Opinion on corporate radio - NY Times
JM1370
some cities, but coast to coast. America would be one big Minot then, with
literally nowhere to turn except Clear Channel. >>
I forsee the day when 1 DJ per daypart per station is the only person you will
hear on 96/97/98 The Fox/Foxy/Foxy Radio. It's sad and scary.
Rich Wood
>I forsee the day when 1 DJ per daypart per station is the only person you will
>hear on 96/97/98 The Fox/Foxy/Foxy Radio. It's sad and scary.
Unless it's a team, that's, essentially, what we have now. I think you
meant there would be one DJ per cluster of stations per daypart.
Terrorism is scary. One DJ per cluster doesn't threaten my safety or
welfare. Uninteresting radio is just sad.
Rich
Dave
machine, of which Clear Channel is part.
On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 13:08:47 GMT, Rich Wood <rich...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
Drewdawg
"John Rethorst" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:noone-20060...@07-130.075.popsite.net...
> New York Times, June 22, 2003
>
> Signals from Nowhere
>
> By WALTER KIRN
>
> I used to take a long road trip every year or two, usually in the middle
> of the summer, with no fixed schedule or specific destination, just a
> vague intention to try new foods and admire the changing scenery. And
> though I always took along an atlas, I rarely used it. I navigated by
> radio.
>
> You used to be able to do that in America: chart your course by the
> accents, news and songs streaming in from the nearest AM transmitter. A
> drawling update on midday cattle prices meant I was in Wyoming or
> Nebraska. A guttural rant about city-hall corruption told me I'd reach
> Chicago within the hour. A soaring, rhythmic sermon on fornication --
> Welcome to Alabama. The music, too. Texas swing in the Southwest oil
> country. Polka in North Dakota. Nonstop Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath and
> Jethro Tull in the Minneapolis-St. Paul suburbs. What's more, the
> invisible people who introduced the songs gave the impression that they
> listened to them at home. They were locals, with local tastes.
>
> I felt like a modern Walt Whitman on those drives. When I turned on the
> radio, I heard America singing, even in the dumb banter of ''morning zoo''
> hosts. But then last summer, rolling down a highway somewhere between
> Montana and Wisconsin, something new happened. I lost my way, and the
> radio couldn't help me find it. I twirled the dial, but the music and the
> announcers all sounded alike, drained, disconnected from geography,
> reshuffling the same pop playlists and canned bad jokes.
>
> What a miserable trip. I heard America droning.
>
> Recently, I found out whom to blame: a company called Clear Channel
> Communications. The mammoth buyer and consolidator of hundreds of
> independent local radio stations -- along with its smaller competitors,
> Infinity Broadcasting and Cumulus Media -- is body-snatching America's
> sonic soul, turning Whitman's vivacious democratic cacophony into a
> monotonous numbing hum.
>
It's not just Clear Channel stations but all the mom & pop stations running
automated from Westwood One satellite format (and other carriers such as ABC
networks). Ma & Pa would rather set up a c-band dish and let the network run
the show.
Chuck
> Terrorism isn't nearly as scary as the neoNazi Bush propaganda
> machine, of which Clear Channel is part.
That is a fact. But most of the brainwashed public is as unaware of what is
happening now, as the German citizens were unaware of what Hitler was doing, for the
same reasons.
Wake up people. It is happening again. How many countries will Bush take over
before you wake up?
Mark Howell
>It's not just Clear Channel stations but all the mom & pop stations running
>automated from Westwood One satellite format (and other carriers such as ABC
>networks). Ma & Pa would rather set up a c-band dish and let the network run
>the show.
>
Mom and Pop's market is probably so crowded with signals and the
audience is so fragmented that they can't charge enough for a spot to
do anything else and stay in business.
Where the Mom & Pop operations can still maintain decent shares and
Wal-Mart hasn't driven the local advertisers out of business, they do
a lot of local programming and public service. I know some of those
operators personally. They work their asses off to make a modest
living.
Mark Howell
Rich Wood
>Terrorism isn't nearly as scary as the neoNazi Bush propaganda
>machine, of which Clear Channel is part.
I think a lot of us might like some examples. If you're talking about
the rallies, those were not ordered from corporate. I know a lot of
Clear Channel people and every one has told me the same story.
Individual stations made their own decisions.
What other examples? If you're talking about their talk radio slant
you have to remember that Clear Channel bought virtually all their
syndicated talent. They were right wing conservatives before they
became part of Clear Channel. They bought them because their shows
were very successful.
The person I credit for making Clear Channel what it is today, Randy
Michaels, hardly struck me as a conservative. Do some research on some
of his antics as a jock. They make George Bush's college days look
tame.
Since I keep hearing the term Nazi in posts where someone disagrees
with someone, please define what a neo-Nazi is in your mind.
Rich
Rich Wood
>It's not just Clear Channel stations but all the mom & pop stations running
>automated from Westwood One satellite format (and other carriers such as ABC
>networks). Ma & Pa would rather set up a c-band dish and let the network run
>the show.
How often do you do what this NY Times writer did? How many people do.
The implication is that there should be only one AC station in the
country, one Country station, etc. If you want that format you get in
you car and drive to where it is.
Most people don't, so they like those formats in their own home towns.
The fact that I can hear Rush Limbaugh in every city and town doesn't
bother me. I don't make programming decisions based on how many other
stations that might sound like mine exist in other markets.
If it makes travelling across the country less interesting, take a
plane.
Rich
Dave
can fell it on the 5th Floor at Premier. The air is thick with it.
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 13:12:12 GMT, Rich Wood <rich...@earthlink.net>
wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Jun 2003 14:19:39 GMT, Dave <ric...@knac.com> wrote:
Cajun Gwailo
plane.
you miss the point. radio is boring now. and committing suicide as an
industry with that attitude.
(i am a former station owner and network exec)
radio always succeeded despite onslaughts from "new" media thru the decades
(TV, FM, cable) because it was LOCAL and IMMEDIATE. more importantly it was
consistently LOCAL.
Lowrey May's boys, and the Wall Street $ that drives big radio companies
lack a fundamental understanding of WHY people listen to the radio. Same
reason that internet radio failed.
People don't listen for the music, per se. They listen because radio is
their LOCAL friend. A companion. It keeps them company on their commute,
at the beach, doing their chores in the house, when they are alone, late at
night.
Unless you understand and embrace that, you will fail in the media; and
subsequently, the media will eventually collapse.
David Eduardo
"Cajun Gwailo" <gwa...@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:oyCJa.488778$vU3.2...@news1.central.cox.net...
>
> (i am a former station owner and network exec)
>
> their LOCAL friend.
You apparently missed the key issue of radio when you were in the business.
Radio is not about localism, or just about playing the hits or talking about
topical subjects.
Radio is listened to because it is entertaining. Whether it is local,
national, musical or all talk, live or voice tracked is irrelevant if the
programming is not interesting and entertaining.
Bad or mediocre local radio will not stand up to good non-local products.
Cajun Gwailo
national, musical or all talk, live or voice tracked is irrelevant if the
programming is not interesting and entertaining.
yes, but the definition of that to the LOCAL audience is not decided by
randy michaels...
or premier...
or anyone a thousand miles away.
in lots of communities, the morning jock reading the obits is fascinating.
there's a place for all the formats and ways of presenting them.
but satellite voice tracks in minot or ottumwa are eventually doomed to
fail. or be replaced by an alternative media that can serve the needs of
the community.
TomHendricks474
Bad or mediocre local radio will not stand up to good non-local products.
>>
And.....
And bad or mediocre non-local product (product? when did music stop being an
art and become a product?0
will not stand up to good local radio.
And good has hardly ever had anything to do with $$$$
Tom Hendricks, ed. of Musea
(now celebrating our 10th year)
http://musea.digitalchainsaw.com
For a list of the Corp. Art Weasels
http://CJR.org/owners/
David Eduardo
>
> yes, but the definition of that to the LOCAL audience is not decided by
> randy michaels...
Randy has not been in a programming position for well over a year. Why do
you bring him up?
But since you did, he is probably the most significant influence in "saving"
AM radio after Rush; most of the Jacor/CCU AMs have considerable local news
content.
>
> or premier...
Which is a syndicator that provides programs, not "programming." No
different than the Blue Network in the 40's.
>
> or anyone a thousand miles away.
Oh, you mean the way radio started and the way TV has always been.
Cajun Gwailo
hopefully you are somewhere where you can't do much damage.
Sven Franklyn Weil
TomHendricks474 wrote:
> And bad or mediocre non-local product (product? when did music stop being an
> art and become a product?0
It is a product in the sense that it is something made or PRODUCED by
someone.
