Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
"Talk of the Nation" cancelled
50 views
Skip to first unread message
leansto...@democrat.com
Apr 16, 2013, 9:28:35 PM4/16/13
to
Catching up on some KQED podcasts, I heard Talk of the Nation was canceled. I can do without the Mon-Thu stuff, though I have no objection to the quality, rather it is a funny time for talk radio for me. However, I am going to miss Science Friday.
I caught this on the Forum podcast with David Stockman.
I caught this on the Forum podcast with David Stockman.
Carl Zwanzig
Apr 17, 2013, 1:51:30 AM4/17/13
to
On 4/16/2013 6:28 PM, leansto...@democrat.com wrote:
> Catching up on some KQED podcasts, I heard Talk of the Nation was
> canceled. I can do without the Mon-Thu stuff, though I have no objection
> to the quality, rather it is a funny time for talk radio for me. However,
> I am going to miss Science Friday.
IIRC, SciFri isn't being canceled, just ToTN.
> Catching up on some KQED podcasts, I heard Talk of the Nation was
> canceled. I can do without the Mon-Thu stuff, though I have no objection
> to the quality, rather it is a funny time for talk radio for me. However,
> I am going to miss Science Friday.
z!
leansto...@democrat.com
Apr 17, 2013, 2:00:51 AM4/17/13
to
http://scifri.org/newsroom.html
Full text:
In an effort to bring more news to the middle of the day, NPR announced today that Talk of the Nation will end its 21-year run, on July 01, 2013. Science Friday will continue as an independent program, and will retain its Friday 2-4 Eastern Time broadcast spot.
While our sympathies are with our colleagues on the Talk of the Nation staff, we’re excited about the future and look forward to continuing what we do best: reporting on the latest developments in science and technology.
Despite a downward trend in radio listenership, Science Friday is thriving. Our aggressive push into new technologies has brought our content to new people, many of whom are not regular public radio listeners. We have one of the largest podcasting audiences in public radio, and the largest number of Twitter followers of any public radio program. We have an active and engaged Facebook fan community, and our website attracts tens of thousands of unique visitors each week. Our fans are passionate, loyal, and engaged.
As supporters, listeners, and advocates of Science Friday, I’m sure many of you are wondering what you can do to help. First, spread the word by sharing our content with your friends, family, and colleagues, so that we continue to grow our audience and meet new people. Second, advocate for Science Friday by reaching out to your local station and NPR and telling them how much you value us. Third, make a donation to Science Friday or to your local station to sustain carriage of Science Friday in your community.
Danielle Dana
Executive Director
Science Friday Initiative
spamtrap1888
Apr 17, 2013, 4:25:57 AM4/17/13
to
On Apr 16, 11:00 pm, "leanstothel...@democrat.com"
Meh. I liked Politics Wednesday as much as Science Friday.
For me the one feature of Taco Donation was that it ran live on the
West Coast. All the other network/syndicated shows are delayed when I
hear them.
But if the replacement show from Boston was so great, how come NPR
didn't cut over to them when the explosions took place?
<leanstothel...@democrat.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 16, 2013 10:51:30 PM UTC-7, Carl Zwanzig wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 16, 2013 10:51:30 PM UTC-7, Carl Zwanzig wrote:
For me the one feature of Taco Donation was that it ran live on the
West Coast. All the other network/syndicated shows are delayed when I
hear them.
But if the replacement show from Boston was so great, how come NPR
didn't cut over to them when the explosions took place?
Patty Winter
Apr 17, 2013, 10:39:52 AM4/17/13
to
In article <kkld45$7ae$1...@dont-email.me>, Carl Zwanzig <zb...@radix.net> wrote:
>
>IIRC, SciFri isn't being canceled, just ToTN.
will be willing to air a new show only four days a week in order to save
Fridays for SciFri. They could, of course, tape-delay SciFri to a different
time slot, but that's not ideal for a call-in show.
KQED-FM is seeking input from listeners about what to put in the 11-1
slot.
Patty
James Duncan
Apr 17, 2013, 11:02:04 AM4/17/13
to
their programming. It's a bad sign. The projected replacement show,
"Here and Now", is often just lightweight fluff.
Patty Winter
Apr 17, 2013, 12:19:34 PM4/17/13
to
In article <16etm8tp3aj6s02uc...@4ax.com>,
James Duncan <jdun...@nospam.org> wrote:
>
>As with all other US mass media, NPR is feeling the need to dumb down
>their programming. It's a bad sign. The projected replacement show,
>"Here and Now", is often just lightweight fluff.
They say that H&N is going to be doing longer, more in-depth segments.
>
>As with all other US mass media, NPR is feeling the need to dumb down
>their programming. It's a bad sign. The projected replacement show,
>"Here and Now", is often just lightweight fluff.
We shall see.
NPR's claim that their stations wanted a midday news show may be
correct, but I don't buy their claim that TotN is no longer needed
because there are other talk shows available for public radio stations
that weren't available when TotN began. I've listened to a couple of
those supposed alternatives, and they're nowhere near the quality of
TotN.
Patty
spamtrap1888
Apr 17, 2013, 3:53:51 PM4/17/13
to
On Apr 17, 9:19 am, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
> NPR's claim that their stations wanted a midday news show may be
> correct, but I don't buy their claim that TotN is no longer needed
> because there are other talk shows available for public radio stations
> that weren't available when TotN began. I've listened to a couple of
> those supposed alternatives, and they're nowhere near the quality of
> TotN.
The guest host today (Wednesday) is really soliciting calls from the
> NPR's claim that their stations wanted a midday news show may be
> correct, but I don't buy their claim that TotN is no longer needed
> because there are other talk shows available for public radio stations
> that weren't available when TotN began. I've listened to a couple of
> those supposed alternatives, and they're nowhere near the quality of
> TotN.
listeners -- hard -- and integrating the calls very well into her
interview with the guests. Sometimes I have a hard time distinguishing
the guest from the caller.
Regarding other talk shows: KUSP enabled me to become a fan of the
Diane Rehm show. Despite her injured voice, she has great guests and
asks great questions. But that show airs live from 7-9 AM PST, and I
don't think KQED would preempt Morning Edition for it.
leansto...@democrat.com
Apr 17, 2013, 4:56:43 PM4/17/13
to
It might be my impression, but the carefully metered NPR speaking style seems to have been thrown out the window. Quite a few hosts don't sound "NRP" any more. Personally, I don't care. I don't think vocalization is branding. The reminds me of the Howard Stern w NNNNNNNN B C bit in "Private Parts."
David Kaye
Apr 17, 2013, 6:00:41 PM4/17/13
to
"Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote
> That is correct, although it remains to be seen how many NPR affiliates
> will be willing to air a new show only four days a week in order to save
> Fridays for SciFri. They could, of course, tape-delay SciFri to a
> different
> time slot, but that's not ideal for a call-in show.
