"Kimba W. Lion" wrote in message
Actually, I was trying to look beyond his proselytizing. I used his own
phrase as a reference point.

If you think ownership doesn't matter, well... dream on, silly dreamer.

Thanks for the "if", Kim. I didn't say this and don't believe it.
Ownership matters. But business model matters more, including the ability to
design and subsidize proprietary receivers. The delivery system matters more
because it permits the aggregation of niche tastes. The absence of content
regulation, particularly television-style coerced, non-marketplace, nabcaster
carriage is hugely important. This enables satellite radio to build a secular,
pro-liberty constituency that in time will let it win the battle against
terrestrial for full First Amendment rights.

But ownership is in there somewhere. Regs chose duopoly rather than
monopoly for satellite radio, and chose well.

Never forget that satellite radio is *hometown* radio. It brings the best
of the culture, seven jazz channels for example, to every community in America.
Including the "flyover" communities whose limited commercial potential makes
them irrelevant to terrestrial media elites.

Jerome