Of course the people who PRODUCE the music should get paid for it, just
like the guy who produces the necklaces, cakes of soap or bottles of
contact cement he sells from his street corner stall should get paid for
them)
Or do you think Mozart gave his symphonies away? :-)
--
Sven Weil
New York City, U.S.A.
David Eduardo
> god save the industry if it is being run by people like you.
I see. For stating an opinion different from yours, I am the scourge of the
industry.
Yet you provide no concrete or specific ideas of what makes good radio,
other than stating that "localism" is good and that obits may be very
entertaining.
Yikes.
>
> hopefully you are somewhere where you can't do much damage.
Just in 12 million-plus markets, including three over 10 million. In all of
which we actually ask the local listeners what they enjoy and want and
follow the mandate with a great deal of passion. Which is why I say that
listeners demand entertainment, whatever its origin and source.
Cajun Gwailo
gee, there's only two in the U.S.
David Eduardo
> >>>Just in 12 million-plus markets, including three over 10 million.
>
> gee, there's only two in the U.S.
So? You also a xenophobe?
Cajun Gwailo
no, of course not. but we are "arguing" apples and oranges. "entertaining"
doesn't mean "less local" or vice-versa.
but i will stick with my original premise. it has to keep you COMPANY.
that is why people have historically listened - "entertainment value" or
not. as we could argue all day "what's entertaining." that was the point
about obits. some people might enjoy them. or "tradio."
using "randy michaels" is an example. you can interchange that with Jeff
Pollock, or Frank Magid, or any corporate PD you want. doesn't matter.
as for CCU's "local news" --- the two minute cut-ins "This is news from
Clear Channel International?"
i don't know that i'd give Limbaugh credit for "saving AM." and certainly
syndicated programming has made it easier for some AMs to be viable.
Cajun Gwailo
nope. worked in radio that covered 65 countries. including 5 years in
china. lived on 5 continents. and you?
if you are working outside of the u.s. and making these arguments, that's
different. radio, like any other electronic media, has grown up differently
than in the u.s. has different audience habits / needs.
if you haven't worked in u.s. local radio, you have no idea of what i am
talking about.
and if you are working for a spin off of some state controlled
broadcaster --- well, then, that's another kettle of fish, isn't it?
David Eduardo
> >>For stating an opinion different from yours
>
> no, of course not. but we are "arguing" apples and oranges.
"entertaining"
> doesn't mean "less local" or vice-versa.
"Entertaining" has, in fact, nothing to do with origin. While it may be
possible to be entertaining with somewhat more ease on a local bases, given
the commonality of listener experiences, there is a reason why local TV
programming generally is whumped by more entertaining natinal shows done in
some studio in Burbank or on some set in Vancouver.
>
> but i will stick with my original premise. it has to keep you COMPANY.
> that is why people have historically listened - "entertainment value" or
> not. as we could argue all day "what's entertaining." that was the point
> about obits. some people might enjoy them. or "tradio."
Obits and swap shop are most appropriate on stations in very small
markets... and on small signals, too. They are examples of
counterprogramming with something a bigger station or a national net or
syndicated program can not do. Strategically, a good idea, especially if the
market is fragmented.
However, you limit the definition of "company" to the exclusion of the
classic example of the personality-devoide A/C that simply blends nice music
during office hours; this is indeed company for someone who can not chat,
can not get up from a desk or a loading dock and wants something to give a
little lift to the day. That's the epitome of company, and it's entertaining
in its intended fashion. And whether it is local or not is pretty
irrelevant.
there are many different situations, each demanding a different solution.
Not all can be satisfied by "localism."
>
> using "randy michaels" is an example. you can interchange that with Jeff
> Pollock, or Frank Magid, or any corporate PD you want. doesn't matter.
Frank Magid was not a corporate PD; Jeff is a consultant, and a fairly
creative one.
>
> as for CCU's "local news" --- the two minute cut-ins "This is news from
> Clear Channel International?"
In many times and dayparts, that is enough. Don't you recognize that many
people don't want news every hour, and they are irritated if they get it?
>
> i don't know that i'd give Limbaugh credit for "saving AM."
Most people who have been involved with AM through several decades would
disagree. If not the saviour, at least the catalyst.
David Eduardo
> >>>So? You also a xenophobe?
>
> nope. worked in radio that covered 65 countries. including 5 years in
> china. lived on 5 continents. and you?
I have only worked on 3 continents and in 22 countries at different times.
Currently only working in 4.
And I once owned a SW station: coverage is nothing without listeners, which
is what most shortwave radio is. Some of those things, like HCJB, have more
kilowatts than listeners.
> if you are working outside of the u.s. and making these arguments, that's
> different. radio, like any other electronic media, has grown up
differently
> than in the u.s. has different audience habits / needs.
Actually, the listening patterns are surprisingly similar, discounting
things like in-car listening. And radio programming concepts that work in
McAllen surprisingly work in Bilbao or Buenos Aires or Bogotá or Bayamón.
>
> if you haven't worked in u.s. local radio, you have no idea of what i am
> talking about.
Does LA count? Miami? San Diego, Phoenix and Albuquerque? New York and
Chicago...
>
> and if you are working for a spin off of some state controlled
> broadcaster --- well, then, that's another kettle of fish, isn't it?
Only worked once for the gu'mmint: Radio Martí, and that was for the
Senate-mandated program audit; the rest of the time has been commercial
radio, mostly start-ups and turn-arounds.
G.T TYSON
The era of do-it-yourself radio is approaching faster than a lot of
people realize:
http://home.nc.rr.com/gttyson/lastradio.html
Everybody is a star...
Rich Wood
>It's a vibe. An ambience. One senses it on a visceral level. You
>can fell it on the 5th Floor at Premier. The air is thick with it.
I've been there. I know the people. Are you saying it's thick with
NeoNazism or Conservatism?
Rich
Rich Wood
<gwa...@nospamhotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>If it makes travelling across the country less interesting, take a
>plane.
>
>you miss the point. radio is boring now. and committing suicide as an
>industry with that attitude.
As I read it, the Time writer was more concerned with the same
programming being available in every market. Every TV market has the
same programming nearly 24 hours a day, breaking from the network for
local news.
I've been a network exec for the past 15 years and wouldn't want a
station that didn't do some local programming. Those stations that
just plug in and walk away don't contribute much audience. Even with
network programming a station can differentiate itself with what it
surrounds the network stuff. Things like a good news department.
For a while Limbaugh was on in San Francisco and San Jose. The show
was exactly the same. The attraction of listening in San Jose was that
it surrounded Limbaugh with stuff relevant to its market.
Frankly, music is boring today. I consider that part of the problem.
We've got formulas piled on top of formulas I'm convinced there was a
rhythm track sampled about 10 years ago and every song released since
has used it.
The only format that has any excitement in it is Hip Hop. It brings
the NRA along with it. In New York we have shootouts in front of radio
stations. Even Hip Hop has a sameness to it. The only difference I
hear are the obscenities used. I find it fun to try and figure out how
someone born and raised in one of New York's wealthiest suburbs could
have suffered so much on the mean streets to sing about it.
Rich
Rich Wood
wrote:
> Everybody is a star...
Yup. It's the same thing that happened when desktop publishing was
invented. Everyone became a graphic artist. We had more advertisng
material that looked like ransom notes than ever before.
Rich
Rich Wood
wrote:
>And good has hardly ever had anything to do with $$$$
Without money how does the good get distributed? Please don't tell me
the Internet. I have no interest in a 128kbps MP3 where I concentrate
more on the artifacts than the content.
We're greating a generation of kids who think audio quality is
anything that makes noise. I had a young friend who went to a concert
and commented that "it didn't sound right."
Rich
TomHendricks474
Or do you think Mozart gave his symphonies away? :-)
>>
I doubt that he worked for Clear Channel or supported the RIAA.
At some point the industry needs to accept the fact that it has ruined radio,
and the music industry.
It's the first step of recovery.
TomHendricks474
Without money how does the good get distributed? Please don't tell me
the Internet. I have no interest in a 128kbps MP3 where I concentrate
more on the artifacts than the content.
Well there are different types of money.
There is corp. money that is tied up in 3 radio conglomerates - and there is
individual money with a lot of variety of voices. It's not the money its the
lack of variety of voices.
We're greating a generation of kids who think audio quality is
anything that makes noise. I had a young friend who went to a concert
and commented that "it didn't sound right."
another salute to radio's payola influence. If radio refuses to stress quality,
why should kid zombies.
One reason is the kids don't hear media sources that stress anything but the
ad-driven drivel they're paid to support and review to the exclusion of all us
indys.
What media source would gain by telling the truth about music quality?
Unfortunately none of the majors.
Rich
TomHendricks474
Yup. It's the same thing that happened when desktop publishing was
invented. Everyone became a graphic artist. We had more advertisng
material that looked like ransom notes than ever before.