It's likely that most NPR affiliates would move Science Friday to a
non-strip time slot, such as Saturday, Sunday, or overnight. There are also
lots of NPR affiliates that strip one-offs such as Piano Jazz, This Way Out,
TUC Radio, Prairie Home Companion, etc., so that there's a different show
each weekday.
I'm thinking that it's time that NPR, PRI, PRX, APM, and Pacifica all join
together and streamline their finances. This explosion in program producers
causes confusion to a LOT of people. For instance, do people know that the
most popular "NPR" shows are not NPR shows at all? This American Life is
produced by PRI and Prairie Home Companion by APM. In fact, that was the
big beef years ago when Garrison Keillor left NPR but couldn't take the PHC
name with him. So, his show became "American Radio Company" for a few years
until he was able to get the name back.
And as it stands, PRI is the largest producer of public radio, followed by
APM. NPR has evolved mainly into a news operation and program distribution
company.
>
> KQED-FM is seeking input from listeners about what to put in the 11-1
> slot.
Well, I'd like to see Joshua Johnson get a KQED talkshow. When he filled in
for Michael Krasny he was superb!
> That is correct, although it remains to be seen how many NPR affiliates
> will be willing to air a new show only four days a week in order to save
> Fridays for SciFri. They could, of course, tape-delay SciFri to a
> different
> time slot, but that's not ideal for a call-in show.
non-strip time slot, such as Saturday, Sunday, or overnight. There are also
lots of NPR affiliates that strip one-offs such as Piano Jazz, This Way Out,
TUC Radio, Prairie Home Companion, etc., so that there's a different show
each weekday.
I'm thinking that it's time that NPR, PRI, PRX, APM, and Pacifica all join
together and streamline their finances. This explosion in program producers
causes confusion to a LOT of people. For instance, do people know that the
most popular "NPR" shows are not NPR shows at all? This American Life is
produced by PRI and Prairie Home Companion by APM. In fact, that was the
big beef years ago when Garrison Keillor left NPR but couldn't take the PHC
name with him. So, his show became "American Radio Company" for a few years
until he was able to get the name back.
And as it stands, PRI is the largest producer of public radio, followed by
APM. NPR has evolved mainly into a news operation and program distribution
company.
>
> KQED-FM is seeking input from listeners about what to put in the 11-1
> slot.
for Michael Krasny he was superb!
David Kaye
Apr 17, 2013, 6:01:51 PM4/17/13
to
"James Duncan" <jdun...@nospam.org> wrote
> As with all other US mass media, NPR is feeling the need to dumb down
> their programming. It's a bad sign. The projected replacement show,
> "Here and Now", is often just lightweight fluff.
I don't see that at all. Public radio stations consistently are at the top
of the ratings in their markets, and especially among the 25 to 49 age
group.
> As with all other US mass media, NPR is feeling the need to dumb down
> their programming. It's a bad sign. The projected replacement show,
> "Here and Now", is often just lightweight fluff.
of the ratings in their markets, and especially among the 25 to 49 age
group.
David Kaye
Apr 17, 2013, 6:04:13 PM4/17/13
to
<leansto...@democrat.com> wrote
> The reminds me of the Howard Stern w NNNNNNNN B C bit in "Private Parts."
And the reason nobody mentioned about "W NNNNNNNN B C" (and Howard should
know better) was because WNBC's competition at that time was WABC. They HAD
to distinguish the "N".
> The reminds me of the Howard Stern w NNNNNNNN B C bit in "Private Parts."
know better) was because WNBC's competition at that time was WABC. They HAD
to distinguish the "N".
Neil
Apr 17, 2013, 7:20:17 PM4/17/13
to
with WWDC in Washington until his contract was terminated on June 25,
1982. And even though he'd signed with WNBC in March of '82, he didn't
(and couldn't) start in New York until after WWDC dropped him in June,
or he worked through the old contract.
Meanwhile, WABC announced, in February of 1982, they were dropping music
for talk. But they didn't actually kill off "Musicradio77" until May 10,
which was concurrently the launch date for ABC Talkradio. (WABC
initially carried most of the Talkradio lineup. Same mostly-KABC dreck
that KGO-FM was carrying, except WABC also got Owen Spann from the network.)
So by the time Stern showed up at W-NNNN-BC, the need to eMMMMMMphasize
the "N" was pretty much gone, and their real music competitors were over
on FM.
Neil
Apr 17, 2013, 7:40:05 PM4/17/13
to
On 4/17/13 3:00 PM, David Kaye wrote:
> "Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote
distributed by MINNESOTA Public Radio, MPR, which could explain the
confusion. MPR changed the name of its distribution arm to APM about a
decade ago.
What you're remembering, though not accurately, is when Keillor decided
to give up doing new, live PHC programs back in 1987 and move with his
new wife to Denmark (where she was from). But as, IIRC, Keillor owned
the rights to the PHC name, MPR created a new program ("Good Evening")
and hired Noah Adams to host it. That endeavor was less than successful,
in part because many stations preferred airing PHC reruns to the new
live program, and after a year or two Adams returned to NPR, Keillor
came back to St. Paul and relaunched PHC, but under a different name,
"American Radio Company of the Air". After a few years of going by that
moniker, they renamed the show back to PHC, which it's been ever since.
> "Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote
>
> I'm thinking that it's time that NPR, PRI, PRX, APM, and Pacifica all join
> together and streamline their finances. This explosion in program producers
> causes confusion to a LOT of people. For instance, do people know that the
> most popular "NPR" shows are not NPR shows at all? This American Life is
> produced by PRI and Prairie Home Companion by APM. In fact, that was the
> big beef years ago when Garrison Keillor left NPR but couldn't take the PHC
> name with him. So, his show became "American Radio Company" for a few years
> until he was able to get the name back.
>
Keillor's PHC was never, ever distributed by NPR. It was originally
> I'm thinking that it's time that NPR, PRI, PRX, APM, and Pacifica all join
> together and streamline their finances. This explosion in program producers
> causes confusion to a LOT of people. For instance, do people know that the
> most popular "NPR" shows are not NPR shows at all? This American Life is
> produced by PRI and Prairie Home Companion by APM. In fact, that was the
> big beef years ago when Garrison Keillor left NPR but couldn't take the PHC
> name with him. So, his show became "American Radio Company" for a few years
> until he was able to get the name back.
>
distributed by MINNESOTA Public Radio, MPR, which could explain the
confusion. MPR changed the name of its distribution arm to APM about a
decade ago.
What you're remembering, though not accurately, is when Keillor decided
to give up doing new, live PHC programs back in 1987 and move with his
new wife to Denmark (where she was from). But as, IIRC, Keillor owned
the rights to the PHC name, MPR created a new program ("Good Evening")
and hired Noah Adams to host it. That endeavor was less than successful,
in part because many stations preferred airing PHC reruns to the new
live program, and after a year or two Adams returned to NPR, Keillor
came back to St. Paul and relaunched PHC, but under a different name,
"American Radio Company of the Air". After a few years of going by that
moniker, they renamed the show back to PHC, which it's been ever since.
