Slashdot Mirror


Homogenized Music

Mansing writes "The connections between broadcast radio and music industry are well known. In the old days, payola was the method to increase a song's (or album's) exposure. But now, the same "free market" corporate music that infects the music industry is also infecting the broadcast radio industry as well. What makes the article so informative is not the business angles, but how business has changed what is broadcast. Seeing the parallels between the recording industry's force fed music and Clear Channel's "nothing is left to whim or chance" programming, I now understand how hard it is for any non-corporate sanctioned music to become widely heard."

469 comments

  1. raido sucks by Alcimedes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    outside of college radio stations, there's nothing left worth listening to, and this tells you why.

    can't someone show a business model to some exec. that shows that

    good music=listeners=money?

    instead of

    crap music we're supposed to play=industry is happy=money

    where's the listener come in?

    oh yeah, as a stat on some marketroids excell spreadsheet showing that if you play enough Britney Spears, people's standards drop low enough to where they can sell their product.

    if you can't tell, i hate almost all broadcast radio. it's been crap for years now and getting worse. i feel like an old man before my time. :)

    1. Re:raido sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "good music=listeners=money?"

      your model is broken. Since when has good music been a moneyspinner?

    2. Re:raido sucks by johnpaul191 · · Score: 1

      that was their point..... that business model does not seem to exist. if it does, not on a large scale. that's where low budget college/community radio wins out.

    3. Re:raido sucks by BankofAmerica_ATM · · Score: 1, Funny

      I am intrigued by your talk about radios. Perhaps I could one day learn how to do CONSCIOUSNESS-TRANSFER over the radio waves? This would surely break the ProjectFaustuslike strangehold that Clear Channel has over music distribution...

    4. Re:raido sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he was saying that we listen to - and more importantly like - crap because its forced down our throats, and if they only played good stuff, we`d buy it and make them rich.

      Anyway, this is pointless. What is `good` music? I like classical music - i somehow dont get the feeling this whole thread is a bunch of geeks who are upset because they cant tape Stravinsky`s serial works - for example - off the radio.

    5. Re:raido sucks by thesolo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      outside of college radio stations, there's nothing left worth listening to, and this tells you why.

      Even that statement isn't true anymore. College radio is no longer a free-spirited playground of diverse music that it once was. Now, college radio is a proving grounds.

      Indies, promoters, radio execs, they all visit college radio stations. They pay the stations/DJs and/or the schools money to get certain songs on the air. They test the market amongst college students, trying to find the next big hit for commercial radio. Very few college radio stations don't have at least some form of commercial influence.

      You can read more on the subject at Salon.com:
      http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2001/03/14/payola / ndex.html

    6. Re:raido sucks by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      I agree. In rochester ny the Nerve used to be the best station around; then around 98 i think they were bought by CCC. They soon started playing the same crap as the radio station bought out in Philly.

    7. Re:raido sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually if all music sounds the same, then I wouldn't need to buy a whole lot of it. I just need to play the same CD over and over again like a 5 years old. ;)

    8. Re:raido sucks by spatley · · Score: 2, Funny

      The most horrible thing about it clearcast is not making a dime
      The company lost money every quarter last year, piling up an annual loss of $1.1 billion. Clear Channel also is shouldering $8 billion in debt -- the legacy of its deal-a-minute expansion spree. With a long advertising slump afoot, the company's stock is selling at about half its peak price of two years ago.

      so they are becoming neither cool nor rich now that really sucks!

    9. Re:raido sucks by ncc74656 · · Score: 2
      Even that statement isn't true anymore. College radio is no longer a free-spirited playground of diverse music that it once was. Now, college radio is a proving grounds.

      Pretty much nobody at UNLV listens to KUNV, the supposed college-radio station. A few years back, they switched from college-radio fare to jazz and similar crap, basically becoming kind of an NPR clone. They thought that was what their audience wanted, or there was more money in it, or something. They even moved out of the student union to an off-campus location.

      Hell, I've just about given up on FM radio. KXTE (107.5) used to be OK, but their "x-treme radio" is sounding more and more like rap (the "style" of music where the "c" is silent). There's an 80s station (KSTJ, 102.7), but as someone else noted lately, many 80s stations tend to play from the same small group of 80s songs—and this one's no exception. (I appreciate that they avoid drek such as NKOTB, but (for instance) the only Depeche Mode they seem to have heard of is "Enjoy the Silence," "Personal Jesus," and "Blasphemous Rumours.") KEDG (103.5) used to be good, but they changed formats--first to R&B, then Spanish-language stuff, and now the latest Britney/Backdoor Boys/N'Suck tripe.

      I stick mostly with talk radio nowadays. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and the local talk-show hosts are nowhere near as repetitive as what gets spun on most FM stations.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    10. Re:raido sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately you're not alone. A station in San Antonio that I can pick up most of the time plays 80s music on the weekends. They have exactly one New Order song in the database, and it's Blue Monday. That's nice and all, but there's a LOT of stuff that can be played, even without resorting to non-single "deep cuts"!

      "Solution": buy more CDs, encode them, run on full-random all the time and start feeling even older.

    11. Re:raido sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why is it no one every mentions the complete shit that is broadcast radio as the REAL reason napster and its ilk are so damn popular.

    12. Re:raido sucks by Bluesee · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My daughter is a deejay for KDVS college station in Davis, CA and she tells me that they are forbidden to play any commercial songs: Radiohead, Garbage, and Smashing Pumpkins, which I believe were to a good extent birthed on college campuses are now off limits to college stations. This is not to say its a bad thing, but even colleges have their skewed policies.

      On another note, I am in a constant process of ridding my life of commercial interests and commercials. I have stopped listening to radio almost entirely on my daily commute, preferring my cassettes. And let me tell you, after listening to good rock or jazz instead of commercials with their jingles and subliminal messages and urging to consume or be left out, I feel much more relaxed, much less anxious. I have successfully reduced corporate influence in my life to a manageble level. It's just one example of 'think globally, act locally'. If all people did this, ClearChannel would die the death it really deserves. Now when I listen to the rock station I used to hear all the time, it's easy to spot the manipulative messages they are trying to put over on me, and when I realize how much of their time is spent inflating their self-importance, I can be smug about being the non-conformist. Of course, I get laid a lot less.

      --
      SDMI: Finally! Music that won't rip or burn! Brought to you by the fine folks at RIAA.
    13. Re:raido sucks by jethro200 · · Score: 1

      A very good article. But one thing I don't uderstand -what is the difference between what the "indies" do, and payola? A fine line, it seems...

    14. Re:raido sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They rely on the idea of "good enough" music, i.e. as long as they can sell whatever they are trying to push, they don't bother to look at the product. And they do sell the stuff that plays on the radio.

  2. crapola is more like it by GutBomb · · Score: 2

    this is complete crap. college radio! i hear the strangest most non-commercial shit ever on college radio. there is even a college station in L.A. that plays wall to wall industrial. these people have never heard of a dial on thier radio?

    1. Re:crapola is more like it by mrybczyn · · Score: 3, Informative

      College radio tends to have very low power broadcast, and hence low range. If you don't live in a college town, or even on the outskirts, you don't get it.

      Besides, from the last slashdot article on payola in the music industry, seems like a lot of the big college radio stations are where the corporate fuzz do their test runs.

    2. Re:crapola is more like it by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Funny

      College radio has no advertising. Nobody knows it's there. And most people are scared to go below 92 on their radio dials, because that's where the boring classical stations and *shudder* NPR are.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:crapola is more like it by Drizzten · · Score: 1

      UT-Austin's shared radio stations, KVRX and KOOP, have online presences. KVRX broadcasts all day on the web to make up for it's sharing agreement. Do other college stations do this?

      --

      "All mankind is at the mercy of a handful of neurotics". - Norman Douglas
    4. Re:crapola is more like it by ph0rk · · Score: 1

      Most college radio stations rotate formats often, and switch shows and/or DJ's around. I used to work for my local station, and could be industrial one semester could become reggae the next.

      Granted, you'll usually not find a heavy dose of top 40, which is well and good, but i'd prefer not to substitute marley for ministry.

      --
      semantics are everything!
    5. Re:crapola is more like it by RevAaron · · Score: 2

      Weird. Where I've lived, we didn't have anything for our college stations (770 AM RadioK or KUMD). They have shows at different times of the day and week. Sure, shedules change, but it's pretty consistent semester to semester. For my stations at least.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    6. Re:crapola is more like it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that LA station KXLU perchance? If not what is it? I need to know!!!!

    7. Re:crapola is more like it by GutBomb · · Score: 2

      kxlu sounds familiar. i have not been there in quite a while so i don't rmemeber exactly. i just know it was pretty low on the dial. near the classical stuff

    8. Re:crapola is more like it by Reductionist · · Score: 1

      If your college is especially lame, like the one where I went to grad school, they only broadcast over the campus cable TV system.

      Yep that's right.. Listen to the radio through your TV.

      The upside was that since the ratings were so low it was very easy to become a volunteer DJ. The downside was that they only allowed DJs to play songs from their stupid collection of ASCAP/RIAA approved Top 40 CDs.

      I did it once before walking out in disgust. No wonder no one ever listened to the damn thing.

  3. The same music over and over again by pfb · · Score: 1

    o'er here in engerland, specifically london, the two or three main radio stations (imo): capital & radio, play the same tunes everyday.

    In fact I'm pretty certain that capital plays the same tunes at the same time everyday...

    --
    -- ribbit
    1. Re:The same music over and over again by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Interesting
      o'er here in engerland, specifically london, the two or three main radio stations (imo): capital [capitalfm.com] & radio [bbc.co.uk], play the same tunes everyday.

      When I lived in Michigan there were a couple radio stations, WHNN & WIOG which pretty much fit that same bill. Result: I stopped listening to them.

      I've often wondered, even aloud to others, why radio stations insist upon overplaying music. I once had the complete Led Zepplin collection, but go so sick of hearing it over and over on the radio (usually on a radio at work) that I sold off all but two albums (Physical Graphitti & In through the out door, which didn't get much airplay.)

      I still have to be in a very narrowly defined mood to listen to Phil Collins, so scarred am I by years of radio beating me over the head with his music. Pretty good stuff, but not when you hear it all the time. (There was even a radio station which planned a Phil Collins-Free weekend, it was so bad.)

      I've got a collection of about 400 CDs (mostly bought in the 80's) most of the newer stuff is alternative, classical, jazz and euro-pop. At the pace I once bought music, I'd think the RIAA and affiliated scum would like to cultivate that, but the influences which built my collection were listening to music from other people's collections (which the RIAA appears dead-set against and even prosecuting me if they could nail one incident. There's the rub, eh?)

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:The same music over and over again by __aawsxp7741 · · Score: 2

      I don't know about Capital, but Radio 1 (I assume that's what you mean) certainly doesn't play the same songs all day everyday. I think their daytime program is playlisted (lots of info about that on their website), but they have some great shows in the evening. John Peel, most notably.

    3. Re:The same music over and over again by r_barchetta · · Score: 1


      That might be a non-human, all-tape radio station. We have one where I live and they used to run the same tape for a week then change it for a new one. Lately they've been updating the tape more often.

      Funny thing is that their playlist is more interesting than any other radio station around. And a bonus: with no DJ there is no mindless chatter between songs.

      -r

      --
      Just because something is free does not mean you have to take it.
    4. Re:The same music over and over again by OAB · · Score: 1

      Even worse is that Crapital bought XFM and turned it into a playlisted 'alternative' station.

    5. Re:The same music over and over again by mcwop · · Score: 2

      Yes! People are amazed when they learn that Led Zep has recorded more than the same three of their songs constantly played on the radio.

      --

      "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

    6. Re:The same music over and over again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget the Breezeblock! But John Peel is great. I saw him a few weeks ago at the opening of the 'Teenage Kicks' documentary at the Art Picture House in Cambridge. His taste in music is incredible and SO diverse.

    7. Re:The same music over and over again by chiller2 · · Score: 1

      In Tulsa OK the Clearchannel owned stations are so repetitive I can name the station by the first second of the song playing. Slogan... "Mix '96 - 50 minutes of music every hour" Yes, the SAME 50 minutes of music every hour! Slogan.. "The best music of the 60s,70s,80s,90s and Today!" The miserable list they play is certainly not the best. KISS FM is no better.. Pink's party crap, the same Linkin park song over and over (In the end), etc. Rock 102.3 and The Edge have sadly gone downhill in the past couple of years too. I've taken to avoiding the radio altogether while in the car, and instead listening to CDs.

      --
      --- Commission free trading & free stock up to $500 - use http://share.robinhood.com/kelvinp6 :)
    8. Re:The same music over and over again by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 2
      People are amazed when they learn that Led Zep has recorded more than the same three of their songs constantly played on the radio.

      What!? Three!? I've only heard Stairway to Heaven and Black Dog! I thought there were only two sides of a record!

      --
      That is all.
    9. Re:The same music over and over again by moheeb · · Score: 1

      Even the names of the stations have gone downhill. I think that each city in America has a station called KISS FM or The Edge.

  4. Payola? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought this was still an issue?

  5. huh??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I now understand how hard it is for any non- corporate sanctioned music to become widely heard.

    Yes. Like Chopin.

  6. This is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    It always happens like this. When network TV was getting bland and homogenized, cable stepped up to fill the void. All the net does is accelerate the process.

    All forms of media really need to take their eyes of the ledgers and look toward the future... otherwise they'll be caught by surprise again.

    With the net all neighborhoods are virtual and local.

    -johnkarakash-

    1. Re:This is nothing new by djwavelength · · Score: 1

      Was that an ad for XM radio?

    2. Re:This is nothing new by WeirdKid · · Score: 1

      That whole news article could be an advertisement for XM. In fact, the "Vegas Radio" format the Clear Channel exec was dreaming about exists as XM's channel 73: "Frank's Place".

  7. In past ages the philosphers... by 00_NOP · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "History repeats itself, the first time is tragedy, the second time, farce." So quoth Karl Marx.

    Of course nobody would admit to being a Marxist or even a Marxian - think of all those killed in the Soviet Union and China.

    But it seems that you can't keep a good idea down and those of the Marxist critical theorists of the Frankfurt School keep coming up again and again in /.

    This is what capitalism does, people - it tends to monopoly, and restricts human development.

    The great pity is that the left - and nowhere more so than in the US - seem unable to produce a decent theory of politics - the theory of praxis as it was once called - that connects the frustrations of those who post these articles on /. with proposals to change the world.

    Capitalism is still making us pay for the Soviet Union's experience of repression.

    1. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by Drizzten · · Score: 3, Insightful
      From the article:
      The passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 swept aside many of the old ownership limits, and ignited the business like a firecracker. Small owners started selling, and larger companies began feverishly merging. Six years later, radio is a big business, with publicly traded companies now dominating ownership of the nation's 11,400 commercial stations.
      What gets lost in all this is the fact that those mom-and-pop stations voluntarily sold their stations. Since the people who bought those stations want to make the most money possible, they pander to the widest audience possible. Yeah, it results in the big stations playing pop-oriented hits. But you also have to understand that those stations wouldn't be popular if the music wasn't popular (for whatever reasons that music is...I certainly don't like most of it).

      It's obvious there's a growing backlash against this kind of radio. People don't want to hear 15 minutes of commercials out of 30 minutes of air time. People grow tired with oft-repeated tunes. That doesn't necessarily mean we need to have a political solution. It means those people who feel they are disenfranchised need to start their own radio stations, non-commercial or commercial.
      --

      "All mankind is at the mercy of a handful of neurotics". - Norman Douglas
    2. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by Saloth+Sar · · Score: 0

      > "History repeats itself, the first time is > tragedy, the second time, farce." So quoth Karl > Marx. > Quoting Hegel.

    3. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by RevAaron · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Well, duh. Of course capitalism restricts human development- it's idea is that you gain profit, which is nothing but the money you get by exploiting people. Getting paid a fair wage for your work isn't profit, so, so all you working saps don't get mad and say "w311 1 g0tta eat!!!"

      I'm sure you know this, but it's hugely surprising how many people don't. It's sad.

      Keep it real.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    4. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by ch-chuck · · Score: 2

      No need to stage a communist revolution just yet - read the article: CCU is 8 billion in debt, listenership is falling, etc etc. Like everyone here posts, who listens to radio anymore when you have alternatives? Capitalism may yet come to the rescue: CCU creditors can call their debt in, they may have to file for bandruptcy, they might have to sell off a lot of stations at bargain prices back to community oriented owners. It's just another aspect of the telecom / dot.bomb wave and their bubble hasn't burst yet. I'd love to get a good 1KW Collins AM transmitter for cheap and convert it to ham bands. The /worst/ thing to happen would be for a govt to socialize the thing and freeze CCU in it's current form, like having Castro for your leader until he croaks. Even in a solialist state plain ol' human politics 1.0 still rules whether a corporation owns it or, what we consider worse, a political party owns everything, where some are inevitably more 'equal' than others. In capitalism man opresses man, but in communism it's just the opposite.

      There are more things in heaven & earth than are drempt of in Marx's, or anyone's, 'philosophy'.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    5. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by elefantstn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Here's a newsflash from turn of the 20th century economics for you: the world's economy is not a zero-sum game. If you get rich, that doesn't necessarily make someone else poor.

      I'm sure you knew this, but it's hugely surprising how many people have clearly never read an economics book in their life, but consider themselves experts because they read a website. It's sad.

      --
      If it ain't broke, you need more software.
    6. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by RevAaron · · Score: 2

      Heh.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    7. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is what capitalism does, people - it tends to monopoly, and restricts human development.


      Holy shit, this is awesome. You actually got modded up for a communism vs. capitalism argument based on the fact that capitalism promotes monopolies! Brother troll, I salute you!
    8. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by PacoTaco · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What's really scary is that some people think economists understand the economy.

    9. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This is what capitalism does, people - it tends to monopoly, and restricts human development."

      Utter nonsense, of course. State capitalism, as practiced in America, creates monopolies, but that's because the state deliberately keeps out competition; thanks to copyright and broadcasting restrictions radio music is one of the most deliberately monopolised industries in the world, but that's all due to the government making it that way, not because of EVIL CAPITALISTS.

      "The great pity is that the left - and nowhere more so than in the US - seem unable to produce a decent theory of politics"

      That's because most lefties are the kind of big-government morons who created the radio and music monopolies, and socialism is all oh so 19th century.

    10. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by Cognitive+Dissident · · Score: 1

      >

      Actually, Karl Marx himself said 'I am not a Marxist' while he was still alive. So even then he didn't like the movements claiming to be derived from his philosophy.

    11. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by Eccles · · Score: 1

      This is what capitalism does, people - it tends to monopoly, and restricts human development.

      The reason this situation is tending to monopoly is the fixed resource: the number of channels that can be received on a standard radio. Satellite radio is taking it on on one side, internet radio on another. Or on a completely different tack, mp3 collections on computers with autoplay systems are also competition.

      --
      Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
    12. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by neocon · · Score: 1

      Mod, please mod parent up, insightful.

    13. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by DoomHaven · · Score: 1
      The /worst/ thing to happen would be for a govt to socialize the thing and freeze CCU in it's current form


      No, you are completely wrong.

      The worst thing that can happen is CCU declares bankruptcy, and sells off a lot of stations at a bargrain price to an organization with a ton of money, a vested interest in the music industry, and very few morals.

      Sound like any organization you know of *cough* RIAA *cough*?
      --
      "Don't mind me cutting myself on Occam's Razor"
    14. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by martyn+s · · Score: 2

      You see, you're using your own political theories to defend your own position. I don't think it matters whether they voluntarily sold their stations or not. The fact of the matter is, the old model, in that no one can own more than 40 stations and not more than one in any city, worked. We changed the law, and then so did radio change. And now it sucks more than ever. So you can sit back and wait for your political theories to kick in, or you can advocate changing the law back and have things like they were. Of course, you can't just change the law back. It's too late. A law passed based on six months of lobbying can often take fifty years to undo.

    15. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by ivrcti · · Score: 1

      "This is what capitalism does, people - it tends to monopoly, and restricts human development."

      Can you really look at history over the last 100 years and say that communism has aided human development more?

      Never postulate without the proof to back it up!

    16. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What was in the Soviet Union and is in China is not marxism, nor is it even communism.

    17. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by 00_NOP · · Score: 2

      Can you really look at history over the last 100 years and say that communism has aided human development more?

      If the best defence of capitalism is that it's not the Soviet Union then clearly pro-capitalists are morally bankrupt.

      The cold war is over. Screaming "Commie" at those who disagree with you is no longer acceptible. Read my post again - I'm not defending Communoism, I am lamenting the lack of a left politics that gets to grips with the problems articulated by users of /.

    18. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>This is what capitalism does, people - it tends >>to monopoly, and restricts human development.