Rich
>>
And thousands and thousands of zines - the most vibrant writing in the US
today. (see my site for the Zine Hall of Fame) and yet the mainstream won't
even talk about zines - instead its the ad bought junk blockbusters.
Back to the same problem - all major outlets push the same bad art and refuse
to review good art that's not corp. funded and promoted.
(Time for a no-ad review site - see my site for an idea on just how to do that)
Cajun Gwailo
refuse
to review good art that's not corp. funded and promoted.
that's generally not a problem with the BUYERS, but the SELLERS.\
all major companies are always looking for "non-traditional" -- you just
have to find 1) the right person there, and 2) their buttons..
it's not so hard
gaffo
> It's a vibe. An ambience. One senses it on a visceral level. You
> can fell it on the 5th Floor at Premier. The air is thick with it.
So true......flags everywhere. yellow ribbons everywhere. "support the
troops" signs everywhere.
I'm in a sea of facism everyday when I go to work.
these are dark times friend. ;-(.
gaffo
Its the same thing now................also known as Neo-facism.
gaffo
God I hope it does collapse. That would sure be an improvement. Such a
forcast is a good one for folks like me ;-).
do you support LPFM and "pirate" stations friend?.............we need
more pirates to help improve radio!
gaffo
Hispanic Radio Group? (or some such).......recently boughtout by
Cicnero's Univision.
David Eduardo
"gaffo" <ga...@usenet.net> wrote in message
news:vfhv1ps...@corp.supernews.com...
The Cisneros's group is a minority shareholder of Univision, with less than
8%. Univision is merging with Hispanic Broadcasting, not buying it.
So far, two wrong statements in one sentence.
Oh, and two of the markets I referred to are Buenos Aires (17 million) and
Mexico City (23 million) where HBC has no stations.
Wrong assumption, wrong facts.
Thanks for playing.
Cajun Gwailo
for LPFM.
I'm not sure how old you are, but regretfully, the society we live in plays
not by the rules, but by games, and you have to play the game to "win."
When I owned radio stations, there were "competitive hearings" to see who
was the best qualified to be the licensee. But in reality, whomever could
afford the best FCC lawyer usually one. I learned that early, and
expensively.
Pirate radio - I don't care that it interferes with commercial broadcasters,
but often it interferes with other parts of the crowded spectrum, that's my
only beef.
LPFM was to be the salvation, but they kind of screwed that up, didn't they?
But I think you have another chance at it, if you take the opportunity.
During periods of dissent (and we are about to enter a major one about
broadcast ownership), the government will be far more likely to OVER
COMPENSATE to make up for their past sins. So I think you could get LPFM
opened up to anybody, if you tried.
Bryon Dorgan (R) Senator from North Dakota and Russ Feingold from
Wisconsin, as well as John McCain, are going to come down hard on the
Commission, and are proposing a vote to set aside the June 2 votes. And
give CCU a shot or two. They are all screaming "localism," and this
provides a chance for guys like you to say "LPFM" gives us that voice. And
you should take the opportunity.
Radio IS a mess. Tens of thousands of really good people have lost their
jobs in consolidation. The opportunity that I had - to be a young guy that
wanted to own a station someday, and actually could achieve that, is gone,
under the present system.
Go for it.
Rich Wood
wrote:
>And thousands and thousands of zines - the most vibrant writing in the US
>today. (see my site for the Zine Hall of Fame) and yet the mainstream won't
>even talk about zines - instead its the ad bought junk blockbusters.
>Back to the same problem - all major outlets push the same bad art and refuse
>to review good art that's not corp. funded and promoted.
Why would the mainstream talk about media that's both in competition
(barely) and irrelevant to their business.
You do the math. What kind of circulation can a "zine" have when
they're sharing the market with "thousands and thousands of zines?"
They're still centered around what the "publisher" is interested in
can't generate enough readers to be commercially viable.
Very few can sustain themselves by subscriptions, except the very
specialized financial ones with recognized experts as contributors.
The online "zines" I've read are written by language-challenged
hobbyists with a fetish for some very narrow niche. "Vibrant writing"
isn't a term I'd use to describe the content.
Could your own support itself if you had to pay contributors and run
it like a business?
Rich
Rich Wood
wrote:
>Or do you think Mozart gave his symphonies away? :-)
>I doubt that he worked for Clear Channel or supported the RIAA.
>At some point the industry needs to accept the fact that it has ruined radio,
>and the music industry.
He didn't work for Clear Channel. He worked for much more powerful
institutions A few Kings. The Pope. In a few cases he was accused of
ruining church music (by jealous competitors). This kind of argument
has been going on for a very long time. Only the players change.
Rich
G.T TYSON
(snippage)
>> Lowrey May's boys, and the Wall Street $ that drives big radio companies
>> lack a fundamental understanding of WHY people listen to the radio. Same
>> reason that internet radio failed.
Internet radio has not failed. It's only just now getting started. If
the netcasters can organize themselves along the same lines as the NAB
and other lobbying groups, they *will* be heard from.
(snippage)
> do you support LPFM and "pirate" stations friend?.............we need
> more pirates to help improve radio!
LPFM was a good idea that quickly became a joke. A potential LPFM
licensee must spend many thousands of $$$ on the required legal and
engineering stuff for a coverage range of three or four miles. Pirate
radio is another blind alley. On FM, the FCC will come a-knockin' at
your door and make your life real complicated real quick, especially if
a licensed broadcaster complains. On shortwave, your only audience
will be radio hobbyists looking for a new logbook entry. Internet radio
is legal, at least for now, and your potential audience is much larger.
Many more people own computers than shortwave radios, at least in the
USA. From where I stand, the choice is obvious.
gtt
Cajun Gwailo
the venture capitalists that sunk hundreds of millions into it five years
ago would argue the point.
my point was the reason "that round" failed, was that "those people" lacked
an inherent understanding of why people listen.
same reason sirius and xm won't do that great, and only one (or a merged
entity) will survive.
and please don't anybody bring up the contribution of "Radio greats" like
Lee Abrams....etc.
ChuxGarage
>licensee must spend many thousands of $$$ on the required legal and
>engineering stuff for a coverage range of three or four miles.
While I don't disagree with what you are saying in general, your predicted
coverage area for LPFM is not correct. Contrary to popular belief, most LPFMs
are fairly receivable on a good radio for at least a ten mile radius. You may
not be able to pick them up on a $10.00 clock radio, but they are usually OK on
a decent car radio.
That's works out to a bit over 340 square miles which is not insignificant.
Under good conditions with a good receiver and maybe an outside antenna, 15
miles is not impossible.
LPFM "city grade" signals are indeed about 3.5 miles radius, but if your
programming is compelling enough, people will listen even if the signal isn't
ideal. They will seek out good programming.
This is why it is extremely important for LPFM's to be good, even if they can't
be big. You don't have to sound small, even though you are.
Chuck
KZQX-LP
www.kzqx.com
Sven Franklyn Weil
> programming is compelling enough, people will listen even if the signal isn't
Problem with LPFM was that the CHURCHES got into the act and started
applying for almost all the available frequencies in order to basically
turn them into 24/7 infomercials for their little rackets. What's so
compelling about religious programming?
Why would anyone seek out a low-powered FM signal for preaching when
you've got no shortage of high powered conventional AM and FM stations
doing this stuff in most areas of the country. The New York metro alone
has about 7 or so of these things.
The LPFM frequencies that weren't being applied for by wanna-be LPFM
Churchcasters were snapped up by the large national religous outfits like
Moody Bible Institute and Family Radio as TRANSLATORS in order to import
their feeds from stations as far away as Texas, California, Illinois, etc.
into places like Massachusets.
Shortly after the filing windows were opened there were TONS and TONS of
these translator applications submitted to the FCC.
--
Sven Weil
New York City, U.S.A.
TomHendricks474
>today. (see my site for the Zine Hall of Fame) and yet the mainstream won't
>even talk about zines - instead its the ad bought junk blockbusters.
>Back to the same problem - all major outlets push the same bad art and refuse
>to review good art that's not corp. funded and promoted.
Why would the mainstream talk about media that's both in competition
(barely) and irrelevant to their business.
TH
Exactly
My point is that the public needs to know that every art discussed on corp.
media, played on corp. radio, talked about in corp. magazines, sung in corp.
films, is bought and paid for. They are under the illusion (fostered by the
lying conglomerates)
that this is indeed the best art. It is not. It is often the most trendy,
clonish, and bland art out there.
You know it and I know it. The public does not and for those of us artists in
all formats, who are tring to do good work , instead of trendy crap, it is
infuriating.
RW
You do the math. What kind of circulation can a "zine" have when
they're sharing the market with "thousands and thousands of zines?"
They're still centered around what the "publisher" is interested in
can't generate enough readers to be commercially viable.
