by recycling old magazines yet, if needed, to be able to access past
articles.

But I hate to see magazines cut back on their print content in favor
of online content. POPULAR COMMUNICATIONS has thus far not lost its
focus; I hope MONITORING TIMES gets back to its.

Best,

Joe

On Jan 18, 9:10*pm, Telamon
wrote:
What's wrong with these "the future is digital" guys? When the editorial
staff of a SW magazine advocates all things digital with advice like
listening to SW stations over the web makes it apparent that my dollars
should buy someone else's magazine that actually follows the hobby.

In the Jan 09 issue I was greeted with we are going to "greatly increase
our digital content" so I guess I'll have to go someplace else for real
SW news instead of this digital is wonderful BS. If I want to read about
computers there are several I can think of that do a much better job
then the amateurs that write in MT.

There is no excuse for being a cheerleader for DRM either. We all know
DRM sucks. Why anyone would want old digital technology to replace old
analog technology and think it progress needs to take another look at it.

Even HAM's don't want DRM polluting bands they use but the dunderheads
at MT think DRM is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Pathetic.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California