FarseWatch14
Apr 18, 2013, 1:36:06 AM4/18/13
to
"David Kaye" <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:kkn5st$nm9$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> It's likely that most NPR affiliates would move Science Friday to a
> non-strip time slot, such as Saturday, Sunday, or overnight.
David Kaye
Apr 18, 2013, 5:22:19 AM4/18/13
to
"Neil" <weis...@sonic.net> wrote
> Keillor's PHC was never, ever distributed by NPR.
Thank you. I stand corrected.
> But as, IIRC, Keillor owned the rights to the PHC name,
I stand corrected once again. I checked the trademark registrations and
there is no mention of anybody other than Garrison Keillor owning the PHC
name. I guess I heard a story from an uninformed source at the time because
all these years I believed the name change was a trademark dispute.
> Keillor's PHC was never, ever distributed by NPR.
> But as, IIRC, Keillor owned the rights to the PHC name,
there is no mention of anybody other than Garrison Keillor owning the PHC
name. I guess I heard a story from an uninformed source at the time because
all these years I believed the name change was a trademark dispute.
David Kaye
Apr 18, 2013, 5:26:08 AM4/18/13
to
"FarseWatch14" <FarsW...@Comcast.net> wrote
>
> It's hard to move a program named "Science FRIDAY" to weekends....
Well, they'd change the name, silly. But you knew that.
Let's see...Science Highway, Science Pie Tray, Science Everyday.
>
> It's hard to move a program named "Science FRIDAY" to weekends....
Let's see...Science Highway, Science Pie Tray, Science Everyday.
James Duncan
Apr 18, 2013, 10:19:58 AM4/18/13
to
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 15:01:51 -0700, "David Kaye"
<sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I don't see that at all. Public radio stations consistently are at the top
>of the ratings in their markets, and especially among the 25 to 49 age
>group.
I've seen those ratings too, exemplified by KQED's fantastic numbers.
<sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I don't see that at all. Public radio stations consistently are at the top
>of the ratings in their markets, and especially among the 25 to 49 age
>group.
But some discussion I've heard mentions an NPR deficit and a possible
urgent need to change the listener demographics in some ways - as in
"younger". These underlying reasons may come to light more. Compared
to the past, the public TV side of things has been considerably dumbed
down, and that may be a bellwhether for the radio. Sigh.
FarseWatch14
Apr 18, 2013, 11:18:05 AM4/18/13
to
>> It's hard to move a program named "Science FRIDAY" to weekends....
>
> Well, they'd change the name, silly. But you knew that.
>
> Let's see...Science Highway, Science Pie Tray, Science Everyday.
David Kaye
Apr 18, 2013, 3:23:11 PM4/18/13
to
"James Duncan" <jdun...@nospam.org> wrote
> Compared
> to the past, the public TV side of things has been considerably dumbed
> down, and that may be a bellwhether for the radio. Sigh.
Yeah, PBS is a laughingstock, whereas NPR continues to be a provider of
intelligence. When looking at the listings if KQED is listed as showing old
rock or doo-wop stars or Suze Orman, you can bet it's fundraising time. And
what's with this Lawrence Welk crap? When it was originally on even my
grandmother thought the show was stupid.
And then the Ken Burns half-baked documentaries that give the impression of
being thorough, but leave out true information. His series on Jazz was an
abomination.
> Compared
> to the past, the public TV side of things has been considerably dumbed
> down, and that may be a bellwhether for the radio. Sigh.
intelligence. When looking at the listings if KQED is listed as showing old
rock or doo-wop stars or Suze Orman, you can bet it's fundraising time. And
what's with this Lawrence Welk crap? When it was originally on even my
grandmother thought the show was stupid.
And then the Ken Burns half-baked documentaries that give the impression of
being thorough, but leave out true information. His series on Jazz was an
abomination.
spamtrap1888
Apr 18, 2013, 7:27:04 PM4/18/13
to
On Apr 18, 12:23 pm, "David Kaye" <sfdavidka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "James Duncan" <jdunc...@nospam.org> wrote
> And
> what's with this Lawrence Welk crap? When it was originally on even my
> grandmother thought the show was stupid.
Everyone in my family who enjoyed it has been gone ten years. In his
last decade, my grandfather didn't think they were reruns, but he
didn't get out much.
> And then the Ken Burns half-baked documentaries that give the impression of
> being thorough, but leave out true information. His series on Jazz was an
> abomination.
I missed the Prohibition series.
> "James Duncan" <jdunc...@nospam.org> wrote
>
> > Compared
> > to the past, the public TV side of things has been considerably dumbed
> > down, and that may be a bellwhether for the radio. Sigh.
>
> Yeah, PBS is a laughingstock, whereas NPR continues to be a provider of
> intelligence. When looking at the listings if KQED is listed as showing old
> rock or doo-wop stars or Suze Orman, you can bet it's fundraising time.
The TV listing even calls it "Pledge Programming." They've given up.
> > Compared
> > to the past, the public TV side of things has been considerably dumbed
> > down, and that may be a bellwhether for the radio. Sigh.
>
> Yeah, PBS is a laughingstock, whereas NPR continues to be a provider of
> intelligence. When looking at the listings if KQED is listed as showing old
> rock or doo-wop stars or Suze Orman, you can bet it's fundraising time.
> And
> what's with this Lawrence Welk crap? When it was originally on even my
> grandmother thought the show was stupid.
last decade, my grandfather didn't think they were reruns, but he
didn't get out much.
> And then the Ken Burns half-baked documentaries that give the impression of
> being thorough, but leave out true information. His series on Jazz was an
> abomination.
James Duncan
Apr 19, 2013, 10:39:53 AM4/19/13
to
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:27:04 -0700 (PDT), spamtrap1888
<spamtr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, PBS is a laughingstock, whereas NPR continues to be a provider of
>> intelligence. When looking at the listings if KQED is listed as showing old
>> rock or doo-wop stars or Suze Orman, you can bet it's fundraising time.
>
>The TV listing even calls it "Pledge Programming." They've given up.
Seems like the insipid "Pledge Programming" is virtually continuous. I
<spamtr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, PBS is a laughingstock, whereas NPR continues to be a provider of
>> intelligence. When looking at the listings if KQED is listed as showing old
>> rock or doo-wop stars or Suze Orman, you can bet it's fundraising time.
>
>The TV listing even calls it "Pledge Programming." They've given up.
check "The Guide" daily and noticed this morning that "Best of KQED"
programming will take over the weekend once more. I haven't watched
KQED on my TV in months. I'm a subscriber, but it's for the NPR
mostly. Increasingly irritated, I've cut my annual "gift" in half.
