| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 17:14:45 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: now let me get this straight...you reject the charges the BBC itself admitted it's guilty of, yet say you're not defending the BBC. I haven't rejected charges against the BBC, nor commented regarding the charges or about the Hutton inquiry and the mess the BBC is in. and that, as they say, is the ballgame... I find the obsession with the BBC boring, because BBC has become less and less significant in the big picture of the world, and that will continue, don't you agree? no, i don't. the BBC has 150,000,000 listeners worldwide, not counting its domestic audience, and its TV programs here in the states. it's not as big as it used to be, but it's still influential. and when it lies, it gives credence to lies. forcing it to admit its bias, as the hutton report did, means that the far left, in spite of the BBC's hiring of al jazeera newscasters, will be called on its lies about the united states. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 03:10:31 +0300, Noel
wrote: On Sun, 01 Feb 2004 20:12:18 GMT, (Bob) wrote: the fact you seem reluctant to admit, as a revisionist leftie, is that the BBC itself both admitted it was wrong AND apologized. gilligan lied. that's why he resigned. Of course, that's the spin a right-wing ****tard like you would put on it. Yes, he resigned, but never admitted to lying. so he's an unrepentent liar. oh. by the way. his boss's resigned, too. as to being right wing, i know you far lefties have a fundamentalist belief that anyone who doesn't believe that uncle joe stalin was a great guy is a '****tard', but we liberals believe in freedom, not socialist paradise like you lefties.\ the executives covered for his lie. No, they did not. This is another baseless assumption being made by a right-wing reactionary twit who doesn't even live in the country in question/ really? then why did his boss's resign? because they were tired of their jobs? and that's the end of the story. unless you can show me where the BBC is lying when it said it lied, you got a problem. If you can show a BBC statement with the word 'lie' in it? yeah. in the fact that all the guilty parties no longer work at the BBC. that's a pretty good indication, oh, great, revisionist leftie puppet --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:37:45 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: With BILLIONS of people in the world 150 million is not a big number, Bob. uh, dont keep up with shortwave much, do you? Wrong again, Bob. I use an RX320 in the house, apparently you never actually USE these radios... BBC WS SW and MW listeners were at 115 million in 2002, DOWN 9 MILLION from 124 million in 2001. gee. big deal. that's pretty much what i said. so you start by agreeing with me... So, shortwave isn't going to help in the long run. how many BBC lies in the 'long run'? As with passenger trains and, blimps, Bob, SW is in declining in the big picture. how many lies in the 'big picture'? the BBC's audience is primarily 3rd world. They claim their audience is the entire world-- what they call "opinion formers" and "decision makers" all over the world. For example: "What is important in the States is what type of listener we're getting," says Mr. Byford. ahem. let me point out a simple fact: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in your pompous bloviating, didnt you? BBC's Indian SW audience has plummetted. They're moving rapidly to TV, as will the rest of the 3rd world in a few more years. as i said, you dont listen to shortwave or the BBC much... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
BBC WS SW and MW listeners were at 115 million in 2002, DOWN 9 MILLION from 124 million in 2001. gee. big deal. that's pretty much what i said. so you start by agreeing with me... Pretty much? -- ROTFL! You said you didn't agree that BBC has become less and less significant in the big picture of the world. so you start by agreeing with me... Just wondering what exactly it takes to get to Planet Bob. --- On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 01:47:18 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:37:45 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: With BILLIONS of people in the world 150 million is not a big number, Bob. uh, dont keep up with shortwave much, do you? Wrong again, Bob. I use an RX320 in the house, apparently you never actually USE these radios... BBC WS SW and MW listeners were at 115 million in 2002, DOWN 9 MILLION from 124 million in 2001. gee. big deal. that's pretty much what i said. so you start by agreeing with me... So, shortwave isn't going to help in the long run. how many BBC lies in the 'long run'? As with passenger trains and, blimps, Bob, SW is in declining in the big picture. how many lies in the 'big picture'? the BBC's audience is primarily 3rd world. They claim their audience is the entire world-- what they call "opinion formers" and "decision makers" all over the world. For example: "What is important in the States is what type of listener we're getting," says Mr. Byford. ahem. let me point out a simple fact: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in your pompous bloviating, didnt you? BBC's Indian SW audience has plummetted. They're moving rapidly to TV, as will the rest of the 3rd world in a few more years. as i said, you dont listen to shortwave or the BBC much... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
