On Nov 17, 7:34=A0pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 07:42:05 -0800 (PST), RonB <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >On Nov 15, 5:16=A0pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
> >wrote:
> >> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:31 -0800 (PST), Sonny <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> Man, I had forgotten just how bad TV had gotten. =A0Laughtracks, silly
> >> noises, 500 channels of noise, and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
> >> What's to like?
>
> >Larry, me thinks you are trying to take Red too seriously.
>
> >Loosen up.
>
> Whether or not the guy is funny, TV makes it an unenjoyable couple of
> minutes. =A0I hadn't remembered how bad a brain rotter it was since I
> quit watching -ANY- TV about 3-1/2 years ago.
>
> --
> To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0-- J. K. Rowling
She was a level-headed dancer on the road to alcohol
And I was just a soldier on my way to Montreal
Well she pressed her chest against me
About the time the juke box broke
Yeah, she gave me a peck on the back of the neck
And these are the words she spoke
[Chorus:]
Blow up your TV throw away your paper
Go to the country, build you a home
Plant a little garden, eat a lot of peaches
Try an find Jesus on your own
Well, I sat there at the table and I acted real naive
For I knew that topless lady had something up her sleeve
Well, she danced around the bar room and she did the hoochy-coo
Yeah she sang her song all night long, tellin' me what to do
[Chorus]
Well, I was young and hungry and about to leave that place
When just as I was leavin', well she looked me in the face
I said "You must know the answer."
"She said, "No but I'll give it a try."
And to this very day we've been livin' our way
And here is the reason why
We blew up our TV threw away our paper
Went to the country, built us a home
Had a lot of children, fed 'em on peaches
They all found Jesus on their own
(John Prine)
On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 07:42:05 -0800 (PST), RonB <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Nov 15, 5:16 pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:31 -0800 (PST), Sonny <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>
>> Man, I had forgotten just how bad TV had gotten. Laughtracks, silly
>> noises, 500 channels of noise, and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>> What's to like?
>>
>
>Larry, me thinks you are trying to take Red too seriously.
>
>Loosen up.
Whether or not the guy is funny, TV makes it an unenjoyable couple of
minutes. I hadn't remembered how bad a brain rotter it was since I
quit watching -ANY- TV about 3-1/2 years ago.
--
To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.
-- J. K. Rowling
On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:05:27 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Nov 16, 8:12 am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>[snipped for effect]
>
>>....... and far higher intelligence of
>> books once again.
>
>But whatcha gonna do when you get all those books coloured?
Build a CNC crayon-eraser, _that's_ what.
--
To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.
-- J. K. Rowling
...Or he owns a "poetic licence"
"Just Wondering" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Your statement that "I've got a deal for you on some swamp land over in
Arizona," if true, would mean that (a) you own (or at least have
authority to sell on behalf of the owner) some swamp land in Arizona,
and (b) the asking price is low enough that I could buy the land and
resell it at a decent profit. That would interest anyone who is
interested in making a buck.
But I take your statement that you've god a deal for me on swamp land in
Arizona to mean that you actually had no such deal because there is no
swamp land in Arizona, but that when I posted, "To be fair, it was
Congress not Reagan who cut PBS funding, and it was not "to make them go
away," it was (a) giving a nod to the notion that funding PBS was not
the proper role of the federal government, and (b) a token (i.e.
minuscule) reduction of the federal budget," I was mistaken in my facts.
As it turns out, Arizona has plenty of swamp land, which I just
proved. It is you, not I, who was mistaken on both points.
On Nov 19, 2:27=A0am, "Josepi" <[email protected]> wrote:
> OK WTF is "political license" then?
Self-indulgent 'permission' politicians grant themselves to spout
bollocks at the general public's expense? I dunno, what d'you reckon?
On Nov 20, 2:39=A0am, "Josepi" <[email protected]> wrote:
> How does one go about getting one of them there "political licenses"
Get n the horn to Hades?
> and how much do you reckon they cost?
Soul and/or dignity.
> Then we should go after a "poetic licence". Hard to believe people have t=
o
> pay to write poetry!
Some people SHOULD pay to write poetry. Revenue put towards subsequent
health-care demands.
> Maybe in the UK. They have to pay to listen to a radio.
No.
"David Paste" wrote:
> and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
Is that bit true?!
----------------------------
Actually it's closer to 23 minutes of program and 7 minutes of
commercials out of every 30 minutes.
What is truly frustrating is that every station is synchronized with
every other station so that the all run commercials at the same time.
You can't escape.
Lew
On 11/19/10 10:22 PM, Roy wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:06:51 -0600, -MIKE-<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
>> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
>> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
>> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
>> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>>
>> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
>> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
>> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
>> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
>> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
>> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
>> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
>> completely ignored.
>
>
>
> Wow. I thought I was the only Camp OU club member in the group. I used to
> live in Scott Quad when a couple guys in the dorm got the idea of broadcasting
> radio via the dorm electrical circuits. They used a room back by the entrance
> to the steam tunnels. That made it dry, nice and warm, and you could get to
> just about any building on campus without getting wet on a rainy day, which is
> how I found the room they were using in the first place.
>
> This evolved into ACRN (All Campus Radio Network) in 1969-70 when they got the
> school to help fund it. Prior to that they paid for it out of their own pockets
> as I recall. They first incorporated some nearby dorms, and eventually expanded.
> It was still using the wiring for broadcasting when I left the dorms. From your
> post, it sounds like it has evolved into a major undertaking.
>
> I wonder how the original founders would take it. I always had the impression
> they started this as a hobby on a shoestring. I'm sure they would have taken
> commercials though. They were always needing cash.
>
> The next time you hit the town, hoist one for me at the Union or the CI.
> Actually, if it's at the Union, go ahead and have one of the steamed coney dogs
> for me too. The coney sauce they used way back when was the best coney sauce
> in the world. If it is the same stuff, have two.
>
> Regards,
> Roy
ACRN is still alive and well and was in the same building as my office.
I don't know a lot of what's up lately, since I've been gone from there
for more than a decade.
I believe both pubs you mention are still serving and the steam tunnels
are still cranking it out. 20 degrees outside and you'd still see dorm
room windows open, blowing air *inside* their rooms to cool off. :-)
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:06:51 -0600, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
>I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
>the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
>and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
>funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
>broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>
>The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
>other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
>the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
>should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
>advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
>subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
>that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
>completely ignored.