>I missed the Prohibition series.
online. There are a number of great PBS productions sprinkled around
plus other good news and documentary shows, but they are too
infrequent to keep me happy. KQED's "Image Makers" has been great,
but that's a relatively easy production to do. It was a limited
production though and is essentially all reruns now.
For depth and discussion programming KQED and PBS have new competition
from internatinal providers. I watch Al Jazeera "In Depth" and
"Witness" for instance more than I do KQED. RT is also good
sometimes, not to mention the BBC.
Anyway, I'm concerned that the loss of TOTN signals a new dumbing down
of NPR such as we've already seen with PBS.
Patty Winter
Apr 19, 2013, 12:32:01 PM4/19/13
to
In article <ask2n814672uuptoi...@4ax.com>,
James Duncan <jdun...@nospam.org> wrote:
>
>Seems like the insipid "Pledge Programming" is virtually continuous. I
>check "The Guide" daily and noticed this morning that "Best of KQED"
>programming will take over the weekend once more. I haven't watched
>KQED on my TV in months. I'm a subscriber, but it's for the NPR
>mostly. Increasingly irritated, I've cut my annual "gift" in half.
I'm right with you, James. I always make my checks out to "KQED-FM"
>
>Seems like the insipid "Pledge Programming" is virtually continuous. I
>check "The Guide" daily and noticed this morning that "Best of KQED"
>programming will take over the weekend once more. I haven't watched
>KQED on my TV in months. I'm a subscriber, but it's for the NPR
>mostly. Increasingly irritated, I've cut my annual "gift" in half.
to make it clear which part of the organization I'm supporting. And
I, too, am reducing my contribution.
KQED-TV's pledge programming has resulted in the pre-emption of NEW
episodes of Masterpiece, Frontline, and Nova, at least. Some of them
have been broadcast at a later date; I'm not sure that all have. To
me, that's the last straw--pre-empting the shows that have built a
loyal viewership in favor of quick-buck pledge programs.
I think David K. is correct that KQED is in a financial hole because
of that big building they've got and have to pay for. They make hardly
any local TV shows, so I don't know what they're doing with all that
space. Thank heavens that the FM folks have been building a first-rate
news operation.
I've had long talks with KQED development personnel about the situation,
so they know how frustrated I am with it. The problem is that those
pledge programs do bring in money. Personally, I think they're doing so
at the expense of long-term loyalty and thus ongoing donations, but I
don't have a solution to that quandry. I think every public TV station
is looking for one.
>Anyway, I'm concerned that the loss of TOTN signals a new dumbing down
>of NPR such as we've already seen with PBS.
convinced that NPR affiliates need another news show between ME and ATC.
NPR said such a show was requested in discussions with its biggest
stations, yet John Boland said KQED had not been consulted on the change,
which is very odd. But my real concern is for the smaller stations in the
heartland. TotN is a vital alternative to the bombastic, combative talk
shows (only minimally call-in shows) that are rampant in rural areas.
It presents a wide range of viewpoints in a civil manner, and Neal Conan
acts as a moderator and interviewer, not a pontificator. Replacing it
with a news show will be a real loss in that regard.
Patty
spamtrap1888
Apr 19, 2013, 12:45:09 PM4/19/13
to
On Apr 19, 9:32 am, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
> I think David K. is correct that KQED is in a financial hole because
> of that big building they've got and have to pay for. They make hardly
> any local TV shows, so I don't know what they're doing with all that
> space. Thank heavens that the FM folks have been building a first-rate
> news operation.
Similarly, the dumping of TOTN for a cheaper, station-produced
> I think David K. is correct that KQED is in a financial hole because
> of that big building they've got and have to pay for. They make hardly
> any local TV shows, so I don't know what they're doing with all that
> space. Thank heavens that the FM folks have been building a first-rate
> news operation.
corresponds to a new building for NPR. Did the network spend more than
they can afford?
> Here & Now may turn out to be a fine newsmagazine, but I'm still not
> convinced that NPR affiliates need another news show between ME and ATC.
> NPR said such a show was requested in discussions with its biggest
> stations, yet John Boland said KQED had not been consulted on the change,
> which is very odd. But my real concern is for the smaller stations in the
> heartland. TotN is a vital alternative to the bombastic, combative talk
> shows (only minimally call-in shows) that are rampant in rural areas.
> It presents a wide range of viewpoints in a civil manner, and Neal Conan
> acts as a moderator and interviewer, not a pontificator. Replacing it
> with a news show will be a real loss in that regard.
>
Western, Jesus, and the Rush/Sean/Billo part of the ideological
spectrum, hearing different points of view may be essential to your
sense of well-being.
leansto...@democrat.com
Apr 19, 2013, 4:53:32 PM4/19/13
to
A decade in any technology business is an eternity. Often the new gear does more for less.
James Duncan
Apr 20, 2013, 2:14:36 PM4/20/13
to
On 19 Apr 2013 16:32:01 GMT, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com>
wrote:
>KQED-TV's pledge programming has resulted in the pre-emption of NEW
>episodes of Masterpiece, Frontline, and Nova, at least. Some of them
>have been broadcast at a later date; I'm not sure that all have. To
>me, that's the last straw--pre-empting the shows that have built a
>loyal viewership in favor of quick-buck pledge programs.
I don't think they've all been broadcast. Most irritating! However,
I have found them on the PBS website and watched online. Typically, I
get a PBS new show eblast, but when I check KQED I find that it is not
being broadcast on KQED and may never be, actually. Maybe I should
donate directly to PBS and not KQED, at least for the TV side of
things. I didn't watch KQED-TV once in March, but I did go to PBS
online.
>Here & Now may turn out to be a fine newsmagazine, but I'm still not
>convinced that NPR affiliates need another news show between ME and ATC.
>NPR said such a show was requested in discussions with its biggest
>stations, yet John Boland said KQED had not been consulted on the change,
>which is very odd. But my real concern is for the smaller stations in the
>heartland. TotN is a vital alternative to the bombastic, combative talk
>shows (only minimally call-in shows) that are rampant in rural areas.
>It presents a wide range of viewpoints in a civil manner, and Neal Conan
>acts as a moderator and interviewer, not a pontificator. Replacing it
>with a news show will be a real loss in that regard.
Yes, you're totally right. Speaking of the heartland, I was
participating in a Texas related blog. I pointed out how surprised I
am that Laredo, population 250K, has neither a PBS nor NPR station,
not even a translator. My surprise was met with derision from freedom
loving Texans who didn't want no eastern intolects telling them how to
think. I was surprised and dismayed, but I'm just an elitist. So you
can see there are pockets of resistance to public broadcasting's more
thoughtful programs and how lightweight shows such as "Here and Now"
get traction.
wrote:
>KQED-TV's pledge programming has resulted in the pre-emption of NEW
>episodes of Masterpiece, Frontline, and Nova, at least. Some of them
>have been broadcast at a later date; I'm not sure that all have. To
>me, that's the last straw--pre-empting the shows that have built a
>loyal viewership in favor of quick-buck pledge programs.