TH
Not without reviews. And reviews are bought and paid for.
Look if I had a site (and I'm looking for investors now - and Lord help corp.
art if I get even one)
for fair reviews, and George NowhereMan from Rural-ville gets 10 stars for his
music and N-Sync gets 0 for their lifetime work, then how does the public
respond.
And every fair review continues to spotlight people like George NowhereMan and
hits hard against the worst of corp. art (and the worst of Indy bad art -
there's a lot of that too) then soon the tide will change.
It is a case of the emperors clothes. And the minute someone publicly and
openly and consistently and nationally shouts out this $$$ art scam, the house
of cards will fold faster than the buy order of m. Stewart.
RW
Very few can sustain themselves by subscriptions, except the very
specialized financial ones with recognized experts as contributors.
The online "zines" I've read are written by language-challenged
hobbyists with a fetish for some very narrow niche.
TH
Not e-zines, but zines. There is a world of difference.
RW
"Vibrant writing"
isn't a term I'd use to describe the content.
Could your own support itself if you had to pay contributors and run
it like a business?
TH
Well at first it would be hard because the public has gone into its
shell-shocked zombie mode from 2 decades of junk art. BUT
IF I got fair reviews on a national scale? Yes.
For ex. it takes a film maybe 80mill in promotion to win an audience. How bad
does a film have to be before it takes all that money to win an audience? (And
how much of that is just joke accounting?)
I could change the art world 5 times over with 80 million AND sell a PTA home
video and make as much profit. If a film takes 80 million in promo to convice
people to see it on the first week end, then what does that tell you about the
quality of corp. art film?
And buy the way I have a song on a national CD now.
It is a promo CD for the theater chain Landmark - it is in all 53 theaters and
features ONE INDY - me - and a bunch of corporate art music.
You do the comparison and get the CD free at any outlet
http://www.lonestarwebstation.com/mtmkfront.html
Tom Hendricks
TomHendricks474
have to find 1) the right person there, and 2) their buttons.. >>
No they're not. They are looking for clone acts. To say anyone on radio since
the last 2 decades is in anyway different from what went before is hard for me
to accept.
TomHendricks474
licensee must spend many thousands of $$$ on the required legal and
engineering stuff for a coverage range of three or four miles. Pirate
radio is another blind alley. On FM, the FCC will come a-knockin' at
your door and make your life real complicated real quick, especially if
a licensed broadcaster complains. On shortwave, your only audience
will be radio hobbyists looking for a new logbook entry. Internet radio
is legal, at least for now, and your potential audience is much larger.
Many more people own computers than shortwave radios, at least in the
USA. From where I stand, the choice is obvious.
gtt
For now, but the majors are trying their best to shut down interenet - mostly
through licensing fees.
What I've suggested as ed. of Musea, is for the FCC to not allow but force
diversity by reserving some stations for local no-ad content on every market.
If locals want to use it fine, if not it sits waiting for their community.
Cajun Gwailo
since
the last 2 decades is in anyway different from what went before is hard for
me
to accept.
advertisers. not syndicators, program companies or networks.
they don't care what they put on, only that it sells.
and advertisers are ALWAYS looking for "different." like i said, its a
matter of getting to the right person and pushing the right button.
Cajun Gwailo
these translator applications submitted to the FCC.
yes, but that's why i say you are going to have another window of
opportunity if you want it.
the commission will be receptive to diversity in ownership in order to
balance the fucked up concentration in radio and tv.
congress will argue it. watch.. this is all cyclical. when i started in
radio you could own 6 ams, 6fms. period.
it goes around and around. just play the game. on their field.
Harold
> Internet radio has not failed. It's only just now getting started.
I agree. We're still in the earliest stages of Internet radio; the
maturation process will probably continue for years before it is
anywhere near as stable as traditional broadcast radio. There are
many unknowns at this point: How will listeners choose to listen to
Internet radio, at their home or via their wireless devices (or both)?
Will listeners opt to pay for Internet radio, or will they prefer AM
& FM radio's system of advertising-supported radio? Will there be
room for both ad-supported and subscription-based Internet radio, or
will the only "free" 'net radio stations be the public radio stations?
Now that the new wireless standards are being adopted we'll begin to
see new devices emerge, and more people will begin to tune into
Internet radio. Wireless 'net radio streams are already being
introduced, like RadioStorm's cell phone webcast (
http://radiostorm.com/ ). This is just one small step in the movement
towards wireless 'net radio, but it's a step, nonetheless. Soon we'll
begin to see a wave of wireless Internet radio streams, and more
devices made specifically to tune into them. Some of these devices
will be hybrids--cell phone/PDA/Internet radio tuners; others will be
strictly manufactured for 'net radio. More and more people will begin
to embrace the wonderful diversity of programming heard on Internet
radio, and then AM & FM radio reign will be over. AM & FM radio will
never cease to exist, but it will eventually become less of a cultural
and media leader. That is already happening today, but at a slow
rate, currently. It will pick up as technologies are improved.
--
H. J.
VoyagerRadio
Transmitting Chillout & Downtempo Electronica to Earth
Site: http://www.VoyagerRadio.com Blog:
http://voyagerradio.blogspot.com
gaffo
>
> it goes around and around.
Ya -every 50 yrs!!......we'll all be dead by the time we get a
Representative Democracy back!...........if ever..............
gaffo
RIAA royalties will result in Clear Channel and ilk owned internet XM
like stations out the wazzo.
One "home grown" interent radio. No "Free" internet radio. No "diverse"
internet radio. The "system" will make sure of that!!
In 5-10 yrs you will have all the Clear Channel-like fodder you want via
the internet. Britney and more Britney.......maybe some disney radio to
go alone with that tasty big mac.
gaffo
I so ashamed ;-(. embarrasing.............
Rich Wood
wrote:
>You know it and I know it. The public does not and for those of us artists in
>all formats, who are tring to do good work , instead of trendy crap, it is
>infuriating.
You're acting like a victim. You require other people or companies to
give you validity.
>Not without reviews. And reviews are bought and paid for.
>Look if I had a site (and I'm looking for investors now - and Lord help corp.
>art if I get even one)
>for fair reviews, and George NowhereMan from Rural-ville gets 10 stars for his
>music and N-Sync gets 0 for their lifetime work, then how does the public
>respond.
How will you promote the site? Do you honestly believe a web site can
change the face of art? I want some of what you're smoking.
>Not e-zines, but zines. There is a world of difference.
Pardon my naivete. What's the difference? Are you actually going to
publish a printed magazine? I was under the impression that an e-zine
was an electronic magazine, whether it's on the net or CD.
>Could your own support itself if you had to pay contributors and run
>it like a business?
>
>TH
>Well at first it would be hard because the public has gone into its
>shell-shocked zombie mode from 2 decades of junk art. BUT
>IF I got fair reviews on a national scale? Yes.
There you go again. The victim. What if a national magazine or other
media outlet (corporate) gave you an honest but negative review?
>I could change the art world 5 times over with 80 million AND sell a PTA home
>video and make as much profit. If a film takes 80 million in promo to convice
>people to see it on the first week end, then what does that tell you about the
>quality of corp. art film?
What it tells me is that it's expensive to reach a population of
nearly 300 million who have other interests in their lives. You
believe people are clamoring for what you've got. I say they really
don't care until you convince them they should care.
I admire your determination but think you need to formulate a business
plan that will show you what it'll cost to promote (however you chose
to do it) and what the likely return on the investment will be. Any
smart investor is going to want to see that before he pours money into
someone else's fantasy.
Rich
Chad Gould
> On 23 Jun 2003 17:47:23 GMT, tomhend...@cs.com (TomHendricks474)
> wrote:
> >And good has hardly ever had anything to do with $$$$
> Without money how does the good get distributed? Please don't tell me
> the Internet. I have no interest in a 128kbps MP3 where I concentrate
> more on the artifacts than the content.
> anything that makes noise. I had a young friend who went to a concert
> and commented that "it didn't sound right."
Can you blame them? Try and find a piece of so-called music these days
that has not been run through the latest heavy-duty chain of 16 or so
compressors, gates, and limiters, designed to squash the signal so
that all dynamics are gone. This way, it sounds "heavy" and
"wall-of-soundish" on $29 K-Mart boom-boxes. [It also makes a
state-of-the-art system sound like a $29 boom-box. No matter.]
A 128kbps MP3 isn't exactly a downgrade from this level of poot. To be
honest, the only good stuff I've heard of recent *has* been
distributed through the Internet. There are a few exceptions, as there
always are, but they are much rarer than hi-quality recordings even
from 10 years previous.
Rich Wood
<gwa...@nospamhotmail.com> wrote:
>the venture capitalists that sunk hundreds of millions into it five years
>ago would argue the point.
