I have mixed feelings about the ARRL, but I think he has a valid point.

First of all, I really hate QST. I find the April fools articles highly
insulting (Scientific American used to do it, but they took the time to
make the articles creative and thought-provoking (not to mention highly
convincing). It's as if QST just has some extra pages every year that
they can't fill with useful information.

Another thing that really burns me about QST is the proportion of
articles about putting memory or peripherals in your computer, or using
the internet. Not only are there plenty of magazines out there that are
doing a much better job of supporting the PC culture, but the internet
is also arguably the reason that kids are not interested in ham radio
anymore.. well, that, and the ARRL is still trying to attract
youngsters with the exciting prospect of talking to people around the
world. They haven't noticed that kids are carrying cell phones to
middle school and making penpals on other continents with AIM.

Finally, I really don't like contesting at all, and this is a big part
of QST's content too. Contesting brings out the ugliest aspects of most
hams' personalities, and it's just not interesting to me to fight qrm
and lousy bands to exchange a callsign, qth, and get the hell off my
frequency, over and over again,

I would happily join if I could do without it, but as it says in the
masthead, membership and subscription to QST cannot be separated. Here
is the reason, in case you're wondering. I worked for a
pretty-good-sized magazine, and I spoke with QST's editor so this isn't
something I just made up. Magazines do not get rich selling
subscriptions. They do, however, have to demonstrate large circulation
in order to convince advertisers to part with their money. QST is a big
money maker for the ARRL, but if half of the members quit their
subscription, Kenwood, Icom, HRO, and all the others would invest in
other publications with better numbers.

Is the league wasting our money? I don't know.. I took a break from ham
radio for a few years while pursuing other interests, and last year
when I got back on the air I discovered a new band. Okay, well, it's
just a few frequencies, but I know that in the past hams have gotten
stirred up over the prospect of losing a band to wireless cable,
paging, or whatever, and the ARRL played a big part in defending our
spectrum (or at least that's how I remember it). I know the FCC isn't
in the habit of just giving up frequencies too, so I have to think that
the league's lobbyists had at least something to do with that.

Maybe it would be perfect if we could get rid of QST and get the league
to put those dollars and personnel into the other, more practical
functions, but I suspect that, aside from the three of us, just about
everyone actually likes reading that rag, and there isn't much of an
incentive for them to scrap it.

The editors and directors of QST are really nice people to talk to, and
I encourage everyone to call them and (tactfully) share your feelings.
If nobody complains about it, why should they fix it?