Wow. I thought I was the only Camp OU club member in the group. I used to
live in Scott Quad when a couple guys in the dorm got the idea of broadcasting
radio via the dorm electrical circuits. They used a room back by the entrance
to the steam tunnels. That made it dry, nice and warm, and you could get to
just about any building on campus without getting wet on a rainy day, which is
how I found the room they were using in the first place.
This evolved into ACRN (All Campus Radio Network) in 1969-70 when they got the
school to help fund it. Prior to that they paid for it out of their own pockets
as I recall. They first incorporated some nearby dorms, and eventually expanded.
It was still using the wiring for broadcasting when I left the dorms. From your
post, it sounds like it has evolved into a major undertaking.
I wonder how the original founders would take it. I always had the impression
they started this as a hobby on a shoestring. I'm sure they would have taken
commercials though. They were always needing cash.
The next time you hit the town, hoist one for me at the Union or the CI.
Actually, if it's at the Union, go ahead and have one of the steamed coney dogs
for me too. The coney sauce they used way back when was the best coney sauce
in the world. If it is the same stuff, have two.
Regards,
Roy
"Robatoy" wrote:
> Easy to DVR though... BUT! Nothing is more frustrating and annoying
than the pledge drives on PBS. You get lulled into a nice program and
then they make while they work every conceivable angle to pull a few
bucks out of your pocket...fukkum.. Kroft left them a billion, what?
Is all that money gone ?
--------------------------------
Say, "Thank you President Reagan".
Just one more example of a trickle down screw job of the masses.
Lew
On 2010-11-16 19:08:46 -0500, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> said:
> Say, "Thank you President Reagan".
>
> Just one more example of a trickle down screw job of the masses.
>
> Lew
Just as bad as de-funding that "pinko" public broadcasting, the relaxed
ownership rules leave us with about three huge conglomerates owning
most of the broadcast outlets has stifled any sort of creative or local
radio... which feeds the vapidity of what now passes for music. Excuse
me, make that "product."
Pre de-reg, ownership was limited to a handful of AM, FM, and TV
stations. Can't remember the limits now, but I seem to recall three of
each, and no more than two in combination in any market. Today, you'll
have any number of stations under common ownership operating out of the
same studios and offices. It may make sense to combine some operations
-- sales, for instance -- but having one jock cutting voice tracks for
multiple stations, or even multiple stations in multiple markets,
ensures "uniform and consistent mediocrity."
Not even sure it enhances shareholder value, no matter what Ronnie's
ideological successors tell us. And combining operations has failed to
save newspapers... circulation continues to shrink, the "news hole" and
ad revenues with it. It's not just a matter of another technology
(i.e., the intenet) overmhelming print and broadcast. When you "cut to
the bone" too severely, the patient can die.
No long range thinking -- and in the case of Ron, no thinking beyond
the next nap.
Steve <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
>
> Just as bad as de-funding that "pinko" public broadcasting, the
> relaxed ownership rules leave us with about three huge conglomerates
> owning most of the broadcast outlets has stifled any sort of creative
> or local radio... which feeds the vapidity of what now passes for
> music. Excuse me, make that "product."
>
*snip*
You've noticed that too? I don't even listen to local radio any more,
except for Cubs games, because the mix is too boring. If I find a radio
station that plays something I like, they usually repeat the same 4 hour
block again (just in case I missed it.) I could do a better job with a
MP3 player set on "Random."
Puckdropper
--
Never teach your apprentice everything you know.
"Mike Marlow" wrote:
> Geezus Lew - what the hell are you talking about here?
---------------------------------
Reagan cut PBS funding in an attempt to make them go away, but they
survive by almost constant begging as a source of funding.
As the old saying goes, "What you give up on the oranges you make up
on the grapefruits, etc".
Lew
On 11/18/2010 3:08 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>
>> Geezus Lew - what the hell are you talking about here?
> ---------------------------------
> Reagan cut PBS funding in an attempt to make them go away, but they
> survive by almost constant begging as a source of funding.
>
>
To be fair, it was Congress not Reagan who cut PBS funding, and it was
not "to make them go away," it was (a) giving a nod to the notion that
funding PBS was not the proper role of the federal government, and (b) a
token (i.e. minuscule) reduction of the federal budget.
"Just Wondering" wrote:
> To be fair, it was Congress not Reagan who cut PBS funding, and it
> was not "to make them go away," it was (a) giving a nod to the
> notion that funding PBS was not the proper role of the federal
> government, and (b) a token (i.e. minuscule) reduction of the
> federal budget.
-----------------------------
And I've got a deal for you on some swamp land over in Arizona.
Lew
On 11/18/2010 4:23 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Just Wondering" wrote:
>
>> To be fair, it was Congress not Reagan who cut PBS funding, and it
>> was not "to make them go away," it was (a) giving a nod to the
>> notion that funding PBS was not the proper role of the federal
>> government, and (b) a token (i.e. minuscule) reduction of the
>> federal budget.
> -----------------------------
> And I've got a deal for you on some swamp land over in Arizona.
>
http://www.lat-long.com/ListLocations-1-Arizona-Swamp.html
In which of these location do you have title to swamp land? How many
acres are for sale? What is your asking price?
On 11/20/2010 8:27 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Just Wondering" wrote:
>
>> http://www.lat-long.com/ListLocations-1-Arizona-Swamp.html
>> In which of these location do you have title to swamp land? How
>> many acres are for sale? What is your asking price?
> --------------------------------
> Good questions.
>
> What interests you?
>
> Lew
>
Your statement that "I've got a deal for you on some swamp land over in
Arizona," if true, would mean that (a) you own (or at least have
authority to sell on behalf of the owner) some swamp land in Arizona,
and (b) the asking price is low enough that I could buy the land and
resell it at a decent profit. That would interest anyone who is
interested in making a buck.
But I take your statement that you've god a deal for me on swamp land in
Arizona to mean that you actually had no such deal because there is no
swamp land in Arizona, but that when I posted, "To be fair, it was
Congress not Reagan who cut PBS funding, and it was not "to make them go
away," it was (a) giving a nod to the notion that funding PBS was not
the proper role of the federal government, and (b) a token (i.e.
minuscule) reduction of the federal budget," I was mistaken in my facts.
As it turns out, Arizona has plenty of swamp land, which I just
proved. It is you, not I, who was mistaken on both points.