      Under capitalism, which is free trade, no company can establish or hold a monopoly without the customers consent. This is because every customer is free to decide which companies he wants to do business with. Since everyone (supposedly) wants the best value for money, those companies that can deliver much more value than the competition tends to get the most of the market, while companies that don't deliver much value tend to go out of business.

      But even then, the surviving company(/ies) cannot rest, since if they take advantage of the situation to screw the customers, their value for money will drop, making competition possible again.

      darn.farrell

    19. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by jonerik · · Score: 2

      What was in the Soviet Union and is in China is not marxism, nor is it even communism.

      Perhaps not in the classic sense of the word as Marx/Ingles defined it. But considering that every single nation which labelled itself "communist" during the 20th century turned into at best a police state and at worst a charnel house, I don't have a lot of confidence in any group that espouses communism as a desirable goal for a nation, nor do I believe that the final outcome will be different no matter who attempts it. The track record simply isn't very good, to say the least. Give me one good reason why any rational person should believe a communist organization that says, "Oh, but we'll get it right!"

    20. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by moheeb · · Score: 1
      "In capitalism man opresses man, but in communism it's just the opposite."

      So that means in communism man opresses man?

    21. Re:In past ages the philosphers... by neocon · · Score: 1

      If the best defence of capitalism is that it's not the Soviet Union then clearly pro-capitalists are morally bankrupt.

      No, the best defense of capitalism is that unlike every other system that has been tried, it has produced tremendous liberty and prosperity for all levels of the societies which have tried it.

      On the other hand, it does appear looking at this thread that the only defense proponents of communism are coming here with is `we'll be different this time. we promise!'.

      The cold war is over. Screaming "Commie" at those who disagree with you is no longer acceptible.

      No one is `screaming' anything at anyone, but it's funny -- I would think that if anything could be described as the `lesson' of the cold war, it would be that Communism doesn't work, and causes misery and tyranny when it is tried...

  8. Sold out by FearUncertaintyDoubt · · Score: 1
    "It's a fun idea," Zier says of his brainchild, "but fun ideas can be very dangerous. It can be an inside joke that only you and your co-workers and your Aunt Rose think is funny. Besides, we're happy with the formats we have."

    Fun ideas being dangerous? I believe the term for this is "sold out".

  9. internet radio is where it's at! by roy23 · · Score: 1

    I can find dozens of shoutcast stations that play the wierd stuff I want, without loads of ads!
    Admittedly, I'm usually lister 4 out of a maximum of 9 and the music stops when the dj switches off their pc or their dsl line goes down.

    1. Re:internet radio is where it's at! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but there are people doing it right too. See icelands muzik.is for example. The users choos their own music, vote for it and have real influence on the station.

  10. You are just jealous by PhysicsGenius · · Score: 0, Troll
    Is anybody complaining that Renaissance painting shows "too many fat, naked women"? No, we call it great art. Keep in mind that it was popular at the time. People liked it.

    The radio stations play what people listen to. Britney and N'Sync are good musicians playing good music. Just because they are popular with the hoi polloi doesn't make them crap. And I think they would resent your implication that they are "corporate"--all popular musicians started off unpopular and on the fringe. They made it through hard work to their art and deserve recognition of that fact.

    1. Re:You are just jealous by ShavenYak · · Score: 2

      Britney and N'Sync are good musicians playing good music.

      I hope this is a joke, I see someone modded it funny. Neither Britney nor N'Sync are good musicians. They aren't musicians at all. Have you ever seen any of them play an instrument?

      I'm not even sure you can classify them as singers. Has anyone ever heard any of them sing by themselves, without a studio full of equipment?

      --

      Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
    2. Re:You are just jealous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Britney sings.. I saw her just the other day on a Pepsi commercial. She's pretty hot too. Chicks don't have to be ugly to be good musicians.

    3. Re:You are just jealous by stekylsha · · Score: 1

      Not at all. Do you not consider Luciano Pavaroti a musician? How 'bout Nat King Cole, Perry Como, Frank Sinatra, and a host of others that sing but don't play instruments? Yeah, they'ze all old people music (except Luciano) but just because someone doesn't play an intrument doesn't make them not a musician.

      Now, I'll agree that the two sited are not the best musicians but just by the fact that they make music (yes, heavily produced music) makes them musicians.

      Remember Christopher Cross? He did one of the songs for the movie "Arthur" many years ago. Ever hear him *without* the studio production? Geez! Muy icky. But he was (is?) a musician.

      It's sad that the pablum that is being forced to the American radio listening audience is not necessarily *good* music but popular because it's what the music companies want you to hear. Throw enough money and marketing at a song and people buy into it. And because the large record labels have the money to throw, well ...

      College radio stations have a good idea but usually the format is so lax that every time a new DJ comes on the format changes. This isn't conducive to listening for a lot of people. Internet (and satellite) radio will sell but need more exposure. For now, independent radio stations (for profit) are probably the best bet for good music; enough pablum to keep the coffers fed plus new/alternative music that isn't being force fed.

      I live in one of the Clear Channel monopoly zones and the music, quite frankly, sux. Luckily an independent radio station (KFSD-FM) started recently that plays actually plays more than the generic crap. Heh, and it's forced the other alternative station to change what it plays too. When I hear new music, it's on the independent station. Yeah, they have their rotation but they also play a lot of music that's new or not mainstream. And then few weeks later I'll here 91x (the CC station) anounce some song as "new" music.

      So what's the point of all this inane rambling? That just 'cause you don't play an intrument doesn't mean you aren't a musician. And just because you live in a Clear Channel suck ass area doesn't mean that you don't have a good radio station in your area.

      --
      "There is no spoon." - Neo
      "Spoooon!" - The Tick
  11. McRadio by freality · · Score: 2, Funny

    Memes need a name :)

  12. Clear Channel == Devil by Wind_Walker · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    The problem with Big Radio (ala Big Tobacco/Oil/etc) is that most people don't know that they're all being controlled by the same company, Clear Channel. They have 1225 radio and 37 television stations under their control. That amounts to about 80% of the total radio stations in the USA.

    Does anybody else remember the "CC" commercials on the radio, emploring people to register internet domains that end in .cc? Guess what "CC" stands for! That's right! Clear Channel. That was their bid to get into the internet business, and from what I hear, it failed. But just think about that... Every radio station that your heard those commercials on was controlled by Clear Channel.

    These people are worse than the RIAA and MPAA combined.

    1. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Amarok.Org · · Score: 4, Informative
      Does anybody else remember the "CC" commercials on the radio, emploring people to register internet domains that end in .cc? Guess what "CC" stands for! That's right! Clear Channel. That was their bid to get into the internet business, and from what I hear, it failed. But just think about that... Every radio station that your heard those commercials on was controlled by Clear Channel.

      Did you even think to research this before you spewed it out?

      The .cc tld is the ISO country code for the Cocos Islands - who sold the rights to the tld to eNic, one of the VeriSign companies. Clear Channel had nothing to do with it. Nice conspiracy theory, though. Maybe the tin-foil hat isn't working?

      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
    2. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Servo5678 · · Score: 2
      Guess what "CC" stands for! That's right! Clear Channel.

      Everyone loves a good conspiracy, but I thought the .cc domain was from the Cocos Islands (unless Clear Channel owns their own island chain, too).

      http://www.colchis.com/domain.htm has the info on that.

    3. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by duffbeer703 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Clear channel was pushing that top-level domain, and originally had changed all their radio and television stations and even provided sponsors websites .cc domains. (as in clear channel)

      It does stand for Cocos Islands, but was being sold as meaning "Clear Channel"

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    4. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by larry+bagina · · Score: 1
      They have 1225 radio and 37 television stations under their control. That amounts to about 80% of the total radio stations in the USA.

      The article puts it at around 10% cross country.
      Clear Channel has grown from just 30 stations to more than 1,220 -- more than one of every 10 in the nation.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    5. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Garion911 · · Score: 1

      Bzzzzst.

      Wrong answer. I heard these commericials on a non-CC owned station. Locally owned and operated.

      www.classicrock.com
      (TK99 in Syracuse, NY)

      --
      Slashdot is like Playboy: I read it for the articles
    6. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Nilatir · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hey Taco! Any chance of getting a "Full of Crap" moderation option?

      --

      "We were half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold."
      -- Hunter S. Tolkien
    7. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Amarok.Org · · Score: 2

      So if I start moving all my domains to ".sr" (the assigned country code of Suriname), and promote them as "Silly Rabbit", this somehow changes who owns the TLD?

      Clear Channel does *not* control the .cc TLD, VeriSign (through one of it's subsidiaries) does. It doesn't matter how many domains CC has registered, or what they say it means, the fact is that it's *not* theirs.

      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
    8. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This thread indicates that the market for top level domain names is about the same order of rationality as that for radio stations.

      Most of the "benifits" of markets come from the concept known as "free markets". These are the economists eguivalents of "massless strings" and "frictionless bearing".

    9. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by rocket97 · · Score: 1

      no no no no no..... you all have this wrong. "CC" is not owned by 'Clear Channel' or that island colony the 'Cocos'. It is owned by the great Bill Gates. Yes it is true. You ask why did he not name it .bg well silly person that is because the BeeGee's would have had a nice little law suit againsed him for trademark infringement. But for it not being due to that... what is that? You want to know what a butt is for? For Poopy silly... ha ha ah... anyway... So why did he decide to make it .cc well that is simple as well. Everyone knows that his nickname is 'Moeny' so he thought to himself one day "hmmm Money Money what do I have a lot of.... Cash and Cars.... CC.... I am a friggin genious" And that my friends is how .cc domains came into existance.

      --
      "The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
    10. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by duffbeer703 · · Score: 2

      Get a clue.

      At the time of the promotion 18 months ago, a Clear Channel affiliate was the exclusive registrar of .cc domains. They exerted defacto exclusive control over the domain until their marketing campaign failed. The 600 residents of the Cocos Islands have zero control (or interest) in the .cc namespace.

      So if you control a massive Fortune 500 company called "Silly Rabbit", and make a deal with Suriname or some other obscure coutry in partnership with VeriSign to exclusively market the .sr domain, you essentially have all the rights of "ownership".

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    11. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, I guess maybe I was hallucinating when the .cc domain was opened to public registration, and my local Clear-Channel owned radio station had a 4 hour love-fest where the morning show guys were taking calls on the question "What .CC domain do you want to register" and they were saying CC=Clear Channel every five minutes. And I suppose this is a rediculus liberal myth.

    12. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Amarok.Org · · Score: 2

      Promotion/resale != ownership

      Did you actually read that article you linked to? It says that Clear Channel entered an agreement to promote and resell - it did not say that Clear Channel owned, controlled, or otherwise influenced the TLD.

      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
    13. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by FreeUser · · Score: 2

      So if I start moving all my domains to ".sr" (the assigned country code of Suriname), and promote them as "Silly Rabbit", this somehow changes who owns the TLD?

      Effectively it does, if you control all of the radio and television that the majority of people in the US can get their information from.

      If you repeat a deception, even an outright lie, long enough and loudly enough people will believe it. Does it really matter that .cc stands for the Coconos if 90% of the people have been convinced that it stands for 'clear channel'? Not really. Think of the frustration RMS feels when his GNU system is almost always referred to as "Linux" giving him zero credit for having written most of the system ... now imagine trying to explain to someone living in Colombus, Ohio (or another medium-sized city with only Clear Channel stations to listen to, and no other real choice) that .cc doesn't stand for what every rock, country, and talk station has been telling them it does, but for an obscure collection of islands somewhere 'out there' instead. You'll be even less well received than RMS has been.

      Granted, Clear Channel doesn't appear to have succeeded in their effort to rebrand .cc under their name, but it certainly looks as though they tried, and had they succeeded it would not have been the first time in recent history that mass media would have succeeded in redefining what was 'true' and what wasn't ... that is one of the things that make these media cartels so powerful, after all.

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    14. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Amarok.Org · · Score: 1

      Holy crap, a well reasoned argument! What are you doing posting on Slashdot?

      Your point is well spoken, and taken.

      --
      -- "Other than that, how was the play Mrs. Lincoln?"
    15. Re:Clear Channel == Devil by Thud457 · · Score: 0

      You still listen to music?

      sheesh!

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  13. Re:Sarah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that I know what Sarah looks like, I find your posts very funny! What kind of animal is Gizmo?

  14. Radio GaGa by toupsie · · Score: 2
    I can't remember the last time I listened to the radio for music. With an MP3 library that can play for over 30 days 24/7 without repeating (started buying CDs in '86) and the Internet, radio music is so 20th century. The only reason I even turn on a radio is to listen to the news or talk.

    Radio music is dead. You can tell by the ratings of FM stations. They pick up their biggest audience when the kings of fart jokes and naked chicks hit the air, i.e., Shock Jock Talk Radio. Howard Stern, Opie & Andy and their moronic minions of copycats are the only ratings FM stations are getting these days. Its no wonder that Clear Channel and Inifinity are looking outside of shoving ads into their customer's ears for revenue.

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    1. Re:Radio GaGa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Philadelphia (the 5th largest market in the US), the #1 music station plays no music in the daytime. Just Stern, O&A, etc.

    2. Re:Radio GaGa by MrHanky · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem with the modern music distribution channels (p2p that is) is that you don't get to know about music you don't about: you don't know how to search for things you never heard about. Radio is quite brilliant when it comes to forcing The Unknown upon you. That's what I like about radio; but as the subject of this thread shows, this is less widespread in America. So I'm glad I live in Norway .

    3. Re:Radio GaGa by EllisDees · · Score: 1

      Napster was actually great for finding new music. All you had to do was search for someone who you liked, and then view all of the other files that someone who had that artist also had. A few random downloads from someone who has similar musical tastes often paid off.

      I'm not 100% sure, but I think Limewire also has this ability.

      --
      -- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
    4. Re:Radio GaGa by the_consumer · · Score: 1

      p2p could kick broadcast's ass in one respect: collaborative filtering. Instead of searching for things you've never heard about, they can be suggested to you based on your listening history as it compares to that of others, particularly if there is a rating system involved. I don't know that any file sharing services are offering this yet, but I do know there are various sites that will give you a survey of certain films, for instance, which you rate on a 1-5 scale, which generates a profile for you which can be compared against the profiles of others to provide you with suggestions for the next film you pay to see in the theater.

      --
      "If you're thinking what I'm thinking, you're right." -
    5. Re:Radio GaGa by mudder · · Score: 1

      You actually like NRK? It might just be because I was a stupid American kid living in Norway, but I always found NRK to be rather boring. The raio station never played music (I have a hunch talk radio is more interesting when you're completely fluent, not to mention not a kid), and when they did, they would only play softer rock songs, none of the heavier music. The TV station was a little bit better (especially when they started trying to compete with Channel 2). Lots of interesting British television, plus some good Norwegian stuff too. However, I do remember them only broadcasting for aboput 8 hours a day back in the late 80's. The rest of the time you either got a test signal, or a clock.

    6. Re:Radio GaGa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has browsing capabilities, but I don't think I've ever found a host that had them enabled.

    7. Re:Radio GaGa by MrHanky · · Score: 1

      No, I don't like NRK. I like Harald Are Lund's programs. He usually plays a dose of Captain Beefheart, some jazz, some noise, some techno etc., and then lots of music you probably never heard of. He's really great for getting to know new music. I don't actually like most of the music he plays, but I'll always hear something new.

      NRK has changed a bit since you lived here; now it's 3 radio channels and 2 TV channels, but HAL has been there since before 1970.

    8. Re:Radio GaGa by MrHanky · · Score: 1

      Yes, this is true. However, you will only find the music you are expected to like this way. Based on my history of liking Aphex Twin, Lesser, Squarepusher, Boards of Canada, Techno Animal etc., there is only a slim chance of predicting I'm also going to like Lambchop, Helmet, Naked City and Giant Sand. Not to mention that very few people share music that practically noone has heard about.

      Your arguement goes well with your nick -- p2p is perfect for the "more of the same" philosphy of consumerism, which is actually exactly what radio is criticized for in the above article.

      When it comes to discovering music you didn't know you would like, there's nothing like good old-fashion force-feeding.

    9. Re:Radio GaGa by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2

      The only reason I even turn on a radio is to listen to the news or talk.

      And you wonder why talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Howard Stern, Art Bell and Dr. Laura have contracts paying them in the millions of dollars per year.

      Radio's most profitable niche nowadays is talk radio, no contest. After all, Howard Stern's show is essentially a risqué talk radio show.

  15. Re: "college" radio by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 2

    "i hear the strangest most non-commercial shit ever on college radio."

    This is probably why a lot of listeners stay away. Most people don't WANT to hear anything new, or risk their cozy bland existence by hearing anything which might challenge their concept of what constitutes "music". (end of bitter gripe). I do suspect that its very diversity is one of the factors hurting "college" or community radio - it's almost impossible to predict what will be playing when you tune in. Will it be death metal, reggae, christian rock, aboriginal talk radio or something completely unexpected? Personally, I like that. It's neat. I don't care for the Christian rock, but hey, turn off the radio for an hour, and later something else will be on :-)

    "There is even a college station in L.A. that plays wall to wall industrial."

    Cool :-D I have to put on a CD player to get my morning dose of Front Line Assembly...

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  16. Force-fed music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Force-fed music? What is michael talking about? No one makes you listen to the radio! No one makes you buy albums (I've more-or-less stopped doing so, as they are just too annoying). No one makes you trade music on Kaaza or whatever.

    If you don't like the music industry, stop listening , stop whining, and make your own music. It what I do.

    1. Re:Force-fed music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Make your own music?

      I am really sick of this particular sentiment on slashdot. Anytime someone complains about the sorry state of a given industry, there are always people who pipe in, "Hey, you don't like it, change it!"

      Well, guess what, not everyone has the wherewithal to be experts at EVERYTHING! I'm a fairly intelligent guy, with a few areas of expertise, but I have no musical talent whatsoever. Sure I COULD make my own music, but even I wouldn't want to listen to it.

    2. Re:Force-fed music by the_consumer · · Score: 1

      what do you do, put on those big earmuffs they wear at the shooting range when you go to a store or restaurant? I'm constanly being barraged with other people's questionable taste in music whenever I go out in public.

      --
      "If you're thinking what I'm thinking, you're right." -
    3. Re:Force-fed music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But 'cutting" the oily, arrogant business-brownshirts purse is SOOOOOOOO much fun ... can't ya hear the RIIIIIIIIP ! Can't ya hear 'em squeal !! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

    4. Re:Force-fed music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a different form of force-fed, and it is very annoying! I can't stand that....

  17. Got a problem with corporate radio? by Satan's+Librarian · · Score: 1
    Support LPFM, or hell, just run a high-power pirate radio if you have the balls for it.

    I can still breath air for free, and I'm damn well going to use it for radio as well if I want to. IMHO, regulating the airwaves the way they do in the US is worse than any RIAA crud. At least we can choose to buy music from alternative sources. Can we choose to use different air?

  18. News For Nerds: Stuff That Doesn't Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "In the old days, payola was the method
    to increase a song's (or album's) exposure."

    Wasn't there an article on Slashdot a couple of
    weeks ago about payola?

    Nothing has changed.

    Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

  19. What I think should be done with music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think of literature. Think of rolarcoasters and fashion. What is the difference? The former is by default about art, expression, meaning, philosophy. The latter are by default about social conformity, seeking ever higher levels of stimulation, materialism, etc. Although they can blur into each other, those are the defaults. Commercialising music (and movies and books) changes the nature of its production and design; changes the nature of its contents. I believe it is bad for society to have music created by commercialism. They play on base desires. Their music is generally empty of meaning - it is synthetically-created lowest common denominator stuff.

    Commercialising music is like replacing the libraries with rolar coasters.
    We all know what a corrupting influence commercialisation has been on software and goodness knows what else.

  20. The problem is not a failure of the market by squarooticus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The market is working just fine. The problem is that the majority are willing to listen to the homogeneous crap that CCU broadcasts. You can argue all you want that the airwaves are a "public good" and not just another form of property, but in the end of the day, someone is going to be arbitrarily choosing what goes on the airwaves no matter how the power to choose is apportioned. And if it's the public (read: majority) choosing how to use that good, you can be assured they're not going to waste that bandwidth on indie rock, metal, big-band music, or African tongue-clicking.

    Instead of complaining, choose one of the alternatives: listen to satellite radio, internet radio, listen to CD's (the real ones, not those phony pseudo-CD's), etc. If CCU truly isn't performing a service that people want, advertisers will stop buying airtime and it will go bankrupt. I'm guessing that isn't about to happen anytime soon.

    --
    [ home ]
    1. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by Wansu · · Score: 2

      The market is working just fine. The problem is that the majority are willing to listen to the homogeneous crap that CCU broadcasts.

      Only because that's all they get anyway.

      CCU truly isn't performing a service that people want, advertisers will stop buying airtime and it will go bankrupt.

      I'm not sure how tightly coupled advertising is to the actual number of listeners.