"What is important in the States is what type of listener
we're getting," says Mr. Byford. ahem. let me point out a simple fact: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in Mark Byford's statement actually came AFTER the BBC had decided to stop direct SW to USA. He made lots of comments on the fact that they believed FM rebroadcast of BBC was reaching the right target, and that was one of them. They even claimed that their US audience numbers were increasing due to listeners on FM. --- On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 01:47:18 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:37:45 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: With BILLIONS of people in the world 150 million is not a big number, Bob. uh, dont keep up with shortwave much, do you? Wrong again, Bob. I use an RX320 in the house, apparently you never actually USE these radios... BBC WS SW and MW listeners were at 115 million in 2002, DOWN 9 MILLION from 124 million in 2001. gee. big deal. that's pretty much what i said. so you start by agreeing with me... So, shortwave isn't going to help in the long run. how many BBC lies in the 'long run'? As with passenger trains and, blimps, Bob, SW is in declining in the big picture. how many lies in the 'big picture'? the BBC's audience is primarily 3rd world. They claim their audience is the entire world-- what they call "opinion formers" and "decision makers" all over the world. For example: "What is important in the States is what type of listener we're getting," says Mr. Byford. ahem. let me point out a simple fact: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in your pompous bloviating, didnt you? BBC's Indian SW audience has plummetted. They're moving rapidly to TV, as will the rest of the 3rd world in a few more years. as i said, you dont listen to shortwave or the BBC much... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in
your pompous bloviating, didnt you? Pompous Bloviating... ROTFL! PLEASE give me some more easy shots like that redundancy, Bob! On Planet Earth, it's easy to recognize that folks who use words like "Bloviating" are... POMPOUS! But, on Planet Bob, you're oblivious! ROTFLMAO! --- On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 01:47:18 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 10:37:45 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: With BILLIONS of people in the world 150 million is not a big number, Bob. uh, dont keep up with shortwave much, do you? Wrong again, Bob. I use an RX320 in the house, apparently you never actually USE these radios... BBC WS SW and MW listeners were at 115 million in 2002, DOWN 9 MILLION from 124 million in 2001. gee. big deal. that's pretty much what i said. so you start by agreeing with me... So, shortwave isn't going to help in the long run. how many BBC lies in the 'long run'? As with passenger trains and, blimps, Bob, SW is in declining in the big picture. how many lies in the 'big picture'? the BBC's audience is primarily 3rd world. They claim their audience is the entire world-- what they call "opinion formers" and "decision makers" all over the world. For example: "What is important in the States is what type of listener we're getting," says Mr. Byford. ahem. let me point out a simple fact: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in your pompous bloviating, didnt you? BBC's Indian SW audience has plummetted. They're moving rapidly to TV, as will the rest of the 3rd world in a few more years. as i said, you dont listen to shortwave or the BBC much... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:32:47 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: BBC WS SW and MW listeners were at 115 million in 2002, DOWN 9 MILLION from 124 million in 2001. gee. big deal. that's pretty much what i said. so you start by agreeing with me... Pretty much? -- ROTFL! You said you didn't agree that BBC has become less and less significant in the big picture of the world. what is 'less significant' in a world where the BBC is the leader? and how many lies in 'less significant'. you seem reluctant to admit what the BBC itself admitted...it lied. so you start by agreeing with me... Just wondering what exactly it takes to get to Planet Bob. says the last holdout against the BBC's self admitted lies. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:32:48 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: "What is important in the States is what type of listener we're getting," says Mr. Byford. ahem. let me point out a simple fact: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in Mark Byford's statement actually came AFTER the BBC had decided to stop direct SW to USA. if you'll permit to say: Bull****. the BBC quit broadcasting to NA several years ago. He made lots of comments on the fact that they believed FM rebroadcast of BBC was reaching the right target, and that was one of them. They even claimed that their US audience numbers were increasing due to listeners on FM. which had zip to do with the thread at all. the BBC does not use FM on shortwave. those of us who DO shortwave kinda know that... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:32:50 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in your pompous bloviating, didnt you? Pompous Bloviating... ROTFL! PLEASE give me some more easy shots like that redundancy, Bob! On Planet Earth, it's easy to recognize that folks who use words like "Bloviating" are... POMPOUS! But, on Planet Bob, you're oblivious! ROTFLMAO! dontcha love it when guys who are too stupid to know that the BBC lied cant even go to dictionary.com and read: blo·vi·ate To discourse at length in a pompous OR boastful manner (emphasis added) in your rather sorry state, lacking all credibility, your boastfulness AND pompousity are a poor substitute for your pathetic knowledge...or lack thereof...of any aspect of the BBC, shortwave, or international broadcasting. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
blo·vi·ate To discourse at length in a pompous OR boastful manner (emphasis Bob, thanks for showing everyone WHY I said "pompous bloviating" is redundant! --- On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 01:06:25 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:32:50 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in your pompous bloviating, didnt you? Pompous Bloviating... ROTFL! PLEASE give me some more easy shots like that redundancy, Bob! On Planet Earth, it's easy to recognize that folks who use words like "Bloviating" are... POMPOUS! But, on Planet Bob, you're oblivious! ROTFLMAO! dontcha love it when guys who are too stupid to know that the BBC lied cant even go to dictionary.com and read: blo·vi·ate To discourse at length in a pompous OR boastful manner (emphasis added) in your rather sorry state, lacking all credibility, your boastfulness AND pompousity are a poor substitute for your pathetic knowledge...or lack thereof...of any aspect of the BBC, shortwave, or international broadcasting. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
Mark Byford's statement actually came AFTER the
BBC had decided to stop direct SW to USA. if you'll permit to say: Bull****. the BBC quit broadcasting to NA several years ago. The Byford statement was mentioned by me, here in RRS, in 2001: From: W G White ) Subject: Q: US/Aussie swl DXers - hows the World Service blackout doing? Date: 2001-12-07 13:12:26 PST Joe [---] wrote in message ... "Your Friend Bill" "Remove The NO In The Reply wrote message ... [...] For the most part we can still hear the WS but we're real ****ed about the affront...especially the auto-workers in Detroit. [...] Why them in particular? Mr. Byford apparently thinks Detroit auto workers are not part of the BBC's target audience of opinion formers and decision makers. He revealed this idea in a news interview: "What is important in the States is what type of listener we're getting," says Mr. Byford. "We're not going to stop the Detroit car worker listening to the World Service -- we welcome anyone -- but our target audience is opinion formers and decision makers." -- Mark Byford What a concept, heh. Geoff --- On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 01:02:48 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:32:48 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: "What is important in the States is what type of listener we're getting," says Mr. Byford. ahem. let me point out a simple fact: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in Mark Byford's statement actually came AFTER the BBC had decided to stop direct SW to USA. if you'll permit to say: Bull****. the BBC quit broadcasting to NA several years ago. He made lots of comments on the fact that they believed FM rebroadcast of BBC was reaching the right target, and that was one of them. They even claimed that their US audience numbers were increasing due to listeners on FM. which had zip to do with the thread at all. the BBC does not use FM on shortwave. those of us who DO shortwave kinda know that... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
= = = "W G (Geoff) White"