Steve wrote:
> On 2010-11-16 19:08:46 -0500, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]>
> said:
>> Say, "Thank you President Reagan".
>>
>> Just one more example of a trickle down screw job of the masses.
>>
>> Lew
>
> Just as bad as de-funding that "pinko" public broadcasting, the
> relaxed ownership rules leave us with about three huge conglomerates
> owning most of the broadcast outlets has stifled any sort of creative or
> local radio... which feeds the vapidity of what now passes for music.
> Excuse me, make that "product."
>
> Pre de-reg, ownership was limited to a handful of AM, FM, and TV
> stations. Can't remember the limits now, but I seem to recall three of
> each, and no more than two in combination in any market. Today, you'll
> have any number of stations under common ownership operating out of
> the same studios and offices. It may make sense to combine some
> operations -- sales, for instance -- but having one jock cutting
> voice tracks for multiple stations, or even multiple stations in
> multiple markets, ensures "uniform and consistent mediocrity."
>
> Not even sure it enhances shareholder value, no matter what Ronnie's
> ideological successors tell us. And combining operations has failed to
> save newspapers... circulation continues to shrink, the "news hole"
> and ad revenues with it. It's not just a matter of another technology
> (i.e., the intenet) overmhelming print and broadcast. When you "cut to
> the bone" too severely, the patient can die.
>
> No long range thinking -- and in the case of Ron, no thinking beyond
> the next nap.
Ok - I'm going to admit that I'm missing something. I just don't see how
this has anything at all to do with Regan's economic philosopy.
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Nov 19, 5:11=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Errrmmm 'reckoning' isn't Josepi's strong suit, David.
Ah, I see.
On Nov 16, 11:37=A0pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Easy to DVR though... BUT! Nothing is more frustrating and annoying
> than the pledge drives on PBS. You get lulled into a nice program and
> then they make while they work every conceivable angle to pull a few
> bucks out of your pocket...fukkum.. Kroft left them a billion, what?
> Is all that money gone ?
Hey, at least you aren't held to ransom by a bloody TV license!
On Nov 19, 10:48=A0am, David Paste <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2:27=A0am, "Josepi" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > OK WTF is "political license" then?
>
> Self-indulgent 'permission' politicians grant themselves to spout
> bollocks at the general public's expense? I dunno, what d'you reckon?
Errrmmm 'reckoning' isn't Josepi's strong suit, David.
On Nov 15, 11:16=A0pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
> and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
Is that bit true?!
On Nov 16, 8:12=A0am, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
[snipped for effect]
>....... and far higher intelligence of
> books once again.
But whatcha gonna do when you get all those books coloured?
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:31 -0800 (PST), Sonny <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I suppose some of you have seen this, but it's worth a rerun.
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRg8rJUXwQc
Cute concept, but...
Man, I had forgotten just how bad TV had gotten. Laughtracks, silly
noises, 500 channels of noise, and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
What's to like?
--
To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.
-- J. K. Rowling
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 15:38:49 -0700, Just Wondering
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 11/18/2010 3:08 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
>> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>>
>>> Geezus Lew - what the hell are you talking about here?
>> ---------------------------------
>> Reagan cut PBS funding in an attempt to make them go away, but they
>> survive by almost constant begging as a source of funding.
>>
>>
>To be fair, it was Congress not Reagan who cut PBS funding, and it was
>not "to make them go away," it was (a) giving a nod to the notion that
>funding PBS was not the proper role of the federal government, and (b) a
>token (i.e. minuscule) reduction of the federal budget.
Wanna bet that the poor, mislead liberal who made that statement
doesn't buy that?
--
Education is when you read the fine print.
Experience is what you get if you don't.
-- Pete Seeger
Awesome!
The one I liked best was the snowplough dig-out saver.
A barrel of rocks, at the end of the driveway supported a vertical post
inserted into it. At the top of the post was a pulley system with a rope
attached to the end of a long 2x12, forming a ramp from the raised end at
the barrel to the other side of the driveway (up-traffic).
As the plough came down the street it's tire ran up the ramped 2x12 and
flattened it to the pavement. The other end of the pulley then hoisted up a
plywood wall across the end of the driveway, rejecting any snow dumping from
the plough blade.
He actually demonstrated it working like a charm (once!)... Was the best one
yet!
"Sonny" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:ace79d99-797a-41b8-9b1f-ccff1048fccd@o34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com...
I suppose some of you have seen this, but it's worth a rerun.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRg8rJUXwQc
Sonny
On 11/15/2010 5:16 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:31 -0800 (PST), Sonny<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I suppose some of you have seen this, but it's worth a rerun.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRg8rJUXwQc
>
> Cute concept, but...
>
> Man, I had forgotten just how bad TV had gotten. Laughtracks, silly
> noises, 500 channels of noise, and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
> What's to like?
>
> --
> To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.
> -- J. K. Rowling
what's to like?? the fact that the shows are funny and entertaining.
sometimes even educational (myth busters) don't like commercials??
Then get a fukkin dvr and learn to use it.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
> > Michael Kenefick wrote:
> > Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
> > that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
> > Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
> >
> > Bill
>
> I'm not talking about viewers time.
> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
>
> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>
> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
> completely ignored.
University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
be able to sell advertising.
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> In article <[email protected]>,
> -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
> >> Michael Kenefick wrote:
> >> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
> >> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
> >> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
> >>
> >> Bill
> >
> >I'm not talking about viewers time.
> >I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
> >
> >I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
> >the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
> >and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
> >funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
> >broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
> >
> >The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
> >other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
> >the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
> >should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
> >advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
> >subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
> >that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
> >completely ignored.
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> > -MIKE-
> >
> > "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
> > --Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
> > --
> > http://mikedrums.com
> > [email protected]
> > ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
> >
>
> All broadcast stations in this country are subsidized by the government.
You live in England?
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article<[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >>
> >> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
> >>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
> >>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
> >>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
> >>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
> >>>
> >>> Bill
> >>
> >> I'm not talking about viewers time.
> >> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
> >>
> >> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
> >> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
> >> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
> >> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
> >> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
> >>
> >> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
> >> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
> >> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
> >> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
> >> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
> >> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
> >> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
> >> completely ignored.
> >
> > University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
> > station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
> > radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
> > running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
> > station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
> > business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
> > be able to sell advertising.
> >
>
> That doesn't make it right or legal.
It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
things.
