> If you would defend > your right to a free and open media marketplace as strong as > you defend against a perceived slight against Matt's efforts > then this would never be a problem.
Fxck yerself. I went to 5 community action meetings with 2 including members of the fcc, where there was strong opposition to say the least. I'm talking hundreds in attendance and all voices in unison. Sounds like much more than what was said about matt. But didn't make a difference. You sound like an idiot for even suggesting that the monopoly is present due to lack of action on behalf of the people. C'mon dawg, everyone in the world (especially right now) should know that decisions at that level are being bought, not simply spoken for. > Granted it's a > small country, probably the same size as the Chicago market > that Matt services, but it's the idea. You're wrong again. When you're talking radio and exposure (which you are by the use of the word niche market) it's not the idea, it's the coverage area and the number of listeners. > "National radio" is more "mainstream" than "community radio" > is all that I said. Not true. What you said was, "...What's even more remarkable is that this, for so many reasons, would *never* happen on American radio these days." (which sounds to me like marginalizing community radio) I think everyone that has replied were simply addressing this statement and giving counterexamples. Knowing that you're not physically here, trying to educate you about the real state of radio today is the most positive response you could've received. Obviously you didn't take it that way. And of course you wouldn't take community and indy radio seriously, you're not listening to it. Point is, I don't have to wait till mills and garnier decide to get "eclectic" to hear sets like that. And that's what's really important. So instead of slagging markets that you don't patronize. Why don't you give us some insight into the state of Canadian radio, and why this type of mixing/programming is so rare to you? I'd be really interested to hear. > Anyway, then Matt got all defensive and made comments like this: > > "It's time people took community radio seriously as an > alternative to the ClearChannel near-monopoly of programming." > > I disagree, I think it's time people took seriously the idea > of PREVENTING or BREAKING-UP the "ClearChannel near-monopoly > of programming." So should we also stop watching independent films and instead put pressure on the major studios to produce more leftfield movies for fear that they will eventually kill the indy market? No. I think you misjudge the position. It's not a position of retreat, it's using the weapons at your immediate disposal to fight the battle instead of asking the enemy if you can borrow his guns. > Nothing would make me happier > than for you to become syndicated and available across the > country, nationaly, but until then you're a niche within a > niche, just like I am. Really? I thought he was an integral part of a decentralized force of underground disk jockeys keeping the spirit of free radio alive (with more listeners than some "national" radio stations <cough> brussels <cough>. Peace and chicken grease. Kamal K. Stoddard Turner Broadcasting Systems ** I am exactly what I wanted to become since I was 5 years old. Since 5 year olds are not noted for mature judgement and sometimes aspire to piracy or gunfighting, this is not necessarily a sign of success. **
