Removed from dying AM radio

[DavidEduardo]

You're sure opinionated for someone who only joined a few weeks ago, and who has only made 14 posts so far.

He's a recognizable poster who did not make it through the board reorganization and is now on with a new identity. If he is the poster I believe him to be, he has far more posts than you.

Of course, he said as much in his message, but to be able to argue, you ignored that part.

 

[DavidEduardo]

Then why doesn't he have anything to add to the discussion besides whining?

He has already posted, particularly about the profusion of new LPFMs and translators... a highly related item.

Perhaps at this point he wants to hear the thoughts of others, but the digression into "southren" politics is annoyingly distracting.

 

[Avid Listener]

He's a recognizable poster who did not make it through the board reorganization and is now on with a new identity. If he is the poster I believe him to be, he has far more posts than you.

Of course, he said as much in his message, but to be able to argue, you ignored that part.

I don't recognize him. Now, if he isn't the poster you believe him to be, then what?

 

[TheBigA]

I'm also amused at the accusations that somewhat "salty" language indicates a lack of good arguments, yet when those people who make that accusation are losing the argument, that's when they run to the censor to tattle.

If you're winning, there's no need to be vulgar. Children who lack the knowledge to make solid arguments are the ones who have tantrums, not articulate presenters of facts. And no one "tattled." The moderator simply did his job.

 

[JeffM]

So are we supposed to count the stars?

Boxcar of Whores? Or do the stars just represent words of any size, you cream of wheat.

Funny, the first thing I thought of too was you Cream of Wheat.
Or: Leg of Lamb, Milk of Magnesia, Writ of Mandamus, Hall of Fame, Oil of Olay, Duke of Earl... This could actually end up turning into something funny, you Center of Gravity! (And just in the Nick of Time...)

 

[AbsalomWasADemocrat]

Then why doesn't he have anything to add to the discussion besides whining?

You're sure opinionated for someone who only joined a few weeks ago, and who has only made 14 posts so far.

Who I am or how long I might have been here doesn't matter. It's the purpose of the words I've written that does.

I'd hope that a wiser man would look at the vast number of comments directed at his attitude and approach (on this board and formerly on the other board) and hopefully choose to pause for some reflection. Instead you fire off another pair of knee-jerk epistles designed to only further antagonize. You seem unwilling, or perhaps unable, to consider even the slightest possibility of a need for change. You could contribute in a positive way to this site. You could have elsewhere. You choose not to.

Sadly, when I read your contributions to this site, I'm often reminded of a monologue from the movie version of Herb Gardner's classic play "A Thousand Clowns."

"My simple child reaction of what you did is that you are not funny. Funnier than you is even Stuart Schlossman, who is my friend, and is eleven, and puts walnuts in his mouth and makes noises. What is not funny is to call us names, and what is mostly not funny is how sad you are, and I'd feel sorry for you if it wasn't for how dull you are...And that's my opinion from the blue, blue sky."

 

[ContinuousWave]

Who I am or how long I might have been here doesn't matter. It's the purpose of the words I've written that does.

I'd hope that a wiser man would look at the vast number of comments directed at his attitude and approach (on this board and formerly on the other board) and hopefully choose to pause for some reflection. Instead you fire off another pair of knee-jerk epistles designed to only further antagonize. You seem unwilling, or perhaps unable, to consider even the slightest possibility of a need for change. You could contribute in a positive way to this site. You could have elsewhere. You choose not to.

As someone who is late to this thread, I will admit the last few posts you have made seem
1) extremely biased (love how you post a political 'slant' in your name; couldn't think up of something radio based??)
2) lacking in candor of a "respected" poster
3) AND extremely snobbish and rude (Especially to a Board Manager in PUBLIC..that's what PM is for...but to do it in a forum?? Nope, that invites censure....that's just pitiful !)

And NO, I am not taking anyone's side in this argument either...I do have my own opinions on AM radio and will post them when I feel like it and now is not the time.

 

[BOZ Profit]

No. The standards of what is and is not acceptable are vague and ambiguous.

Please explain how:

One good rule to use when posting is if it is indecent for broadcast, it should be deemed indecent for the boards. Is that fair?

is vague and ambiguous. In case I actually have to clarify, broadcast is not cable, cable is not broadcast.

There are some participants in here who get the vapors over terms as harsh as "heck" or "darn".

I think it is clear we are not concerned over those words.

I will be happy to comply with clear and unambiguous standards of what can and cannot be used, as soon as I see them.

There is an Announcement on every page and a post in the Policy Discussion forum (must be a logged in member to view) http://www.radiodiscussions.com/showthread.php?681850-RadioDiscussions-com-Moderation-Policy

Now all that being said, Avid Listener, I have been patient and have tolerated more than everyone else here would have. I think that is a fairly unanimous conclusion. There have been a few complaints, more publicly posted than by way of reported post. But they are complaints against you non-the-less. So, where do we go from here? The next step is a suspension. DO be careful how you respond. An apology will get you father than more criticism. Just sayin.