      --
      Wansu, th' chinese sailor
    2. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by Lozzer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Is the fact that listening figures are down 10% in the U.S. since the market was deregulated a sign that the market has not been totally successful? You can measure success in many ways. - Profit, Revenue, Listeners, Diversity.

      I prefer the British system (and I am biased) where some of the RF spectrum is reserved for public radio (The BBC). This has some varied, and quality stuff. There is also commercial space, with the more homogonized genres. It is probably more workable over here, as we have a comparatively small geographic area.

      The point I'm trying to make, however, is that you don't have to divide up the airwaves "all commercial" or "all centrally planned", but you can do a bit of both. (Even if it sounds like a choice between free market and command economy)

      I guess you can listen to the BBC World Service ;-)

      --
      Special Relativity: The person in the other queue thinks yours is moving faster.
    3. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by ec_hack · · Score: 1

      Satellite radio may not be a viable alternative. According to the XM web site, Clear Channel is a "strategic partner" of XM. They have to go to CC for shows like Art Bell, rush Limbaugh, Jim Rome, etc.

    4. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2

      However, while Clear Channel has an interest in XM satellite radio, they still have to consider the fact you have to fill some 100 channels of audio on XM. They realize this and have to program in a very large variety of music to fill these channel allocations.

    5. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure how tightly coupled advertising is to the actual number of listeners.

      Believe me, the ad executives are!

    6. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by CaseStudy · · Score: 2

      Um, no. You're falling into one form of the indie fallacy, that of "people would like music X, only they're not exposed to it."

      Tastes legimately differ, and when stations pop up playing nontraditional formats (e.g., Mars-FM and KNAC in the Southern California area), they're not as profitable and consequently are easily bought out.

    7. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by Mr.Sharpy · · Score: 1

      I disagree. I see this as a market failure because the big broadcasters were able to move much faster than any sort of public opinion in acquiring the majority of the radio stations in America. They have reached a point where the public is pretty irrellevant to their programming, because they know the public HAS to listen to what they play because there are few to no alternatives. CC bought them all!

      Advertisers can exert no pressure on CC either, because if they want to advertise on the air, well they have to do it on a CC station for the same reason the public has to listen to it. Their only choice is "Do I want to have my commericals on KRAP101.9 or KRAP106.7."

      You can't even say that people have political recourse because politicians are bought and sold like stock. Political direction is sold to the highest bidder.

      And so the invisible hand is amputated at the shoulder, and the market fails.

    8. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by squarooticus · · Score: 1

      Sure there are alternatives. Not on the radio dial, but elsewhere: CD's, internet, satellite radio. As I said.

      --
      [ home ]
    9. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by ivrcti · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Let me offer a $0.05 business lesson. When enough people who enjoy your kind of music (you didn't mention your preferences) and HAVE PLENTY OF MONEY TO SPEND, then congratulations, your music will be on every other FM station, because the advertisers will be hoping YOU will listen. Until then, BUY the CD's of your favorite artists and definetely go see a concert. Keep them in business. Because in the end, even music is business.

    10. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by geoswan · · Score: 2
      I prefer the British system (and I am biased) where some of the RF spectrum is reserved for public radio (The BBC). This has some varied, and quality stuff. There is also commercial space, with the more homogonized genres. It is probably more workable over here, as we have a comparatively small geographic area.

      Geographic size has nothing to do with. The system here in Canada is similar to what you describe in Britain. cbc.ca

    11. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by Zoop · · Score: 3, Funny

      We have this too: National People's Radio. It's a command system, ruled by the government even though they only have a 10% stake. The only problem is that in order to be alternative there needs to be diversity--and only in large cities is there market enough for public radio stations to do anything than run "Talk of the Nation" all day long, which is just NPR trying to compete with AM radio. So what you have is this:

      The unwashed masses listen to pablum.

      The right-wing masses listen to AM radio and country music stations.

      The monied left-wingers listen to NPR.

      The monied right-wingers listen to NPR and complain about the slant.

      The left-wing masses (college students who wear black and listen to the Cure) listen to College Radio and bitch about how the man is opressing them by playing Meat Beat Manifesto instead of the Cure.

      And guess what? It's been like this for years and CC's ownership has been a marginal change at most.

    12. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by gotih · · Score: 2, Informative

      woo hoo! glad that here in LA the 'left-wing masses' have a few more choices which, fortunately, rarely play The Cure.

      KPFK a pacifica station. they don't take any corporate funding and are completely free from the government (uh, except for the FCC)

      KXLU which is a decent good college radio station

      KILL! (corporate) RADIO well, it's web only but it's a cool project started by the LA Independent Media Center and RE:Generation TV. very 'college radio' style but has some great shows (and they occasionally play the cure)

      KCRW the NPR/PRI station with some good shows (chocolate city!) but mostly i don't like the music. but at least i can agree with the format...

      but that doesn't mean that i won't complain about radio here -- community radio licenses are not available here as they are in some other cities. community radio licenses were to enable underserved communities the ability to broadcast using a 10 to 100 watt transmitter. it was strongly opposed by NPR (of course, it would be a strong alternative)

      and the LA 'hip hop' stations plays only gangsta rap -- there is A LOT of good hip hop and rap out there (well, i like it) that doesn't have anything to do with benzes, ho's, or fo'ties.

      --

      fear is the mind killer
    13. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by FallLine · · Score: 2

      I mostly agree with your analysis (except for the government command part). While I, personally, fall more into the monied right wingers category (even with respect to the apparent bias), I think you underestimate NPR, even "Talk of the Nation." I know what you are talking about to some extent, but I see a fundamental difference between NPR (e.g., Talk of the Nation) and what can be found on AM radio in most cities, enough so that I'll tune into NPR fairly regularly when I'm driving (and only AM for traffic and such). I've yet to see the intelligence, insight, depth, or simple willingness to experiment that I see fairly often on NPR and virtually never on all other options out there (and I say this despite the fact that I often find their to be a slant that is considerably left of where the nation is and where I am particularly)

      As for the general situation with radio, it seems to me that the inadequacy of radio has more to do simple economic realities (e.g., insufficient demand to make the costs worthwhile for commercial interest or public support) and people's preference than with any sort of conspiracy or attitude on the part of broadcasters. Yes, I find radio often lacks the substance or entertainment that I crave. Similarly, I can also claim that I'd like to get a good/fresh sushi in less than 5 minutes, within a 5 minute drive, during the lunch rush for less than 2 dollars. The point is that just because there is a "demand" for something different does not mean that there is an appropriate solution. There seems to be an widely held understanding on slashdot and other forums that radio sucks, but no real solutions are offered and superior alternative examples (e.g., other countries, other times, etc...just romantic ideas) are few and far between. BAH

    14. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by deanc · · Score: 1


      Believe me, the ad executives are!



      No, the ad executives are concerned with the demographics of listeners, particularly those within the 18-34 listening demographic. Programs that can reliably hold onto a portion of this demographic are much more valuable than a program that attracts a huge audience in the 35-54 range. This, of course, defeats the purpose of the "public airwaves"-- they are supposed to be a public resource for people of all interests and age demographics to be catered to, not just a small, economically valuable one.



      This may not be economically viable in the "long term" (and heck, ClearChannel is hemoraging money), but it is what all the ad executives believe while they destroy our radio programming infrastructure, so it is what they chase after. You're committing the classic fallacy of assuming that just because a person has "executive" in a title implies they're pursuing policies that make logical sense.

    15. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by pjp6259 · · Score: 1

      I think even in the U.S. some of the spectrum is reserved for non-profits. That is why you never hear for profit radio stations below 92 MHz on FM.

      --
      Computers don't make mistakes. What they do, they do on purpose.
    16. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      Your claim is that radio airplay represents the music the public wants, because the advertisers would leave if people didn't listen. That claim is based on the unstated premise that it is possible to *tell* how many people are listening to a radio station at a given time. There's no Neilson rating system for radio, or any equivilent. The whole system is based on guesswork, and twisting the cause and effect on its ear - instead of industry execs doing what they falsely believe they are doing - monitoring people's tastes by watching album sales, and then playing those albums, they instead *create* demand for whatever albums they happen to be playing.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    17. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by deanc · · Score: 1

      Instead of complaining, choose one of the alternatives: listen to satellite radio, internet radio, listen to CD's (the real ones, not those phony pseudo-CD's), etc.

      That defeats the purpose of radio. Radio is there so that people of all demographics in the local community can be catered to, not just the 18-34 demographic being sent some tolerable programming for mass consumption for the benefit of national advertisers. Radio is supposed to be there to allow us to have local broadcast programming without being forced to resort to alternatives. It does mean that "someone" is going to be choosing the programming, but it is supposed to be a chooser who is local-- especially since radio is a short-range local medium.

      The question is whether the airwaves are a "community resource" or whether they belong to companies trying to serve up a demographic to advertisers.

      I can use all of these alternatives (at my expense, of course), but that doesn't change the fact that the airwaves were regulated specifically so that they would cater to my community specifically, and not to national advertisers.

    18. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      It's National PUBLIC radio, not "People's". Then again, maybe you knew that and were trying to make a politically ignorant communist reference.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    19. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      Like so many other commenters, you seem to be operating under the impression that it's possible for advertisers to tell how many people are listening to a radio station. No such measure exists.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    20. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by yusing · · Score: 1

      The market is working just fine. The problem is that the majority are willing to listen to the homogeneous crap that CCU broadcasts.

      The majority have their tastes determined by what the machine is programmed to throw up. People want what the commercials have to offer because they don't know what they're missing. It takes time and opportunity to evolve a taste for things that are more challenging. Unless you are fortunate to have musical friends who can guide you, it's easier just to go with the commercial flow. After all, it's pleasant enough -- in a Stepford Wives sort of way.

      --

      "You must try to forget all you have learned. You must begin to dream." -- Sherwood Anderson

    21. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by alizard · · Score: 2
      Quotes from the article:
      The company lost money every quarter last year, piling up an annual loss of $1.1 billion. Clear Channel also is shouldering $8 billion in debt -- the legacy of its deal-a-minute expansion spree. With a long advertising slump afoot, the company's stock is selling at about half its peak price of two years ago.

      The company lost money every quarter last year, piling up an annual loss of $1.1 billion.

      The other day, Clear Channel reported that it lost $16.9 billion during the first three months of 2002, mostly as a result of writing off devalued assets.

      Indeed, radio is changing. Arbitron reports that Americans are listening to it less each year. The ratings service estimates that on average people spend 10 percent less time with it now than in 1996.

      Note that radio broadcasters were one of the sets of corporate interests who wanted to use CARP to shut down Internet radio.

      I'd say that the marketplace is speaking. These statements are storm warnings saying the business model is in deep shit. Their normallosses are $1.1 billion, they're carrying $8+ billion in debt, and they just had a $16 billion writedown?

      Clear Channel probably won't get the message until the banks carrying their line of credit tell them they don't feel like paying.

    22. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by Asterisk · · Score: 1

      Why even bother having music on the radio at all, then? It would be much more economically sensible to simply broadcast advertisements 24/7. Since people's tastes are determined by what's on the radio and not the other way around, they'll surely listen, won't they?

    23. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by yusing · · Score: 1

      simply broadcast advertisements 24/7

      Why don't you try it that way then ... and let me know how it works out.

      If you observe how most people acquire their listening preferences, you'll find that most people are relatively naive about music, and acquire their tastes as a result of accidents ... for example, what their parents and significant others listen to.

      Most people are also lazy (okay, "short of time") and will push the easiest buttons to push (can't program a VCR). They are social creatures, and will tend to listen to what other people they are around most listen to. (Do you know the names of any Asian music stars? Ever had an opportunity?)

      This is all simple observation. From there you can deduce that the radio is the easiest place to find music, etc., etc.

      The idea that commercial radio does *anything* to expand listener's horizons is *so* contraindicated by experience that it isn't even worth entertaining.

      --

      "You must try to forget all you have learned. You must begin to dream." -- Sherwood Anderson

    24. Re:The problem is not a failure of the market by Zoop · · Score: 2

      No, I was making a politically aware comment on the amount of "Freedom" NPR really has. They have their stakeholders and respond to their interests.

  21. return of the payola by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

    I heard last week that radio stations are still being paid for every song they select. The record companies can't pay them outright, but they can have an associate agency pay the radio station to preview 3 new releases and select one to put in heavy rotation, as long as their isnt' a specific quid pro quo

    See MarketPlace (Public radio finance show) for more info.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  22. What about Canada? by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 1

    Sort of off-topic - how does radio work up here in Canada? - I know we have our own big media companies (Shaw, Global) but how involved are they with radio? Do we have Clear Channel here?

    I listen to the classic rock and college radio stations mostly so I never really paid much attention.

    It's kind of wierd how quickly things move - bands I listened to in junior high are on that classic rock station - i'm only 22

    --
    Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
    1. Re:What about Canada? by Pope · · Score: 1

      A friend of mine here in Toronto said it best: the only difference between CFNY (one-time 'alternative' station) and Q107 (psudo 'classic rock') is that Q107 plays Zepplin and CFNY plays Siouxsie.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    2. Re:What about Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im not to sure about canada, but to be honest a lot of band make it big up here because of CanCon. They arent played because of public demand but because of federal demand.

    3. Re:What about Canada? by DarrylM · · Score: 1

      Well, here in Saskatchewan, most of our big stations seem to be owned by one company. While their talk radio station is, IMO, excellent and have much local content, the music stations play the same stuff a lot and I've stopped listening to them.

      There are some bright spots here though. Back in my home town a local ham radio operator set up his own FM station (with full CRTC approval) and apparently he plays a very good variety of music. And in the city I'm living in there is a group setting up an independent, non-profit Christian music station (which is the kind of music I'm into). While the power levels might not be the 100KW that the big stations use, a good antenna high enough off of the ground can do wonders.

      Due to the sparse population, Saskatchewan seems to have a lot of bandwidth available and because the land is so flat it's usually easy to get a tower higher than everything else. I'm not sure about the situation in larger centres, however.

    4. Re:What about Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many years ago CFNY had a promotion with the rule that if you caught them playing the same song twice in one day then you would receive a prize reward (and get entered into the big draw, etc.). It was a commercial radio station but was definitely an innovator.

      Now they bill themselves as 'New Rock' but are really Top 40.

    5. Re:What about Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Almost all of the radio stations in the Maritimes are owned by Maritime Broadcasting System (MBS). When MBS buys a radio station, you KNOW it's going to suck in less than a year. C98 in Saint John, New Brunswick was one of the best radio stations I'd ever heard in the fall of 1998. They didn't push the envelope and play innovative stuff, but you could hear Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, and AC/DC (not just "You Shook Me All Night Long") at 7:00 am. After MBS bought them, they changed to a "Classic Rock" format. It got very repetitive. I'm still haunted from the experience of hearing "Bang a Gong" by T-Rex and "Werewolves in London" five times a day.

      If you're an artist in the Maritimes, don't quit your day job. No matter what genre of music you play. I've only ever heard a local band played on a Maritime radio station once, which is a damn shame, because there are lots of great bands in the Maritimes. And no, I'm not just referring to traditional east coast music. Believe me, CanCon only benefits bands in Toronto and Vancouver, and bands that have already made it on the charts, like Sloan.

    6. Re:What about Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's nothing. The other day, I heard Billy Joel's "Piano Man" and Bob Seger's "Old Time Rock and Roll" on the local OLDIES station.

      That's... wrong. So very wrong.

  23. Bandwidth solves this problem soon? by Andy_R · · Score: 5, Informative

    i think the problem here is one of bandwidth... here in the UK, we have a small number of large indepedent radio networks, as well as regional stations that are currently peddling almost exactly the same type of music as each other, all going for the least offensive (to the average listener) and most bland music 'product' that they can find, in order to maximise advertising revenue - a 'one size fits all' system.

    However, I can't see that this will last for long, as soon as any of the following technolgies reach the average consumer household: Net radio, Stand alone recievers for audio-only channels over satellite, digital radio (we are a long way ahead of the US in this field, I believe, as the BBC have pushed the technology) and increased spectrum avaialbilty due to theproposed switch off of terrestrial analogue TV transmitters (which the UK governement are keen on as they stand to rake a fortune in from selling the bandwidth off).

    When any (or all) of the above technolnogies are mature, then it will be possible to deliver cost-effective radio to much smaller markets (with tightly targetted adverts), so the constant search for the lowest common denominator will no longer be the best way to maximise advertising revenue, providing a wide spectrum of choice will be more cost effective.

    --
    A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
    1. Re:Bandwidth solves this problem soon? by BeenaBerry · · Score: 1
      The local stations are not peddling 'almost' exactly the same type of music in the UK, they are peddling exactly the same type of music. The majority of them are owned by the same company. Folks in London, the North-West of England and a few other big cities don't notice so much because they have proper indies but the rest of us have to put up with this lot.


      They have the same logo, with the words changed, the same jingles and slogans (sometimes with the station name clumsily dubbed over), the same competitions (so you're competing with the whole country, not your area), the same theme weekends, etc, etc. And the same music. A lot of the programming is shared too.


      I wouldn't mind so much, if they didn't pretend to be local stations rather than a national station with local opt-out segments. When people phone in, they carefully avoid giving out their location. When there's OBs, they just say "James and Kerry are out and about 'in the city'" but don't identify which one, so everyone thinks it's theirs.


      I hope digital broadcasting will change this, but I doubt it - these WERE originally local licenses, but Big Radio took over.

    2. Re:Bandwidth solves this problem soon? by jafac · · Score: 2

      It's not the bandwidth of the number of radio channels that's the limiting factor - it's the bandwidth of the promotors. They can only control so many stations. With Web Radio - the promotors will have to controll thousands of stations, and geography doesn't become a factor at all. So obviously, the route to controlling Web Radio isn't with payola/promotors. It's with CARP legislation.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    3. Re:Bandwidth solves this problem soon? by RickyRicardo · · Score: 1

      I think the UK has already responded to this problem by the sheer number of pirate radio stations that operate out of London and elsewhere. The only reason that radio even remains popular over there is because of the pirates putting the cutting edge tracks out there, and the bigger stations (Radio1, Kiss -- which started out as a pirate) just copping their formats. If you look at the present-day UK charts, a good portion of those songs were broke on pirate stations before they broke anywhere.

      -Ricky

  24. If you listen to only punk, you are not affected. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All my life I have only listened to hardcore punk, regular punk, ska-punk, and some pop punk.

    And except for a few bands (pop punk) that got on the radio, all of my music is totally untainted by the big 5 music publishers.

    None of my music is harmed or affected by payola, other than making it harder to find in regular retail outlets.

    If everone found their music the way i find it (and I bought and own about 800 cds and records), then the world would be a better place.

    Many genres are similar to freedom from corporate payola.... there are hundreds of them, punk is one of them.

    The article is written from the perspective of an N*Sync-Britney Spears-S Club7 viewpoint and not a wider view.

  25. era of the corperations by iplayfast · · Score: 2

    There have been many eras. There was the bronze age, iron age, industrial age, and now we have the corporate age.

    Each one of these ages gave more power to a select group of people. The corporate age gives the most power to the fewest people. This is showing up in the government and laws, in the schools, in every work place, and most dangerously how people think. RMS is an extremist only because of the times that we live in.

    1. Re:era of the corperations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USA had another one ... the "GUILDED AGE" ... say 1870-1890. The outcome, actually was not all that bad as unions & a middle-class formed around complex skill-sets. I don't mean to romanticize it - that's just what happened.

    2. Re:era of the corperations by Tardigrade · · Score: 1

      Less concentrated power than in the feudal age.

  26. For a more thorough look at ClearChannel by Tony+Tastey · · Score: 5, Informative

    Check out the extensive coverage they've gotten over at Salon for the past year or so. There's about a dozen articles about various aspects of their business practices.

    http://www.salon.com/ent/clear_channel/
    1. Re:For a more thorough look at ClearChannel by JerC · · Score: 1

      I have one simple question. When you visit that page, why are ALL the articles written by the same journalist? Don't get me wrong; I don't enjoy what CC has done to broadcast radio either. But 12 stories? That's twice the amount of letters in the word GRUDGE.

      --
      Sigs are for squares. Like pants!
    2. Re:For a more thorough look at ClearChannel by Tony+Tastey · · Score: 1

      Heh, you'd prefer fluff pieces? One of the things I really like about Salon in general, and that series in particular, is the fact that they let their writers do a series of stories about a specific topic. It lets you get a much more thorough look at something than you usually get from the major media outlets. They seem to have decided that we the public doesn't care about anything that can't be summed up in a single page.

  27. The Plus Side by withak53 · · Score: 1

    At least Clear Channel is several billion dollars in debt.

