Michael Black wrote:
Telamon ) writes:

I think the Sony did all right! (Unfortunately the Hams were talking
about Heat Pumps, which is not one of my favorite subjects. So after
my little "experiment," I turned everything off and went to bed!)

I find most ham conversations boring. That would change if some were my
friends and I was interested in their personal details but as strangers
talking about some thing that interests them is generally not
interesting. When I listen to hams I care about how well I receive them
and where they are located and maybe their equipment but that is about
it.

Of course, one big difference is that amateur radio is a two-way
form of communication, with broadcasting specifically prohibited.
So listening to it is like overhearing someone on the bus having
a conversation with a friend, which generally is uninteresting unless
you're part of the conversation.

Broadcasting is to address those listeners at home, so if they aren't
talking to that audience, they aren't doing their job.

Just as with utility listening and number stations, listening to ham
radio is often for the sake of testing one's ability to receive a weak
signal or to run up a score of something, with the contents being
secondary.

Michael

What you're saying makes sense, and I myself would have said the same
thing at one time. Surely, you'd think that commercial radio stations,
whose very survival depends on their ability to attract and retain
listeners, could offer up something more interesting to listen to than
your typical conversation between hams. However, at least in my
opinion, they do not.

Where FM is concerned...forget about it. It's such a wasteland now that
I sometimes forget it even exists. Commercial AM is better, but there's
a lot of junk there, too. So many long infomercials about human growth
hormone or whatever the latest variety of snake oil is, etc. I actually
find that that the conversations I find by tuning around the ham bands
at random are more interesting...even if it's just some guy talking
about his antenna, or his house repairs, or whatever. At least it's
real, and I can relate to it. Real people, real events and real
problems are just more interesting to me than the programming dreamt up
or purchased by the folks at commercial broadcasters.

I actually think this was one of the initial appeals of "reality TV".
The networks were producing so much garbage that someone realized they
could get better programming just by turning a camera on somewhere and
walking away. But of course, the temptation to improve upon "reality"
is irresistible, I guess, and what now goes under the name "reality TV"
is anything but real--shows like The Surreal Life and The Simple Life
with Paris Hilton--these shows have zilch to do with "reality".
Consequently, they stink.

Okay...I'm done!

Steve