"Li-Changchun" wrote in message
...
Tory fury as BBC sends hecklers to bait Howard
By Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor

The BBC was last night plunged into a damaging
general election row after it
admitted equipping three hecklers with microphones
and sending them into a
campaign meeting addressed by Michael Howard, the Conservative leader.
The BBC has turned into a Socialist leftwing propaganda machine.

Not exactly. This row has little to do with politics per-se!

Recently the BBC announced staff reductions of close to 28%
including cutbacks of some rather popular TV and Radio
programmes in the UK. (..to put it in a way that you Americans
would understand, it would be as if several USA based TV
networks announced that they were going to broadcast
only 50% of all Baseball and Football games and replace what was
lost with Infomercials)

This is why so many are upset over BBC Management.

They have sacrificed programme content for greater
financial profits at the expense of their viewers and listeners.

I would gather if the same were done in the USA as has
been done in the UK, that a general insurrection and
revolution would no doubt ensue shortly thereafter..

Igor Reameas Rothschild wrote:


"Li-Changchun" wrote in message
...
Tory fury as BBC sends hecklers to bait Howard
By Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor

The BBC was last night plunged into a damaging
general election row after it
admitted equipping three hecklers with microphones
and sending them into a
campaign meeting addressed by Michael Howard, the Conservative leader.
The BBC has turned into a Socialist leftwing propaganda machine.

Not exactly. This row has little to do with politics per-se!

Recently the BBC announced staff reductions of close to 28%
including cutbacks of some rather popular TV and Radio
programmes in the UK. (..to put it in a way that you Americans
would understand, it would be as if several USA based TV
networks announced that they were going to broadcast
only 50% of all Baseball and Football games and replace what was
lost with Infomercials)

This is why so many are upset over BBC Management.

They have sacrificed programme content for greater
financial profits at the expense of their viewers and listeners.

I would gather if the same were done in the USA as has
been done in the UK, that a general insurrection and
revolution would no doubt ensue shortly thereafter..


Monday Night Football has been moved from ABC, which is a broadcast
network that can be received in most areas with an antenna, to ESPN,
which is on cable TV only, read expen$ive subscription fees. So far no
insurrections have been noted. I know that the same megacorporation owns
both ABC and ESPN, and that over the air TV has not been profitable in a
LONG TIME, but still there are some football fans that will not be able
to see the game anymore. But in a country where fans pay outrageous fees
to have 10 sports channels, those few fans don't amount to much.

Yes, BBC Management seems to have no clue about anything, they've been
drastically cutting back the World Service part of their operation to
the point where it can only be heard in the mornings for a few hours and
an hour of news in the evenings in the Americas, and just South America
at that. The point is apparently to cut off shortwave-once the WS's
bread and butter-completely and rely on a network of FM stations.
Unfortunately these FM stations decide when and how much of the BBCWS to
broadcast. If you go to bbcworldservice.com and go to the dialog box
where you can enter your city for programming info, you'll see this.
Enter San Francisco, for example, the nearest Big City to yours truly.
You'll see that the WS gets six hours in the wee hours of the morning
(midnight-6am) and an hour of news at 2pm. A sad substitute for
shortwave, but in North America this is what we're supposed to take.
Many BBC "affiliates" don't even broadcast The World Today or Newshour
but a sanitized news program called "World Affairs" or something
similar.

What's holding you Brits back from getting rid of your government over
this? At least vote Blair out of office, he's quite unpopular for
dragging the UK into Iraq from what I understand. And then there's your
royal family. Name ONE THING it's good for, besides tabloid fodder. Join
the world, become a republic already!



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:54:13 -0700, running dogg wrote:

Igor Reameas Rothschild wrote:


"Li-Changchun" wrote in message
...
Tory fury as BBC sends hecklers to bait Howard
By Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor

The BBC was last night plunged into a damaging
general election row after it
admitted equipping three hecklers with microphones
and sending them into a
campaign meeting addressed by Michael Howard, the Conservative leader.
The BBC has turned into a Socialist leftwing propaganda machine.

Not exactly. This row has little to do with politics per-se!

Recently the BBC announced staff reductions of close to 28%
including cutbacks of some rather popular TV and Radio
programmes in the UK. (..to put it in a way that you Americans
would understand, it would be as if several USA based TV
networks announced that they were going to broadcast
only 50% of all Baseball and Football games and replace what was
lost with Infomercials)

This is why so many are upset over BBC Management.

They have sacrificed programme content for greater
financial profits at the expense of their viewers and listeners.

I would gather if the same were done in the USA as has
been done in the UK, that a general insurrection and
revolution would no doubt ensue shortly thereafter..


Monday Night Football has been moved from ABC, which is a broadcast
network that can be received in most areas with an antenna, to ESPN,
which is on cable TV only, read expen$ive subscription fees. So far no
insurrections have been noted. I know that the same megacorporation owns
both ABC and ESPN, and that over the air TV has not been profitable in a
LONG TIME, but still there are some football fans that will not be able
to see the game anymore. But in a country where fans pay outrageous fees
to have 10 sports channels, those few fans don't amount to much.