 

[DavidEduardo]

I don't recognize him. Now, if he isn't the poster you believe him to be, then what?

You have only been on this forum, thankfully, for less than a year per your profile. I am thinking back to the previous board owner era, which would be prior to your registration.

 

[jmtillery]

If you want a thread to get back on topic, instead of whining about what other people are posting, why not try posting something on-topic yourself? Anyone can whine about what other people post. If you want the thread to move in another direction, post something pertinent. That's simple common sense. Anyone who participates in forums like this should know that. It's not some special secret that only moderators are able to reveal.

Thank you for you comment as it is very much appreciated.

To address your question regarding "whining", I don't "whine" as that accomplishes very little if anything constructive. Apparently your definition of whining and mine are not one in the same. I did, however, make a comment about the political direction and implied name calling the thread has taken. I enjoy a good political dialogue as much as anyone; however a radio forum such as Radio Discussions is not the place for it. Furthermore name calling, implied or otherwise, is non constructive and instead causes the readers to become negatively emotional which I'm sure you will agree is non-productive and will easily cause the discussion to completely change course away from the original topic as has happened here. Although I have not actively sought out such a forum, perhaps there is a "Political Discussions" message board somewhere that can accommodate those who prefer to discuss Southern Democratic politics and politics in general.

With that, what I have previously posted and have posted here is in fact "pertinent" to the overall discussion. Once again thank you for your comments and opinions.

 

[FredLeonard]

(AM) Radio is a fad, it won't last.
TV is going to kill radio
FM radio is going to kill AM radio
The internet is going to kill radio.
For 90 years people have said that AM is on it's death bed and yet it's still here, and as David pointed out, only a few AM's have handed in their licenses, and those were either stations that shouldn't have been licensed in the first place, or had very bad facilities.
It is still here, and will be for a while. When over 90% of people in the United States and Canada still listen to radio on a weekly basis, and that number is the same now as it was 14 years ago, it brings a Mark Twain quote to mind.
There have been some FMs that have also gone silent. We had one in Ottawa that went silent in October. It's not likely to come back, and maybe a signal challenged FM will move to that frequency. None of our AM's will be flipped.

Denial: A river in Egypt.

And the Titanic was unsinkable.

The people who said radio was a fad 90 years ago were the operators of vaudeville circuits. They were in the same position rusty-tower AM radio is now.

Listen on a weekly basis? So, what? To qualify for the 90 percent takes five minutes a week. Pretty anemic compared to when average DAILY listening was measured in hours. Calling AM alive and well is comparable to saying grandma is OK, even though she's in the ICU hooked up to a bunch of tubes.

 

[AbsalomWasADemocrat]

ContinousWave, I both highly enjoy and highly respect your contributions to this site. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I've been around most every radio discussion site on the internet. The first place where I participated was in 1993 with Bill Pfeiffer's old Usenet newsgroup via dial-up modem and local BBS. I've been part of the old CompuServe and Prodigy boards. I'm still an almost daily participant at "the other" site. After participating since the early days of radio-info, I left here a few months back.

When I made a choice to return two weeks ago, it was on a whim. It was a topic that involved Pat Robertson. The screen name I chose is a play on Robertson's father's given name and the father's lifelong political affiliation. It does not reflect any personal political viewpoint. And I will grant you one point. I write as a long time participant. The post count does not reflect that. I was mistaken in not considering that post count while commenting.

As for Boz, I find him to be a man of faith, tolerant almost to a fault and incredibly slow to wrath. I find the first point to be most admirable and worthy of great respect. The two latter points, while also worthy of respect, also can occasionally be quite irritating. I liked the moderation style that the late Bill Pfeiffer used with rec.radio.broadcasting. With Bill, the majority of this thread and many comments elsewhere would never have made it to Usenet. My comment of the 18th would never have passed muster. I can see the return from Bill now, asking if I'd like an opportunity to rewrite and perhaps tone it down a bit.

I debated for some time over whether to, this time only, include Boz. Many simply choose to hold their tongues. Some talk privately, as Boz and I have done in the past. On rare occasions, private conversation isn't enough and public comment is needed. Boz had joined in the conversation. Right or wrong, I gambled to go against convention in this case. I did so because I felt that users, both pro and enthusiast and including yourself, deserved someone to comment against the noise.

If that means I deserve censure...that I'm rude, snobbish, pitiful...I'm person enough to accept that judgement. As for my writing style? I can see in today's online world how my style might be considered rude or snobbish. I tend to overwrite. It's not going to change. It has served me well for nearly 60 years, both publicly and privately.