= = = wrote in message . .. - - - S N I P - - - Mark Byford's statement actually came AFTER the BBC had decided to stop direct SW to USA. He made lots of comments on the fact that they believed FM rebroadcast of BBC was reaching the right target, and that was one of them. They even claimed that their US audience numbers were increasing due to listeners on FM. - - - S N I P - - - WGW, The BBC World Service (BBC-WS) is being 'offered' in the USofA to local FM & AM Radio Stations associated with the Public Broadcasting System's Radio Services (usually college and community stations). The "Syndicator" for the BBC-WS is Public Radio International (PRI). PRI offers the BBC-WS at a very low cost as an alternative news service to PBS's National Public Radio news programs: Morning Edition, All Things Considered, Weekend Edition, ETC. The PRI and BBC-WS 'relationship' has been on-going for about 2 to 3 Years. THE PAST: As a young man growing up in the 1960s Pop Science & Electronics were cutting edge reading and Shortwave and being a Ham was about being out there. But today there are ten times the number of Computer Magazines and many more OnLine "eZins" on the Web. The simple fact is... Today's young people will not be the next generation of SWLs. The Demographics are Clear; Count the Number of Households in the USofA with: * Three or more AM/FM Radios * Two or more TV Sets * Cable Hook-up * Satellite TV Dish * Car or Truck with a AM/FM Radio * Home Computer with Internet * Local Newspaper Delivery * Shortwave Radio YES - Shortwave Radios are at the bottom of the list. THE BBC's FUTURE IN THE USofA: For most Americans there is nothing more convenience then simply turning on a common AM/FM Radio in their home, at work, in their car, or on a portable at the park. Listening to the AM/FM Radio is part of every American's Daily Routine at some time during the day for an average of two or more hours. There may very well be One Million 'regular' SWLs in the USofA. (That comes out to be 1 in 300 persons.) What is the Demographics of the average SWL in the USofA ? Largely: White Male; Age 45-60 Some College Clearly a Limited and Diminishing Customer Market for the BBC-WS. The BBC is 'now' on Cable TV. The BBC is 'now' on TV via the Dish. The BBC & BBC-WS is 'now' on the Internet. The BBC-WS is 'now' on FM Radio via PRI and your 'local' Public/College FM Stations. WHY "FM" RADIO: Lets say 1 in 60 person's listens regularly to an FM 'public' Radio Station. And Once-A-Week each of these Listeners is 'exposed' to the BBC-WS. [ That is Five Time (5X) the Audience at a Lower Cost to the BBC. ] That is what the BBC wants a 'new' Listener and a Growing Audience. * A Younger Listener (Building the Future Listener Base) ) * More Female Listeners equal to the number of Male Listeners. * Greater Numbers of Multi-Racial and Ethnic Listeners * A College Age Audience (Public Radio Stations are frequently associated with Colleges.) * To Inform and Shape the Views of America's Next Generation of Leaders. * To Build an Affinity (Cultural Link) between Young Americans and British Traditions and Ideas. [More of America's Future Leaders will come from this Social-Economic Group.] TODAY IN THE USofA: The BBC and the BBC-WS are focused on Tomorrow and a New Generation of Listeners. The BBC and the BBC-WS are using Today's Technology to Deliver their Message. For the BBC and the BBC-WS, it is All About Getting Your Message to the 'Right' People for the Lowest Cost. mtywtk ~ RHF .. .. |
|
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:27:55 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: Mark Byford's statement actually came AFTER the BBC had decided to stop direct SW to USA. if you'll permit to say: Bull****. the BBC quit broadcasting to NA several years ago. The Byford statement was mentioned by me, here in RRS, in 2001: From: W G White ) Subject: Q: US/Aussie swl DXers - hows the World Service blackout doing? someday...someday...the left will learn to quit whimpering, whining and complaining the issue was the BBC's lies...and lie they did. they admitted it. geoff...ever willing to mouth the BBC's cliches about their objectivity...is reluctant to admit what the BBC itself told us: it lied. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:01:41 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: blo·vi·ate To discourse at length in a pompous OR boastful manner (emphasis Bob, thanks for showing everyone WHY I said "pompous bloviating" is redundant! geoff, head of the dept of redundancy dept, is loathe to read a dictionary, let alone admit the BBC lied the left just cant handle the truth... --- On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 01:06:25 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:32:50 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in your pompous bloviating, didnt you? Pompous Bloviating... ROTFL! PLEASE give me some more easy shots like that redundancy, Bob! On Planet Earth, it's easy to recognize that folks who use words like "Bloviating" are... POMPOUS! But, on Planet Bob, you're oblivious! ROTFLMAO! dontcha love it when guys who are too stupid to know that the BBC lied cant even go to dictionary.com and read: blo·vi·ate To discourse at length in a pompous OR boastful manner (emphasis added) in your rather sorry state, lacking all credibility, your boastfulness AND pompousity are a poor substitute for your pathetic knowledge...or lack thereof...of any aspect of the BBC, shortwave, or international broadcasting. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