I have found them on the PBS website and watched online. Typically, I
get a PBS new show eblast, but when I check KQED I find that it is not
being broadcast on KQED and may never be, actually. Maybe I should
donate directly to PBS and not KQED, at least for the TV side of
things. I didn't watch KQED-TV once in March, but I did go to PBS
online.
>Here & Now may turn out to be a fine newsmagazine, but I'm still not
>convinced that NPR affiliates need another news show between ME and ATC.
>NPR said such a show was requested in discussions with its biggest
>stations, yet John Boland said KQED had not been consulted on the change,
>which is very odd. But my real concern is for the smaller stations in the
>heartland. TotN is a vital alternative to the bombastic, combative talk
>shows (only minimally call-in shows) that are rampant in rural areas.
>It presents a wide range of viewpoints in a civil manner, and Neal Conan
>acts as a moderator and interviewer, not a pontificator. Replacing it
>with a news show will be a real loss in that regard.
participating in a Texas related blog. I pointed out how surprised I
am that Laredo, population 250K, has neither a PBS nor NPR station,
not even a translator. My surprise was met with derision from freedom
loving Texans who didn't want no eastern intolects telling them how to
think. I was surprised and dismayed, but I'm just an elitist. So you
can see there are pockets of resistance to public broadcasting's more
thoughtful programs and how lightweight shows such as "Here and Now"
get traction.
phalanx
Apr 20, 2013, 2:36:47 PM4/20/13
to
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:39:53 -0700, James Duncan <jdun...@nospam.org>
wrote:
RT is also good
>
Here's another fan of RT and their documentaries, including their
latest, Baghdad Taxi.
For those who complain that RT only shows Russia in a positive light,
I'd like to refer them to the documentary on Chernobyl and one the
Beslan school massacre, Town of Little Angels.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
wrote:
RT is also good
>
Here's another fan of RT and their documentaries, including their
latest, Baghdad Taxi.
For those who complain that RT only shows Russia in a positive light,
I'd like to refer them to the documentary on Chernobyl and one the
Beslan school massacre, Town of Little Angels.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---
David Kaye
Apr 20, 2013, 4:10:49 PM4/20/13
to
David Kaye
Apr 20, 2013, 4:16:34 PM4/20/13
to
"James Duncan" <jdun...@nospam.org> wrote
> I don't think they've all been broadcast. Most irritating! However,
> I have found them on the PBS website and watched online. Typically, I
> get a PBS new show eblast, but when I check KQED I find that it is not
> being broadcast on KQED and may never be, actually.
Are you absolutely sure? KQED(TV) has several subchannels now, and it's
hard to believe that they're not carrying the entire PBS inventory. As for
contributions, you might contact KQED and tell them that you plan to donate
directly to PBS if they can't get their act together. I've found their
viewer services department very responsive (and likewise the FM's listener
services).
> I don't think they've all been broadcast. Most irritating! However,
> I have found them on the PBS website and watched online. Typically, I
> get a PBS new show eblast, but when I check KQED I find that it is not
> being broadcast on KQED and may never be, actually.
hard to believe that they're not carrying the entire PBS inventory. As for
contributions, you might contact KQED and tell them that you plan to donate
directly to PBS if they can't get their act together. I've found their
viewer services department very responsive (and likewise the FM's listener
services).
Neil
Apr 20, 2013, 6:41:58 PM4/20/13
to
American Masters program about the late Phil Ochs, which I really wanted
to see, but KQED never aired it, preferring instead to run a third week
of begathons. (Most PBS stations seem to get by with one pledge week at
a time, some need two to make their nut, but KQED routinely requires
three week chunks, and sometimes an extra weekend or two, to pay the
mortgage on the Mariposa Mansion.)
Eventually I found the Phil Ochs documentary on PBS's website and
streamed it on my smartphone. IIRC, when I checked KQED's schedule on
their website, this program never got scheduled for any of their program
streams. Considering that the Bay Area was friendly territory for Ochs
in his lifetime, I found their decision to overlook the program
particularly surprising.
Phil Kane
Apr 20, 2013, 6:51:56 PM4/20/13
to
>I'm right with you, James. I always make my checks out to "KQED-FM"
>to make it clear which part of the organization I'm supporting. And
>I, too, am reducing my contribution.
Oregon Public Broadcasting gets my $5 a month come what may, mainly
>to make it clear which part of the organization I'm supporting. And
>I, too, am reducing my contribution.
because I listen to KOPB-FM as my "default" station and I want to keep
employed several of their engineering staff with whom I collaborate in
the Portland SBE chapter and it's companion Skyline Tower Amateur
Radio Club.. We rarely watch their TV programming.
Phil Kane
Beaverton, OR
Patty Winter
Apr 20, 2013, 7:21:19 PM4/20/13
to
In article <fhl5n8dakc2ilndf3...@4ax.com>,
James Duncan <jdun...@nospam.org> wrote:
>
>. Typically, I
>get a PBS new show eblast, but when I check KQED I find that it is not
>being broadcast on KQED and may never be, actually. Maybe I should
>donate directly to PBS and not KQED, at least for the TV side of
>things. I didn't watch KQED-TV once in March, but I did go to PBS
>online.
I haven't checked whether there's a way to donate to PBS directly,
>
>. Typically, I
>get a PBS new show eblast, but when I check KQED I find that it is not
>being broadcast on KQED and may never be, actually. Maybe I should
>donate directly to PBS and not KQED, at least for the TV side of
>things. I didn't watch KQED-TV once in March, but I did go to PBS
>online.
but that's a good idea. I did send a token donation to WGBH a year
or so ago, to thank them for all their productions. Now *there's*
a station that turns out a lot of content. (Even more than we realize,
since some of it is local to Boston.)
> Speaking of the heartland, I was
>participating in a Texas related blog. I pointed out how surprised I
>am that Laredo, population 250K, has neither a PBS nor NPR station,
>not even a translator. My surprise was met with derision from freedom
>loving Texans who didn't want no eastern intolects telling them how to
>think. I was surprised and dismayed, but I'm just an elitist. So you
>can see there are pockets of resistance to public broadcasting's more
>thoughtful programs and how lightweight shows such as "Here and Now"
>get traction.
Patty
Patty Winter
Apr 20, 2013, 7:57:06 PM4/20/13
to
In article <kkustg$itm$1...@dont-email.me>,
David Kaye <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> KQED(TV) has several subchannels now, and it's
>hard to believe that they're not carrying the entire PBS inventory.