Yes, BBC Management seems to have no clue about anything, they've been
drastically cutting back the World Service part of their operation to
the point where it can only be heard in the mornings for a few hours and
an hour of news in the evenings in the Americas, and just South America
at that. The point is apparently to cut off shortwave-once the WS's
bread and butter-completely and rely on a network of FM stations.
Unfortunately these FM stations decide when and how much of the BBCWS to
broadcast. If you go to bbcworldservice.com and go to the dialog box
where you can enter your city for programming info, you'll see this.
Enter San Francisco, for example, the nearest Big City to yours truly.
You'll see that the WS gets six hours in the wee hours of the morning
(midnight-6am) and an hour of news at 2pm. A sad substitute for
shortwave, but in North America this is what we're supposed to take.
Many BBC "affiliates" don't even broadcast The World Today or Newshour
but a sanitized news program called "World Affairs" or something
similar.

What's holding you Brits back from getting rid of your government over
this? At least vote Blair out of office, he's quite unpopular for
dragging the UK into Iraq from what I understand. And then there's your
royal family. Name ONE THING it's good for, besides tabloid fodder. Join
the world, become a republic already!



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


You can get the World Service, in hifi digital sound, 24 hours a day
on XM satellite radio. The equipment is under $100.

Somebody in this group knows somebody who bought an old sheet metal
radio fo $10,000, on which (if it still works at all) the BBC will
sound like it's going through a Maestro Phase Shifter.

In article ,
David wrote:
You can get the World Service, in hifi digital sound, 24 hours a day
on XM satellite radio. The equipment is under $100.

I bought my R-1000 on closeout for $300 about 22 years ago.

How much will a 22 year subscription to XM cost?

Mark Zenier Washington State resident

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:11:05 GMT, (Mark Zenier)
wrote:

In article ,
David wrote:
You can get the World Service, in hifi digital sound, 24 hours a day
on XM satellite radio. The equipment is under $100.

I bought my R-1000 on closeout for $300 about 22 years ago.

How much will a 22 year subscription to XM cost?

Mark Zenier Washington State resident

You get what you pay for. You can get the BBC for what...3 or 4 hours
a day (if the Sun ain't flaking out)? Do you really care about the
BBC or are you just trying to be special because you make do with an
obsolete delivery system?

"David" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:11:05 GMT, (Mark Zenier)
wrote:

In article ,
David wrote:
You can get the World Service, in hifi digital sound, 24 hours a day
on XM satellite radio. The equipment is under $100.

I bought my R-1000 on closeout for $300 about 22 years ago.

How much will a 22 year subscription to XM cost?

Mark Zenier Washington State resident

You get what you pay for. You can get the BBC for what...3 or 4 hours
a day (if the Sun ain't flaking out)? Do you really care about the
BBC or are you just trying to be special because you make do with an
obsolete delivery system?

There's more to radio than the BBC. You should check it out sometime. You
know, broaden your horizons.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:04:34 -0500, "MnMikew"
wrote:


"David" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:11:05 GMT, (Mark Zenier)
wrote:

In article ,
David wrote:
You can get the World Service, in hifi digital sound, 24 hours a day
on XM satellite radio. The equipment is under $100.

I bought my R-1000 on closeout for $300 about 22 years ago.

How much will a 22 year subscription to XM cost?

Mark Zenier Washington State resident

You get what you pay for. You can get the BBC for what...3 or 4 hours
a day (if the Sun ain't flaking out)? Do you really care about the
BBC or are you just trying to be special because you make do with an
obsolete delivery system?

There's more to radio than the BBC. You should check it out sometime. You
know, broaden your horizons.

True. But that's not what we were talking about.

There're 10,000 audio streams (at least) on the internet, are you
going to try-out each one?

In article ,
David wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:11:05 GMT, (Mark Zenier)
wrote:

In article ,
David wrote:
You can get the World Service, in hifi digital sound, 24 hours a day
on XM satellite radio. The equipment is under $100.

I bought my R-1000 on closeout for $300 about 22 years ago.

How much will a 22 year subscription to XM cost?

Mark Zenier Washington State resident

You get what you pay for. You can get the BBC for what...3 or 4 hours
a day (if the Sun ain't flaking out)?

Let's see. 15360 is good for a couple of hours in the dead of night,
then 6195 and 9740 give another four or five starting about four in
the morning, then 7160 can be listenable until 10 AM PDT, then then
15280 or 15360 in the late afternoon for a couple, then the two or
three hours targeted to the Americas on 5975, 7160 and 15360 again,
then KOAC-550 starting about 10 PM or so, and the local FMs at 1 AM.
So probably 16 hours a day, of varying quality.