>
>my point was the reason "that round" failed, was that "those people" lacked
>an inherent understanding of why people listen.
I've been involved with several webcasting providers. All have failed
because the cost increases as you increase audience. The were all well
funded and had many webcasting clients. The cost of success killed
them. Virtually none of the clients could generate enough of an
audience to make it salable
>same reason sirius and xm won't do that great, and only one (or a merged
>entity) will survive.
Once there's a receiver that receives AM/FM/Sirius/XM in heavy
production I believe you'll see some serious (no pun intended) growth.
Rich
Rich Wood
wrote:
>What I've suggested as ed. of Musea, is for the FCC to not allow but force
>diversity by reserving some stations for local no-ad content on every market.
>If locals want to use it fine, if not it sits waiting for their community.
Define diversity. What would please you? The FCC has been trying
define/force diversity through EEO and special deals for minorities.
The current de-consolidation suggestions favor selling stations to
minorities.
Are you talking about cultural (art) diversity or cultural (racial)
diversity?
If you're a white male, forget it. You'll pay full price or not be
allowed to particpate, at all.
Rich
Cajun Gwailo
>>>Do you honestly believe a web site can change the face of art?
Of course it can, and will.
That's what they said about MTV....and music videos....which begat a new art
form in television commercials first, then cinema (i.e. McG as a director).
Video games is another example.
EVERY new media/art form has a profound effect on everything else. Whether
it not it happens on the timetable WE would like, rather than it's own -
that's another discussion.
Thirty years ago, four unruly working class boys from Liverpool changed the
world.
It happens all the time.
Rich Wood
wrote:
>Now that the new wireless standards are being adopted we'll begin to
>see new devices emerge, and more people will begin to tune into
>Internet radio. Wireless 'net radio streams are already being
>introduced, like RadioStorm's cell phone webcast
Let's see. I have cell service at $59.95 (plus many taxes) per month
for 700 prime minutes. After that it's 45 cents per minute. That gives
me about 12 hours of prime "talk time" per month.
That would limit me to 12 hours a month, assuming I never made a phone
call. Internet access comes out of your airtime. Nights and weekends
are unlimited if I want to confine my listening to 9pm to 6am weekdays
and 9pm Friday to 6 am Monday. God help me if I go over the 700 prime
minutes. It's gonna cost.
Earthlink offers a CDMA2000 1xRTT wireless network at 144kilobits
(optimal). It allows 50MB per month for $89.95 and $0.005/KB over the
50. How many songs in glorious tinny mono can I listen to before I
begin to rack up the costs? Oops. It doesn't work with cell phones. It
needs wireless PDAs or an AirCard 555 for laptops.
Even when the prices come down, what kind of wireless infrastructure
will providers need to serve the listeners equal to even one large
radio market (services go to the largest markets first) with even AM
radio quality? I'll bet they couldn't handle the top rated New York
station's audience.
Rich
Rich Wood
>One "home grown" interent radio. No "Free" internet radio. No "diverse"
>internet radio. The "system" will make sure of that!!
Why shouldn't webcasters pay licensing fees for copyrighted material
they use? The current system stinks, but it isn't fair to the
copyright holders to get nothing for their product.
Rich
Rich Wood
<gwa...@nospamhotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>Do you honestly believe a web site can change the face of art?
>
>Of course it can, and will.
I'll watch the sky to see the first flying pig.
>That's what they said about MTV....and music videos....which begat a new art
>form in television commercials first, then cinema (i.e. McG as a director).
Don't you rmember the incredibly heavy coercive promotion MTV ran on
TV stations ("I want my MTV") to pressure cable systems to carry them?
What web site has the corporate (pardon the word) resounces to do that
kind of promotion. How many years did it take?
>Video games is another example.
>EVERY new media/art form has a profound effect on everything else. Whether
>it not it happens on the timetable WE would like, rather than it's own -
>that's another discussion.
Again, with enormous investments.
>Thirty years ago, four unruly working class boys from Liverpool changed the
>world.
Thanks to "corporate" music companies. Enormous investments: tours, TV
appearances. Not a web site.
>It happens all the time.
Yes, it does. With enormous investments in promotion to let the
general public know they exist.
Rich
Sven Franklyn Weil
> I'll watch the sky to see the first flying pig.
Please don't start dropping squealing swine from a plane!
Live turkeys were bad enough!!!!!
Cajun Gwailo
>>>>Yes, it does. With enormous investments in promotion to let the
general public know they exist.
hey, you're right.
QUIT.
people that want things to happen, MAKE them happen.
obviously - you want it all handed to you.
TomHendricks474
You're acting like a victim. You require other people or companies to
give you validity.
TH
I and other indy artists are victums of an unfair system fostered by a slanted
media. You bet.
I don't need others to give me validity. But in the busines of art, if you
don't get fair reviews you can't build a career. It's just that simple.
Ex. being heard on a major radio station will reach more people then playing in
100-seat clubs every day for a year.
You know that. I know that. The corp music co's know that. The public chooses
mostly from what they hear on the radio - though its gotten so bad lately that
most young music lovers have dumped all radio and gotten music elsewhere. I
think that is a first in history when all the worst music was on radio.
>Look if I had a site (and I'm looking for investors now - and Lord help corp.
>art if I get even one)
>for fair reviews, and George NowhereMan from Rural-ville gets 10 stars for his
>music and N-Sync gets 0 for their lifetime work, then how does the public
>respond.
RW
How will you promote the site?
Do you honestly believe a web site can
change the face of art? I want some of what you're smoking.
TH
Yes a single website would change art because fair reviews are so rare for the
90% of artists in every format outside the 6 conglomerates. There is a market
of almost everybody for such a review site. Also the public would like to know
the truth instead of Joel Siegel or Gene Shallot praising every movie they
ever see.
>Not e-zines, but zines. There is a world of difference.
RW
Pardon my naivete. What's the difference? Are you actually going to
publish a printed magazine? I was under the impression that an e-zine
was an electronic magazine, whether it's on the net or CD.
TH
I've printed copies of my zine Musea every month since 1992. In about 1996 I
began adding them to the web. There are exactly (the new one was printed today)
123 issues of Musea in circulation.
The web version is just a reprint of the print version. So in my case the
e-zine is just my printed zine added to the web.
RW
>Could your own support itself if you had to pay contributors and run
>it like a business?
>
>TH
>Well at first it would be hard because the public has gone into its
>shell-shocked zombie mode from 2 decades of junk art. BUT
>IF I got fair reviews on a national scale? Yes.
There you go again. The victim. What if a national magazine or other
media outlet (corporate) gave you an honest but negative review?
TH
It won't happen. I'd love it though. You must understand that as long as they
spell my name correctly, it'll help.
What doesn't help at all is total anonymity. Nothing can destroy an artists
career more than no publicity whatsoever. The public will pick and choose even
badly reviewed things.
I've been mentioned in UTNE, and my song is on a nation CD - it all helps.
Otherwise there is nothing to build a career on.
>I could change the art world 5 times over with 80 million AND sell a PTA home
>video and make as much profit. If a film takes 80 million in promo to convice
>people to see it on the first week end, then what does that tell you about the
>quality of corp. art film?
RW
What it tells me is that it's expensive to reach a population of
nearly 300 million who have other interests in their lives. You
believe people are clamoring for what you've got. I say they really
don't care until you convince them they should care.
RW
Well of course you are correct. No one should buy my stuff or the work of any
other indy artist unless they want to. But the point is no one knows about me
or any other indy artist. All I want is a fair chance to impress the public. No
indy artist has that now. And the pool of talent that IS allowed a review is
shrinking (thanks FCC)
RW
I admire your determination but think you need to formulate a business
plan that will show you what it'll cost to promote (however you chose
to do it) and what the likely return on the investment will be. Any
smart investor is going to want to see that before he pours money into
someone else's fantasy.
TH
OF course. There is a rough draft on my website (or maybe two) Unfortunately
biz people I've talked to, are not interested in anything new at this time.
What I think will be required is one individual that would help finance it that
truly believes in quality art and wants to promote it.
The site is so easy to do and set up, that even the threat of backing would get
me started. It would be an ebay type site that would connect artists and the
public - but not for buying and selling, but for reviewing and reading about
new and classic art. And note there is no warehousing or selling, or product to
make etc.
You could say its Amazon without the books.
It would take re-setting up my website for it(I already get 5,000 visitors a
week) full time salaries for me and one other - part time for accountants, tech
help, reviewers, as needed, and maybe a room with 2 computers.
I now help review zines for a national underground publication Zine World
(though it is a print version), and we've already set up the system. It reviews
EVERY printed item we get period. I would do that on the 'all arts' scale. It's
pretty much one investor away from happening IMO
Tom
Rich
gaffo
> In article <fk1mfvcil003el104...@4ax.com>, Rich Wood wrote:
>
>>I'll watch the sky to see the first flying pig.