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article<[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >>
> >> On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> In article<[email protected]>,
> >>> [email protected] says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
> >>>>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
> >>>>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
> >>>>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
> >>>>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bill
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not talking about viewers time.
> >>>> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
> >>>>
> >>>> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
> >>>> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
> >>>> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
> >>>> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
> >>>> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
> >>>>
> >>>> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
> >>>> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
> >>>> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
> >>>> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
> >>>> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
> >>>> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
> >>>> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
> >>>> completely ignored.
> >>>
> >>> University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
> >>> station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
> >>> radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
> >>> running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
> >>> station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
> >>> business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
> >>> be able to sell advertising.
> >>>
> >>
> >> That doesn't make it right or legal.
> >
> > It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
> > trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
> > things.
> >
>
> They get plenty of training.
Yes, they do, in college.
> Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
> to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
> raising cattle.
So? In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
"broadcasting" majors.
> In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
> learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.
Many engineers will tell you the same thing. Why don't we just do away
with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
_really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.
> But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
> caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.
It's a piss-poor metaphor. If colleges are to train people they have to
be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
things. If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
decent education.
Jeez. Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting shit on
by "college boys".
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>
> On 11/20/10 4:02 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> > In article<[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
> >>
> >> On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> In article<[email protected]>,
> >>> [email protected] says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
> >>>>> [email protected] says...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
> >>>>>>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
> >>>>>>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
> >>>>>>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
> >>>>>>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Bill
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm not talking about viewers time.
> >>>>>> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
> >>>>>> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
> >>>>>> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
> >>>>>> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
> >>>>>> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
> >>>>>> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
> >>>>>> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
> >>>>>> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
> >>>>>> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
> >>>>>> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
> >>>>>> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
> >>>>>> completely ignored.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
> >>>>> station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
> >>>>> radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
> >>>>> running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
> >>>>> station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
> >>>>> business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
> >>>>> be able to sell advertising.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> That doesn't make it right or legal.
> >>>
> >>> It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
> >>> trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
> >>> things.
> >>>
> >>
> >> They get plenty of training.
> >
> > Yes, they do, in college.
> >
> >> Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
> >> to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
> >> raising cattle.
> >
> > So? In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
> > schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
> > "broadcasting" majors.
> >
>
> You're right. Selling ads on college radio is the only experience
> available to business majors. How silly of me.
So where else do they get experience selling radio advertising?
> >> In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
> >> learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.
> >
> > Many engineers will tell you the same thing. Why don't we just do away
> > with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
> > However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
> > such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
> > in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
> > _really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.
> >
>
> You really like to stretch things, huh?
You're the one arguing that college is irrelevant.
> >> But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
> >> caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.
> >
> > It's a piss-poor metaphor.
>
> Actually it's a really good metaphor because it's illustrates, directly,
> taxpayer dollars competing with private sector dollars.
It ignores the purpose of the expenditure.
> > If colleges are to train people they have to
> > be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
> > things. If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
> > whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
> > decent education.
> >
> >Jeez. Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting shit on
> > by "college boys".
>
>
> I'm guessing you could stretch a piece of bubblegum about a hundred feet.
> I think that statement reveals some issues you're dealing with, not me.
You're the one saying that college doesn't teach anything useful and so
colleges should not be allowed to provide activities that give students
real-world experience in the activities they will perform in the
workplace.
> To the point since you seem to obtuse to grasp it (maybe you should have
> payed more attention in college), taxpayer funded or heavily subsidized
> institutions such as PBS, should not be competing commercially with the
> private sector.
You are conflating student-operated radio stations with PBS now.
Steve wrote:
>
> Just as bad as de-funding that "pinko" public broadcasting, the
> relaxed ownership rules leave us with about three huge conglomerates
> owning most of the broadcast outlets has stifled any sort of creative or
> local radio... which feeds the vapidity of what now passes for music.
> Excuse me, make that "product."
>
> Pre de-reg, ownership was limited to a handful of AM, FM, and TV
> stations. Can't remember the limits now, but I seem to recall three of
> each, and no more than two in combination in any market. Today, you'll
> have any number of stations under common ownership operating out of
> the same studios and offices. It may make sense to combine some
> operations -- sales, for instance -- but having one jock cutting
> voice tracks for multiple stations, or even multiple stations in
> multiple markets, ensures "uniform and consistent mediocrity."
>
> Not even sure it enhances shareholder value, no matter what Ronnie's
> ideological successors tell us. And combining operations has failed to
> save newspapers... circulation continues to shrink, the "news hole"
> and ad revenues with it. It's not just a matter of another technology
> (i.e., the intenet) overmhelming print and broadcast. When you "cut to
> the bone" too severely, the patient can die.
>
> No long range thinking -- and in the case of Ron, no thinking beyond
> the next nap.
Ah, but the other side of the coin is that YOU can start a broadcast station
without a lot of red-tape, hearings, public-necessity, community support,
anti-competitive complaining by established stations, etc.
Actually, the barrier to entry for an FM station is in the few tens of
thousands of dollars range. You can even subscribe to a station feed from
aggregators. That is, there is one company that determines the playlist and
feeds the results to any number of subscribers. It's likely that the exact
same music is going out, at the exact same time, to fifty stations around
the country.
In my town, Houston, there is ONE classical broadcast station and it's a PBS
affiliate (spit). I assume there is not another because it would not be
economically viable.
But who knows?
How does one go about getting one of them there "political licenses" and how
much do you reckon they cost?
Then we should go after a "poetic licence". Hard to believe people have to
pay to write poetry! Maybe in the UK. They have to pay to listen to a radio.
"David Paste" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:635f08c3-c292-4919-9d37-9db72bee3085@g26g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
Ah, I see.
On Nov 19, 5:11 pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Errrmmm 'reckoning' isn't Josepi's strong suit, David.
On Nov 20, 4:05=A0pm, -MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/20/10 2:00 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article<[email protected]>,
> > [email protected] says...
>
> >> On 11/20/10 4:02 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>> In article<[email protected]>,
> >>> [email protected] says...
>
> >>>> On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
> >>>>> [email protected] says...
>
> >>>>>> On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
> >>>>>>> [email protected] says...
>
> >>>>>>>> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't=
argue
> >>>>>>>>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers ti=
me. The
> >>>>>>>>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
>
> >>>>>>>>> Bill
>
> >>>>>>>> I'm not talking about viewers time.