Bob, thanks for showing everyone WHY I said
"pompous bloviating" is redundant! geoff, head of the dept of redundancy dept, is loathe to read a dictionary, let alone admit the BBC lied You spout "pompous bloviating." I say redundant. You live with that. I'm off to greener pastures. Best wishes, no kidding, Geoff --- On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:20:29 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:01:41 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: blo·vi·ate To discourse at length in a pompous OR boastful manner (emphasis Bob, thanks for showing everyone WHY I said "pompous bloviating" is redundant! geoff, head of the dept of redundancy dept, is loathe to read a dictionary, let alone admit the BBC lied the left just cant handle the truth... --- On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 01:06:25 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:32:50 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: the BBC does not even broadcast to north america. kinda forgot that in your pompous bloviating, didnt you? Pompous Bloviating... ROTFL! PLEASE give me some more easy shots like that redundancy, Bob! On Planet Earth, it's easy to recognize that folks who use words like "Bloviating" are... POMPOUS! But, on Planet Bob, you're oblivious! ROTFLMAO! dontcha love it when guys who are too stupid to know that the BBC lied cant even go to dictionary.com and read: blo·vi·ate To discourse at length in a pompous OR boastful manner (emphasis added) in your rather sorry state, lacking all credibility, your boastfulness AND pompousity are a poor substitute for your pathetic knowledge...or lack thereof...of any aspect of the BBC, shortwave, or international broadcasting. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:43:11 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: Bob, thanks for showing everyone WHY I said "pompous bloviating" is redundant! geoff, head of the dept of redundancy dept, is loathe to read a dictionary, let alone admit the BBC lied You spout "pompous bloviating." I say redundant. You live with that. I'm off to greener pastures. \ no doubt fertilized with the lies of the BBC which you lefties fail to acknowledge wonder why he focuses on irrelevancies, instead of the real issue? too embarrassed? by the way...how's uncle joe's cold? --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
I'm off to greener pastures.
\ no doubt fertilized with the lies of the BBC which you lefties fail to acknowledge Bob's off to browner pastures. --- On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:09:33 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:43:11 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: Bob, thanks for showing everyone WHY I said "pompous bloviating" is redundant! geoff, head of the dept of redundancy dept, is loathe to read a dictionary, let alone admit the BBC lied You spout "pompous bloviating." I say redundant. You live with that. I'm off to greener pastures. \ no doubt fertilized with the lies of the BBC which you lefties fail to acknowledge wonder why he focuses on irrelevancies, instead of the real issue? too embarrassed? by the way...how's uncle joe's cold? --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
You're going to have to do better than that Geoff. Bob's won this little
debate, hands-down. "W G (Geoff) White" wrote in message ... I'm off to greener pastures. \ no doubt fertilized with the lies of the BBC which you lefties fail to acknowledge Bob's off to browner pastures. --- On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:09:33 GMT, (Bob) wrote: On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:43:11 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White" wrote: Bob, thanks for showing everyone WHY I said "pompous bloviating" is redundant! geoff, head of the dept of redundancy dept, is loathe to read a dictionary, let alone admit the BBC lied You spout "pompous bloviating." I say redundant. You live with that. I'm off to greener pastures. \ no doubt fertilized with the lies of the BBC which you lefties fail to acknowledge wonder why he focuses on irrelevancies, instead of the real issue? too embarrassed? by the way...how's uncle joe's cold? --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:37:58 -0500, "W G (Geoff) White"
wrote: I'm off to greener pastures. \ no doubt fertilized with the lies of the BBC which you lefties fail to acknowledge Bob's off to browner pastures. pastures...redundancies...anything to avoid dealing with the BBC's lies.... thus the logic of the far left. --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:50:33 -0600, "Stinger"
wrote: You're going to have to do better than that Geoff. Bob's won this little debate, hands-down. unfortunately geoff is not alone in his apologia for the late, great BBC... --------------------------- to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com" and enter 'wf3h' in the field |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:38 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com