>
>
> Please don't start dropping squealing swine from a plane!
>
> Live turkeys were bad enough!!!!!
>
Nah............he'll just cut their throuts over the air for listens to
hear the pig squeal their last breath.
Oh wait our lovely radio industry has already done that one. OK, cut the
throut of some homeless smuck and listen to him gurgle his last.
That would help in the ratings.
how about it Rich? Good idea?
gaffo
Not cellphones Rich!! My god man!! WiFi!! laptops...........there are a
few free WiFi site around large urban areas. And one can "Warchalk" to
find others. And their are the pay services from Starbucks also.
Computers Rich......not cellphones!!!
Still not practical yet.
By the time it is I'm sure corporate media will have bought out any
quality internet radio might have developed though.
Cajun Gwailo
is an "online version of your printed mag", which, as I recall, you have
been doing for ten years.
my qualifications to "review" your site and ideas comes from 30 years of
experience in a variety of media and communication companies all over the
world, at the highest levels of decision making - you would recognize all of
their names. additionally, i have been involved with over two dozen
start-ups, both new and traditional media. some started with a web page
like yours and made millions of dollars - some started with just an idea.
after spending some time navigating the site, and reading the "articles," it
is apparent why you haven't succeeded. your stuff is crap.
why would anyone want to invest in, or subsidize thru advertising, your
rants, raves, and pomposity?
the site isn't attractive,or easily navigable
you haven't even bothered to run spell check on the content (hopefully you
do in the printed version)
you may have been using that name for ten years (I'm not sure) but you got
beat to the punch on getting the domain name, didn't you? (at least
according to WhoIs). so you're sitting on somebody else's server - and
doesn't THAT look professional? isn't that like saying "here's my personal
business email address" and having it be a hotmail name?
you sit on this forum and whine about the corporate world, blah blah blah,
and you want someone to hand you money so you can continue to pontificate
about the world according to YOU.
ted kysinksi did it without a budget.
come on, man. do the work. there are no short cuts.
and so there's your "fair and honest review" -- and i didn't even charge
you, like you are proposing to do to poor saps of artists that would fall
for your line of b.s.
TomHendricks474
is an "online version of your printed mag", which, as I recall, you have
been doing for ten years.
>>
my qualifications to "review" your site and ideas comes from 30 years of
experience in a variety of media and communication companies all over the
world, at the highest levels of decision making - you would recognize all of
For you to call it crap is all I ask.
Don't you get it? I'm doing everything that is against corp. art.
GW
additionally, i have been involved with over two dozen
start-ups, both new and traditional media. some started with a web page
like yours and made millions of dollars - some started with just an idea.
You did go to the bottom and see the back issues button, and peruse all 30+
issues?
Well for those undecided - see
why corp. types hate Musea but the other 5,000 visits a week keep reading,
downloading, and talking about it. check it out
http://musea.digitalchainsaw.com
And no matter what the RIAA says it is legal to download my music.
TomHendricks474
matter of getting to the right person and pushing the right button.
>>
the same?
TomHendricks474
Define diversity. What would please you? The FCC has been trying
define/force diversity through EEO and special deals for minorities.
TH
No ads! That alone would insure diversity. Because there is no no-ad media.
Even PBS has ads and infomercials now.
RW
The current de-consolidation suggestions favor selling stations to
minorities.
Are you talking about cultural (art) diversity or cultural (racial)
diversity?
TH
no ads diversity. You see all the media is beholding to advertisers - and the
only advertisers that can afford steady ads is big biz - so in the end of the
loop its always pleasing big biz to insure ads, to insure the radio station
stays on. No diversity there IMO and it shows.
RW
If you're a white male, forget it. You'll pay full price or not be
allowed to particpate, at all.
TH
That is another problem I have with the mainstream media - it always stresses
the black/white conflict, never the poo rich conflict. It does this IMO to
safely skirt the issue of a rich dominated ad driven media. It isn't racism its
buyer-ism. And in the end the advertiser always targest the buyer not the
general audience that is both black/white and poor/rich. So no matter the
outward conflict the real media is supporting rich of any color over poor of
any color and never talk about it. The media then is geared for buyers not
anyone else.
Rich
TomHendricks474
>>
Why would it come back around? why would giant consolidators give up their
power or influence over Washington? Would that be good business for these
companies when greed is job 1?
TomHendricks474
> Internet radio has not failed. It's only just now getting started.
I agree. We're still in the earliest stages of Internet radio; the
maturation process will probably continue for years before it is
anywhere near as stable as traditional broadcast radio. There are
many unknowns at this point: How will listeners choose to listen to
Internet radio, at their home or via their wireless devices (or both)?
Will listeners opt to pay for Internet radio, or will they prefer AM
& FM radio's system of advertising-supported radio? Will there be
room for both ad-supported and subscription-based Internet radio, or
will the only "free" 'net radio stations be the public radio stations? >>
But if the RIAA and the 5 recording companies they represent, deny licensing to
any but their own, then net radio is sewed up pretty much before it begins.
TomHendricks474
that has not been run through the latest heavy-duty chain of 16 or so
compressors, gates, and limiters, designed to squash the signal so
that all dynamics are gone. This way, it sounds "heavy" and
"wall-of-soundish" on $29 K-Mart boom-boxes. [It also makes a
state-of-the-art system sound like a $29 boom-box. No matter.]
A 128kbps MP3 isn't exactly a downgrade from this level of poot. To be
honest, the only good stuff I've heard of recent *has* been
distributed through the Internet. There are a few exceptions, as there
always are, but they are much rarer than hi-quality recordings even
from 10 years previous.
>>
I protest this everytime I play because I give twice a week concerts in a
closet sized Box Office of the Inwood Movie Theater in Dallas.
My guitar - a seldom-in-tune '64 Sears standard Silvertone, my amp the size of
a shoebox.
What I'm trying to do is show that good music doesn't need gimics - voice and
guitar and a closet that looks like a fish tank is enough to please a public
that seems to enjoy it.
TomHendricks474
Why shouldn't webcasters pay licensing fees for copyrighted material
they use? The current system stinks, but it isn't fair to the
copyright holders to get nothing for their product.
Rich
>>
They should and they want to - just like radio. But that isn't enough. The Big
5 want additional cash - a piece of every song because they think its file
sharing when you play a song on the net MP3 quality - if I am understanding the
arguments correctly. Someone here on this newsgroup will know the details, I
bet. A reasonable fee is a fair fee. That's what a lot of internet radio
stations were wanting.
Cajun Gwailo
time. that's "arts hell"
Sven Franklyn Weil
TomHendricks474 wrote:
> Don't you get it? I'm doing everything that is against corp. art.
And what you are doing is the same mistake that Pacifica Radio/WBAI-FM
New York is doing. They want to be the anti-corporate radio so bad
that they go out of their way to sound worse than the most amateurish
college-student run station.
This is why that network will never get
to be anywhere near competition for a right-wing megaphone like
WMAL/Washington DC or WABC/New York.
If you want to kill your supposed enemy, you have to work from within.
You play by their rules...don't just concentrate on content, but also
on PACKAGING and PRESENTATION. Slickness and professionalism sell to
the masses who will then stick around for the content. Only the
converted will tolerate cheesyness in order to stroke their egos.
Sven Franklyn Weil
> few free WiFi site around large urban areas. And one can "Warchalk" to
> find others. And their are the pay services from Starbucks also.
Warchalking????? Are you NUTS man?
That little game is for hard-core geeks with too much time on their
hands.
Joe Average with two jobs, 5 kids and a mortgage and car
payments is not going to go around his neighborhood looking for
wireless computer networks to tap into so he can listen to on-line
streaming audio!
--
Sven Weil
New York City, U.S.A.
Sven Franklyn Weil
> geez, i didn't realize you were in dallas. no wonder you have such a hard
> time. that's "arts hell"
Having a properly tuned gui-tar and a good amp may help....
Someone
> my qualifications to "review" your site and ideas comes from 30 years of
> experience in a variety of media and communication companies all over the
> world, at the highest levels of decision making - you would recognize all of
> their names. additionally ...
LOL. Whenever I read something like the gratuitous self-promotion
as in the above, I always picture the writer as someone who has pictures
of himself all over his walls! Anything following it is summarily dismissed.
David Eduardo
"Someone" <som...@somewhere.org> wrote in message
news:vfnd3va...@news.supernews.com...
Duly noting, of course, that the person claims notoriety yet hides behind
anonymity
Rich Wood
Weil) wrote:
>In article <fk1mfvcil003el104...@4ax.com>, Rich Wood wrote:
>> I'll watch the sky to see the first flying pig.
>
>Please don't start dropping squealing swine from a plane!