> >>>>>>>> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
>
> >>>>>>>> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We=
were in
> >>>>>>>> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and t=
elevision,
> >>>>>>>> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, unive=
rsity
> >>>>>>>> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as pu=
blic
> >>>>>>>> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>
> >>>>>>>> The student radio station would sell advertising to local mercha=
nts and
> >>>>>>>> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The ow=
ners of
> >>>>>>>> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as w=
ell they
> >>>>>>>> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budge=
t for
> >>>>>>>> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a =
publicly
> >>>>>>>> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cu=
t of
> >>>>>>>> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, =
but gets
> >>>>>>>> completely ignored.
>
> >>>>>>> University activities often fall in special categories. =A0A stud=
ent radio
> >>>>>>> station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how t=
o run a
> >>>>>>> radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. =A0=
Part of
> >>>>>>> running a radio station is the business side of it and if the stu=
dent
> >>>>>>> station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience i=
n the
> >>>>>>> business end of running a radio station. =A0Ergo to do its job it=
has to
> >>>>>>> be able to sell advertising.
>
> >>>>>> That doesn't make it right or legal.
>
> >>>>> It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have=
be
> >>>>> trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sort=
s of
> >>>>> things.
>
> >>>> They get plenty of training.
>
> >>> Yes, they do, in college.
>
> >>>> Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
> >>>> to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
> >>>> raising cattle.
>
> >>> So? =A0In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
> >>> schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
> >>> "broadcasting" majors.
>
> >> You're right. =A0Selling ads on college radio is the only experience
> >> available to business majors. =A0How silly of me.
>
> > So where else do they get experience selling radio advertising?
>
> Google: internship.
>
> >>>> In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
> >>>> learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.
>
> >>> Many engineers will tell you the same thing. =A0Why don't we just do =
away
> >>> with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
> >>> However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station =
are
> >>> such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying m=
an
> >>> in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren=
't
> >>> _really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.
>
> >> You really like to stretch things, huh?
>
> > You're the one arguing that college is irrelevant.
>
> Check that...you could stretch a piece of bubblegum a mile.
>
> Ok, maybe took your bait on this whole thread... I doubt it. =A0But if
> you're serious with that statement, you really need a remedial class in
> reading comprehension. =A0:-)
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>> But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help gett=
ing
> >>>> caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.
>
> >>> It's a piss-poor metaphor.
>
> >> Actually it's a really good metaphor because it's illustrates, directl=
y,
> >> taxpayer dollars competing with private sector dollars.
>
> > It ignores the purpose of the expenditure.
>
> >>> If colleges are to train people they have to
> >>> be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
> >>> things. =A0If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, =
don't
> >>> whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
> >>> decent education.
>
> >>> Jeez. =A0Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting shit=
on
> >> =A0 > =A0by "college boys".
>
> >> I'm guessing you could stretch a piece of bubblegum about a hundred fe=
et.
> >> I think that statement reveals some issues you're dealing with, not me=
.
>
> > You're the one saying that college doesn't teach anything useful and so
> > colleges should not be allowed to provide activities that give students
> > real-world experience in the activities they will perform in the
> > workplace.
>
> I said neither of those things.
> That's like coming to the conclusion that if I said the college meal
> plans should cut back on foods high in saturated fats, that I said
> colleges don't provide any healthy foods in their meal plans.
>
> >> To the point since you seem to obtuse to grasp it (maybe you should ha=
ve
> >> payed more attention in college), taxpayer funded or heavily subsidize=
d
> >> institutions such as PBS, should not be competing commercially with th=
e
> >> private sector.
>
> > You are conflating student-operated radio stations with PBS now.
>
> No, I'm comparing the two. =A0I never said they were the same thing.
>
> wow.
>
> --
>
> =A0 -MIKE-
>
> =A0 "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
> =A0 =A0 =A0--Elvin Jones =A0(1927-2004)
> =A0 --
> =A0http://mikedrums.com
> =A0 [email protected]
> =A0 ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
"Yo, Mike" *gently taps him on the shoulder and passes him a single
malt.*
You are playing right into his hand. That's what he does. As a subtle
troll, he's pretty efficient, but he can't stop himself from
streeeeetching and introducing strawmen and red herrings into the
argument.
David Paste wrote:
> On Nov 18, 9:38 pm, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> TV license - what the hell is that?
>
>
> A permit to operate equipment capable of receiving and decoding
> television broadcasts. Oh yes. Many countries have them apparently,
> but it is seemingly only the UK which actually makes sure it's
> extracted from the punters. It's 145 quid per year - a pretty penny
> for the BBC, really. No wonder the Murdochs hate it. You can have a
> license for 49 quid, but only if your telly is black & white!
Yow!
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:03:26 -0800 (PST), David Paste
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Nov 15, 11:16 pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>> and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>
>Is that bit true?!
Probably not quite, but for news programming, the last time I timed it
for the half hour nightly news, there were 13 minutes of commercials.
For decades, I got pissed at the commercials always interrupting a
movie.
On TV, a movie will take 2 hours to be broadcast. When you go to buy
the same exact movie on DVD it's only, say, 87 minutes long.
Disgusting.
I recall BBC America being a bit better than that, though.
I wish they'd had more episodes of Red Cap. That Tamzin Outhwaite gal
was a real looker and I thoroughly enjoyed the shows; less predictable
than US programming.
--
To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.
-- J. K. Rowling
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Robatoy" wrote:
>
>> Easy to DVR though... BUT! Nothing is more frustrating and annoying
> than the pledge drives on PBS. You get lulled into a nice program and
> then they make while they work every conceivable angle to pull a few
> bucks out of your pocket...fukkum.. Kroft left them a billion, what?
> Is all that money gone ?
> --------------------------------
> Say, "Thank you President Reagan".
>
> Just one more example of a trickle down screw job of the masses.
>
> Lew
Geezus Lew - what the hell are you talking about here?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Nov 18, 9:38=A0pm, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> TV license - what the hell is that?
A permit to operate equipment capable of receiving and decoding
television broadcasts. Oh yes. Many countries have them apparently,
but it is seemingly only the UK which actually makes sure it's
extracted from the punters. It's 145 quid per year - a pretty penny
for the BBC, really. No wonder the Murdochs hate it. You can have a
license for 49 quid, but only if your telly is black & white!
On Nov 16, 11:33=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Actually it's closer to 23 minutes of program and 7 minutes of
> commercials out of every 30 minutes.