  28. More geeks in space!!! by RealisticWeb.com · · Score: 1

    I have had a beef with how radio works ever since clear channel bought the local channel where I live. The numbers were Z103, and the morning show was "the freak show". Very local, very funny. Now they forced them to rename it "the morning Z". Or I like to call it the morning snooze. They used to have an hour long show on Sunday nights where they would play only local music, the garage band that I was in actually got some air time that way, and helped us sell some CD's, but that is all gone now. If you call in to make a request, it had better be on thier pre-approved list, or forget about it. It makes me want to start up my own non-prophit puplic domain station. I would have to have a technology based show. Whouldn't that be cool? Somthing on the lines of geeks in space, but more regular!

    --
    Sigs are out of style, so I'm not going to use one...oh wait..
  29. Which... by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    Which is why webcasting should be a good thing.

    If artists want to be heard they should look into making some of their music available over the web, with its considerably smaller financial requirement (as opposed to owning a radio station or network)

    Just because the RIAA and broadcasters want to hobble internet play of their corporate property or sacred cow, shouldn't limit the ability of grass roots growth of online broadcast and distribution of non-properties. Seems to me the burden of proving ownership of music was placed upon the RIAA in the Napster trials, which should offer some protection for small startups.

    Problem is, though, if it doesn't get a move on then you can expect the legal/regulatory groundwork to be followed up by the same old corporate crap on the web, and protected against competition; i.e. to be a webcaster you must have an engineer, you must have records of all air play, you must have permits, you must blah blah blah, you must leap over very high hurdles cleverly placed by purchased legislation/regulation.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  30. One clearchannel station that plays "good" music. by Hitch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    DC101 in the MD/DC/VA area plays decent music. sure, it's mostly the same corporate jam it down your throat rock that we've all gotten used to, but they've started playing a lot of songs by "Carbon Leaf", an independent band, and they sponsor unsigned local bands for a lot of the shows they put on. Welbilt is a pretty good band that just opened their Chili cookoff. anyway, I guess what I'm saying is that individual stations have more say in their programming that it at first appears.

    --
    You see, without that little doohicky, the universe stops.
    http://propheteer.org
  31. Yet another reason... by cmay666 · · Score: 1

    Add this article to the long list of why internet radio is FAR superior to broadcast/FM. And don't think payola is a thing of the past. MANY artists' songs see the light of day because of modified payola, which still amounts to labels indirectly paying stations (i.e. ClearChannel) for exposure. Example: Limp Bizkit. I'm also surprised there was no mention of ClearChannel's bullying tactics in getting artists to "agree" to play SFX (i.e. ClearChannel) sponsored tours, or else face the prospect of getting blacklisted from ClearChannel airplay.

    Good NPR story on ClearChannel and its practices:
    http://www.wnyc.org/onthemedia/transcr ipts_040602_ clear.html

  32. Caption competition by Salsaman · · Score: 2
    What we need is a caption competition for the pic in the article.

    My suggestion:

    "You better play what we say or you'll get this baseball bat up your a** !!"

    1. Re:Caption competition by Misch · · Score: 2

      How about "All your stations are belong to us"?

      --

      --You will rephrase your request for me to go to hell. Goto statements are not acceptable programming constructs
    2. Re:Caption competition by Xaoswolf · · Score: 1
      "Every time I try to get it, that B flies away...

      But now that I got my wonder bat..."

  33. WCBE columbus oh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then we have examples or where good ecletic stations like WCBE are be driven into the ground by politicing. For those who don't know WCBE is owned by the Columbus Board of Eduction and is the only NRP FM affiliate in Columbus. The School board used to provide about 250k of funding every year and the rest was gotten through twice yearly fund drives and sponserships. Guess what, the board cancelled this springs fund drive. Pretty soon at least one local market will be left with one local alternative station (WWCD who wants WCBE's antenna site really bad) and one classical station.

  34. Anybody ever think about.. by Sc00ter · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Okay. I've already seen some posts about college radio. Now, college radio has the benifit of not having to make much (if any) money to stick around. Unlike commercial radio stations.

    That being said, some of you might find the college radio station better to listen to becuase you get to hear different stuff, things that you don't get to hear on mainstream radio. Now, did you ever seem to think that the reason that it's not on mainstream radio is because mainstream people think that the music sucks?

    Commercial radio is there to make money, so they need to play what MOST people want to hear, not what you want to here. I like techno, most places don't play techno, why? becuase mainstream people don't like techno, in fact some people hate it (my brother included).

    To say that college radio or internet radio is better then commercial radio is silly. Just becuase you don't like it doesn't rule out the fact that somebody must like it, because it's still around, and it's doing well. I've also found that there's some people (an ex-coworker comes to mind) that listens to non-mainstream stuff just becuase it's non-mainstream. I found it to be shit and could see why it wasn't played on the radio. This just goes to show, different people have different tastes, and just because you don't like Britney doesn't rule out the fact that a lot of people do.

    1. Re:Anybody ever think about.. by djwavelength · · Score: 1

      But because the same big company is trying to control all the stations it can, and because there is a finite amount of stations in an area, you are forced to listen to something. There isn't the choice to listen to a techno station, or a punk station, or anything that isn't mainstream. That is the problem with the system, not that people don't like something others do.

    2. Re:Anybody ever think about.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your basic premise is 100% correct. The crap on college radio, electronica, etc. does indeed suck. That's why it is relegated to college radio.

      However, the dateless oddball wing of the slashdot crowd happens to be correct that commercial radio sucks as well. But it is a trend that began long before Clear Channel came into existence. CC is simply the straw man bacause they are successful (gee, like bashing the successful has never happened here before!).

    3. Re:Anybody ever think about.. by Sc00ter · · Score: 2

      Some people have pointed out Clear Channel, they own quite a few stations in my area.. You know what, they don't all play the same thing. That arguement doesn't really work.

    4. Re:Anybody ever think about.. by Storm+Damage · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, they're pretty careful about their stations competing against each other. Those several stations, however, are almost assuredly guaranteed to play the same thing that their several stations play in all the other markets they're in.

      Without knowing what city you're in, I'm betting they have a modern hard rock station (Staind, Disturbed, Kid Rock, Korn, Godsmack), a "Good Times, Great Oldies" station, playing "hits from the 70s, 80s and 90s", a Classic Rock station which for some reason mixes in quite a bit of 80s hair metal (Bon Jovi, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, Styx, Van Halen...and 50-50 says they have a "Two-fer Tuesdays program), A top-40 station that caters to the teenybopper crowd (Britney, N-Sync, O-Town, Enrique, etc), a "No-repeat workday" light-rock mix-it up station for the office-crowd (They might even spice things up with an all 80s lunch or something), and/or a "Talk-Radio" with call-in shows hosted by a crowd of conversers who hash and re-hash the same 30 minutes of subject matter over and over their 3-hour show segments.

      And like it says in the article, almost all their stations probably air 16-20 minutes of commercials per hour during peak times.

    5. Re:Anybody ever think about.. by Skip666Kent · · Score: 2

      Now, did you ever seem to think that the reason that it's not on mainstream radio is because mainstream people think that the music sucks? As much as your question may provoke an irate response from some, I see it as perfectly valid. I still, however, have to disagree in large part. Primarily, my question is 'How can people think that a piece of music sucks if they have never heard it?'. Now there are a lot of possible answers to that on both sides of the fence that I won't bother going into, but I think it points to the main problem and difference between the commercial radio of today and the commercial radio of yesterday, and that is, simply, that pop Radio DJ's no longer serve any purpose beyond spewing out a bit of inane Howard Stern wannabe banter and fart-jokes between songs and commercial blocks. They have no influence on play lists or pushing new songs beyond commenting on what they are fed from above. They exist soley to give a semblance of humanity to what has long since become an in-human medium. Pop Music Radio is no longer interesting or in any way exploratory or unpredictable. Even the 'outrageous' gags and stunts that dj's pull in a vain and pathetic attempt to say "Really! We're here for a reason!" are woefully predictable in their utter void of depth, thought or creativity. Try listening to the auditory vomit that we get from WBCN in Boston on your drive home and you'll hear what I mean. This is a station that had a long history of being progressive and controversial in some very enlightened ways back in the 70's and early 80's. Then they abandoned that to suckle the fetid teat of Classic Rock, fired anyone and everyone with an ounce of originality and replaced them with mindless small town blue-collar flunkies from the Conneticut School of Broadcasting. Oh well. I almost had a point there somewhere!

      --
      **>>BELCH
    6. Re:Anybody ever think about.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought about it, too. Your opinion, like mine, is worth just that: It's an opinion, but I have to disagree with you.
      For every song that is "safe" to air, means that it is only a very small subset of the available material that's been recorded by a wider variety of artists. By appealing to the broadest possible market, a song is appealing to the most common taste possible. That means there's no innovation, no exploration of new musical ideas or much thought that goes into it.

      Following that logic, you're endorsing market control of a given sector by one or two producers. Do you want every movie you see put out by George Lucas? Every book you read to be written by Stephen King? Every meal you eat to be from McDonald's? Probably not.

      My favorite male vocal artist right now is a guy named Tito Paris. Bet you never heard of him, right? That's because ClearChannel would never have him on one of their play lists. He's from Cape Verde and has a truly amazing voice.

      The point here is that there is a much bigger world out there than what corporate, English-speaking America would have you believe. It's all about your money, son! It's all about getting you to pony up the cash for Britney Spears soda can insulators and N'Sync beach towels.

      Fortunately, I am an independent thinker and I'm much happier for it.

  35. Public Service is nice. by eddy · · Score: 2

    I live in Sweden. We have several Public Service TV and Radio stations. The biggest radio station is Programme 3, P3.

    P3 play a lot of top-20 stuff, but fortunately smaller interests are seen to. One favourite is P3 Live, which airs four days a week -- a new band/artist every day. Very good and broad selection of music, and excellent live quality

    Look around the playlists. There's everthing from Slitknot, Bob Hund, In Flames and lot's of lot's of bands you've never heard of and would never ever hear on a commercial station.

    Tonight is Kittie, and Entombed is coming up soon. Very nice.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:Public Service is nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slipknot never heard in a commercial FM station?
      Dont make me laugh...

    2. Re:Public Service is nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They must really do their research if they're playing Kittie. They're a Canadian band, and they'r e not that well known here in Canada.

    3. Re:Public Service is nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is Prime STH from Sweden ? I caught them on HBO's Reverb show and was quite impressed (bought the CD). Per the topic at hand, you don't hear any of their songs on the radio around here (western NY), just that shitty rap/metal/rock combo crap that you can't even listen to with the kids in the car because it gives everyone a headache.

    4. Re:Public Service is nice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHA I went to high school with kittie!

  36. Open Source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will they make this music Open Source? We have to retain control over the music, especially when we have an enormous pool of hardened developers contributing to the Open Source movement.

    How can we ever hope to wrest away control from RealMedia and MS if we don't stand united?

  37. Re:radio sucks by skribe · · Score: 2

    Try listening to TripleJ. Brought to you by the tax payers of Australia.

    --
    Blog
  38. Music and art. by Byteme · · Score: 1

    The music industry today is going to do the same thing to music as what Hollywood has done to film. Now the only creative force in the 'industry' is profit. Thank god for college radio and indie labels...

    I don't work in the business, my college radio DJ and garage band days are over - but if I was a successful artist in music I would give back. Scout for talent - help them self produce their work, let them be in full control of the creative process and maintain full ownership of their creations... and also be vocal about the ills of the industry while doing so.

    With the FCC recent opening of regulations to low power stations I see no reason why small local non-profit stations might emerge. I live in a small town (30,000) which happens to be nearby over six colleges and universities (all with college radio stations) in western Massachusetts (student population might exceed 80,000). We have over a dozen record stores, possibly 50-100 local bands and many music related support (engineers, critics... etc). If there was a local public owned station it could be staffed 24hrs. And this is not a major market which does have two local Clear Channel stations...

    Now that I have been thinking, it is time to get to work on this!

  39. Raido Sucks? So what? by Drath · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So what? I haven't listened to music on the radio since high school. Why? Well I can decide what I want to listen to for myself. If you can't investigate new music on your own then the radio telling you what to like shouldn't be a concern of yours.

    Checkout some independent or smaller labels. Labels like Matador Records, Prawn Song, Fat Wreck, and may others. It's a shame that labels like Grand Royal were forced out of business for not force-feeding the status quo. Read Nude As The News for non mainstream album reviews.

    Find a band you Like and check out their influences. This is a good way to find new stuff to listen to. Like Led Zeppelin? Listen to Muddy Waters. Like Trey Solo? Listen to Count Basie, Sun Ra, or Little Feet. Like Primus? Listen To Rush. Ect.

    GO SEE LIVE MUSIC! If you live near a large city there are tons of show to go see, there are some good websites dedicated to finding shows in your area. Check out Jambase for example.

    Trade Live Music! There are several communities for the trading of live tapes, a large number of bands ok the taping of their shows and the thousands of tapes are out there for free. One Such community Etree is a great example of this.

    Listen to College radio if you live near one!

    Don't complain about the lack of variety on the radio, just don't listen to it.

    1. Re:Raido Sucks? So what? by SanLouBlues · · Score: 2

      Excellent, I can avoid boredom with money! Money for XM or money for albums or money for live music (which I can't listen to at work). My radio cost me $15 and college student that I am, I'm not spending more than that. It's too bad only the weenies here at GMU get the dj gigs. I'd do it, but I need a well paying job because I need more . . . money!

    2. Re:Raido Sucks? So what? by Drath · · Score: 2

      Actually one of the stipulations that recording friendly bands make is that people cannot sell the recordings so the most you should ever pay is the cost of a blank cd and a stamp. That $15 you paid for your radio could have been 10 Radiohead Shows. (Or one copy of Phish 12/31/99 ha.)

    3. Re:Raido Sucks? So what? by deanc · · Score: 1

      I haven't listened to music on the radio since high school. Why? Well I can decide what I want to listen to for myself.

      Actually, the reason why you haven't listened to music on the radio, lately, is probably because you don't drive very much. Those who spend an hour a day in their cars do listen to the radio-- either to get news or to otherwise keep themselves entertained. And when you are stuck in a car and can't stand the fact that the radio has too many ads and few songs you want to listen to, then it really, really gets you upset! Yeah, I hardly listened to the radio much, either-- but then I started dating someone who lives 25 miles away. Suddenly, I was stuck dealing with the local radio situation. And it stinks.

    4. Re:Raido Sucks? So what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, I drive a lot and it's all CDs and tapes. DJs and ads drove me off radio a decade ago and I have never been happier about listening to music in the car.

    5. Re:Raido Sucks? So what? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
      So is it your solution then to go out and buy music randomly, since you can't tell what you're getting ahead of time, and hope that the occasional hit makes the money you spent on the misses worth it? I tried that once. Not again. I wasted too damn much money on albums that were complete garbage. The problem with buying only from the playlists of big radio stations is that you don't hear the good music that company execs just don't "get". But The problem with buying from indie labels is that while some good bands are on indie labels because the big names screw them over, most are on indie labels because they just aren't any good.

      There's some good stuff on indie labels, but the majority of it is crap (somewhat like big corporate labels, I guess.) How do I sift the crap from the good stuff *before* I waste money on it?

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    6. Re:Raido Sucks? So what? by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      A few points:

      1. Most people, for any given type of culture, dont have the time to actually research new artists or culture. This is analagous to why people who research music all the time dont have time to research clothes. Or why fashion experts dont have time to research movies. Or why movie buffs dont have time to research the best lawn-mower companies when they buy lawnmowers. I mean, thats what we're all here for - some people research A, B and C, and we get together at the end of the day to recommend stuff to each other. That's what radio used to be, and to a large extent, one of the promises made by Adam Smith - that by commericalizing these efforts and skills, we'd end up helping each other out, and thusly becoming wealthier in the process.

      Well, radio was and should still be one of the best hot mediums for discovering new music; it's location independant, its free (minus the time you spend listening to ads), its economically accessible, and most importantly of all, its somebody else doing the driving. So to say, stop listening to the radio and adapt to a completely new (for many people) way of finding information (its still funny how many people just assume having a computer is as ubiquitous as having a radio), rather than relying on public, community based sources from people who have the ability to spend their every waking hour hunting for good music to play to you, is not much of a solution at all. The whole point is, if I love music, and discover all these great new bands, it would seem to me I should be *able* to start up a radio station and help my fellow peers by giving them access to my love of music.

      You're essentially saying, to people who listened to radio (typically people without the time or desire to do their own discovery), well, tough shit, find your own stuff. Where's the love in that? Where's the cop-operation? The social synergy? The efficiency?

      2. > the radio telling you what to like shouldn't be a concern of yours.

      Well, it wouldn't be if there was more new music, or greater diversity, or better selection. This much is obvious when you talk to people who listen to the few-and-far-between good radio content available out there (usually college radio, although I'm sure thats a last bastion that will be gone once corperations have time the time to drop another carrot down in one of the last relatively uncorperate cultures available). However, its fairly easy to figure out that people *dont* see themselves getting this from radio as much as they used to, as evidenced by lower listenership, and the popularity of the penultimate anti-mass-market kitchphrase, "I dont listen to the radio, it sucks." The ultimate, being, of course, "I dont watch TV, it sucks." BTW.

      This, "What do you expect, youre the only person you can rely on," attitude that seems to be one of the more popular solutions to corperate subversion of community and culture is only going to drive us apart furthur and ensure that the only people who seek to serve the broader interests of people are only doing so in order to turn mad profit lines and to keep dishing out that cultural crack that is pop music.

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    7. Re:Raido Sucks? So what? by StarFace · · Score: 1

      I pretty much only purchase lesser known releases, and very rarely do I make a purchase that I regret. I use various tools to find out whether it will be good stuff or not. Mp3s are a great resource, and I end up purchasing much of what I download. The stuff I do not purchase, I don't like, and it gets deleted. Web zines that focus on indie artists are good to check in to. Even using main stream tools such as AMG can find you a lot of interesting stuff that makes a relative safe purchase. Streaming net broadcasts, forums ... there are plenty of ways to keep your finger on the pulse of the unknown, without spending a dime, or even lifting yourself out of the chair.

      I'll admit, I enjoy "the hunt" more than the average person. It is my hobby, so I dedicate more time to it than most people would probably be willing to donate. So yes there is a price, but it is far from impossible, and certainly doesn't require wanton random purchases.

      --
      V
    8. Re:Raido Sucks? So what? by g00z · · Score: 1

      Well, now I can't spend any mod points on this article because I'm forced to post. :)

      I'd like to point out that Matador is owned by a major label (Sony Music I think).. They stopped being indie a long time ago.

      Viable alternatives to the type of stuff Matador is crankiing out:

      Check out:

      Touch and Go
      Drag City
      Quarter Stick
      Minty Fresh
      Southern
      Jade Tree
      K Records
      Kill Rock Stars
      Merge

      A bunch of others are way good too.. But those are the labels that are on the top of my list. They all have got fantastic stuff that should suit anybody's tastes. And oh yah, their music is a million times better than this shit that's being cranked out by the major labels.

      For instance, some musical recomedations:

      Pop:
      Papas Fritas
      Komeda

      Loud Good Old Rock n' Roll:
      Shellac
      Oxes
      Dianogah
      Mogwai
      Slint
      Uze da

      Songwritter type stuff:
      Smog
      Neutral Milk Hotel
      Edith Frost

      I better stop.. this list could become quite long.

      --
      "The Wright brothers were the first to fly with a heavier-than-air machine, but boy did they have a lousy plane"
  40. Captain Internet Saves The Day! by Hell+O'World · · Score: 2
    Wait! I'll save you! Da-Da-Daaa! With my amazing Network-O-Power, I can connect you directly to millions of radio stations and mp3 files! The evil forces of Dr. Money are no match for my Connect Ray!!! What? Dr. Money has a new weapon!! He's buying the politicians!! Isn't that illegal?

    Dr Money: At last, I have you under my power, Captain Internet! My minion forces of bad laws will keep your kind down... FOREVER!!! BwaHaHaHaHA!!!

    Will Dr. Money squeeze the life out of the fearless Captain? Will Captain Internet make the world safe for good music again? Tune in next week for anothe exciting episode of...

    CAPTAIN INTERNET OF THE CYBERPATROL!!

  41. Re:If you listen to only punk, you are not affecte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad that you are a stupid, festering pile of shit and so is your "music".

    If you were standing in front of you I'd grab you by the pink spiked hair on your head and rip all of your piercings out.

  42. Strange U.S. station names by Salsaman · · Score: 2
    What's with all the weird station names you have in the US anyway ? They all seem to be odd four letter things starting with K or W. Is there any logic behind it ?

    1. Re:Strange U.S. station names by 512k · · Score: 1

      yeah, all radio stations here, are required to have a unique 4 letter name to identify themselves, if the station is east of the mississippi (the eastern 1/2 of the country)it starts with a "W" if it's to the west, it starts with a a "K". They can pick the other 3 letters themselves.

      --
      ------ Work is so much easier when you don't
    2. Re:Strange U.S. station names by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

      Unless you live in Philadelphia where you have KYW...go figure. I think one of the radio stations in Pittsburgh has the same discrepancy.

