"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
news


The "majority" couldn't care less about IBOC.

This is true. The misguided marketing by the industry has not created much
interest. What is creating interest is unique programming, which is slowly
growing.

The radios they have work fine for them (or used to, before IBOC started
up, or, rather, before, in the case of AM radio, when they backed off the
fidelity to that of a telephone....)

The NRSC 10 kHz roll off came before HD was ever thought of. It was due more
to the overcrowding of the band by the FCC than to any technology issue.

Young people don't listen to the radio anymore. They have their iPod's and
other such digital media players that are used far more widely, and they
don't have to put up with commercials.

Funny, but all statistics contradict you. 95% of teens and 18-24's use
radio. Like all Americans, with more entertainment and leisure time
alternatives, the total usage in hours is less, but radio is used.
Incidentally, the main reason why under-24's use less radio is gaming, not
iPods. iPod owners (or any MP3 player brand) actually use more radio as they
are simply more engaged music users.

For us boomers, radio is becoming a medium that simply ignores us and
doesn't program for or to us, and so is committing a slow suicide.

There is no money in programming to those over 55, so there is no specific
programming... such as standards or 50's oldies... as it is not profitable.
Suicide would be programming to an audience for which there is no advertiser
interest.

"dxAce" wrote in message ...


David Eduardo wrote:


Bottom line is that that 'obit' did not appear on the front page of the
Cleveland Plain Dealer as you stated.

Correct, if you are being picky. A news item appeared on the front page the
day after her death, while an obituary appeared on the obituary page.

So once again, you were caught in a lie. Just one of so, so many over the
past
50 years!

Nah, this is just a difference in terminology. Two items appeared in the
paper, a news item on one page and an obituary on another. Call them
whatever you choose and I am fine with that as the objective of my even
mentioning the item(s) was to clarify the difference between being a
"socialite" and a"community leader."

The issue here was to show
you that my mother was not a "socialite" but a very involved and
dedicated
member of the community where she lived. A two day difference in a date
is
of zero meaning in this. Nice try at obfuscating, though.

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message ...


David Eduardo wrote:


Bottom line is that that 'obit' did not appear on the front page of the
Cleveland Plain Dealer as you stated.

Correct, if you are being picky. A news item appeared on the front page the
day after her death, while an obituary appeared on the obituary page.

So once again, you were caught in a lie. Just one of so, so many over the
past
50 years!

Nah, this is just a difference in terminology. Two items appeared in the
paper, a news item on one page and an obituary on another. Call them
whatever you choose and I am fine with that as the objective of my even
mentioning the item(s) was to clarify the difference between being a
"socialite" and a"community leader."

'Eddy', you are so full of **** I damn near blew my Guinness out my mouth!

Off to Rush, enjoy!



The issue here was to show
you that my mother was not a "socialite" but a very involved and
dedicated
member of the community where she lived. A two day difference in a date
is
of zero meaning in this. Nice try at obfuscating, though.

"dxAce" wrote in message ...


David Eduardo wrote:

Who cares?

I do, because as usual, you made an outrageous claim. YOU CLAIMED that
that
'obit' was on the FRONT PAGE of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. YOU were the
one who
made the big productionof making THE CLAIM, and when proven to be a FALSE
CLAIM,
you made a big production out that as well.

There was an item (news item = news item about a death = obituary) on Page 1
below the fold and another fuller article on the obituary page.

Bottom line, you piece of ****, is that you are once again proven to be a
PATHOLOGICAL LIAR!

Nope. Go find a microfiche or library copy of the PD and you will see there
are two items / articles / reports or whatever your tiny mind wants to
subclassify them as. The fact is, as the stepmother of the editor and
publisher of the paper and widow of the former publisher and Holden family
member, her death was very significant to the paper.

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


David Eduardo wrote:


Bottom line is that that 'obit' did not appear on the front page of the
Cleveland Plain Dealer as you stated.

Correct, if you are being picky. A news item appeared on the front page
the
day after her death, while an obituary appeared on the obituary page.

So once again, you were caught in a lie. Just one of so, so many over
the
past
50 years!

Nah, this is just a difference in terminology. Two items appeared in the
paper, a news item on one page and an obituary on another. Call them
whatever you choose and I am fine with that as the objective of my even
mentioning the item(s) was to clarify the difference between being a
"socialite" and a"community leader."

'Eddy', you are so full of **** I damn near blew my Guinness out my mouth!


That's where the foam came from, as I suspected.

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message ...