>
> What is truly frustrating is that every station is synchronized with
> every other station so that the all run commercials at the same time.
>
> You can't escape.
>
> Lew
Ah! That got me, but the TV of the states does have a rep for such
advertising. The synchronised advert thing is also present here, which
is irritating, but luckily I have a magic box to overcome such short-
term discomfort. I haven't really watched broadcast TV 'live' for
years. It's too painful. Especially seeing as the ads are badly
tailored to the channel / programme, and double especially since The
Discovery Channel started airing ads for everyone's least favourite
space-opera based crackpot cult.
David Paste wrote:
> On Nov 16, 11:37 pm, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Easy to DVR though... BUT! Nothing is more frustrating and annoying
>> than the pledge drives on PBS. You get lulled into a nice program and
>> then they make while they work every conceivable angle to pull a few
>> bucks out of your pocket...fukkum.. Kroft left them a billion, what?
>> Is all that money gone ?
>
> Hey, at least you aren't held to ransom by a bloody TV license!
TV license - what the hell is that?
--
-Mike-
[email protected]
On Nov 16, 6:33=A0pm, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "David Paste" wrote:
> > and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>
> Is that bit true?!
> ----------------------------
> Actually it's closer to 23 minutes of program and 7 minutes of
> commercials out of every 30 minutes.
>
> What is truly frustrating is that every station is synchronized with
> every other station so that the all run commercials at the same time.
>
> You can't escape.
>
> Lew
Easy to DVR though... BUT! Nothing is more frustrating and annoying
than the pledge drives on PBS. You get lulled into a nice program and
then they make while they work every conceivable angle to pull a few
bucks out of your pocket...fukkum.. Kroft left them a billion, what?
Is all that money gone ?
On Nov 15, 5:16=A0pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:31 -0800 (PST), Sonny <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> Man, I had forgotten just how bad TV had gotten. =A0Laughtracks, silly
> noises, 500 channels of noise, and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
> What's to like?
>
Larry, me thinks you are trying to take Red too seriously.
Loosen up.
RonB
On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 20:50:21 -0600, Steve Barker
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On 11/15/2010 5:16 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:31 -0800 (PST), Sonny<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I suppose some of you have seen this, but it's worth a rerun.
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRg8rJUXwQc
>>
>> Cute concept, but...
>>
>> Man, I had forgotten just how bad TV had gotten. Laughtracks, silly
>> noises, 500 channels of noise, and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>> What's to like?
>
>what's to like?? the fact that the shows are funny and entertaining.
One mind-decay point proven for me! <bseg>
>sometimes even educational (myth busters) don't like commercials??
>Then get a fukkin dvr and learn to use it.
I gave up a DVR and 160 channels (I do miss the commercial-free music
channels, but they raped that, too, by killing the jazz/blues fusion
station.) for the peace, tranquility, and far higher intelligence of
books once again. It's not worth looking back. I'm getting more of
my projects done now, too.
--
To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.
-- J. K. Rowling
Sure, three students get some experience.
"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
be able to sell advertising.
On 11/16/2010 10:42 AM, RonB wrote:
> On Nov 15, 5:16 pm, Larry Jaques<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:31 -0800 (PST), Sonny<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>
>> Man, I had forgotten just how bad TV had gotten. Laughtracks, silly
>> noises, 500 channels of noise, and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>> What's to like?
>>
>
> Larry, me thinks you are trying to take Red too seriously.
>
> Loosen up.
>
> RonB
I haven't seen Red's show in a few years, but I thought he was funny.
Reminds me a little of the writing of Patrick McManus who has written
several books of short stories and used to write a column for Field &
Stream magazine. I think Mr. McManus was a "Youper" (sp) though.
In high school, someone sitting next to me asked "Is it really that
funny?", to which I had to answer "Yes!" : )
Bill
On 11/16/10 6:37 PM, Robatoy wrote:
> On Nov 16, 6:33 pm, "Lew Hodgett"<[email protected]> wrote:
>> "David Paste" wrote:
>>> and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>>
>> Is that bit true?!
>> ----------------------------
>> Actually it's closer to 23 minutes of program and 7 minutes of
>> commercials out of every 30 minutes.
>>
>> What is truly frustrating is that every station is synchronized with
>> every other station so that the all run commercials at the same time.
>>
>> You can't escape.
>>
>> Lew
>
> Easy to DVR though... BUT! Nothing is more frustrating and annoying
> than the pledge drives on PBS. You get lulled into a nice program and
> then they make while they work every conceivable angle to pull a few
> bucks out of your pocket...fukkum.. Kroft left them a billion, what?
> Is all that money gone ?
Generally they only have shows I might watch during the pledge drives.
Outside of TOH and ATOH and a couple cooking shows Saturday afternoons,
there isn't much that interests me.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
On 11/17/10 6:34 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 07:42:05 -0800 (PST), RonB<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 15, 5:16 pm, Larry Jaques<[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 15 Nov 2010 13:27:31 -0800 (PST), Sonny<[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>> Man, I had forgotten just how bad TV had gotten. Laughtracks, silly
>>> noises, 500 channels of noise, and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>>> What's to like?
>>>
>>
>> Larry, me thinks you are trying to take Red too seriously.
>>
>> Loosen up.
>
> Whether or not the guy is funny, TV makes it an unenjoyable couple of
> minutes. I hadn't remembered how bad a brain rotter it was since I
> quit watching -ANY- TV about 3-1/2 years ago.
>
Ok, Larry, we get it, you don't watch TV.
Now quit saying it in every stinkin thread. :-p
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 11/18/10 4:38 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> David Paste wrote:
>> On Nov 16, 11:37 pm, Robatoy<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Easy to DVR though... BUT! Nothing is more frustrating and annoying
>>> than the pledge drives on PBS. You get lulled into a nice program and
>>> then they make while they work every conceivable angle to pull a few
>>> bucks out of your pocket...fukkum.. Kroft left them a billion, what?
>>> Is all that money gone ?
>>
>> Hey, at least you aren't held to ransom by a bloody TV license!
>
> TV license - what the hell is that?
>
A strange British thing.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
On 11/18/10 4:08 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Mike Marlow" wrote:
>
>> Geezus Lew - what the hell are you talking about here?
> ---------------------------------
> Reagan cut PBS funding in an attempt to make them go away, but they
> survive by almost constant begging as a source of funding.