Do you really care about the BBC

Their current events feature stuff and the science programs, yes.
(The ones the local NPR stations will never run because they don't' want
to look bad in comparison). I find I'm caring less and less about the
rest as they degenerate down to a "BBCNN" (as some writer to "Write On"
called them last week) news (froth) service. (And they seem to have
followed the party line on the Iraq war). When they shut down their
science unit, I'm gone. But that's not the point.

or are you just trying to be special because you make do with an
obsolete delivery system?

But the main point here is that XM or "Are you Serious?" are just not
cost effective. Spending 10-13? dollars a month for the 1 1/2 channels
that I'd be interested in just doesn't pay off. All I'd care about
is BBC or WRN, NPR to fill in what my local stations censor, maybe a
alternative music or blues channel when I'm in the mood. But for $150
a year? $3000 + inflation + equipment costs over the next 20some years?

The receivers are 100-200 (subsidized) bucks and will probably break
down in 5-7 years as they run some their circuitry pretty hot. And the
providers themselves have shaky finances. Will they be around in a
few years? (Especially when it's time for new satellites to be launched).
They're just a part of the dot.com boom that hasn't burned through their
cash yet. Don't get too dependent on them.

Finally you're at the whims of the few who select which channels
get broadcast in their limited bandwidth. Some new radio fad or
some pressure campaign by some right wing group, and "goodby BBC".
("Market forces will provide what you want", my ass).

Mark Zenier Washington State resident

Mark Zenier wrote:

In article ,
David wrote:
On Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:11:05 GMT, (Mark Zenier)
wrote:

In article ,
David wrote:
You can get the World Service, in hifi digital sound, 24 hours a day
on XM satellite radio. The equipment is under $100.

I bought my R-1000 on closeout for $300 about 22 years ago.

How much will a 22 year subscription to XM cost?

Mark Zenier Washington State resident

You get what you pay for. You can get the BBC for what...3 or 4 hours
a day (if the Sun ain't flaking out)?

Let's see. 15360 is good for a couple of hours in the dead of night,
then 6195 and 9740 give another four or five starting about four in
the morning, then 7160 can be listenable until 10 AM PDT, then then
15280 or 15360 in the late afternoon for a couple, then the two or
three hours targeted to the Americas on 5975, 7160 and 15360 again,
then KOAC-550 starting about 10 PM or so, and the local FMs at 1 AM.
So probably 16 hours a day, of varying quality.

The BBC uses 9825 at 0200-0300 daily to broadcast The World Today.
15280/15360 usually fades out by 0300.

Do you really care about the BBC

Their current events feature stuff and the science programs, yes.
(The ones the local NPR stations will never run because they don't' want
to look bad in comparison). I find I'm caring less and less about the
rest as they degenerate down to a "BBCNN" (as some writer to "Write On"
called them last week) news (froth) service. (And they seem to have
followed the party line on the Iraq war). When they shut down their
science unit, I'm gone. But that's not the point.

I listen for their current events. I listen to The World Today and
that's about it. I find that they have a lot of on the scene reporters
that other news services don't have. What American journalist can report
directly from Havana or Tehran or some of those chaotic African
countries?

CRI is the one trying to be "radio CNN" except they're more like a
Communist version of Fox News.

or are you just trying to be special because you make do with an
obsolete delivery system?

But the main point here is that XM or "Are you Serious?" are just not
cost effective. Spending 10-13? dollars a month for the 1 1/2 channels
that I'd be interested in just doesn't pay off. All I'd care about
is BBC or WRN, NPR to fill in what my local stations censor, maybe a
alternative music or blues channel when I'm in the mood. But for $150
a year? $3000 + inflation + equipment costs over the next 20some years?

The receivers are 100-200 (subsidized) bucks and will probably break
down in 5-7 years as they run some their circuitry pretty hot. And the
providers themselves have shaky finances. Will they be around in a
few years? (Especially when it's time for new satellites to be launched).
They're just a part of the dot.com boom that hasn't burned through their
cash yet. Don't get too dependent on them.

I wonder what will happen to all those cars that have XM built in. I was
looking at new Mazdas the other day and even the economy cars have XM. I
guess those unlucky owners will have to go back to FM.

Finally you're at the whims of the few who select which channels
get broadcast in their limited bandwidth. Some new radio fad or
some pressure campaign by some right wing group, and "goodby BBC".
("Market forces will provide what you want", my ass).

It's funny that David seems to be so concerned with the govt taking away
SW radios, yet he's so bullish on XM. The government, which has a big
stake in satellite radio, could simply order (or pressure) the services
to stop carrying certain channels. Satellite is big NOW, but just wait a
few years when their birds go dead. Then suddenly they'll vanish, and
David will have to break out the R75 again.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

David wrote:

Do you really care about the BBC

Certainly more than Mark Byford, but it would be hard to care less
than that useless parasite.