Posted by Larry Weiss on November 05, 2009 at 15:10:14:
In Reply to: Board Reflections for November 5 posted by Allan Sniffen on November 05, 2009 at 08:37:39:
Allan,
Three things (in no particular order):
1. You talk about election information being available elsewhere, so there is no need for radio carry it. The fact is the same can be said for everything broadcast on radio – music, news, talk, sports – its ALL available elsewhere – cable, Internet, satellite, iPod. So, why broadcast anything on the radio? Why bother with radio at all? Indeed, Ford already manufactures cars, so why should GM or Toyota bother (economy issues not withstanding)? Home Depot already sells tools and lumber, so why should Loews? Walmart sells everything, so why should Target or Sears? Campbell’s makes soup, so why should Progresso? The Beatles recorded good music, so why did the Rolling Stones bother? Heck, there are plenty of other boards that discuss radio in New York, so why should any of us bother with the New York Radio Message Board? The answer is that alternatives are good. America – indeed the world - thrives on them. Its called competition! There are always things that one competitor provides that the other doesn’t. Then the other comes back with something even better! It works great!
As a businessman, the absolute last thing I ever want to here is that I shouldn’t bother with something because its already available elsewhere. Instead, what I want to hear is that someone is doing it elsewhere, lets figure out how to make it better!
Local radio (FM and AM) has advantages that Internet and Cable TV do not – and radio is fully capable of competing with any other media, professionally and cost effectively, and it certainly has the means of supporting community (and profiting from it) in ways that no other media can touch! All it needs is the desire, the creativity, the skills and the gumption. Instead, we get corporate greed and wheeling and dealing in frequencies - with the needs of communities of license coming dead last! Something’s wrong with that, and that’s one of the prime, underlying themes of the thread.
2. You rant for 10 minutes about local AM radio. Yet, that had nothing to do with the thread. Indeed, the example I gave from the early 70’s was on an FM station. However, that wasn’t the point either. The point was about the lack of ANY local coverage on ANY radio station – even the successful FM stations. I acknowledged B-103 providing an update every half hour, and someone else mentioned WRHU’s coverage – but these are well funded FMs (one commercial, one Hofstra University). I'm wondering how it is that you interpreted the thread to be about local AM’s (most of which are daytimers on Long Island - not even on the air for election night coverage).
3. My original post was inspired by, and talked about my fear and my wondering whether voter apathy toward the elections on Long Island might, in part, be somehow connected to radio’s apathy toward public service. I would have liked to hear you touch on that question in your Board Reflections.