David Eduardo wrote:

Who cares?

I do, because as usual, you made an outrageous claim. YOU CLAIMED that
that
'obit' was on the FRONT PAGE of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. YOU were the
one who
made the big productionof making THE CLAIM, and when proven to be a FALSE
CLAIM,
you made a big production out that as well.

There was an item (news item = news item about a death = obituary) on Page 1
below the fold and another fuller article on the obituary page.

Bottom line, you piece of ****, is that you are once again proven to be a
PATHOLOGICAL LIAR!

Nope. Go find a microfiche or library copy of the PD and you will see there
are two items / articles / reports or whatever your tiny mind wants to
subclassify them as. The fact is, as the stepmother of the editor and
publisher of the paper and widow of the former publisher and Holden family
member, her death was very significant to the paper.

'Eddy', the only tiny mind here is yours, as you tried to post something here
and portray it as a 'front page' article.

It was not, and in your typical fashion, you come back to obfuscate, confuse,
and BS as best you can.

Take a walk, butt****.

On Jul 8, 12:48*pm, Dave wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 09:01:50 -0700, RHF wrote:

- - Dave - D'Oh ! Pacific.Org -ain't- NPR [.] ~ RHF

-ps- And Never Was.

- There was a time when Pacifica ran NPR stuff,
- and they used the same CPB satellite.

Dave D'Oh ! - Lame Logic and Tenuous Connections. ~ RHF

OK so you and the Gover-Na-Tor are both driving down
the same Freeway : It Don't Make You a Movie Star.

On Jul 9, 12:53*am, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
"Anonymous" wrote in message

...







Jamming other stations with fat sloppy digital sidebands is indeed
'taking away' those other stations.

These "other stations" that you mention being taken away are not
stations that were ever protected in your area.

These stations were never meant to service your area. *Radio signals go
on virtuallity till infinity. *We have not protected stations to
infinity.

It's a cost vs. reward scenario. *There are a few DX-ers who might not
be happy....but many more reap the benefits of HD radio.

Some of don't live in cities. We are involuntary DXers.

Where is this that you don't have any local radio service?

Again...it may disurb a few DX-ers...but brings much funtionality and
potential to the state of broadcasting.

A few whiners...but the majority get better radio.

The "majority" couldn't care less about IBOC. The radios they have work fine
for them (or used to, before IBOC started up, or, rather, before, in the
case of AM radio, when they backed off the fidelity to that of a
telephone....) *Young people don't listen to the radio anymore. They have
their iPod's and other such digital media players that are used far more
widely, and they don't have to put up with commercials. For us boomers,
radio is becoming a medium that simply ignores us and doesn't program for or
to us, and so is committing a slow suicide.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

D'Oh ! -if- AM/MW Radio's Audience is mostly
over the Age of 55 Years : Program for Them
and Find Advertisers who want to Sell to Them.

nah that would be to simple ~ RHF

dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message ...


David Eduardo wrote:

Who cares?

I do, because as usual, you made an outrageous claim. YOU CLAIMED that
that
'obit' was on the FRONT PAGE of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. YOU were the
one who
made the big productionof making THE CLAIM, and when proven to be a FALSE
CLAIM,
you made a big production out that as well.

There was an item (news item = news item about a death = obituary) on Page 1
below the fold and another fuller article on the obituary page.

Bottom line, you piece of ****, is that you are once again proven to be a
PATHOLOGICAL LIAR!

Nope. Go find a microfiche or library copy of the PD and you will see there
are two items / articles / reports or whatever your tiny mind wants to
subclassify them as. The fact is, as the stepmother of the editor and
publisher of the paper and widow of the former publisher and Holden family
member, her death was very significant to the paper.

'Eddy', the only tiny mind here is yours, as you tried to post something here
and portray it as a 'front page' article.

It was not, and in your typical fashion, you come back to obfuscate, confuse,
and BS as best you can.

Take a walk, butt****.

And, 'Eddy', may I be so bold as to state that the best part of you obviously
dripped down your mothers leg.

"RHF" wrote in message
news:ca2fc371-9ec2-45da-94a5-
D'Oh ! -if- AM/MW Radio's Audience is mostly
over the Age of 55 Years : Program for Them
and Find Advertisers who want to Sell to Them.

nah that would be to simple ~ RHF

Except for small markets, there are no such advertisers. I asked recently
about LA and how many agency buys targeted 55+ and was told, "none." There
are no advertisers who want 55+ in the significant radio metro areas.