I don't expect them to carry "the entire PBS inventory," but I sure as
>
> KQED(TV) has several subchannels now, and it's
>hard to believe that they're not carrying the entire PBS inventory.
heck expect them to air new episodes of series they do carry. I have
documented proof of them not airing new episodes of Frontline, Mystery,
and NOVA. I know that at least two of those eventually aired, but weeks
or months later.
AFAIK, they have never used their subchannels to run pre-empted episodes
at the expected time. BTW, that's something that the commercial stations
in the SFBA routinely do; both KTVU and KNTV use KICU as a backup channel
when they're doing something special. For example, "Grimm" ran on KICU last
night while KNTV was showing a Giants game. (And will do so the next two
Fridays as well.)
>As for
>contributions, you might contact KQED and tell them that you plan to donate
>directly to PBS if they can't get their act together. I've found their
>viewer services department very responsive (and likewise the FM's listener
>services).
of KQED's signature PBS programs?
BTW, I just checked the PBS website, and there is a way to donate
directly. The trick is that, if you've previous told the PBS website
that you watch a specific PBS station, that set a cookie and clicking
the DONATE tab will take you to that station's donation page, so you
have to remove the PBS cookies in order to get the PBS donation page.
Patty
Patty Winter
Apr 20, 2013, 8:02:56 PM4/20/13
to
In article <70237007-152d-4565...@l2g2000pbn.googlegroups.com>,
spamtrap1888 <spamtr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Apr 19, 9:32�am, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
>> I think David K. is correct that KQED is in a financial hole because
>> of that big building they've got and have to pay for. They make hardly
>> any local TV shows, so I don't know what they're doing with all that
>> space. Thank heavens that the FM folks have been building a first-rate
>> news operation.
>
>Similarly, the dumping of TOTN for a cheaper, station-produced
>corresponds to a new building for NPR. Did the network spend more than
>they can afford?
I doubt it. It costs more to send reporters around gathering stories for
>On Apr 19, 9:32�am, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
>> I think David K. is correct that KQED is in a financial hole because
>> of that big building they've got and have to pay for. They make hardly
>> any local TV shows, so I don't know what they're doing with all that
>> space. Thank heavens that the FM folks have been building a first-rate
>> news operation.
>
>Similarly, the dumping of TOTN for a cheaper, station-produced
>corresponds to a new building for NPR. Did the network spend more than
>they can afford?
a newsmagazine than it does to have a host sit in a studio interviewing
guests and taking phone calls.
Patty
Patty Winter
Apr 20, 2013, 8:06:23 PM4/20/13
to
In article <s0o5n8t1rvo9l7nti...@4ax.com>,
phalanx <nob...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:39:53 -0700, James Duncan <jdun...@nospam.org>
>wrote:
>
>On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:39:53 -0700, James Duncan <jdun...@nospam.org>
>wrote:
>
> RT is also good
>
>Here's another fan of RT and their documentaries, including their
>latest, Baghdad Taxi.
Hmmm, I'll give it another try then. Seems like every time I tune in,
>
>Here's another fan of RT and their documentaries, including their
>latest, Baghdad Taxi.
they're on some sort of "what the U.S. is doing wrong now" story.
Any idea when "Baghdad Taxi" might air again? I don't see it on their
schedule, although there's a not-helpful listing for "Documentary"
several times this weekend.
Patty
David Kaye
Apr 21, 2013, 2:34:53 AM4/21/13
to
"Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote
> How were they "responsive"? Viewer services can't prevent the pre-emption
> of KQED's signature PBS programs?
Responsive in getting back to me with a human email rather than a
boilerplate. I'm not sure if they've taken any of my suggestions because I
suggested them, but they've implemented things I've suggested. Among those
were putting a mini-schedule for each stream right on the front page of the
KQED.org/TV page. That way I immediately know what's going on. The other
suggestion was to play additional runs of their local "ImageMakers",
especially one during the overnight (when I'm more likely to watch).
They've done this, though 5:00am is a little late for me.
> How were they "responsive"? Viewer services can't prevent the pre-emption
> of KQED's signature PBS programs?
boilerplate. I'm not sure if they've taken any of my suggestions because I
suggested them, but they've implemented things I've suggested. Among those
were putting a mini-schedule for each stream right on the front page of the
KQED.org/TV page. That way I immediately know what's going on. The other
suggestion was to play additional runs of their local "ImageMakers",
especially one during the overnight (when I'm more likely to watch).
They've done this, though 5:00am is a little late for me.
David Kaye
Apr 21, 2013, 2:37:19 AM4/21/13
to
"Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote
> I doubt it. It costs more to send reporters around gathering stories for
> a newsmagazine than it does to have a host sit in a studio interviewing
> guests and taking phone calls.
I've suggested to KQED-FM listener services that they run another local
talkshow from 11am to 1pm, hosted by Joshua Johnson, a phenomenal
interviewer, it turns out. I noted that "Forum" suffers from trying to cram
way too much material into 2 hours, and since they already have the
production staff, it shouldn't be too expensive to add the additional 2
hours with much of the same staff.
> I doubt it. It costs more to send reporters around gathering stories for
> a newsmagazine than it does to have a host sit in a studio interviewing
> guests and taking phone calls.
talkshow from 11am to 1pm, hosted by Joshua Johnson, a phenomenal
interviewer, it turns out. I noted that "Forum" suffers from trying to cram
way too much material into 2 hours, and since they already have the
production staff, it shouldn't be too expensive to add the additional 2
hours with much of the same staff.
David Kaye
Apr 21, 2013, 2:39:51 AM4/21/13
to
"James Duncan" <jdun...@nospam.org> wrote
> Yes, you're totally right. Speaking of the heartland, I was
> participating in a Texas related blog. I pointed out how surprised I
> am that Laredo, population 250K, has neither a PBS nor NPR station,
> not even a translator.
Just for ducks I looked it up. Dang! You're absolutely right. Not only
are there no non-comm stations of the NPR ilk, but no translators -- AND
Laredo isn't close enough to any other market that has them that people
could even pick up stations with big yagis on their roofs.
This sounds like a job for Lansman and Milam, or their proteges.
> Yes, you're totally right. Speaking of the heartland, I was
> participating in a Texas related blog. I pointed out how surprised I
> am that Laredo, population 250K, has neither a PBS nor NPR station,
> not even a translator.
are there no non-comm stations of the NPR ilk, but no translators -- AND
Laredo isn't close enough to any other market that has them that people
could even pick up stations with big yagis on their roofs.
This sounds like a job for Lansman and Milam, or their proteges.
James Duncan
Apr 21, 2013, 10:40:38 AM4/21/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 13:16:34 -0700, "David Kaye"
<sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Are you absolutely sure? KQED(TV) has several subchannels now, and it's
>hard to believe that they're not carrying the entire PBS inventory. As for
>contributions, you might contact KQED and tell them that you plan to donate
>directly to PBS if they can't get their act together. I've found their
>viewer services department very responsive (and likewise the FM's listener
>services).