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    3. Re:Strange U.S. station names by Servo5678 · · Score: 2
      What's with all the weird station names you have in the US anyway ? They all seem to be odd four letter things starting with K or W. Is there any logic behind it ?

      From what I hear, stations that start with a W are east of the Mississippi River, while stations that start with a K are west of it. As for the other 3 letters, typically they are made up. For example, WBSH in the Illinois/Missouri area is in the Wabash Valley (sound out the station letters). Sometimes they make sense, sometimes they're just arbitrary.

    4. Re:Strange U.S. station names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      ...odd four letter things starting with K or W.

      Yup. The FCC strikes again. W is for stations east of the Mississippie, K is for stations west of it.

    5. Re:Strange U.S. station names by Hell+O'World · · Score: 2

      K is for the stations that use the KDE desktop and W is for those that use the Wnome.

    6. Re:Strange U.S. station names by Buran · · Score: 2

      And for those who live on the Mississippi, the stations have both prefixes. It's not unheard of in such towns and cities to be surrounded by K--- stations with the occasional W--- thrown in for good measure, or vice versa.

      They are called "call letters" and they're how the station is identified, much like a ham's call sign (which is two letters, a number, and three more letters.)

      A station is required to announce its call letters on the air once in a given interval, if not more often, though I don't know what that interval is. I've heard DJs cut into ads or weather forecasts, etc. to say "The FCC says we only have 15 seconds more to announce our call letters, so here they are --" and cut right back into programming. Quite amusing.

    7. Re:Strange U.S. station names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are their call signs. Each country get a block of alpha prefixes for call signs.

      In the UK you would have "G" (Great Britain, get it?). Germany is "D", MeXico is "X", etc. The US has W, K, and N.

      In Europe, most stations are likely publicly owned, so they don't bother with the call sign. In the US, the call sign is assigned as part of the licensing process.

      For historical reasons, you see "W" east of the Mississippi, and "K" west of it. "N" is not used for broadcast stations for some reason, though industrial and special purpose stations have "N" call signs (e.g. radio hams)

    8. Re:Strange U.S. station names by dwheeler · · Score: 3, Informative

      For more info on U.S. call letters, see http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/statid.html. If you loathe what's available on radio now, start your own station. The FCC Media burea has some information on how to do that, see http://www.fcc.gov/mb. Yes, that's nontrivial.

      --
      - David A. Wheeler (see my Secure Programming HOWTO)
    9. Re:Strange U.S. station names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ITU, the international governing body for radio, sets out the rules for call signs in each country. Although everyone is familiar with American calls that start with W and K, few people outside amateur radio know that the US is also assigned the starting letters N and A...which spells WANK...I've always suspected there was a Brit behind this assignment...Oh, and while the East/West of the Mississippi thing is mostly true, there are plenty of exceptions - eg, in Dallas/Fort Worth, WRR, WFAA, WBAP.

    10. Re:Strange U.S. station names by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      much like a ham's call sign (which is two letters, a number, and three more letters.)

      X#XX (1X2), or X#XXX (1X3) also. Depends on the level of your license, and whether you applied for a new callsign when you upgraded. There are some 1X1s for special event callsigns too.

      Ham always starts with a W, K, N, A, in the US.

      Radio all over the world uses callsigns, and follow pretty much the same conventions, they are all regulated by the ITU which is international.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    11. Re:Strange U.S. station names by 9633 · · Score: 1

      us is w,k,n and aa-al.

    12. Re:Strange U.S. station names by ncc74656 · · Score: 2
      I think one of the radio stations in Pittsburgh has the same discrepancy.

      That, IIRC, would be KDKA.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    13. Re:Strange U.S. station names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > That, IIRC, would be KDKA.

      The very first commercial radio station.

    14. Re:Strange U.S. station names by jafac · · Score: 2

      Obviously KOME in LA is made-up. Sex sells. Or so I hear.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    15. Re:Strange U.S. station names by Jason_Knx · · Score: 1

      That one has a K because it happens to be one of the very first stations to get designations. I'm not entirely sure when the W started in eastern stations.

  43. Re: Marx by ke6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Capitalism does tend towards monopoly. But the monopolistic trend is countered by some things Marx never considered. Inventers, developers, people who just think outside the business box, they then provide more competition. Of course, the Monopolies will try to eat them up, but they can and do fail at that, and get washed up and forgotten.

    While Communism, that's the Monopoly of the state, with no chance for competition, after all the State KNOWS what you need and want. Even if it's true for the majority, the Tyranny of the Majority is not something to be desired either.

    So Monopoly, from Communism or Capitalism is bad. But at least with Capitalism, we have a chance against it.

    Bill

  44. This is a good thing by boristdog · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's this kind of situation that leads to a change in music. That's how we got punk rock in the first place. There won't be a rebellion until there is something to rebel against.

  45. Re:raido sucks and advertisers are stoooopid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Advertisers run like hell from the 54+ crowd, especially the female segment. Why? I dunno. They're the ones with the disposable income, the best tastes, and are actually influenced by what they hear.

    The 18 to 54 crowd has bills, prespent income (credit card debt), college tuition, and they're minds are already made up, don't care what they hear.

    So, I make my money by targetting nonprofit appeals to the geezer crowd. The best bucks per appeal doesn't happen until you start mailing to the 60+ widows. And AARP perennially does real well, too. And you know their crowd.

    So, again, why don't advertisers like the 60+ crowd, helluva lot of money to be made there.

  46. Hark! Yon Radioplay Doth Sucketh Verily! by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    Acually, it's a pretty good thing that much of it sucks, otherwise I'd probably hear more music I like and spend a ton more money buying it.

    I sure as h311 ain't buying any Britney Spears.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Hark! Yon Radioplay Doth Sucketh Verily! by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just like George Lucas and the other vendors of schlock film don't have to worry about the millions of over-30 people who don't watch 40 movies a year, the Warners and Sonys and such don't really care about the millions of over-20's who only buy a handful of albums each year, and get a lot more bang for their buck by peddling one mega-star whose every bit of merchandise kids will eat up. The savvy mature music listener isn't enough of an economic force to displace the Brittney Spears and boy-bands from the center stage, or from the radio.

  47. CD101 -- Columbus, Ohio by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

    I know this will come off sounding like a shameless plug for a radio station, but the folks at CD101 in Columbus really have it right. They are one of the only non-corporatized radio stations in the city, and have won the local "Columbus Magazine" award for best radio station for the past 10 years or so.

    They also broadcast over the Internet, sponsor special things for the community, such as Comfest and the Andyman-a-thon in December (one of the DJ's goes on-air for 48 straight hours and plays great music and auctions off some pretty cool gear throughout the 2 day period with all proceeds going to charity), and bring in great bands from all over the nation and the world in fact in order to keep non-standard music on the horizon.

    Worth a good listen if you have the chance.

    --
    Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    1. Re:CD101 -- Columbus, Ohio by Skidge · · Score: 2

      CD101 was the one thing I missed when I moved from Columbus to Cleveland. Cleveland radio, with the exeption of a few hi-or-miss college stations (most notably WRUW 91.1FM out to Case Western Reserve University), is a mess of corporate top 40 garbage. It's a good thing my car has a CD player.

      Every once in a while I fire up the CD101 webcast to see what I'm missing.

    2. Re:CD101 -- Columbus, Ohio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they wouldn't keep trying to "buy" WCBE's antenna site for a song I'd probably listen to them more. So, I just lump them in with the other commerical format stations.

    3. Re:CD101 -- Columbus, Ohio by Syllepsis · · Score: 2

      I know this will come off sounding like a shameless plug for a radio station, but the folks at CD101 [cd101.com] in Columbus really have it right. They are one of the only non-corporatized radio stations in the city, and have won the local "Columbus Magazine" award for best radio station for the past 10 years or so.

      Yea, a bit south of you down here in Oxford, OH we have WOXY 97X which is a killer indie station.

      Too bad I am more of an electronic listener than indie rock, but they do play a bunch of stuff I like.

      Does the Andyman-a-thon have anything to do with Andyman's Treehouse? I am moving to Grandview in two months and trying to feel out the scene.

  48. college radio shreds Re:corporate radio sucks by johnpaul191 · · Score: 2, Informative

    the only commercial radio i listen to is talk radio, otherwise it's college radio. though i will admit i am biased because i work at one. having been involved with an urban (philly) college, non-commercial station now for about 10 years i can see how dedicated people are to the station.
    we, WKDU 91.7fm play pretty much "music not heard on other stations". we are the only free format, student run station left in Philadelphia. our programming cover punk/hardcore, indie, reggae, techno/hjouse/trace and whatever else. one thing about our programming... we do not follow the generic college block programming for styles of music. basically every 3 hours the DJ changes and most all of the time it's not the same style of music. a program guide (online or in print form) is helpful, but most people don't seem to care. they still listen most all of the time. i guess being the last Philly student run station and the only one without programming (DJ picks 100% of their own music) makes us pretty much the only broadcast option for many people.
    We have been webcasting for a few years now (and hopefully will be able to in the future if those damn fees don't kill us) and have seen a pretty good online response. though we are not always on 24 hours a day, we do not shut down for holidays or summer (Drexel U runs full year... 3 months quarters). our webcast listeners are a mix of people in the local area, and around the world. i guess the bonus we have over other internet radio stations is a bigger budget than many with cool musical tastes, a lot of DJs and a record/cd collection we have been building up since 1968. i'm all for people starting their own webcasting stations, but there are some things bedroom run stations can't do as easily (live bands, DJ marathons, buy a lot of rad hardware)

    the coolest thing about webcasting is the ability for a station like ours to reach everywhere. there are a lot of decent little stations out there, but unless you live in the right area (area often being small due to low power transmitters), you miss out.

    corporate radio will always suck, but thanks to the internet we all have more options.

  49. Article Summary by rnturn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    To save folks the time, here's a quick summary of the article: middle-aged manager of a group of radio stations tells us all how hard it is to make ends meet in today's radio marketplace.

    Hint: Skip to the last 2-3 paragraphs and find the real point of the article. You'll be glad you did.

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    1. Re:Article Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you wonder: Are revenue targets and expense controls and mainstream formats all there is? Wasn't radio more . . . fun back when he was starting out?

      Well, he concedes, there's more pressure now, and the business has certainly changed. But he quickly brightens. "Yes, it's different," he says. "But I tell people who say that to get over it. It's going to change again. Change is good! Change is the future! It's not supposed to be the way it was. C'mon, get over it!"

      Indeed, radio is changing. Arbitron reports that Americans are listening to it less each year. The ratings service estimates that on average people spend 10 percent less time with it now than in 1996.

      That, of course, was the year Congress deregulated radio and unleashed companies like Clear Channel. Maybe the decline in listening since then is just a coincidence.

    2. Re:Article Summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And here's a quick summary of the Slashdot responses: geeky adolescent males whine about how the radio won't play techno or industrial, genres that appeal almost exclusively to geeky adolescent males.

    3. Re:Article Summary by rnturn · · Score: 2

      Nice generalization. Not that I wouldn't mind hearing a little techno or industrial now and again, I'd also like to hear a little classical, country, bluegrass, jazz, etc. I can remember some radios stations that used to play a much wider variety of music than they'd dare today. In fact, for about thirty years, there was a station in Chicago that would play all of the genres that I listed above. Until, that is, they were bought out by the company in mentioned in the article. Now if I dare to tune that station in I might have to listen to a one hour special about the trials and tribulations of Sheryl Crow's rise to fame.

      Just why the hell does each genre need its own radio station? These mega-media companies insult everyone's intelligence and change the station formats according to their brain-dead survey results that tell them what ``everyone's'' supposed to prefer. Message to media moguls: We like variety! Instead, you're giving us a steady stream of songs that all basically sound the same by artists who look basically the same. Don't think too hard about why we're not tuning in like we used to.

      Geez...

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  50. Killer Artists & the Internet Top 40 by PurpleHigh · · Score: 1

    On getting "non-corporate sanctioned music" to be heard:

    I still think the Internet has the ability to completely obliterate the power that Clear Channel, the RIAA, and their ilk have on widely-heard music. Maybe it is like the 'Killer App' problem: in the same sense that the killer app still eludes us (if it wasn't Napster), the killer Internet artist does too. It's going to take a Net-born artist or perhaps a handful of artists, brought together as a package, to really give people a reason to pay attention to Internet music.

    I think it's a visibility problem. I'm sure there are artists out there who I would really enjoy...but it takes such an effort to find them. What I'd like is something like an Internet Top 40: a professionally programmed, DJ'ed, sleek production presenting new and independent artists that I can listen to while I program/cook/take a shower. The situation right now, where everything is so fragmented, doesn't lend itself well to taking on the power of the traditional media conglomerates.

    1. Re:Killer Artists & the Internet Top 40 by djwavelength · · Score: 1

      The killer app for internet radio is the device that lets you tune into a net station from your car.

  51. playing an instrument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the human voice is an instrument. i see britney singing all the time (OMG she is the light of my life) and so she is a musician. things like electric guitars and casio keyboards are instruments so I don't see whats wrong with equipment"

  52. Punk Music by totallygeek · · Score: 2
    It is interesting that now some independent labels for punk bands are selling 100,000 copies per disc. Look at labels like Fat Wreck Chords, Dischord, Alternative Tentacles and Epitaph. Bands like NOFX and Right Turn Clyde are really selling tons of "albums". Sometimes corporate backing isn't needed, heck NOFX loathes it to the point were they sued MTV for playing a cut of one of their releases in South America.

    1. Re:Punk Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes corporate backing isn't needed, heck NOFX loathes it to the point were they sued MTV for playing a cut of one of their releases in South America.

      So, they sued MTV... how quaint.

      "Look we're suing them on principle, not on the fact that doing so will net us a lot of money so that we can be rich and our fans won't accuse us of 'selling out' just because we become popular to the majority of America."

    2. Re:Punk Music by shuffle40 · · Score: 1

      So, they sued MTV... how quaint.

      "Look we're suing them on principle, not on the fact that doing so will net us a lot of money so that we can be rich and our fans won't accuse us of 'selling out' just because we become popular to the majority of America."


      Welp, it's a fact that you can't make all people happy all of the time. If you did some research and understood the subject matter, you would know the history of the band and you would know they just don't give a f**k about selling out. They sold out tons of shows before they took legal action against MTV, and they will continue to do so after.

      I think suing on the principle that they used their own money to record, manufacturer, market, and distribute their works and some corporate giant comes along and decides it's okay to broadcast such works without permission is a pretty damned goot premise. I mean, if they wanted that sort of exposure they wouldn't have gone through the process of doing it 'their way'.

      I'm probably wasting keystrokes, preaching to the deaf...

    3. Re:Punk Music by totallygeek · · Score: 2
      In speaking with Fat Mike on this they did not recover more than a $10,000 penalty above attorney's fees for this. MTV claims more than that per minute, and they aired over 45 seconds of NOFX...so, show me how that is selling out or getting rich.

  53. Overgeneralization by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2, Insightful

    outside of college radio stations, there's nothing left worth listening to, and this tells you why.

    Nonsense. You might mean "only college stations play the kind of music I like," which certainly doesn't mean that other stations suck. Or you might mean that many commercial stations have short, safe playlists. But then there are stations that don't fit that mold.

    This is just like the overgeneralization that commercial music sucks, when you'll find instead that all of the music played on college stations is, in fact, commercial. The myth among anti-media geeks is that CDs from Britney Spears and Mariah Carey are put out by Evil Money Grubbing Corporations, while music from Chemical Brothers and Radiohead is put out by Independent Freedom Loving Hippies. When, in fact, there's no difference.

    1. Re:Overgeneralization by junklight · · Score: 2, Insightful


      The myth among anti-media geeks is that CDs from Britney Spears and Mariah Carey are put out by Evil Money Grubbing Corporations, while music from Chemical Brothers and Radiohead is put out by Independent Freedom Loving Hippies.

      Why would freedom loving hippies put out commercial music like the chemmical brothers or radiohead??

      This in fact goes right against your argument - what YOU think of as underground music is actually REALLY mainstream...

      mark

    2. Re:Overgeneralization by proj_2501 · · Score: 2

      There are still independent labels out there.

      For example, Underground Resistance is owned by no one. They distribute through Submerge, who is also owned by no one.

      They're pretty good at the anti-corporate propaganda thing too.

    3. Re:Overgeneralization by Gambit253 · · Score: 1

      While the music itself may be commercial, I think the point made was that radio stations that are in it for money suck in general. Most college stations are funded by the university itself and therefore don't need to get money from the labels in exchange for playing certain songs. There is great music out there that doesn't get heard on the radio because the labels won't allow it to be played.

    4. Re:Overgeneralization by SN74S181 · · Score: 1

      Labels like those are vigorously anti-popular. If they got popular ('commercial') they'd make sure they changed something about their product to get back 'on track.'

      There's always an 'underground culture.' Hell, I bought into that kind of fun when I was younger too.

      It doesn't matter to anybody who isn't playing around in that little world.

    5. Re:Overgeneralization by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2

      This in fact goes right against your argument - what YOU think of as underground music is actually REALLY mainstream...

      I don't think that at all. You misread my post.

    6. Re:Overgeneralization by Computer! · · Score: 2

      music from Chemical Brothers and Radiohead is put out by Independent Freedom Loving Hippies. When, in fact, there's no difference.

      Real anti-media geeks know there's no difference. You must be thinking of Sparta, Pushbutton Objects, or Cornelius, sucka. Radiohead is corporate, and so are the Chemical Brothers. Not that I dislike their music, but comparing them to Brittney Spears or Mariah is like comparing apples to apples.

      --
      If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
    7. Re:Overgeneralization by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2

      Not that I dislike their music, but comparing them to Brittney Spears or Mariah is like comparing apples to apples.

      And that would be why I said "when, in fact, there's no difference" :P

    8. Re:Overgeneralization by Computer! · · Score: 2

      What I meant was, that goes without saying.

      --
      If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
    9. Re:Overgeneralization by reverius · · Score: 1

      Offhand, I can think of another one... Fugazi.

      I seem to remember more artists w/ their own independent labels, but can't remember who they are right now...

  54. the payola hearings of the 60's were a scam by spoot · · Score: 3, Informative

    All that the payola laws and hearings of the 60's did was take the power of music influence from the individual (disc jockey) and put them in the hands of the corporations. The large radio corporations of the day (rko, gannet, etc...) saw that the control of their content was being usurped to the talent of their stations. The DJ was the all important business and creative liaison at the stations. Record labels did anything to get to the talent, including bribes and perks. All the payola hearings and laws did (brought about from the investigation of the Miami DJ convention) was remove the personality from the equations. Enter the more influential role of the program and music director of stations in the late 60's and 70's. The only real exception would be the "progressive" radio essentially invented by Tom Donahue in SF. Payola was seen as a threat to the radio corporations of the day, God forbid that an indiviual (ie: dj) could have that much control over their (the corporations) widget. So a public spectacle was made. And the dj was villified as a wolf, while the real wolfs were in fact the corporations afraid of loosing control of their publicly liscenced product... that was supposed to be in "the public interest."

    Today in the corporate mentality of the radio world, the individual, the station DJ or the program/music director has any real say as to the music being played on the station. All edicts are essentially made by the corporate programming heads. Everything from play lists, national contesting and yes... even talent. Most talent is run on an automation system (usually prophet) that essentially has destroyed the job market for radio talent and stifled any creativity and the talent pool, stagnating radio to where it is in the present day. Radio listenership is down in the last few years. There just not much compelling. As my daughter puts it, "radio sucks." Hopefully something will happed to shake it up soon, so some rebel out there can get back to creating something compelling again on the radio dial.

    1. Re:the payola hearings of the 60's were a scam by GMFTatsujin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have to say at this point that DJ's do nothing but get my dander up anymore.

      I'm only 28, so this is before my time, but it seems like the days of the Golden Age of Radio Music (50's and 60's) focussed as much on the music that the DJ played by choice as they did on the personality of the DJ. Nowadays, DJs are handed lists of scheduled tunes to spit out, leaving them completely removed from the decision-making process.

      What's the upshot? You can't listen to what the DJ likes to listen to anymore. There's no musical connection to them for the audience to resonate with. Particular DJs don't have particular styles anymore. There's no recognition of individual DJs and styles, no loyalty, and no sense that (*here's the important bit*) the DJ is sharing music with you that he or she thinks is really worth listening to.

      (Whoops -- there's that "sharing music" idea again.)

      DJs are therefore distinguished by their chatter between songs. Which is not music. I turn on the radio to listen to music or news, not chatter. Hence, I hate DJs. They're cookie-cutter gibbering monkeys to me, failed stand-up comedians who couldn't muster enough journalistic skills to become bona fide reporters.