>
>Live turkeys were bad enough!!!!!
Not to worry. I love animals and would only use the pigs that can
actually fly. Even then, I'm going to be under a protective roof just
in cast there are navigational failures or ice releases from the
lavatories.
Rich
Rich Wood
>Oh wait our lovely radio industry has already done that one. OK, cut the
>throut of some homeless smuck and listen to him gurgle his last.
>
>That would help in the ratings.
>
>how about it Rich? Good idea?
That doesn't deserve a reasoned response.
Rich
Rich Wood
Weil) wrote:
>Having a properly tuned gui-tar and a good amp may help....
He can't do that. That's what corporate art does - has tuned
instruments. It would constitute a breach of his committment to be
different.
Rich
Rich Wood
wrote:
>If you're a white male, forget it. You'll pay full price or not be
>allowed to particpate, at all.
>
>TH
>That is another problem I have with the mainstream media - it always stresses
>the black/white conflict, never the poo rich conflict.
The broadcast media must adhere to FCC rules. One of the few
violations that can actually cost you a license is not following FCC
EEO "guidelines" and meeting the quotas they deny are there.
> It does this IMO to
>safely skirt the issue of a rich dominated ad driven media. It isn't racism its
>buyer-ism.
I see you've never worked in radio or spoken to a personnel director
who has had to deal with the mountains or paperwork the FCC requires
to show you tried to meet the quota that isn't there. I take it you've
never been in the position of having to hire people in an FCC
regulated industry. I have. It's unfair to everyone concerned.
It's particularly unfair the qualified white males who have to wait
until the company has run the required ads to find a minority to take
the job. I want to hire qualified people. I don't give a rat's
posterior what race the candidate may be. I've hired many minorities
because I felt they were the best people for the jobs. In every case
my decision was right. I didn't need the gummint to tell me who the
best candidate was. If EEO disappeared tomorrow I'd hire them again.
>And in the end the advertiser always targest the buyer not the
>general audience that is both black/white and poor/rich. So no matter the
>outward conflict the real media is supporting rich of any color over poor of
>any color and never talk about it. The media then is geared for buyers not
>anyone else.
It's business. People with money buy products. When was the last time
you saw a Mercedes ad that touted how well it can pull a double wide?
The only ads that target the poor are ones that produce products
everyone needs and the poor can afford.They're general targets for
products we all need, regardless of our financial status. Why would a
manufacturer insult the poor by targeting them with an ad for a
product far out of their reach.
The FCC rules are race based. Ad campaigns are based on the target
consumer for a specific product.
Rich
Rich Wood
>> Even when the prices come down, what kind of wireless infrastructure
>> will providers need to serve the listeners equal to even one large
>> radio market (services go to the largest markets first) with even AM
>> radio quality? I'll bet they couldn't handle the top rated New York
>> station's audience.
>Not cellphones Rich!! My god man!! WiFi!! laptops...........there are a
>few free WiFi site around large urban areas. And one can "Warchalk" to
>find others. And their are the pay services from Starbucks also.
>Computers Rich......not cellphones!!!
>Still not practical yet.
The original article was based on cell phones. That's why I used them
as the basis for my post. I have a WiFi network at home that even
programs my Tivo via the net (and takes all my viewing info with it).
My laptop WiFi card will do both 802.11a and b.
I used to have Go America's unlimited wireless service at $49.95 a
month for an optimal 14.4Kbps. With the level of spam I get it became
too slow to be of any value and I don't care to pay Earthlink to
deliver my spam for double the price with a data limit and extra fees.
Starbucks in New York uses T-Mobile. It's $7.95 per day per location.
If I move to another Starbucks I have to pay $7.95 again. If I want to
sit at a single Starbucks for the whole day I have to pay only once. I
wouldn't mind paying a daily price for unlimited access at any
Starbucks I visit during the day. My email isn't worth nearly $18+ per
day.
If I go somewhere else I may need a Boingo account.
There's a coffee shop just around the corner that has signs outside
claiming Internet access. I asked where it came from. No one knew. I
asked several people who should have known. "It's just in the air" I
was told. Probably someone in the apartment above has a wireless
router with no encryption. Let's pray he never moves. Another free
site is a tofu restaurant in the Village. Unfortunately I don't like
tofu. If I want to sit in the blazing sun in Bryant Park I can get a
free connection.
If I want to listen to music I can load up my hard drive with MP3s and
take along a few DVDs and not pay a penny for exactly what I want to
see or hear. If I want to go the corporate route I have a tiny Walkman
so I can listen to as much cookie-cutter radio as I can tolerate. At
the gym I use a tiny Minidisk player that also does MP3. I can ignore
my fellow bodybuilders with the best of them. Who needs to talk to a
human. How 80's.
>By the time it is I'm sure corporate media will have bought out any
>quality internet radio might have developed though.
Then you need to get off your butt and form a company to beat them to
it. Are there no entrepreneurs here or just victims?
Rich
Rich Wood
Weil) wrote:
>In article <vfn1cdl...@corp.supernews.com>, gaffo wrote:
>> few free WiFi site around large urban areas. And one can "Warchalk" to
>> find others. And their are the pay services from Starbucks also.
>
>Warchalking????? Are you NUTS man?
>
>That little game is for hard-core geeks with too much time on their
>hands.
Why would I need that? The software that came with my WiFi card
automatically displays any signal it detects. I don't have to search
for anything. it even shows me which have encryption and which don't.
>Joe Average with two jobs, 5 kids and a mortgage and car
>payments is not going to go around his neighborhood looking for
>wireless computer networks to tap into so he can listen to on-line
>streaming audio!
He's going to look awfully supicious sitting on the stoop when the
cops ask him if he lives there and the building super shoos him away
because he's blocking foot traffic. It can even make an investment
banker look like a well-to-do homeless person.
Rich
Rich Wood
wrote:
>But if the RIAA and the 5 recording companies they represent, deny licensing to
>any but their own, then net radio is sewed up pretty much before it begins.
Unless you don't pay the bill, why would they deny you a license? It's
in their best interest to collect huge fees from anyone foolish enough
to pay them. The more people listen, the more you pay.
Rich
Dexter J
First off - sorry for not getting back with my dream TV schedule brother
Wood as yet - what I thought was going to be a quicky gig has been extended
(happily) into the summer and time has been short here at my desk.. I have
started and poke at it when I take breaks and will forward when I have the
dream week lined up.. There is much to choose from when you start really
looking at it..
Secondly - stick to your guns brother Hendricks - the reason streaming
radio didn't do so well in the hands of - some - standing media enterprises
is - because - it was a re-hash (often a straight simulcast) of what they
have on the air and listeners/viewers have a much bigger dial on the i-net
(which apparently is a 'downside' from a business point of view - you know
- all that tricky content competition from outside your market 'thang)..
This was further impacted by the fact that most folks didn't have a very
wide modem in the first pass a few years ago - so the signal was choppy and
unreliable (kind like Crystal Sets if you are old enough to remember
hooking one of those up to the radiator).. My take is they bailed too early
and eagerly so given the internet changes so much of the traditional
broadcast/publication/advertising model..
As to wireless - WiFi is what I think (and have mentioned before) is going
to happen in North American because it's hardware independent - but you
should know that several of my fans in Europe kick up the stream on G2 Cell
devices right now using RealAudio (they have a better Cell system there)..
I feed a fixed stream at 21kbs which is OK for the content I run here at
Radio Free Dexterdyne and in Canada we cover the Artist's royalty in a
fixed tax on all recordable/writable media sold..
Almost all of it gets sucked up by the big labels you refer to of course -
but every so often an independent gets a slice when no one is paying any
attention.. We have a little picnic around here when it happens locally..
Anyway, this structure allows for .org independent online music and arts
sites like mine, although I'm more developing and testing new media server
technology than engaging in any really seriously important Arts
enterprise.. Therefore, if I own a real factory copy of what is online and
I take measures to disallow download as well as limit caching at the
listeners drive to no more than 30% of a given work to meet the
reproduction rules in actual DCMA - I'm good to go.. RealAudio as annoying
as it is is specifically designed to do this on a codex level via the
stream so that you can let folks listen to a whole tune - but - you can
control the cache trace to meet the technical DCMA rules on the
listener/viewer's drive which is why I chose it..
If you want to sell advertising on your stream or your website - you then
fall into the commercial end of the biz here in Canada and should be
handing a performance royalty over because you are making money on their
work.. All of which I think is fair as long as you are bitcasting and not
sharing tunes, in which case you should be picking up a distribution
royalty fee as well to my mind..