Again to ContinuousWave, thank you for your candor and for your contributions to this site.

 

[FredLeonard]

K.M. To quote Bill Gates, that's one of the dumbest things I ever heard.

Radio stations are licensed users of the public airwaves. Anybody can open a doughnut shop and the failure rate in the fast food industry is pretty high. Not anybody can start up an AM radio station. There are too many of them and the dead wood needs to be cleared. Maybe you have a better way to clear it.

The rule-makers made a huge mistake when they allowed licensees to have near automatic renewal and to sell their licenses. Almost as dumb was not charging - or auctioning off - broadcast licenses.

Funny how you right-wingers like to keep trotting out the bogeyman of COMMUNISM. You people are obsessed with it, even though you don't know the name of the country. Just shows special ed didn't do its job.

Funny thing, greedy stupid people in various industries push for de-regulation and when they get it, everything goes to pot. De-regulation ruined the airline industry and it's almost finished doing the same to radio.

 

[FredLeonard]

K.M. (1) Stop twisting things. (2) Al Haig played for your team, not mine.

AM reinvented itself once - more than a half century ago. It was a different world and people in radio were different, too.

I didn't decide anything. I gave an opinion. The public has voted. Very few people listen to AM because there is little or nothing in most markets that most people want to hear.

However, if I could decide, I'd roll back all broadcast regulations by about 40 years.

 

[Ravens]

Al Haig played for your team, not mine.

That's not what I hear! I hear you're a hardcore neocon!

 

[FredLeonard]

That's not what I hear! I hear you're a hardcore neocon!

You and whoever you heard that from clearly don't know what a neocon is.
"Try crackin' a book sometime." - James Earl Jones

 

[JeffM]

Fred, it is perfectly all right for you, as an individual to have no use for foreign language, religious, or brokered programming. It is not all right for you to unilaterally decide that there is no room in the world for those broadcasts. In other words, unlike Al Haig's infamous moment in the sun, you are not in charge here.

Finally, something to be grateful for this season.

 

[FredLeonard]

That's great. If you first get rid of your cell phone, computer, flat screen TV and all other modern conveniences, I'll agree that we should return radio to the way it was 40 years ago. That won't make radio better....just make you think you're 40 years younger. And it won't solve the problems radio had 40 years ago that made deregulation necessary. Truthfully, given the explosion of non-regulated media in the last ten years, I think radio would benefit from even more deregulation to put it on a level playing field with everything else.

The fact is that rolling back FCC regulations by 40 years won't improve the situation AM radio is in now. It would, in fact, make it worse.

40 years ago, radio was better. And profitable. And relevant - people not only listened, they talked about it. Radio had buzz. The industry got itself deregulated and then went to work killing itself. Don't blame other options. People have always had other options. The problem is listeners preferring other options.

One example: Look at major market numbers for news/talk stations under the fairness doctrine.

 

[L Chanon Gade]

40 years ago, radio was better. And profitable. And relevant - people not only listened, they talked about it. Radio had buzz. The industry got itself deregulated and then went to work killing itself. Don't blame other options. People have always had other options. The problem is listeners preferring other options.

One example: Look at major market numbers for news/talk stations under the fairness doctrine.

While I agree with the fairness Doctrine comment, the reality is that if we had the options of today back in 1972, radio would have been in the same trouble. We as young teens came to radio for free, current music. The Dj's were value added....sometimes. BTW: 1972 Was a good year for AM radio, a brief respite from the FM incursion into it's Top-40 dominance.

Fifteen years ago this month Napster made free music a fait accompli and nothing has stopped that. Not over 30,000 lawsuits. Not ITunes. It, followed by other file sharing apps and then YouTube has removed the primary motivation for new listeners to put up with songs they don't like and of course, commercials.

As for AM, most of the devices that people buy today have radio as an appendage. They are loaded with computer power that makes AM impractical due to the impossibility of adequate shielding of the RF end at the MW end. At the very least and external antenna is required -doable, but not on a smartphone or MP3 player.

I recently met two guys from CBS-tv in one of our restaurant locations. We didn't talk much about radio, but I did ask how CBS would deal with the dilemma of having two fading, expensive AM Newsers and no where on FM to put them without blowing up good formats. One mentioned the model might be to bypass FM and go straight to I.P. while keeping the AM till it becomes too unprofitable.

Chan.

 

[Ravens]

Getting rid of the Fairness Doctrine didn't run people to other content sources. The invention of those sources ran people to those sources.

People aren't on their smart phones because of some FCC rule. They're there because the content is more customizable and instant. TV existed 40 years ago, but it wasn't the 500 channels we have now.

Radio beat out other options because radio was more immediate. It no longer is. That's why it's not thought of as the place to be now.