      I listen to my local university-driven NPR affiliate, and that's all. That station has a vast library of out-of-the-way music from every conceivable genre, and the DJs get to pick and chose what they'd like to play. Sometime I hate what they chose. Other times, I'm pleasantly surprised.

      Imay not know their names, but I know their styles. I love that.

      GMFTatsujin

    2. Re:the payola hearings of the 60's were a scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no recognition of individual DJs and styles, no loyalty, and no sense that (*here's the important bit*) the DJ is sharing music with you that he or she thinks is really worth listening to.

      Right on. But the old DJ style you mention is still alive and well in people who go out and spin records for audiences and call themselves ... DJ's! Of course you have to be willing to part with the rock paradigm and get into the beat/electronic paradigm that's replacing it, driven by some of the most creative people in music today.

      Radio is dead. Real music is back in the basements and garages and then steps out on the street where it always belonged, and on which the radio has always fed. The digital culture emerging now will, before much longer, displace the dinosaurs. Time to listen before you later regret missing it.

  55. Listen to Independant Radio by Royster · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    College stations, public radio stations, off-beat formats abound on the low end of the FM spectrum. You often get commercial-free stations and an eclectic mix of music.

    Here in NYC, I listen to WFUV (Fordham University) and WNYC (public radio). When I'm out on Long Island, I listen to WUSB (SUNY Stony Brook) and Connecticut public radio.

    Cultivate your ear.

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
  56. ...or is your argument backwards? by Interrobang · · Score: 3

    Er, could it be that people like what they hear because they only hear what they're given to hear, and not the other way around (that they hear only what they like)? If people actually were exposed to a wide variety of music on the radio, they might suddenly discover that they like other music, besides manufactured factory-farmed "bands" like Britney et al.

    Perhaps an example: the Insane Clown Posse, who, although (yes) they're on a major label, have so far managed to sell multiplatinum on several albums with NO commercial airplay whatsoever. On the other hand, I'd say they're the exception that proves (in either sense) the rule.

    In any case, a pithy thentiment from the Dead Kennedys keeps playing through my head:

    Could it be they put out one too many...lousy records?

    Who do we tell to get off the air NOW?

  57. Slashdot Radio by hirofxp · · Score: 1

    Slashdot has a huge reader base, and if they were to set up a station of their own, maybe even just rebroadcasting college radio shows from across the world, they'd be making a huge difference in the way people listen to music on the internet.

  58. Re:If you listen to only punk, you are not affecte by dr_dank · · Score: 1

    And except for a few bands (pop punk) that got on the radio, all of my music is totally untainted by the big 5 music publishers.

    Not quite. With some notable exceptions (i.e. - Vagrant Records, Victory, etc) many of the small labels (Spitfire, Artemis, Thrill Jockey) have dupe and distribution deals with subsidiaries of the big 5.

    Many genres are similar to freedom from corporate payola.... there are hundreds of them, punk is one of them.

    As Loud Rock Director of a college radio station, I was in constant contact with the indies (The independent promoters that are the arbiters of payola these days) who would give me guest list access to shows and other goodies for charting and adding albums to the library and playlist. Its not nearly as pervasive as commercial promotion, but thats the way many are promoted.

    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
  59. support good radio by paradesign · · Score: 1
    support NPR (National Public Radio)
    101.9WDET in the Detroit area. its the only radi i listen to other than the morning shock jocks, Drew and Mike rule, Biiitch! 101.1WRIF, and the drive home fm talk guys Deminski and Doyle 97.1WKRK?

    hey wait, that means i only listen to non music original content on the radio, wow, what a strange thing. Misic radio sucks almost as bad as Music Television MTV.

    --
    I want 2D games back.
    1. Re:support good radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I listen to the exact same shows in morning and afternoon drive.

      A few months back, Drew & Mike were talking about the Gene Simmons interview on NPR, and they made a tounge-in-cheek comment about how they share so many listeners with NPR. (Drew and Mike are polar opposites of the typical NPR radio hosts). Then they lamented NPR 'dumming down' their listeners.

      They're a local Detroit morning show, but its a shame that they're not in syndication. 10x funnier and much more interesting than the typical Howard Stern, Mad Cow, etc. shock-jocks.

  60. Audiogalaxy for yourself by colmore · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK Tired of radio and MTV? Me too! Who the heck decided that bad Eddie Vedder impressions would be popular this year?

    Here's some bands worth checking out: (reply and post your own)

    Neutral Milk Hotel
    The Microphones
    The Shins
    The Dismemberment Plan
    Need New Body
    The Mountain Goats
    Boards of Canada
    ... and You Will Know Us by the Trail of Dead
    Sparklehorse
    Belle & Sebastian
    Brighteyes
    Matmos
    The Hot Snakes
    The White Stripes (yeah, they've got a video, but they rock harder than anything since Zepplin)

    music has always been comercial and pandering to trends, but in the past five years or so it has gotten *much* worse. There has not been a single innovative band to make it to the popular stage, music hasn't seen anything like this since the dark ages of the late 50s/early 60s. Think about it, what was the last novelty hit? What was the last song that got popular just because some DJ thought it was amusing? It's been quite a while. The early 90s saw innovative acts like Nirvana, Beck, and Liz Phair getting tons of airplay, and now we just have 1001 Pearl Jam/Creed rip-off acts. I won't comment on the R&B teen pop, that's obviously commercial fluff, and it wouldn't bother me if there were good things elsewhere. When we had the New Kids on the Block, we also had U2 and REM. Rap is, thankfully, still going strong, it probably has a good 10 or 15 years of life left in it.

    Rock and Roll is approaching death. It will soon be as dead as Jazz. It will still be made. There will still be people doing amazing and creative things with it. But it's period of cultural relevancy is nearing the end.

    Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the Strokes/White Stripes garage/blues punk thing will take off. That would be cool.

    --
    In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    1. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by wafath · · Score: 1
      Mary Prankster

      They rock. She rocks. A baltimore band. Check them out.

      (oh... I like The Dismemberment Plan too. Not what you would think from their name.)

      W

    2. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The White Stripes (yeah, they've got a video, but they rock harder than anything since Zepplin)"

      Odd, they sound EXACTLY like the Sex Pistols to me. First time I heard them I thought "This one isn't on Never Mind The Bullocks!?"

      Meaning no originality at all. Only someone too young to know the original would be impressed with them (I'm the same age as Johnny Rotten, BTW).

    3. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by colmore · · Score: 2

      Oh I know the Pistols, don't get me wrong. But the Pistols weren't that innovative really. Listen to early Stooges and Ramones and other New York 70s punk scenemakers, the sex pistols are really just a strange imitation of it. The Clash and Wire are my fave British 1st and 2nd wave punks.

      The White Stripes are pretty derivative, but they draw from a lot of sources. There's definitely a punk sound, but if you listen to their albums (especially their first album) you *have* to hear Zepplin I & II in there. But there's also a good amount of Stones, Big Star, and general blues-rock in there as well. I'm impressed by their ability to keep so much of rock intact even when stripping it down to the barest essentials (just a drum and guitar, occasional keyboard)

      See 'em live, they're fun.

      --
      In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    4. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by DickPhallus · · Score: 2

      Some others worth trying, a few different 'genres' if you will too:

      Godspeed you Black Emporer!
      Einsturzende Neubauten
      Aube
      Shotmaker
      Leftfield
      Hayden
      Fan tomas

      I second the white stripes...

      The soundtrack to Pi is cool too.

      --

      --
      Some weasel took the cork out of my lunch.
    5. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by suss · · Score: 2

      Think about it, what was the last novelty hit?

      Take your pick:

      Lou Bega - Mambo #5
      Los Del Rio - Macarena
      Baz Luhrmann - Everybody's Free (To Wear Sunscreen)
      Modjo - Lady

      What was the last song that got popular just because some DJ thought it was amusing?

      Cornershop - Brimful of Asha
      Spiller - Groovejet

      Ohwell, i guess music in Europe isn't as dead as in the US...

    6. Re: Audiogalaxy for yourself by vslashg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The White Stripes (yeah, they've got a video, but they rock harder than anything since Zepplin)

      <sarcasm>Which is *really* surprising, because the rule is if a group has a video, they suck.</sarcasm>

      The fact that you're apologizing for a group having a video is a pretty clear indication that you might not like mainstream music precisely because it is mainstream. Yes, quite a lot of mainstream music sucks. But quite a lot of indie music sucks, too. There's also good music both on and off major labels. We should judge music by what it sounds like, not where it comes from.

      It's the same phenomenon that makes some long-time fans of a band get pissed off when the band makes it big. I've never understood it. If White Stripes makes it big, next year we'll be reading a post on Slashdot from another user complaining that the radio only plays mainstream crap like White Stripes and never plays any of his favorite bands.

    7. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by tobes · · Score: 1

      C-Average
      The Fucking Champs (aka C4AM95)
      Aesop Rock
      Dr. Octagon
      Folk Implosion
      And...I'll second The Dismemberment Plan

    8. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cavestar
      Love Spirals Downwards
      Assemblage 23
      VNV Nation
      Cranes
      Sol Invictus

    9. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by jafac · · Score: 2

      Don't you mean Wir? :) (Where Is Robert?)

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    10. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by gotih · · Score: 1

      i don't know about all of those, actually i don't recognize all of them but weren't most of those songs released in like 96-98? like, before clear channel was the force it is now?

      --

      fear is the mind killer
    11. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know if they play these guys in your towns everyone, but they never have in mine (Columbus, OH). My current fav's:

      Boy Hits Car
      Nonpoint
      Econoline Crush (I've heard one song on the radio, but not their best one IMHO)
      Spineshank

      All loud, angst-ridden metal, but usually with a bit of twist to their sound. Boy Hits Car especially has this 'Egyptian' sound to it.

    12. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by HappyCycling · · Score: 1

      /* Here's some bands worth checking out: (reply and post your own) Neutral Milk Hotel The Microphones The Shins The Dismemberment Plan Need New Body The Mountain Goats Boards of Canada ... and You Will Know Us by the Trail of Dead Sparklehorse Belle & Sebastian Brighteyes Matmos The Hot Snakes The White Stripes *\ Hipster.

    13. Re: Audiogalaxy for yourself by colmore · · Score: 2

      No, that's not what I'm saying. And it's not what I think.

      The point of my post was to reccomend a bunch of bands that don't get airplay. Because I've also been listening to the white stripes so much lately, I went a bit off topic and reccomended them.

      Popular bands I have known and loved:

      Pearl Jam
      Nirvana
      Beck
      Bjork
      The Strokes
      REM
      The Butthole Surfers
      The Eels
      The Chemical Brothers
      Radiohead
      etc. etc. etc.

      The White Stripes but me in a bit of a conundrum though. Hey're a ripoff. But they ripoff things that people haven't ripped off in quite a while. If the radio were filled with Stripes clones, it would be irritating. But by themselves, they're refreshingly different.

      --
      In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    14. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes, and if you're really interested in finding out my daily 'discoveries', go to my blog: caveman_blog.

    15. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by colmore · · Score: 2

      I (heart) Godspeed you Black Emperor. Disk 1 of Raise Your Skinny Fists... is in my CD player right now.

      --
      In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    16. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by SmittyTheBold · · Score: 2

      Rasputina
      Over the Rhine
      Kenna
      Ani DiFranco
      Jimmy Eat World
      Joy Electric
      John Mayer
      Placebo
      Portishead
      The Bran Flakes
      Wolfsheim
      Tortoise

      Some are more mainstream than others, and this is a VERY eclectic mix...just because one doesn't suit your fancy, don't discount the others.

      --
      ± 29 dB
    17. Re:Audiogalaxy for yourself by ces · · Score: 1


      Aqua - Barbie Girl

      It was a fairly cool song and major bonus points for Mattel's clueless lawsuit.

      --
      Happy Fun Ball is for external use only.
  61. Death of a giant by intermodal · · Score: 1

    the thing is, the radio industry and the record industry both work on outmoded business models. More and more people get sick of the same crap being played all the time and the same lack of variety and originality being played over and over again every day. As much as I hate to admit that the Internet changes all the rules, it does. 20 years ago, how do you get a band from San Francisco exposure in Frankfurt, Germany and Ontario? Either you sent a friend there a record, or you got in a van and went there. Now you put it on the internet and if you can find a way to get people to listen, you may spread via word of mouth. The difference is that eventually the concept that success in music equals fame and fortune needs to die, not be shored up by government law and evil legislation like the DMCA and it's ilk. The fact is, Radio's days are waning, and one can only hope that from the ashes (if people wise up and make CC and such die) will rise small college-like stations in their place that actually listen to what the people want...

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
  62. Filling a need by wirefarm · · Score: 2

    Radio is crap - we all know that.
    So what do we do? We download. We seek out old and different things to hear - sometimes it's an old Tom Waits song, or perhaps something from "Grease" that was playing the summer you first fell in love in junior high school - maybe it's something new from Moby that you have no idea if you really like or not. I would guess, though, that if they really took a look at what people were downloading, filtered out the 14-20 year olds, they could find a really half-decent radio playlist in the works.
    OK, but then, you have the obvious 'segments' of the market - you find twenty people downloading old Gold Band cajun recordings and 300 downloading 1967 SanFran psychedelica - no need to lump them together, just create two streams and inject your advertising every fifth song or so.
    If I were a record label, I would *welcome* people downloading old stuff from my catalog that I didn't happen to be pushing at the time - you get one person donloading an old song, he's just a sick - but imagine you get fifty people (fifty people!) a day downloading an old song. "And friends they may think it's a movement..." (Or at least a meme...) (Sorry, Arlo.)

    Using one of the p2p apps, did you ever use the option to "See what else this guy has"? I mean, if I find someone who has a great old Django tune that I've never heard, I want to see what else he's got laying around. Often times, I see a song in their list that I may have on CD but haven't popped in for a while - guess what? I'll probably pop it in and give it a listen.
    There is a tremendous amount of information on listening habits out there that is not being used.
    Imagine a programmable radio station wher you could select the type of music you want to hear based upon what people download - imagine it in some form of pseudo-sql:
    Select (*.mp3 > 160Kbps) from alldownloads where user has downloaded "Gavin Bryars" and "Portishead", exclude $porn, exclude $top40...

    Bad example, but it could be a lot of fun...

    Once I found a guy using giFT (FastTrack) who had such an incredibly good selection (and a kickass connection) that I wrote a shell script to check his new downloads everyday - his kind of unbiased good taste is something is something that I would *pay* for. (Though I would never pay for a *corporate* selection in a million years..)

    OK - it's late here and I've had too much wine...
    Cheers,
    Jim in Tokyo

    --
    -- My Weblog.
  63. Thank goodness for college radio stations. by dpbsmith · · Score: 2

    Universities played an extremely important role in the start of radio, as they did in the Internet. Like the Internet, radio originally began as a noncommercial domain, but commercial interests persuaded Congress to change that. As a sop to the universities, they reserved some quantities of spectrum for "educational" broadcasting in the FM band at the low end of the spectrum.

    These days it's very rare for my FM tuner to show a reading higher than my body temperature...

  64. Who did Britney blow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...to get a record contract?

  65. don't blame marx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the excesses of the Soviet Union or China, or for that matter Cambodia, the Shining Path rebels, etc. Marx's analyses of history, and the trends of economic theory are still powerful and insightful. The development of the proletariat state he predicted is not something, in his real theoretical work, that came about as the result to revolutionary activity on the part of political groups. And definitely not in a manner like those followed by the notable communist movements of the 20th century.

    Some will argue, pointing to the communist manifesto as proof; it's a small work, and short on the generally thourough, historically grounded work that is characteristic of Marx. Most Marx, as anyone who has merely perused Kapital will tell you, is anything but polemnical.

    Also, as a side note, people frequently say that the events of the 20th century discredit the viability of the worker state that Marx predicted. Bear in mind that no communist state of the 20th century was close to what Marx expected; all were pre-industrial societies (Russia, barely out of the middle ages, and now just entering the 20th century). Some have called the information age a sucessor to the industrial which completely subverts the work of Marx. I think it fits in well, actually. Eventually, the worker will rise up and make communial the ownership of intellectual property.

    1. Re:don't blame marx by neocon · · Score: 1

      Yes, yes, no doubt you're better, smarter, and more moral than all the people who made the same argument in the twentieth century. And no doubt, if we just give you the reins of power, it will be different this time than all the other times, no really, you promise...

      You'll have to forgive us if we don't feel like taking that chance...

  66. its a good point.. but.. by BOFslime · · Score: 0

    I don't agree fully.. Just because alot of people like something doesn't make it good. Take n'sync... Most musicians will say the're music sucks, but Millions of teen girls SCREEM when they hear/see anything having to do with them. go over to another example. Smokeing, Billions do it, but its not a good thing.

    (ah.. i can already hear the flamer [ha! pun!]..) "you can't say that.. smokeing is addicting!"

    yes it is.. but they're are smokes that know smokeing is bad.. don't want to do it.. but still do. I'm not counting that.. i'm talking hardcore smokers that like to do it.. and don't want to quit.
    Just becuase alot of people like something doesn't mean its good.. i may make lots of money (cough.. somkeing cough).. but its still bad.

    so its perfectly fine to say that college/internet radio is better to listen to.

    -brian

    1. Re:its a good point.. but.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the point he's making is "just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's bad".

  67. CC uses predatory concert promotion practices... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    From a recent Bill Moyers report:

    ClearChannel refuses to play up-and-coming bands that won't sign up for their concert promotion and booking services. (They won't do this to Britney or n'suck just yet).

    Concert promoters bid a certain amount to 'get' a show, then book the venue, promote it, sell tickets, etc. CrapChannel overbids the fair market value (what the other promoters can expect to bid) by as much as 50%, some say in an effort to 'dry out' the local promoters and drive them out of business. This means that you, the consumer, get to pay 50% more for the ticket to the show! Ever wonder why it costs $50 to see a decent mainstream show?

  68. Re: "college" radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " This "industrial" crap you speak of is about as musical as a pair of fighting cats in a garbage can.
    Get off your high podium jackass. You do not hold the moral high-ground here"


    Wow, can we say cognitive dissonance?

  69. Mudhens by dfenstrate · · Score: 2

    The Mudhens. My favorite band lately. kind of folk-rock-latin-alternative stuff. give it a shot, you'll probably like it.

    They're not really like anyone else out there, so I can't give an analogy. Or maybe I'm no good at analogizing bands.

    Either way, check them out.

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  70. Who Cares by EvictedHellCitizen · · Score: 1

    Give the people what they want. Personally, I do not listen to radio. I'm a little surprised that their method works--since many different generes of music appear on the Billboard charts, resulting in a mishmosh of music that does little to satisfy one's desire for good music. For example, if I hear an old Floyd song, it sets me on a Floyd journey. Maybe throw in some old Stones, Doors, something that fits that's not necessarily as mainstream as what I just heard.

  71. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your post was the ONLY accurate post for the entire story!

  72. Look out corporate america, here comes my pirate r by hirofxp · · Score: 1
  73. Another alternative: satellite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    While it isn't going to satisfy everyone, XM Radio and Sirius are a reasonable alternative with over 100 commercial-free channels of pretty much every genre you can think of.

    I'm thinking of buying a reciever so I can hear bluegrass on the radio more often than the once a week it gets played on one of the local public stations.

  74. This is why they will die. by mesozoic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm convinced that the Internet is what will lead to the demise of the recording industry and the broadcast industry.

    As it is today, radio and record sales are the two main ways for an artist to become popular, sell out their shows, and make money. However, there is a high barrier to entry; the recording and broadcast industries want to profit, and so they only support music that will make them money--regardless of quality.

    But the Internet allows all artists to be heard, by all people, with no strings attached but the size of your pipeline. Since artists never get paid for record sales to begin with, it hardly matters whether their music gets copied online--so long as it's good, they'll still sell out their concerts.

    Ten to twenty years from now, the recording industry will be a crumbling colossus. People will get sick of being force-fed their music, of having to pick between identical blonde models with equally bad style, of seeing the same old stuff on the charts every week. By then, the Internet will have become powerful enough that any artist who wants to be heard, will be.

    1. Re:This is why they will die. by CompKid · · Score: 1

      "so long as it's good, they'll still sell out their concerts."

      Ah, but look who owns/controls the concert venues!

      Make something happen yourself- sponsor a band through FairTunes.com. Sponsor a studio at somewhereoutwest.com. Don't expect that market forces will provide for everyone worth providing for. Art ain't like groceries...

    2. Re:This is why they will die. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      People will get sick of being force-fed their music, of having to pick between identical blonde models with equally bad style, of seeing the same old stuff on the charts every week.

      You underestimate the bad taste of the American Public.

      :/

    3. Re:This is why they will die. by jafac · · Score: 2

      It's just what I said when I first used the web back in 1994. "This is going to change EVERYTHING".