>
It should be cut altogether.
It's providing nothing that the private sector isn't.
Also, it hasn't been non-commercial in decades.
For that reason it is, in fact, competing with the private sector, which
public tax-payer dollars should never be used to do.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
Michael Kenefick wrote:
> -Mike-
>
> Your answer makes it clear you have not watched the good shows on PBS.
> Or your local PBS station is not funded enough to get the good programs.
> Nightly Business Report, Nova, Antiques Roadshow, This Old House, Ask
> This Old House, Rick Steve Travels, Globe Trek, The New Yankee Workshop,
> American Woodshop, Wood Turning Workshop, Keeping Up Appearances, Are
> you being Served, the Train travel shows, the food shows, the children
> TV shows (sans overt ads for toys) are but a few of the great PBS
> programs you will not see on Broadcast TV.
>
> Now, I have noticed that not all PBSs are the same. In Chicago a few
> years ago, I found the Good PBS programs were on an independent station.
> The PBS badge station was an extended ballyhoo for Chicago.
>
> PBS only allows the sponsor to make a 15 - 20 second pitch at he
> beginning and / or end of program. I would allow a full minute, if it
> meant less pledge drives.
>
> Broadcast TV networks do not carry the variety that PBS does. So no
> competing is taking place.
>
> Mike in Ohio
Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
Bill
On 11/18/10 6:03 PM, Michael Kenefick wrote:
> -Mike-
>
> Your answer makes it clear you have not watched the good shows on PBS.
> Or your local PBS station is not funded enough to get the good programs.
> Nightly Business Report, Nova, Antiques Roadshow, This Old House, Ask
> This Old House, Rick Steve Travels, Globe Trek, The New Yankee Workshop,
> American Woodshop, Wood Turning Workshop, Keeping Up Appearances, Are
> you being Served, the Train travel shows, the food shows, the children
> TV shows (sans overt ads for toys) are but a few of the great PBS
> programs you will not see on Broadcast TV.
>
Incorrect assessment on your part. I regularly watch half the shows you
listed. I also am very familiar with public broadcasting and used to be
very involved with it in my last job, which contributes to my confidence
in saying it should be done away with.
>
> PBS only allows the sponsor to make a 15 - 20 second pitch at he
> beginning and / or end of program. I would allow a full minute, if it
> meant less pledge drives.
>
> Broadcast TV networks do not carry the variety that PBS does. So no
> competing is taking place.
>
The competing to which I refer is for commercial sponsorship $$.
Broadcast TV (lets include all commercial television regardless of the
conduit: cable satellite, et al) does in fact carry the variety (I would
argue, more variety) of programming that PBS does. And if PBS were to
drop of the earth tomorrow, shows like those, and in fact, most of those
exact shows, would be picked up by commercial television. If there is a
demand, of course.... which is the only reason they should exist in the
first place. Personally, I believe the demand is there.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
> Michael Kenefick wrote:
> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
>
> Bill
I'm not talking about viewers time.
I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
completely ignored.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
In article <[email protected]>,
-MIKE- <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
>>
>> Bill
>
>I'm not talking about viewers time.
>I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
>
>I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
>the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
>and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
>funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
>broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>
>The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
>other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
>the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
>should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
>advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
>subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
>that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
>completely ignored.
>
>
>--
>
> -MIKE-
>
> "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
> --Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
> --
> http://mikedrums.com
> [email protected]
> ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
>
All broadcast stations in this country are subsidized by the government.
--
Make it as simple as possible, but no simpler.
Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org
On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>>
>> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
>>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
>>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
>>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
>>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>
>> I'm not talking about viewers time.
>> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
>>
>> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
>> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
>> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
>> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
>> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>>
>> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
>> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
>> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
>> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
>> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
>> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
>> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
>> completely ignored.
>
> University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
> station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
> radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
> running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
> station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
> business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
> be able to sell advertising.
>
That doesn't make it right or legal.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>>
>> On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>
>>>> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
>>>>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
>>>>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
>>>>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bill
>>>>
>>>> I'm not talking about viewers time.
>>>> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
>>>>
>>>> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
>>>> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
>>>> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
>>>> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
>>>> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>>>>
>>>> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
>>>> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
>>>> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
>>>> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
>>>> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
>>>> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
>>>> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
>>>> completely ignored.
>>>
>>> University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
>>> station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
>>> radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
>>> running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
>>> station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
>>> business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
>>> be able to sell advertising.
>>>
>>
>> That doesn't make it right or legal.
>
> It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
> trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
> things.
>
They get plenty of training. Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
raising cattle.
In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.
But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 11/20/10 4:02 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>>
>> On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>
>>>> On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
>>>>>>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
>>>>>>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
>>>>>>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm not talking about viewers time.
>>>>>> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
>>>>>> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
>>>>>> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
>>>>>> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
>>>>>> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
>>>>>> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
>>>>>> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
>>>>>> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
>>>>>> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
>>>>>> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
>>>>>> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
>>>>>> completely ignored.
>>>>>
>>>>> University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
>>>>> station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
>>>>> radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
>>>>> running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
>>>>> station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
>>>>> business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
>>>>> be able to sell advertising.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't make it right or legal.
>>>
>>> It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
>>> trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
>>> things.
>>>
>>
>> They get plenty of training.
>
> Yes, they do, in college.
>
>> Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
>> to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
>> raising cattle.
>
> So? In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
> schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
> "broadcasting" majors.
>
You're right. Selling ads on college radio is the only experience
available to business majors. How silly of me.
>> In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
>> learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.
>
> Many engineers will tell you the same thing. Why don't we just do away
> with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
> However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
> such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
> in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
> _really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.
>
You really like to stretch things, huh?
>> But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
>> caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.
>
> It's a piss-poor metaphor.
Actually it's a really good metaphor because it's illustrates, directly,
taxpayer dollars competing with private sector dollars.
> If colleges are to train people they have to
> be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
> things. If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
> whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
> decent education.
>
>Jeez. Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting shit on
> by "college boys".
I'm guessing you could stretch a piece of bubblegum about a hundred feet.
I think that statement reveals some issues you're dealing with, not me.
