What is with these naysayers on a shortwave newsgroup who are
anti-shortwave?
I'm scratching my head to try to figure out why guys that are so AGAINST
something
bother with lurking around in the shadows of a newsgroup devoted to a
specific topic.

Every time one of these doomsday posts appears the creeps crawl out of the
woodwork and bad rap shortwave radio which, incidentally, is healthy and
thriving. If you look at the
article source it came from "CZ" land...so maybe in "CZ" things have changed
with domestic shortwave
but during the last year there has been countless new outlets and and
expanded shortwave coverage
appear throughout the globe.

Pay no attention to such nonsense. Regardless of what the overzealous
techno-cheerleaders
would like us all to believe, the world is not only comprised of
industrialized nations full of
brainwashed people who've let themselves become hypnotized by the Internet.
The frail and
choking Internet is rife with mushrooming problems and the portability and
ready-access to
shortwave will continue to thrive. Many countries in even the last year have
realized this and
have increased their shortwave facilities and schedules.

Carl wrote:
Every time one of these doomsday posts appears the creeps crawl out of the
woodwork and bad rap shortwave radio which, incidentally, is healthy and
thriving. If you look at the
article source it came from "CZ" land...so maybe in "CZ" things have changed
with domestic shortwave
but during the last year there has been countless new outlets and and
expanded shortwave coverage
appear throughout the globe.

IMHO the article is a very nice explanation why they are reducing their
shortwave broadcasts. It's spun (spinned?) that they are doing it because
everyone else is doing it, which is not really true.

Many places are doing it because there are a lot better and cheaper ways of
reaching their audience. At one time radio was the new, better and cheaper
(for the producer) way. Now there are lots of others.

BUT it does not mean that everyone, or even most producers are doing it.

Sorry guys, while you were using the internet to pirate music and video,
the rest of the world was taking over the air waves. The world really is
not all the US and the EU.

If you think so, go to Radio China's English web site and look at their
coverage and schedule, there's more there than the BBC has had in a
very long time.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation.
i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia.

Carl wrote:
What is with these naysayers on a shortwave newsgroup who are
anti-shortwave?
I'm scratching my head to try to figure out why guys that are so AGAINST
something
bother with lurking around in the shadows of a newsgroup devoted to a
specific topic.

Every time one of these doomsday posts appears the creeps crawl out of the
woodwork and bad rap shortwave radio which, incidentally, is healthy and
thriving. If you look at the
article source it came from "CZ" land...so maybe in "CZ" things have
changed
with domestic shortwave
but during the last year there has been countless new outlets and and
expanded shortwave coverage
appear throughout the globe.

Pay no attention to such nonsense. Regardless of what the overzealous
techno-cheerleaders
would like us all to believe, the world is not only comprised of
industrialized nations full of
brainwashed people who've let themselves become hypnotized by the
Internet.
The frail and
choking Internet is rife with mushrooming problems and the portability and
ready-access to
shortwave will continue to thrive. Many countries in even the last year
have
realized this and
have increased their shortwave facilities and schedules.


Such as?

I have nothing against shortwave radio. In fact, I spent $2k last week
on a shortwave radio. HFBC is dead. Not shortwave. Not radio. HFBC.

www.vpr.net carries the World Service on a dialup friendly low-fi stream.

On Jan 20, 9:58*am, dave wrote:

I have nothing against shortwave radio. *In fact, I spent $2k last week
on a shortwave radio. *HFBC is dead. *Not shortwave. *Not radio. *HFBC.

- Show quoted text -

OK Dave. I stand corrected. I'll believe you. This time. ;-)

On Jan 20, 7:06*am, "Carl" wrote:
What is with these naysayers on a shortwave newsgroup who are
anti-shortwave?
I'm scratching my head to try to figure out why guys that are so AGAINST
something
bother with lurking around in the shadows of a newsgroup devoted to a
specific topic.

Every time one of these doomsday posts appears the creeps crawl out of the
woodwork and bad rap shortwave radio which, incidentally, is healthy and
thriving.

***APPLAUSE***APPLAUSE***
I hit the send button basically saying what you said above before I
got to your post. I know this group is about the entire spectrum and
antennas plus all the other goodies that go along with this great
hobby.

But the namesake of this forum is ahem "shortwave" - so I agree with
the head scratching also but I think deep down we both know why
specific people always seem to beat that drum. I'll let them figure it
out. Ha!

Bob Dobbs wrote:




Shortwave versus the internet - I've never caught a cyber virus from my short
wave radio, heard lots of infected prattle from the xians, but tuning away or
turning it off sure is easier than a format and restore.

I use Puppy Linux whenever possible.

I like the BBC a lot. When I lived in Texas and they were slamming 250
KW at the Americas from Ascension back in the '80s, I could easily hear
the air handlers in Bush House on my 2010. That was fantastic audio.

Now I listen to the World Service on satellite or the web, and I find
other amazing things to listen to on the radio (like really weak
stations 9,000 miles away).