Yes, they are responsive. They answer every email I've ever sent
<sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Are you absolutely sure? KQED(TV) has several subchannels now, and it's
>hard to believe that they're not carrying the entire PBS inventory. As for
>contributions, you might contact KQED and tell them that you plan to donate
>directly to PBS if they can't get their act together. I've found their
>viewer services department very responsive (and likewise the FM's listener
>services).
them, although that's only been on the FM side. Maybe I need to start
hitting the TV side actually.
On Jan. 29 I got a "Henry Ford Premieres Tonight!" PBS American
Experience eblast. I checked "The Guide" and saw that not only did it
not premier on KQED that night, it was never aired the whole week. As
best I can remember it never aired on KQED, so far anyway. So on
premier night I watched it online via PBS. For me, that was a KQED-TV
red letter day.
James Duncan
Apr 21, 2013, 10:43:49 AM4/21/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 23:34:53 -0700, "David Kaye"
<sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Responsive in getting back to me with a human email rather than a
>boilerplate. I'm not sure if they've taken any of my suggestions because I
>suggested them, but they've implemented things I've suggested. Among those
>were putting a mini-schedule for each stream right on the front page of the
>KQED.org/TV page. That way I immediately know what's going on. The other
>suggestion was to play additional runs of their local "ImageMakers",
>especially one during the overnight (when I'm more likely to watch).
>They've done this, though 5:00am is a little late for me.
Next time you talk to them about "ImageMakers", you can ask them to
<sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Responsive in getting back to me with a human email rather than a
>boilerplate. I'm not sure if they've taken any of my suggestions because I
>suggested them, but they've implemented things I've suggested. Among those
>were putting a mini-schedule for each stream right on the front page of the
>KQED.org/TV page. That way I immediately know what's going on. The other
>suggestion was to play additional runs of their local "ImageMakers",
>especially one during the overnight (when I'm more likely to watch).
>They've done this, though 5:00am is a little late for me.
get some more films. Now it's just reruns. Another half-assed
initiative on their part.
James Duncan
Apr 21, 2013, 10:53:47 AM4/21/13
to
On Sat, 20 Apr 2013 11:36:47 -0700, phalanx <nob...@nowhere.com>
wrote:
>Here's another fan of RT and their documentaries, including their
>latest, Baghdad Taxi.
>
>For those who complain that RT only shows Russia in a positive light,
>I'd like to refer them to the documentary on Chernobyl and one the
>Beslan school massacre, Town of Little Angels.
RT, Al Jazeera, and the BBC all have some great documentaries about
things I never would've known otherwise. RT indeed has had reports of
ecological issues in Russia, etc. I'm not sure a direct attack on
Vladimir Putin will happen any time soon. I watch all these alternate
channels critically to sort out jingoistic biases as best I can.
RT's analysis of Boston in relation to American security initiatives
was completely misguided I thought. Almost ridiculous. So certainly
there are a few problems with these other channels, but you just keep
your critical thinking hat on. It certainly beats seeing the 413th
rerun of an ancient Moody Blues concert on a KQED pledge week.
wrote:
>Here's another fan of RT and their documentaries, including their
>latest, Baghdad Taxi.
>
>For those who complain that RT only shows Russia in a positive light,
>I'd like to refer them to the documentary on Chernobyl and one the
>Beslan school massacre, Town of Little Angels.
things I never would've known otherwise. RT indeed has had reports of
ecological issues in Russia, etc. I'm not sure a direct attack on
Vladimir Putin will happen any time soon. I watch all these alternate
channels critically to sort out jingoistic biases as best I can.
RT's analysis of Boston in relation to American security initiatives
was completely misguided I thought. Almost ridiculous. So certainly
there are a few problems with these other channels, but you just keep
your critical thinking hat on. It certainly beats seeing the 413th
rerun of an ancient Moody Blues concert on a KQED pledge week.
James Duncan
Apr 21, 2013, 11:04:52 AM4/21/13
to
On 20 Apr 2013 23:57:06 GMT, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com>
wrote:
>BTW, I just checked the PBS website, and there is a way to donate
>directly. The trick is that, if you've previous told the PBS website
>that you watch a specific PBS station, that set a cookie and clicking
>the DONATE tab will take you to that station's donation page, so you
>have to remove the PBS cookies in order to get the PBS donation page.
What I do is use different 4 browsers. Three of them are continuously
active as right now. The fourth is Opera, and on that one I never log
in to anything nor enter information. So if I want to do a clean
search or make clean entry into a website such as PBS, I start Opera.
wrote:
>BTW, I just checked the PBS website, and there is a way to donate
>directly. The trick is that, if you've previous told the PBS website
>that you watch a specific PBS station, that set a cookie and clicking
>the DONATE tab will take you to that station's donation page, so you
>have to remove the PBS cookies in order to get the PBS donation page.
active as right now. The fourth is Opera, and on that one I never log
in to anything nor enter information. So if I want to do a clean
search or make clean entry into a website such as PBS, I start Opera.
Neil
Apr 21, 2013, 12:08:06 PM4/21/13
to
language version of VOA. It runs on 36.3, one of KICU's secondary
streams (along with a Korean channel on 36.2 that never makes any sense
to me). It's a mix of a news channel, a propaganda service, and a series
of mini-travelogues about China. The propaganda is subtle, not the kind
of screaming newsreader you see on clips of North Korean TV, and the
news and discussion programming is actually pretty sober.
Eric Weaver
Apr 21, 2013, 2:59:22 PM4/21/13
to
On 04/20/2013 11:39 PM, David Kaye wrote:
> This sounds like a job for Lansman and Milam, or their proteges.
Except if either of them gets withing 100 mi of Laredo, they'll be shot
> This sounds like a job for Lansman and Milam, or their proteges.
as long-haired hippies.
Nope, the good folks of Laredo don' need no Eastern in-to-lex tellin em
what to think. Nor no damn dirty hippies from Californication. Nor
none of those pointy-headed longhairs from Corpus Christi, neither.
Country, Western, Southern-Rock, and Limbaugh are plenty.
leansto...@democrat.com
Apr 21, 2013, 7:36:52 PM4/21/13
to
My issue with Forum, and of course it is me and not the show, is Krasny likes literature. Fine if that is your thing, but I'm not going to listen to some author bloviate about his or her fiction. The nice thing about podcasts is I don't have to download that stuff. I'm in the Ronn Owens camp of only reading non-fiction. Life is short, and I rather fill my mind with facts.
Regarding having to send reporters out in the field for this noon news, I suspect much of the NPR show will be rehash from Morning Edition and maybe work in progress for All Things considered. Just a guess of course, but I can't see them setting up new staff to gather material for the show.