To the point since you seem to obtuse to grasp it (maybe you should have
payed more attention in college), taxpayer funded or heavily subsidized
institutions such as PBS, should not be competing commercially with the
private sector.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 11/20/10 2:00 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article<[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>>
>> On 11/20/10 4:02 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>
>>>> On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>>>> In article<[email protected]>,
>>>>>>> [email protected] says...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Michael Kenefick wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
>>>>>>>>> that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
>>>>>>>>> Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bill
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not talking about viewers time.
>>>>>>>> I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
>>>>>>>> the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
>>>>>>>> and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
>>>>>>>> funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
>>>>>>>> broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
>>>>>>>> other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
>>>>>>>> the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
>>>>>>>> should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
>>>>>>>> advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
>>>>>>>> subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
>>>>>>>> that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
>>>>>>>> completely ignored.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
>>>>>>> station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
>>>>>>> radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
>>>>>>> running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
>>>>>>> station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
>>>>>>> business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
>>>>>>> be able to sell advertising.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That doesn't make it right or legal.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
>>>>> trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
>>>>> things.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They get plenty of training.
>>>
>>> Yes, they do, in college.
>>>
>>>> Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
>>>> to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
>>>> raising cattle.
>>>
>>> So? In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
>>> schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
>>> "broadcasting" majors.
>>>
>>
>> You're right. Selling ads on college radio is the only experience
>> available to business majors. How silly of me.
>
> So where else do they get experience selling radio advertising?
>
Google: internship.
>>>> In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
>>>> learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.
>>>
>>> Many engineers will tell you the same thing. Why don't we just do away
>>> with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
>>> However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
>>> such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
>>> in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
>>> _really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.
>>>
>>
>> You really like to stretch things, huh?
>
> You're the one arguing that college is irrelevant.
>
Check that...you could stretch a piece of bubblegum a mile.
Ok, maybe took your bait on this whole thread... I doubt it. But if
you're serious with that statement, you really need a remedial class in
reading comprehension. :-)
>>>> But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
>>>> caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.
>>>
>>> It's a piss-poor metaphor.
>>
>> Actually it's a really good metaphor because it's illustrates, directly,
>> taxpayer dollars competing with private sector dollars.
>
> It ignores the purpose of the expenditure.
>
>>> If colleges are to train people they have to
>>> be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
>>> things. If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
>>> whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
>>> decent education.
>> >
>>> Jeez. Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting shit on
>> > by "college boys".
>>
>>
>> I'm guessing you could stretch a piece of bubblegum about a hundred feet.
>> I think that statement reveals some issues you're dealing with, not me.
>
> You're the one saying that college doesn't teach anything useful and so
> colleges should not be allowed to provide activities that give students
> real-world experience in the activities they will perform in the
> workplace.
>
I said neither of those things.
That's like coming to the conclusion that if I said the college meal
plans should cut back on foods high in saturated fats, that I said
colleges don't provide any healthy foods in their meal plans.
>> To the point since you seem to obtuse to grasp it (maybe you should have
>> payed more attention in college), taxpayer funded or heavily subsidized
>> institutions such as PBS, should not be competing commercially with the
>> private sector.
>
> You are conflating student-operated radio stations with PBS now.
>
No, I'm comparing the two. I never said they were the same thing.
wow.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 11/20/10 5:22 PM, Robatoy wrote:
>
> "Yo, Mike" *gently taps him on the shoulder and passes him a single
> malt.*
>
> You are playing right into his hand. That's what he does. As a subtle
> troll, he's pretty efficient, but he can't stop himself from
> streeeeetching and introducing strawmen and red herrings into the
> argument.
I believe you are accurate with your assessment.
Enjoying a Yazoo Onward Stout straight from the growler.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On Tue, 16 Nov 2010 15:33:12 -0800, "Lew Hodgett"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"David Paste" wrote:
>
>> and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>
>Is that bit true?!
>----------------------------
>Actually it's closer to 23 minutes of program and 7 minutes of
>commercials out of every 30 minutes.
>
>What is truly frustrating is that every station is synchronized with
>every other station so that the all run commercials at the same time.
>
>You can't escape.
Bwahahahahaha! I did, Lew. I told Dish to shove it and switched to
Netflix.
--
To the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.
-- J. K. Rowling
OK WTF is "political license" then?
"David Paste" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:de5b3a07-b869-4258-ac5b-15bc5868d38e@p11g2000vbn.googlegroups.com...
A permit to operate equipment capable of receiving and decoding
television broadcasts. Oh yes. Many countries have them apparently,
but it is seemingly only the UK which actually makes sure it's
extracted from the punters. It's 145 quid per year - a pretty penny
for the BBC, really. No wonder the Murdochs hate it. You can have a
license for 49 quid, but only if your telly is black & white!
On Nov 18, 9:38 pm, "Mike Marlow" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> TV license - what the hell is that?
On 11/16/2010 5:33 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "David Paste" wrote:
>
>> and 27-minutes/hour of commercials.
>
> Is that bit true?!
> ----------------------------
> Actually it's closer to 23 minutes of program and 7 minutes of
> commercials out of every 30 minutes.
>
> What is truly frustrating is that every station is synchronized with
> every other station so that the all run commercials at the same time.
>
> You can't escape.
>
> Lew
>
>
yes you can. DVR. then wait 15 minutes and hit play. Let it record
ahead of you whilst you watch and skip the commercials. I do it every
thursday night.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
-Mike-
Your answer makes it clear you have not watched the good shows on PBS.
Or your local PBS station is not funded enough to get the good programs.
Nightly Business Report, Nova, Antiques Roadshow, This Old House, Ask
This Old House, Rick Steve Travels, Globe Trek, The New Yankee Workshop,
American Woodshop, Wood Turning Workshop, Keeping Up Appearances, Are
you being Served, the Train travel shows, the food shows, the children
TV shows (sans overt ads for toys) are but a few of the great PBS
programs you will not see on Broadcast TV.
Now, I have noticed that not all PBSs are the same. In Chicago a few
years ago, I found the Good PBS programs were on an independent station.
The PBS badge station was an extended ballyhoo for Chicago.
PBS only allows the sponsor to make a 15 - 20 second pitch at he
beginning and / or end of program. I would allow a full minute, if it
meant less pledge drives.
Broadcast TV networks do not carry the variety that PBS does. So no
competing is taking place.
Mike in Ohio
<snip>
> It should be cut altogether.
> It's providing nothing that the private sector isn't.
> Also, it hasn't been non-commercial in decades.
> For that reason it is, in fact, competing with the private sector, which
> public tax-payer dollars should never be used to do.