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  75. I want my own call-letters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KUNT and KLIT

  76. There's a Vegas like station for this guy on XM. by Kajota · · Score: 1

    There's a station on XM satellite radio just for this guy. It's called Frank's place and it plays all that Frank Sinatra type music. It would be funny if the man in charge of the Clear Channel stations in DC was listening to satellite radio because he couldn't hear what he wanted on FM.

  77. Neutral Milk Hotel is awesome by mrscorpio · · Score: 1

    God, Neutral Milk Hotel is so good! If anyone is looking where to start with that band, I suggest "Naomi", "Holland 1945", "Oh, Comely", "Two-Headed Boy", and "Two-Headed Boy Pt. 2". And then buy the "In the Aeroplane Over the Sea" album and listen from front to back, it's awesome.

    Chris

    1. Re:Neutral Milk Hotel is awesome by colmore · · Score: 2

      Sadly I only heard of them in 1999, so I never got to see them live (and I live in Athens! Graaa!) though I have had the pleasure of meeting and talking with Jeff once or twice. He's an interesting fellow.

      Fortunately last year I saw the Circulatory System, and Mr. Mangum sang on 4 of the songs. His voice is so... bizarrely amazing.

      --
      In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
  78. bite the hand....don't listen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Radio is a sound salvation
    Radio is cleaning up the nation
    They say you better listen to the voice of reason
    But they don't give you any choice
    'cause they think that it's treason.
    So you had better do as you are told.
    You better listen to the radio.

    I wanna bite the hand that feeds me.
    I wanna bite that hand so badly.
    I want to make them wish they'd never seen me.

  79. Oh Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you know nothing of the recording and music industry? The ONLY music(?) played on commercial stations is PAID FOR! People are dying for good music. You want proof? The number one grammy winner was the soundtrack for "Oh Brother, where art thou?" The music was NEVER played on the radio, yet the CD sold millions. People heard the music when they saw the film. Just think what would happen if good music was played on the radio?

  80. My bands... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iron Maiden
    Iced Earth
    After Forever
    Ayreon
    Blind Guardian
    Nightwish
    Blue Oyster Cult (Still going strong!!)
    Tristania
    Rhapsody

    1. Re:My bands... by jonnythan · · Score: 2

      Fuckin A. I dunno who you are, but you have exquisite taste (meaning, of course, they match my own). I first discovered Ayreon on Napster when I found an mp3 of Bruce singing with them...

      Anyway, good stuff.

    2. Re:My bands... by roamer · · Score: 1

      It is good to know that I am not the only one into Power/Progressive metal. You get too used to listening to really good stuff, and you really come to expect more from music. I am going to go see Blind Guardian, Edguy, Gamma Ray, and Angra this fall in Atlanta (as well as 6 other bands I really don't care for).

      --
      I don't respect your opinions, but I respect your right to hold them
    3. Re:My bands... by Qrlx · · Score: 1

      You should check out Kyuss. They rocked. The "Blues for the Red Sun" album is my favorite.

  81. Ha! Buy your own show! by rkent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you wanted your own daily radio show, Clear Channel would sell you the time for about $1,200 an hour.

    Wow! That's really sad and kind of cool at the same time. It shows that a lot of their stuff really is basically extended commercial time, but it's also a chance for something else to slip in the lineup.

    Think about it. For about $300 grand (yes I KNOW that's a lot), pretty much anyone could have his own show for an hour a day on weekdays, all year long. Now they probably wouldn't let you do anything "subversive" like rant on about corporate radio sucking, BUT: why not get a coalition of several dozen smaller labels together to get a show?

    Clearchannel stations are by nature large-market ones, and if you picked a slot at like 3 or 4 pm, you would get kids after school and it would be before the "rush hour" slot that's so valuable. Say 50 labels chipped in, they could each get at least a couple songs on per week, and take some time to promote local shows, websites, band interviews, and all that.

    And since the labels themselves are putting together the shows, rights shouldn't be an issue. I'm sure I'm missing a dozen reasons why this wouldn't work, but it SOUNDS so neat... *sigh*

  82. Re: "college" radio by meadowsp · · Score: 1

    Well thank god you're here to show the un-enlightened sheep the way.

    Oooo, look at me, I'm so cool, I know the best(tm) sort of music to listen to, and obviously my tastes are the best.

  83. Re: Marx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Capitalism does tend towards monopoly. But the monopolistic trend is countered by some things Marx never considered. Inventers, developers, people who just think outside the business box, they then provide more competition. Of course, the Monopolies will try to eat them up, but they can and do fail at that, and get washed up and forgotten.

    Exactly. That's why destructive megacorps like Microsoft and AOL-Time-Warner don't exist in our capitalist society here in the USA.

  84. Yeah, whatever. by tswinzig · · Score: 2

    This is what capitalism does, people - it tends to monopoly, and restricts human development.

    Yes, let's look back at the golden age of Communist Radio! Where popular music is replaced by government propaganda.

    And if you tell me that a true communist country has yet to be seen, I will barf.

    Yeah, so the small radio stations sold to the big guys, and clear channel has a monopoly. If they abuse the monopoly, the could be facing trouble down the road.

    In the meantime, our CAPITALIST markets helped create this thing called the Internet, and it is already being used to compete against the radio stations. (Socialist MP3 traders notwithstanding.)

    --

    "And like that ... he's gone."
    1. Re:Yeah, whatever. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
      And if you tell me that a true communist country has yet to be seen, I will barf.
      A true communist country has yet to be seen. Here, let me get you a bucket.

      And communism isn't the opposite of capitalism, so don't assume that anyone opposed to one is in favor of the other. Socialism is the opposite of capitalism, and there have been examples of that type of country, and they all sucked - for the same reason that unregulated capitalism sucks - any sufficiently gigantic organisation is no longer beholden to the people that made it big. That's true regardless of whether that organisation is one for the purpose of making money or one for the purpose of controlling a country. Both types have the same problem.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  85. People Still Have The Power by asukaikari · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Radios play what people want to hear. When people don't want to hear it anymore, it will be gone. I don't blame big corporations for the songs on the radio (there are better things to blame them for, pick your battles) - its the people who make and break bands. And personally, I find the songs on the radio these days more listenable than ever before. Evidently all my radio stations are owned by the same people now, but I've hardly even noticed.

    Everyone noted there are alternatives. I've even had a hard time finding mainstream music on the internet. It's all like indie and experimental. Then of course there is mp3 sharing as well.

    But if you want the songs on the radio to change - go do something about it. Support your favorite bands - go to their shows and give their cds to people. If you want new music go to clubs and find it. Look at Linkin Park, I heard of this band forever ago before they had a record out. People had seen them and everyone in Orange County was talking about them. And I was also pretty suprised to hear the Strokes on the radio, they're a pretty indie sounding band. But there was techno before its short radio boom and it lives on after in smaller circles. Someone talked about punk, which also had a radio hayday (circa early epitaph) but in general has been able to survive as its own thing. And a lot of punk bands and a ton of punk fans don't want them to be on the radio. The radio is dependant upon what vocal people and their money like. Whether the radio station is owned by mom and pop or a corporation, if they want to survive, that's what they'll play. Point being, from the audience standpoint, it doesn't matter who owns it. and eventually Vegas Radio will get played when the corporation realizes they've saturated the market with too many of the same sounding stations. And they'll realize it eventually.

  86. Re:One clearchannel station that plays "good" musi by Hallow · · Score: 2

    Carbon Leaf is a band from Richmond, VA. (where I happen to live). They have an mp3.com page too. They're a good recorded band, and an incredible live band, sort of a rock/country/bluegrass mix with increasingly heavy Celtic influences (their version of Mary Mac kicks arse!). The also won the American Music Award's New Music Award this past January, and the CMJ Music Marathon.

    There's actually several decent live bands in Richmond, and I for one would rather pay for a live show than a CD. You wanna piss off the RIAA? Support local, unsigned bands. Spend your money on concert tickets (where most artists make their real $$) rather than CD's.

  87. Can't hear the new Elvis on CC? You can here! by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 1

    97x - WOXY

    WOXY out of Oxford OH is a commercial station but they don't have a huge range but they DO webcast in a comparatively beefy 48k Stream.

    These guys really are the future of Rock and Roll (It's their trademark). Here's the new music added this week.
    the catheters : endless avenues
    radio 4 : certain tragedy
    prodigy : baby's got a temper
    You see their whole playlist here. They're spinning the new Elvis Costello, Doves, Bad Religion. I got turned onto Irish band Ash and Swedish band Kent listening to these guys and I believe they are still the only stations in the country playing them.

    Plus their 48K stream gets past the government firewall I am behind.

    Ah musical serendipity!

  88. Re: Marx by RevAaron · · Score: 2

    Communism isn't neccesarily monopoly of the state. There is such a thing as stateless communism, and it happens to be the 'government' which all humanity used for thousands and thousands of years. Still do in some places, those groups we've not assimilated or murdered. Yet.

    Tyranny of the Majority is not something to be desired either.

    Lucky us, we've got both in the US! Tyranny of the majority in our political matters, and monopolies in your economic matters! Yea!

    --

    Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  89. Directory of college stations? by Buran · · Score: 2

    Is there a directory of college radio stations and their freqencies online anywhere? I live near a major well-known (though private) university and I'd like to see if they've a student-run station I can listen to to see if I have a reason to ever tune my car's radio away from the local NPR station.

    1. Re:Directory of college stations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      www.100000watts.com. Plug in your locale and start by looking below 93 MHz. Simple.

  90. Good music will be heard. See Fugazi by GusherJizmac · · Score: 3, Interesting
    "I now understand how hard it is for any non-corporate sanctioned music to become widely heard."

    If something is truely "good", or at least something that would be popular to sufficient people to sustain the band, it will be heard. Look at Fugazi. They are a D.C. area neo-punk band that does not have merchandise, is not on a major label, and does not make videos. The receive little to no radio airplay outside college stations, and are completely self-sustaining. They continue to charge only $5 admission to their shows and their CDs (I believe) are $10 post-paid from their record label (which they own and operate).

    If you want to do it, and you are talented enough, you do not need major labels or commercial radio.

    --
    http://www.naildrivin5.com/davec
  91. Stop playing the same song over and over and .... by purpledinoz · · Score: 1

    The problem with radio now is that they take a good song, and play it as often as possible until people are utterly sick of that song, and then never play it again. WTF is up with that? This is another reason why MP3s are so popular. People can listen to whatever they want, as often as they want. Not the same song 10 times a day.

    Eventually people will stop listening and the free market will take care of the rest.

  92. BZ won't listen to his own radio stations! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Zier can imagine the whole scene -- the deejays, the jingles, the ironic retro-swinger patter. It's his music, the kind he plays in his car." I love this. This jerk can't stand the crap played on the stations he owns. If he won't listen to it, why does he think I will? Come on BZ, play some Diana Krall or Danny Gatton or Bill Kirchen or something people want to hear....

  93. Clear Channel can be smart...... by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

    In Columbus, OH Clear Channel rules the airwaves. The have also don it in a smart way. Our main local AM station is talk/news all of the time and what I listen to the most. Then there's WNCI home to the Morning Zoo. They have a GREAT morning show that makes me laugh every morning. Thank god they consistently are on top of the Arbitron ratings. That show has local flavor (always plays Buckeye tunes and have Buckeye bits during football season, and whenever an OSU team is doing well), is fun as hell to listen to becuase they just have some of the most off the wall crap. They even have a band called the Zootsuits that sing parody tunes. Very good. Now after they go off, well, let's jsut say the music sucks alot.....too much Britney Spears and 'Nsync type stuff. Occasionally they play something good. After the morning, it's back to 610. Of course they have some syndicated stuff during the day....Rush, Glenn Beck (replacing the ICKY Dr. Laura) and the afternoon dirve tim eyou have local guys John Corby, after him you have the show with no name (Sterling), and then late night Steve "Boom Boom" Cannon. After Cannon goes off you have Art Bell for you X-files folks and in the am you have local radio god Bob Connors. All in all they are nice to listen to and they have the Hineygate parties during every home buckeye game. The weekend seems to be adding a bit more of the automated crap, but they still have a local gardening show and a couple of local hosts. Clear Channel has left the top rated stations alone here in Columbus. That's a good thing!

    --

    Gorkman

  94. Nature of the mass market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    But you also have to understand that those stations wouldn't be popular if the music wasn't popular

    Given a choice between music that a thousand people really like, or music that a hundred thousand people tolerate, a mass-market broadcaster is better off picking the mass-tolerable music. Everybody has their own set of music they would rather listen to, but given the nature of the medium we all end up listening to the same crap. And when we hear it over and over, after a while we get used to it.

    Replace FM radio with wireless networking, customized feeds, and collaborative filtering, and the no-better-than-tolerable mass-market bands will find their true destiny, making commercial jingles while the rest of us listen to good music.

    1. Re:Nature of the mass market by letxa2000 · · Score: 2
      Everybody has their own set of music they would rather listen to, but given the nature of the medium we all end up listening to the same crap.

      What I don't understand is why ANYONE listens to radio? At all?

      I listened to radio in the 80s because I was a kid (read: poor) and new music I liked came out every week. I recorded music off the radio and that's why I sat listening to the radio for hours, waiting for the song I wanted to be played again and hoping the DJ would shut up rather than talk through the intros and fade-outs.

      Later in the decade, when I got employed, I went back and bought CDs of all the music I liked. That's about the same time I stopped listening to radio. It wasn't a conscious decision, it's just that I had the music I wanted on CD and, in my opinion, good music tapered off near the beginning of the 90s.

      Now we're in the year 2002. Poor teenagers (as I was in the 80s) no longer have to listen to radio to record the music they want, they just download it from P2P. Those that are truly interested in "new/non-commercial music" can also just pop online rather than hoping that there is some local "non-corporate" radio station that plays the weird music they're after.

      The fact is, regardless of what station you listen to, corporate, non-corporate, reggae, whatever, it's doubtful you'll like every song they play. In fact, you probably won't like half of them. When you factor in commercials and the DJ talking you're lucky to hear a couple songs you like over the course of an hour. Why bother? I just pop in my one of my mix CDs and I know every song I hear I will like.

      I only listen to radio 1) sometimes when I'm driving cross-country by myself I turn on a TALK station, it kind of keeps you company and keeps you "engaged" in the discussion. 2) when there's nasty weather or nasty traffic I surf the stations looking for some station reporting on it. I usually have better luck on AM.

      Other than that, why bother and why care? Download the music you like, burn it, listen to it. A whole lot less complicated and more likely you'll enjoy the music you're listening to.

    2. Re:Nature of the mass market by good-n-nappy · · Score: 1

      Ahh, if only I had Launch in my car. And if only they had all the music I like.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of fiber.
  95. The reason why XM and Sirius exists today by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2

    The reason why XM and Sirius satellite radio exists today is the fact that we have megacorporations owning large swaths of terrestrial radio stations that have pretty much market-researched all the fringe (and some not-so-fringe) music formats out of existance.

    Right now, most radio stations play the following formats: Adult Contemporary, Hip-Hop, Heavy Metal and Country & Western formats for new music, plus a tightly-controlled selection of oldies. What happened to stations that play Classical, New Age, ethnic, Easy Listening, and wide-selection Oldies music?

    This is where XM and Sirius satellite radio fills the niche. With some 100 channels of audio programming to fill the result is a major resurgence of music formats on these systems that are sorely missed on terrestrial radio today (like the formats I mentioned).

    Yes, I give the nod to college radio stations that are playing a very wide selection of music, but alas, the vast majority of college radio stations don't have powerful enough signals to reach a wide audience like the more mainstream terrestrial broadcasters.

    1. Re:The reason why XM and Sirius exists today by ToddUGA95 · · Score: 1

      I'll say it again...Clear Channel owns a stake in XM Satellite Radio. That's why I REFUSE to buy an XM receiver. I may take a look at Sirius, however.

    2. Re:The reason why XM and Sirius exists today by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2

      I've looked at the channel selections for both XM and Sirius.

      They're pretty much the same, so you can't go wrong with either. Note that XM has a lot of channels of music you'll never hear on terrestrial radio nowadays. =(

    3. Re:The reason why XM and Sirius exists today by FrankNputer · · Score: 1

      Ah yes...fill the voids left by mega-corporations with another mega-corporation. Yea.

      XM is just trying to be all things to all people - they play more fringe formats, but they also play the same stuff that broadcast stations play. The business model is a bit different, and maybe that will work out for them & allow some non-mainstream stuff to get heard - but that's only if it makes them money. If not, they will be chasing the same homogenous audiences that Clear Channel is.

    4. Re:The reason why XM and Sirius exists today by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2

      I of course understand your concerns, but still XM is WAY better than terrestrial radio stations nowadays. At least on XM you can hear things like Classical, New Age, Easy Listening, a lot of ethnic music, and a way bigger selection of oldies, too.

      Also XM has both BBC World Service and ESPN Radio, both of which I listen to a lot.

  96. Re:raido sucks yes and no by bobKali · · Score: 1

    Actually,

    good music = listeners != money

    and

    crap music we're supposed to play = listeners in the demographic that advertisers want = money

    The problem is that the listeners are not the consumers in an advertiser-based business model... they are the product and radio stations want to deliver a high-spending product to their consumers (i.e. the advertisers)

  97. Actually, no. by Wntrmute · · Score: 2

    In the meantime, our CAPITALIST markets helped create this thing called the Internet...

    The Internet was created by the DOD, part of the evil statist socialist government. I guess it must be worthless then, not being created by the holiness of free enterprise.

    1. Re:Actually, no. by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

      Lets see, the link refers to: BBN, Honeywell, AT&T, which I'm sure had to competitively bid for the govt. contracts. Govt does stage large projects of national defence scale, Arpanet, NASA etc, that no business would risk, but private industry is still involved. The govt funded Langley worked on a flying machine, but it was a couple of bike mechanics interested in the same thing that actually pulled it off.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  98. a true marxist state has yet to be seen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What exactly would you have against a marxist state? Apart from the bourgeois attitudes that you haven't given up, what bothers you about it? Bear in mind that we haven't seen a marxist state in practice; nobody who's claimed to follow Marx in the 20th century paid much attention to what he actually said. None of the contentders where industrial economies, a fundamental requirement for the development of the class consiousness of the proletariat.

    1. Re:a true marxist state has yet to be seen by neocon · · Score: 1

      How about we start with the fact that every single Marxist state tried so far resulted in tyranny and mass murder? That certainly seems something to `have against' such a state, no?

  99. Re:One clearchannel station that plays "good" musi by Saffamer · · Score: 1

    DC101 in the MD/DC/VA area plays decent music

    Umm, are you listening to the same DC101 I am? They play ONE Carbon Leaf song and I have yet to hear Welbilt actually played on the radio. I was listening to their webcast crap for a few days and they play the same songs at the same times every. single. day. Yuck. "Wow, there's Nickelback, must be lunch time." ick ick ick.

    The only time they played good music was when "Spineless" (the guy in the washpost article) was out of town and the morning DJ played what HE wanted.

    The Clear Channel 70s station sucks too. There's more to the 70s than Fleetwood Mac! Honest!

  100. Homo-genized Music by Jupiter9 · · Score: 1

    Is that like the Pet Shop Boys or something? :)

    --

    --
    Does anyone remember /\/\/\?
  101. Re: Marx by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

    You speak very fondly of these "stateless communist" societies. Would you be willing to live there or is it enough that you can consider them quaint at a distance? Also do these societies have anything that can be considered modern?

    --
    Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
  102. If You Like Trail of Dead... by tlhf · · Score: 1

    Then you'll like a lot of Post-Rock, which is the genre ToD is kinda part of. Maybe try listening to;
    Victory at Sea
    Mogwai (tho you'll probably have heard of them too)
    Do Make Say Think
    90 Day Men
    Xiu Xiu
    Fin Fang Foom
    Queens of the Stone Age

    tlhf
    xxx
    Oh, and everyone knows that any article mentioning music requires an At The Drive-In reference :D

  103. What a surprise by delphi125 · · Score: 1
    Indeed, radio is changing. Arbitron reports that Americans are listening to it less each year. The ratings service estimates that on average people spend 10 percent less time with it now than in 1996.

    Now I realise that a lot of radio is listened to in the car, garden, or workplace, and that won't have changed. But when you can rip your own CD collection to hard disk and find your news and sports at cnn.com or bbc.co.uk, is it really surprising that listeners are down? Especially if a third of the content is advertising!

  104. Re: Marx by mcwop · · Score: 2
    "Capitalism does tend towards monopoly."

    Monopolies exist under all different forms of Government. One thing we do have is choice (which is definately a result of people thinking outside the box as you describe). So ClearChannel runs most of radio. There are tons of Internet radio stations popping up. Satellite radio now offers quite a bit of choice. Additionally, nothing is stopping independent radio stations from popping up. The ultimate choice is just buying the music and listening to what you want; the U.S. produces an extremely diverse selection of music/programming. Where there is niche demand, there are niche suppliers.