Since XM Public radio doesn't carry NPR news, which I assume NPR won't give them, you do hear a lot of different shows during the usual news hours. There is quite a bit of content out there to fill the slot. Off the top of my head:
"On Point" with Tom Ashbrook
KCRW "To the Point"
"The Takeaway"
"Radio West" out of Salt Lake City
Not exactly on topic, though it does show up at noon on the east coast is the new XM POTUS show by "Smirk".
http://smerconish.com/
It is interesting since XM Potus is not supposed to have a political slant, but Smirk is a right winger, but not an asshole like Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. The funny thing was he and his associate were reading a story where the phrase S-bomb was used instead of shit. They were chatting about not having to be FCC approved, but couldn't do it. Then Smirk said something like he is preparing himself to say the F-bomb some day. These people are on such autopilot that they can't utter an expletive. It is like me trying to say Fifty Cent instead of Fifty Cents. I just can't do it.
The FCC chairman approved an F-bomb a day or so ago. If I can find the story, I'll start another thread.
David Kaye
Apr 21, 2013, 10:05:41 PM4/21/13
to
"Eric Weaver" <we...@sigma.net> wrote
> Except if either of them gets withing 100 mi of Laredo, they'll be shot as
> long-haired hippies.
The paradigm has shifted. It started with "Travus T Hipp", a longhaired
rightwinger who stockpiled guns and had a daily radio show. Today, a lot of
rightwingers have long hair. Freaks me out...
> Except if either of them gets withing 100 mi of Laredo, they'll be shot as
> long-haired hippies.
rightwinger who stockpiled guns and had a daily radio show. Today, a lot of
rightwingers have long hair. Freaks me out...
David Kaye
Apr 21, 2013, 10:17:30 PM4/21/13
to
<leansto...@democrat.com> wrote
> My issue with Forum, and of course it is me and not the show, is Krasny
> likes literature.
> Fine if that is your thing, but I'm not going to listen to some author
> bloviate about his
> or her fiction.
You obviously listen to Owens more than Krasny because Krasny is extremely
well-rounded as a talkshow host. That said, I still think that 2 hours of
Krasny is enough, and Scott Schafer doesn't do it for me. Joshua Johnson,
on the other hand, appears to be perfect for the job.
As for getting up at 3:00am to do a 9:00am show, I'm finding that a little
hard to believe. By now, the Forum folks should have both a reputation and
an address book to be able to contact anybody of merit instantly and have
them come on the show.
> My issue with Forum, and of course it is me and not the show, is Krasny
> likes literature.
> Fine if that is your thing, but I'm not going to listen to some author
> bloviate about his
> or her fiction.
well-rounded as a talkshow host. That said, I still think that 2 hours of
Krasny is enough, and Scott Schafer doesn't do it for me. Joshua Johnson,
on the other hand, appears to be perfect for the job.
As for getting up at 3:00am to do a 9:00am show, I'm finding that a little
hard to believe. By now, the Forum folks should have both a reputation and
an address book to be able to contact anybody of merit instantly and have
them come on the show.
Patty Winter
Apr 21, 2013, 11:40:18 PM4/21/13
to
In article <kl014q$cq4$1...@dont-email.me>,
David Kaye <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>"Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote
>
>> How were they "responsive"? Viewer services can't prevent the pre-emption
>> of KQED's signature PBS programs?
>
>"Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote
>
>> How were they "responsive"? Viewer services can't prevent the pre-emption
>> of KQED's signature PBS programs?
>
> The other
>suggestion was to play additional runs of their local "ImageMakers",
>especially one during the overnight (when I'm more likely to watch).
>They've done this, though 5:00am is a little late for me.
They didn't add an overnight rerun of ImageMakers in answer
>suggestion was to play additional runs of their local "ImageMakers",
>especially one during the overnight (when I'm more likely to watch).
>They've done this, though 5:00am is a little late for me.
to your request. The *entire* KQED 7 p.m. to midnight schedule
is repeated from 1-6 a.m. (Same with KQED+.) Has been for a
few years now. So of course the 11:30 airing of ImageMakers
repeats at 5:30 a.m. Have you not seen that note in every
weekday's listings in On Q?
Patty
Patty Winter
Apr 21, 2013, 11:49:21 PM4/21/13
to
In article <atu7n8lm0kqvp96j1...@4ax.com>,
James Duncan <jdun...@nospam.org> wrote:
>
>RT's analysis of Boston in relation to American security initiatives
>was completely misguided I thought. Almost ridiculous. So certainly
>there are a few problems with these other channels, but you just keep
>your critical thinking hat on. It certainly beats seeing the 413th
>rerun of an ancient Moody Blues concert on a KQED pledge week.
Or the "missing white girl of the week" or "pretty white defendant
>
>RT's analysis of Boston in relation to American security initiatives
>was completely misguided I thought. Almost ridiculous. So certainly
>there are a few problems with these other channels, but you just keep
>your critical thinking hat on. It certainly beats seeing the 413th
>rerun of an ancient Moody Blues concert on a KQED pledge week.
of the week" on the U.S. news channels.
I practically live on BBC World News these days.
Patty
David Kaye
Apr 22, 2013, 1:26:13 AM4/22/13
to
"Patty Winter" <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote
> They didn't add an overnight rerun of ImageMakers in answer
> to your request. The *entire* KQED 7 p.m. to midnight schedule
> is repeated from 1-6 a.m. (Same with KQED+.) Has been for a
> few years now. So of course the 11:30 airing of ImageMakers
> repeats at 5:30 a.m. Have you not seen that note in every
> weekday's listings in On Q?
At the time, ImageMakers wasn't rerun in the overnight. I don't know how
long ago I suggested it, but it was several years ago.
> They didn't add an overnight rerun of ImageMakers in answer
> to your request. The *entire* KQED 7 p.m. to midnight schedule
> is repeated from 1-6 a.m. (Same with KQED+.) Has been for a
> few years now. So of course the 11:30 airing of ImageMakers
> repeats at 5:30 a.m. Have you not seen that note in every
> weekday's listings in On Q?
long ago I suggested it, but it was several years ago.
leansto...@democrat.com
Apr 22, 2013, 1:55:46 AM4/22/13
to
Rather Ronn has mentioned he doesn't read fiction. That is the nature of my comment.
The 3AM comment was from the Forum episode on sleep. It should be in the archive.
David Kaye
Apr 22, 2013, 3:07:56 PM4/22/13
to
"David Kaye" <sfdavi...@yahoo.com> wrote
> At the time, ImageMakers wasn't rerun in the overnight. I don't know how
> long ago I suggested it, but it was several years ago.
Now that I'm thinking about it, I think KQED ran an exercise show for the
elderly during that time period. A very nice woman was sitting in a chair
and showing people how to work their upper body.
> At the time, ImageMakers wasn't rerun in the overnight. I don't know how
> long ago I suggested it, but it was several years ago.
elderly during that time period. A very nice woman was sitting in a chair
and showing people how to work their upper body.
0 new messages