What all this latitude has done here is encourage a stronger independent
Canadian music and arts presence online where the artists themselves and
their fans effectively bypass the entire Label/Media infrastructure and it
has gone a long way to getting a lot of Canadian artists heard, seen, read
whilst making them some actual cash in the bank dough to boot.. Assuming
the copyright holder is savvy enough to avoid releasing their content in
*.MP3/*.ASF formats.. Although amusingly most of the big music trade events
are pushing .MP3/.ASF formats in workshops - which of course releases
everything to the public domain on technical level.. Ignorance is bliss I
suppose..
Anyway - a lot artists are selling their own pressings and works without
handling over a huge slice to the many vampires in the traditional loop -
all of which makes for a much better deal for the creator when and if some
Label A&R player, editor or program director decide they might be the 'next
big thing'..
What seems to freak the 'corp' crowd out most about all of this is that it
interferes with the 'vertical integration' and controllable 'product
lifecycle' model that made their stock so attractive to folks like Vivendi
and Sony - kinda like the Turner model where you own the movies and the
only stations where they are being broadcast - because the real thinkers
also know that content value is actually what separates the winners from
the also rans on an advertising impact basis - if - the viewer/listner has
the opportunity to choose..
My take is that when and if you manage to rid yourselves of the band of
bagmen you have managed to let get elected and appointed down there in my
favorite other country - you should look at setting up a HAM type system
for bitcasters.. This would encourage a .org bitcasting environment with
real rules and standards (but minor hobby fees and technical knowledge
requirements as befits the activity) which would allow for some of the
beneficial things going on here..
I am pushing for something like that in Canada myself actually, mostly so
the artists get enough technical info to stop handing out promotional
.MP3/.ASF to the sharing vampires..
Which is my final point - while it may appear that the RIAA is omnipresent
- and it's working hard with it's local toadies in various countries to
attempt to apply it's rules and collects it's fees overseas (in US dollars
no less) - it is unlikely to succeed as the Internet represents the only
cultural and media outlet not dominated by American culture in many
countries, including our own.
Thusly - many here correctly view the internet as an opportunity to develop
a strong international cultural presence outside the international media
corporate infrastructure.
As an example of this problem - we had to actually bring in Canadian
Content Law for our broadcasters to get them to run - any - Canadian
content at all on our broadcast airwaves several decades ago and they still
scream blue murder every review about it because it makes them slip a
Canadian tune or television show in every so often in Canada.. The rules
have however fostered a real Canadian creative industry and on a
competitive basis actually..
Anyway, don't let them beat you down dude - they may look solid today - but
wait until your media monopolies decide to exercise some political muscle
instead of giving the powers that be free hand jobs on policy and
decisions.. At which point your elected and appointed officials will get a
real taste of what it's like to have their lives run by professional media
decision makers.. It will no doubt be eye opening..
Keep up the good fight brother Hendricks - I have to get back to work here
- otherwise I'd be right in here with you..
Finally - you have a problem in your site on the opening page as of this
morning..
http://musea.digitalchainsaw.com/122sofa.gif
- image is corrupted or missing.. You may not be able to see it at your end
if you have the page cached..
--
J Dexter - webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.org/
all tunes - no cookies no subscription no weather no ads
no news no phone in - RealAudio 8+ Required - all the Time
Radio Free Dexterdyne Top Tune o'be-do-da-day
Kurt Swinghammer - You Turn Me On I'm a Radio
http://www.dexterdyne.org/888/136.RAM
Rich Wood
wrote:
>For you to call it crap is all I ask.
>Don't you get it? I'm doing everything that is against corp. art.
Oh. Why didn't you say that. I've been to the site and I agree with
the review. It's crap. I might have been more gentle and called it
self-indulgent drivel, but crap covers it.
Why does being against "coporate art" mean you have to go to war with
the language?
Rich
Rich Wood
wrote:
At least in the coporate and academic world it's considered
establishing your credibility. What you appear to be looking for is
"I'm Billy Bob and I think ur site iz kewl."
Rich
Rich Wood
<radio...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Duly noting, of course, that the person claims notoriety yet hides behind
>anonymity
I agree. That was the major weakness in the review. The anonymity
makes it impossible to research the reviewer's background even though
we know that everything on the net is abosolutely true.
Rich
Cajun Gwailo
establishing your credibility. What you appear to be looking for is
"I'm Billy Bob and I think ur site iz kewl."
thanks, rich. i figured if i had to explain that to them, well, ya
know.....
Cajun Gwailo
TomHendricks474
TomHendricks474
The only ads that target the poor are ones that produce products
everyone needs and the poor can afford.They're general targets for
products we all need, regardless of our financial status. Why would a
manufacturer insult the poor by targeting them with an ad for a
product far out of their reach. >>
TH
Of course you are right, but that doesn't hide the problem that almost all Big
10 Media is NOT for anyone outside the ad target audience.
Media is not a corp. toy. It should be news and entertainment etc. for all
people not a monied class. And when every ad and every radio format, or evening
news program, is geared toward a monied buying demographic, then this isn't
media for all is it?
If the FCC was really for this country, it would see that media exclusively for
the rich is no media at all. I'm no fan of the FCC either.
TomHendricks474
TH
I don't think that'll work. How can I, an indy site, compete
with AOL/Time Warner on the money they can spend.
And why compete with them on something they've won from the start - they have
real capital, I don't.
Instead I will compete on what I can do as well or in many cases better -
innovative art work, new ideas, and quick turn around of new ideas.
If people can't get beyond fancy graphics then maybe they should stick with bad
Corp. Art.
Anything I do on the net is openly and honestly low tech to allow the most to
access it.
If there is backing then we'll spruce up as needed.
SW
..don't just concentrate on content, but also
on PACKAGING and PRESENTATION. Slickness and professionalism sell to
the masses who will then stick around for the content. Only the
converted will tolerate cheesyness in order to stroke their egos.
TH
If people can't see through the glitter of a false fascade, I' doubt they'd
understand my message either.
--
Sven Weil
New York City
>>
Tom Hendricks, ed. of Musea
TomHendricks474
time. that's "arts hell"
>>
Amen brother. This town is sooooo conservative, they think Mass. is a communist
country.
TomHendricks474
instruments. It would constitute a breach of his committment to be
different.
Rich >>
No that's not it. Instead of destroying an old guitar, you play it because its
sweeter than any new plastic one.
In the same way quality is better than trendiness.
In my case I just have to tune more than others.
It's the diversity of having at least ONE guitar that isn't a $1,000 gismo with
1,000 more effects on it or the amp, to hide lack of talent.
I assure you you can't hide much behind a standard guitar and a small amp. And
you sure can't lyp sinc to a record.
Postage stamp picture of both guitar and me, on CD at.
http://www.lonestarwebstation.com/mtmkfront.html
Dexter J
Thanks - so far it works like a top here and the model being implemented in
several non-bitcasting solutions.. Ungodly dull non-bitcasting solutions
albeit as my base technology will push any binary dataform you got out the
door on a load balanced schedule - but at least if funds my hobby site..
More Show Tunes for a better tomorrow!.. :) ..
Again - stick to your guns dude - cheers and try to look at that .gif error
on your site when you get moment.. I think it's the image file itself..
Cajun Gwailo
I think you knew the answer before you asked the question.
TomHendricks474
wait until your media monopolies decide to exercise some political muscle
instead of giving the powers that be free hand jobs on policy and
decisions.. At which point your elected and appointed officials will get a
real taste of what it's like to have their lives run by professional media
decision makers.. It will no doubt be eye opening..
Keep up the good fight brother Hendricks - I have to get back to work here
- otherwise I'd be right in here with you..
Thanks - I"ve been doing it for 10 years now - so its ingrained in me.
Finally - you have a problem in your site on the opening page as of this
morning..
http://musea.digitalchainsaw.com/122sofa.gif
- image is corrupted or missing.. You may not be able to see it at your end
if you have the page cached..
--
J Dexter - webmaster - http://www.dexterdyne.org/
all tunes - no cookies no subscription no weather no ads
no news no phone in - RealAudio 8+ Required - all the Time
Radio Free Dexterdyne Top Tune o'be-do-da-day
Kurt Swinghammer - You Turn Me On I'm a Radio
http://www.dexterdyne.org/888/136.RAM
Thanks for the support. I've quoted that Canandian % of local music
requirement, more than once in the print version of Musea. It insures at least
a little diversity. And let's hope that the range of the net is such that
these Corp. 10 can't control the bulk of it.
If you are looking for indy music, I have 27 mp3's on my site that (unlike the
RIAA says) are open for sharing.
'Stories' is a song now on a national promo CD for the chain of indy theaters -
Landmark theaters - where I work.
See
http://www.lonestarwebstation.com/mtmkfront.html
Or my website.
And on my website - is the Sofa page picture not coming up?
My volunteer webmaster has troubles with all photos - and because she is doing
all this for free, I'll let it go for now.
Good luck and long live indy radio!