Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#14
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Steve, I'm sure you've confused me with another poster. I've never pined
for a different and supposedly golden era of radio with council meetings, lost puppies and local artists. These were Hendricks and gaffo's themes, not mine. Consolidation was a theme of others. Payola was a theme of others. Live and local, a fetish of others. Automated and local is cheaper and works as well on radio as it does on the web. My issues are, typically 1) The sheer inefficiency of paying for content through undifferentiated commercial sponsorship. Not that long ago, the only way for a listener to pay for radio was to be harangued. 2) NAB's attempts to brake technical progress and its chokehold on the bandwidth and the fundamental liberties of its competitors 3) If excessive competition were a problem (the Bakersfield principle) the license prices wouldn't be going up 4) If even more competition eventually forces profitability and license prices down, terrestrial radio would survive nonetheless, and might even find it necessary to invest in local content to differentiate and compete. Am I a little nostalgic for Wm. B Williams, Shep, Carlton Fredericks, Brad Crandall, Bill Watson, BAI and Monitor? Of course. What thinking listener doesn't have a set of names like these, exemplifying calm, worldliness, spontaneity and respect. But they were rarities even then, they can't be regulated back into existence, and I probably wouldn't have time for them today. The golden era of radio is the one we're in, with satellite, internet and time-shifting through Winamp, CD burning and flash memory. As dismal as AM and FM became, the marketplace found other ways to meet listener demand. Good radio people may have landed out on their ear, but we listeners definitely got our portion. What makes Satellite radio hometown? Well, when NAB does its annual brag about how many artists and songs terrestrial radio introduced, its tally includes about 12,000 signals that any given listener cannot receive. It is satellite that brings these niche formats to every community in the contiguous states. A far richer variety in East Jesus, USA than was available in the biggest markets a few years ago. Each listener is a hometown subscriber/sponsor; satellite has a name on file, a feedback and accountability mechanism in place, and a keen awareness of the economic value that listener represents. XM is developing digital fountain technology and will be as locally differentiated as regulators permit it to be. No longer will the information you need be tied to the music or commercials you despise; it'll be stored in the background and available at your convenience. Including, perhaps, a traffic report from terrestrial, and real-time room availabilities from the local motels. Onscreen or via synthesized voice. NAB will have a fit. I'll admit there's a disigenuous element to the "hometown" crack, though I stand by it. I'm actually on very friendly terms with most of the broadcasters in this community. Jim and Jim, the former owners of one group. Cindy and Jen, the voice talent. George, the new manager. Jan, owner of the other group. Doug and Tracy on the air. Known 'em and liked 'em for years. But I don't listen. Home is where the eardrums are. Jerome "Steve Sobol" wrote in message ... Cooperstown.Net wrote: This angle of attack appears to be going noplace. So I expect we'll shortly be reminded that Karmazin runs Sirius and that both providers are teamed with good terrestrial radio people. Look, folks, perhaps I shouldn't have named names. Especially since I don't follow the satellite radio business as closely as I could. Especially, especially since there are people who are much more familiar with the players involved than I am. ![]() However, if y'all really want to argue that satellite radio is "hometown" radio, I'll argue until my dying day that it's not. It is the diametric OPPOSITE of hometown radio. "Hometown" implies a broadcast outlet directing its programming at an audience in the same geographical area. Jerome, THAT is the point I was trying to make (and apparently failed to make). For us ("us" including you, if I recall correctly) to have complained for years about industry consolidation and the homogenization of radio outlets across the USA, and then for you to tout satellite as "hometown" programming, is beyond my comprehension, and I'm shocked to hear such a thing from any of the regulars, ESPECIALLY you. Maybe I'm just confused. Perhaps you could clarify your statement. **SJS -- JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED "The wisdom of a fool won't set you free" --New Order, "Bizarre Love Triangle" |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
197 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (23-NOV-04) | Shortwave | |||
190 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (21-NOV-04) | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1415 Â September 24, 2004 | Broadcasting | |||
214 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (09-APR-04) | Shortwave | |||
209 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (04-APR-04) | Shortwave |