    The bigger issue is unfair practices (much through the lobbying government) that limit choice. Trying to kill Internet radio through ridiculous fees or banning technology (like an mp3 player), which results in limiting the alternatives to programmed radio. These are just a few examples.

    --

    "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

  105. The death of Pop (Iggy, that is) by sqlgeek · · Score: 1

    I oh-so-clearly remember last summer as I was driving down the road listening to what used to be a good station here in Chicago, WXRT, but has now gone to corporate programming hell (and still it's about the best station in the city). So much to my delight the DJ puts on Iggy Pop & The Stooges "Search & Destroy". Before the song was 1/3 over dead air hits for about 2 seconds, followed by a generic "you're listening to WXRT..." message for 8-10 seconds, followed by bland corporate rock.

    I've always wondered whether the DJ who actually spun that track was fired, though I'm almost certain that he was reprimanded.

    1. Re:The death of Pop (Iggy, that is) by K_E_Morr · · Score: 1

      "I oh-so-clearly remember last summer as I was driving down the road listening to what used to be a good station here in Chicago, WXRT, but has now gone to corporate programming hell (and still it's about the best station in the city)."

      I wholeheatedly agree, it has gone down hill. CBS bought them about 6 or 7 years ago and every day they seem to play more and more 'pop'(NOT Iggy) music. I gotta say though, I'm old (heading out of the target group) I've lived all over, and there's still no other radio station that I can tolerate for 8-10 hours/day

      THEN and THAN, 2 different words, 2 different meanings.

  106. It's an inside job by flatulus · · Score: 1

    ...by the well connected
    Your little protest
    summarily rejected
    It's an inside job
    like it always is
    Just chalk it up
    to business as usual...

  107. pro local bands by Kallahar · · Score: 2

    Last weekend I went down to the beach and a local radio station was having a "battle of the bands" (corny, but it was cool) where they had several local bands play sets. Not only were they helping local bands to get play time (and the bands were quite good), they also specifically billed themselves as the only non-corporate "anti-clearchannel" radio station around.

    Whenever I hear about clearchannel I think of the movie "Airheads"

    Travis

  108. Radio sucks and Clearchannel swallows by uncoveror · · Score: 1

    Homogenized corporate radio is a prime example of what deregulation does to any industry. One they aren't under a watchdog anymore, greed takes over. Instead of providing a valuable public service for profit, profit becomes their sole reason for being, and their products and services go to hell. Next comes merger mainia. Soon there are a few huge companies bogged down with debt dying like Enron, worldcom, and soo, clear channel. Maybe when they finally do croak, the old radio that was worth listening to will return.

    --
    The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
  109. Savatage by jonnythan · · Score: 2

    Dream Theater
    Jawbox
    Dar Williams
    Heather Nova
    Nevermore

    :)

  110. Read the article by wiredog · · Score: 2

    Clear Channel is losing billions/year. Also, read the series that salon.com has run on CC.

  111. Monopoly abuse by dpilot · · Score: 2

    > Yeah, so the small radio stations sold to the big guys, and clear channel has a monopoly. If they abuse the monopoly, the could be facing trouble
    > down the road.

    Unless of course they can buy enough influence in Congress to get the right legislation. After all, the strategy is working so far for the RIAA, MPAA, and isn't doing too badly by Microsoft, either.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  112. Re:Ha! Buy your own show! by IIRCAFAIKIANAL · · Score: 1

    This actually might be worth it in a large city, but I wonder if the costs outweigh the benefits for smaller labels...

    Something worth thinking about if any of you slashdot readers own a label :)

    --
    Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
  113. Mod parent up by wiredog · · Score: 2

    Those Salon pieces are an excellent companion to the Post piece. They show how CC is not only killing radio, it's damaging the music industry and making it even more difficult for new bands to make a go of it.

  114. Wanna know how to stop commercial radio? by fialar · · Score: 1

    Support listener-supported, public radio like the Pacifica Network. I gave $150 to WBAI this year and they are a great radio station in New York. They are part of the Pacifica network which also has stations in California. I definitely recommend them!

  115. Voluntary? by coyote-san · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not sure how "voluntary" many of these sales were. They weren't compelled, in the sense that property is occasionally condemned for a new road or public facility, but that's about all you can say about it.

    Imagine for a moment that you're the owner of a local station (or small chain), and someone like Clear Channel decides they want your radio station. You're making enough to meet payroll, sponsor some community events, but you don't have deep cash reserves. Then CC comes in and tells you to sell for a lowball price.

    You refuse - and they tell all of your advertisers that there's a new sheriff in town. If they sign exclusive agreements with CC stations, they get an ad rate substantially lower than what you can offer. It's far below cost to CC also, but they can pull in money from other stations nationwide.

    But if they don't agree to that exclusive agreement, they're blacklisted by CC stations. Accounts are closed (even if that involves penalties), and even after they're removed from the blacklist (when CC is the only game in town) they'll never get prefered customer rates.

    How long do you think you'll hold onto customers? A few may say with you, but anyone running ads on multiple stations will be forced to dump you. And all CC needs to do to target your advertisers is hire an intern to listen to your station and jot down what ads they hear.

    This isn't an abusive monopoly since CC doesn't yet have a monopoly in that market, but it's as unfair as an unlimited stakes poker game where one player has $100 and another has $1000, and you can't not play.

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
  116. Demographic Profiling is the problem by cblood · · Score: 1

    The big corporate radio does "market reasearch" to determine what music is "Good" and then they force all of there stations to play only the "good" music. What is needed for the suits to demographicly rate DJ's instead of songs and give the dj's the freedom to make their own playlists again. The overly homogenized crap on the radio is part of why napster was so popular. It is also why the record industry is in a nose dive. Very frustrating.

  117. What a weird business model this is... by AB3A · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Look at what most of you are asking for: You all want someone to play your favorite eclectic brand of music that doesn't suck. Only problem is that there are hardly two or three of you who can agree on just what they'd like to listen to.

    Remember, folks, they're in this for MONEY. So they're looking for widest appeal. That's right. The bland stuff. The stuff that offends as few as possible while retaining an interest group.

    Look at it another way: You pay to see bands you like. A bar would book a band that attracts their clientele. If the band is good, expect a cover charge.

    That's all well and good. Now do this without the cover charge, for a population of hundreds of thousands, on a daily basis. Do you even begin to see the problem?

    Yeah, radio is bland. It's mostly boring because you really don't like what they're putting on the air.

    But don't let me stop you. If you feel so strongly, why not put your money where your mouth is, and rent some radio station time for a month. Try to come up with music that will amuse and engage your listeners every single day. Oh, and while you're doing this, try to come up with some way of attracting advetisers to pay your bills.

    Good Luck!

    --
    Nearly fifty percent of all graduates come from the bottom half of the class!
  118. Clear Channel's "Sphere of Influence" by thesolo · · Score: 3, Informative

    While the article talks about Clear Channel's massive amount of stations, I don't think most people realize just how many stations they have until they see a list of them.

    So, on that note, check out the list of stations that Clear Channel owns:
    http://www.cjr.org/owners/clearchannel.asp

    Go ahead, pick out the stations in your town. There are 5 in mine, and all of them are just awful; they play the same songs on an almost daily basis.

    1. Re:Clear Channel's "Sphere of Influence" by RazzleDazzle · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about the hundres of thousands of billboards Clearchannel owns. Also... hmmm all the thousands of music venues they own too. They get to control who is played on the radio, who is advertised on billboards, and who actually plays live at a lot of venues, no wonder no one can hear what they want, only what clearchannel wants, or the few other giant owners.

      --
      ZERO ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ONE! Just brushing up for my next big invention: Ethernet over Voice (EoV)
  119. Because they think by morven2 · · Score: 1

    they know how to market to older people, while they think that marketing to younger people is harder. So they're willing to pay more for exposure to younger audiences.

    1. Re:Because they think by Cmdr+Taco+(luser) · · Score: 1

      You are absolutely correct. On NPR, I heard a brief interview of a salesperson at Coca Cola in which they were discussing the introduction of a new Coke flavor, Vanilla. She was asked how they approached their marketing; who did they spend the most advertising money trying to reach? The answer was precisely what you alluded to. They *must* attempt to sway the teenagers to their own products, before those youngsters have "decided" what the like.

      --
      All things in moderation.
  120. Ideas as property? No. by MenTaLguY · · Score: 2

    The idea that ideas are even "property", an sich, is a pretty new thing, going back maybe 200 years at most.

    Trying to frame the notion of ideas in the context of the Marxist debate over "property" (which really only works for physical things of economic value: excludable and limited) is conceding the real (cultural) battle.

    --

    DNA just wants to be free...
    1. Re:Ideas as property? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you think the heart of the current 'conflict' between individuals and industry with regards to intellectual property is as attempt to take something that is not inherently "excludable and limited" and make it into something that is?

      is DVD encryption anything other than an attempt to forge "property" out of information?

    2. Re:Ideas as property? No. by jafac · · Score: 2

      The idea that ideas are even "property", an sich, is a pretty new thing, going back maybe 200 years at most.

      Not true. The Venitians who invented spectacles (that is, corrective eye lenses, as opposed to the simply magnifiying lenses that existed as early as 262 BC in China) - kept it a closely guarded secret for decades to prevent anyone else from figuring out how they made them so they could reap enormous profits from the exclusive control of the manufacture and sale of eyeglasses. That's more like 600 years old.

      I agree though, the concept is pretty sick. Especially in this form, where people profited hugely and many people who would otherwise have been productive members of society, being able to see - simply were too poor to afford glasses. Maybe that was the case before glasses ever were created in the first place, and sure, the innovation deserves reward - but there's a point where the control becomes abusive. Drawing a distinct line at a given point yeilds to slippery-slope arguments in BOTH directions - but I think that the US constitutional basis of a 14 year copyright/patent is an excellent compromise.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  121. Independent Radio by mrroot · · Score: 2
    --
    I Heart Sorting Networks
  122. Pete Tong? by jcsehak · · Score: 2

    I recently heard about how many of the major UK stations broadcast Pete Tong's radio show (on friday evenings), which apparently showcases the best of the cutting-edge dance electronica. From what I understand, he chooses a playlist based solely on his own opinion, and has since become rather respected in the dance community, to where you've really made it if Pete Tong plays your song. What's your experience with this? Is the show good? Any more info?

    --

    c-hack.com |
    1. Re:Pete Tong? by salsashrk · · Score: 1

      The show is excellent! You should definetely check it out if you can. If you have a windows boxen handy you can listen to BBC Radio 1 via RealOne Player with little to no trouble. It comes in quite clearly on my cable modem with little to no lag or breakup.

      Check it out by clicking the listen live button, and selecting 'high-quality FM' (Don't bother with the enhanced crapola)

      --
      ..cage goes into salsa. Shark's in the salsa. Our shark.
  123. Announcing call letters by JimTheta · · Score: 2

    Station call letters need to be read on the hour, immediately followed by the name of the city in which their licence is registered. After that, most usually announce the city they primarily serve.

    For instance, my local modern rock station, WWDX has a recording that at the beginning of every hour says "92.1 The Edge, WWDX, St. Johns, Lansing" in a 'edgy' radio voice. Where's St. Johns? I don't even know. But Lansing's definitely the market.

    -Grant

  124. Bullshit by JimTheta · · Score: 2

    Yes. W is where we put the New Country Hits stations. K is for Pop Music and Alternative.

    I probably don't need to say this, but just to keep any non-United Staters from being ill-informed, the parent comment is extreme bullshit.

    -Grant

    1. Re:Bullshit by Skip666Kent · · Score: 2

      You humorless numb-nut. That was FUNNY!

      --
      **>>BELCH
    2. Re:Bullshit by Malcs · · Score: 1

      ...and accurate, too.

      --
      My name is Carlos Montoya. You share files of my music. Prepare to die.
    3. Re:Bullshit by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      When you claim the post was accurate you are claiming that there are no alternative or pop stations east of the mississippi river. Not in New York. Not in Boston. Not in Chicago. Not in Washington. Not in the most populous half of the country, essentially.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  125. Internet Radio Conspiracy - Eat What You're Fed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 5 years "terrestial" radio will be obsolete and replaced by internet radio. The music industry has been scheming to set royalty rates for internet radio so high that only they can afford them. The result: a monopoly in which the music industry owns/controls all the radio stations. And we are forced to eat what we're fed, even worse than today. Think "All Britney Spears" station. More at http://www.kurthanson.com

  126. Station ID by morven2 · · Score: 1

    must be read or played between four minutes before the hour, and four minutes after, every hour. You can do it at other times too if you like, but it MUST by FCC regs be done then.

    Station IDs MUST contain the station's callsign and the city they broadcast from. Optionally they can contain the frequency and the words 'FM' or 'AM'. No other words can be put in between the callsign and the city.

    Buncha bullshit, but that's the FCC for you.

  127. One independently owned and operated FM station by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in the US and it is KPRI 102.1 in San Diego (they just changed their name from Sets102, but kept their format). They play good and often rare rock, not the same 300 songs a Clear Channel station will play over and over again. They play a lot of new music first before Clear Channel has the guts to even listen to it. They also get alot of artists to appear in studio and play live songs.

    Because they just did the name change, their web site is still http://www.sets102.com/

  128. Re:There's a Vegas like station for this guy on XM by ToddUGA95 · · Score: 1

    FYI, Clear Channel owns a stake in XM radio.

  129. what about Wilco... by ayeco · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wilco is proving that the bottom line about sales is the quality of music. They were at 13 on Billboards chart last week. Big lable? not any more, they bought their album back from mr big. Their latest album was available online forever and a day before its market launch. People still bought it, and are still buying it.

    1. Re:what about Wilco... by Laplace · · Score: 2

      Um, you have your facts slightly wrong. Time Warner itself thought that "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" was too dark; too much of a risk. After was shelved Tweedy et. al. went looking for a new label to publish it. The found the label Nonesuch was willing to take it and run. I'll give you three guesses as to what major media conglomerate owns Nonesuch. That's right, Time Warner.

      However, it does point out how foolish big corporations have become. "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" is nothing short of brilliant, and it has hit the charts because it is good, and dark, and lyrical. That so much time and energy had to be wasted because Time Warner is run by stiffs is an indication of how sick the industry is.

      As another example, if you're a Dave Matthews fan, try to find a bootleg of "The Lillywhite Sessions," an album that was shelved because it was decided that it didn't have mass market appeal. I'm not a huge Dave Matthews fan, but those recordings are good.

      --
      The middle mind speaks!
  130. Clear Channel owns stock in XM by ouija147 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Clear Channel owns stock in XM. The info can be found in the links from this previous story about FightCloud CDs

  131. Low-power FM has been discontinued by yerricde · · Score: 2, Informative

    those stations wouldn't be popular if the music wasn't popular (for whatever reasons that music is...

    The music is popular because Clear Channel makes it popular.

    the fact that those mom-and-pop stations voluntarily sold their stations

    How are you sure it was as voluntary as you claim? How are you sure they weren't somehow blackmailed into it?

    It means those people who feel they are disenfranchised need to start their own radio stations, non-commercial

    The low-power FM program you speak of has been, in effect, discontinued. From http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/getstat.html: "Applications for construction permits for new LPFM stations or major changes to LPFM permittees or licensees cannot be filed until the next application filing window period. We cannot advise as to when the next application filing window might be." This is government-speak for "We cannot guarantee that there will be a next application filing window." According to this list of prior window dates, there hasn't been a new filing window in nearly a year.

    or commercial

    If you are commercial, you and your advertisers will be harassed by Clear Channel, as coyote-san wrote.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:Low-power FM has been discontinued by Thud457 · · Score: 0

      Thank you, FCC, for looking out for the interests of the public!

      sheesh!

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  132. Re:Ha! Buy your own show! by pherris · · Score: 2
    Salon did an excellent article about someone who bought a block of time (one hour on Sunday nights, paid $15k in advance for one year) and three weeks later Clear Channel cancelled.

    Even though the subject matter (use of marijuana) and show's name ("Club Cannabis") were agreed upon beforehand Clear Channel backed out. It should be noted that it was a sales representative of Clear Channel who came up with the idea for the show and had already sold ad spots (they got 4 minutes per show)

    What kind of company is Clear Channel. When asked to comment company spokeswoman Pam Taylor said, "We don't talk to Salon."

    Playing with Clear Channel is like playing with M$: "If you go to bed with the dogs don't complain about getting fleas (or rabies).

    pherris

    --
    "And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
  133. Radio Free Hawaii was the only good station, ever by Spy4MS · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The playlists were generated exclusively by listener votes. Ballots were everywhere around town and on every island where the signal could reach. They were tallied every week.

    You'd vote for ten songs to put or keep in rotation, ten songs to dump and three songs that would be a hit if radio played it (those songs received proportionately more vote weight).

    It made for an eclectic mix, with votes from outside the main demographic also receiving more weight. I heard hundreds of songs on RFH that I'd never heard before, and never heard since--but I loved almost all of them.

    Sadly, since the music was so diverse they couldn't claim a single demographic and placed last in the Arbitron ratings that are so necessary for advertising dollars. The station collapsed in 1997 for lack of revenue, despite most of the djs being paid near-volunteer wages.

    I know for a fact that the station was the most listened-to station when it was on the air, but the screwed-up Arbitron rating system forced them out of business.

    You can see how eclectic the playlist was at the top 300 archive. And also why it was doomed to fail. Back in 1994, this was not corporate music, even though much of it has been adopted by corporate radio since then.

  134. Re: Marx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Majority ? Actually, not byteboyz we have a REPUBLIC ( constitutionally limited government ) not a Demos.

  135. The blues is just a stealing by wytcld · · Score: 2
    ... different people have different tastes, and just because you don't like Britney doesn't rule out the fact that a lot of people do.

    Taste isn't something that people just have, it's something that develops in relation to what they're exposed to. The British Invasion of the mid 60s happened because because the kids who made up its troops had been exposed not just to Elvis but to Chicago blues, and so developed their taste by working the stuff out on their own instruments and adding their local dance hall sensibility. Then - what almost never happens today - other people figured out how to promote and sell it. The white American audience, already with a taste for pop and rock, developed a taste for what the British kids were doing because there was something obviously stronger and more resonant to it - which turns out to have largely been their direct sourcing of the blues. The taste of the public and musicians moved upwards in linked spirals, with an associated spiral of marketing and promotion.

    Taste is no excuse. Bad taste on the part of the public is a failure of marketing. Bad taste on the part of musicians is a failure of distribution of authentic influences. There are many different kinds of beauty, but ugliness is all the same. And there's more money, in the longer term, to be made by selling the quality product - even if you're always selling against the stupidity of the market, even if short-term pure exploitation and hype seem to be winning the game.

    The real problem is that higher standards of taste aren't confined to the aesthetics of mass marketed art, but extend into standards for politics and stewardship of the Earth. That's why the music industry was reined in in the early 70s, and why children today are raised to the equivalent of the Monkees and the Partridges, exclusively.

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  136. Payola isn't the problem. by eison · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If payola was the reason for the dullness and sameness of broadcast radio, then why is it that you only hear the same 10 songs on 80s channels? Ditto classic rock stations? If paying for playtime on top hits stations explains why they're dull and the same, then there must be a *different* reason for the dullness and sameness on every other kind of commercial station...

    Or, perhaps it's all just due to corporate conservatism and a 'stick-with-what-has-worked' do-nothing take-no-risks attitude. Look at network television and reality series #4232, or the computer games industry and RTS FPS game #2189, or the movie industry and stupid action flick #12092. Occam's razor, people. It's not payola.

    --
    is competition good, or is duplication of effort bad?
  137. try this one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.worldcafe.org

    I liked it very much, until kpbs decided to replace it with 7 solid hours of classical music.

    net broadcasting is challenging at best; better to find an affiliate in your area.

    blah blah I don't work for them, only for myself blah blah

    example of May playlist attached

    Elvis Costello "Welcome To The Working World", "What's So Funny About Peace Love And Understanding", "Spooky Girlfriend", Tart","Dust","When I Was Cruel","Fifteen Petals"
    Jimmy Smith"Strut"
    Beth Orton"Concrete Sky"
    David Gray"Please Forgive Me"
    Mull Historical"Watching Xanadu"
    The Beach Boys"Caroline No"
    Kinky"San Antonio"
    David Baerwald"Compassion"
    Maria Mckee"My Lonley Sad Eyes"
    Van Morrison"Down The Road"
    Robert Plant"Funny In My Mind"
    Chris Whitley"Kick The Stones"
    Gomez"Shot Shot"
    Grant Lee Phillips"Spring Released

  138. My biggest complaint... by Scratch-O-Matic · · Score: 2

    Each track is assigned a "burn" score, a measure of how "burned out" the target audience has become; when the score passes a certain level, the tune disappears.

    This is what pisses me off most of all. Obviously, they play the "hits" to death. But what makes the stations so unbearable is that you only hear one song from any given artist in a week or month. As soon as a new single is released, you never hear earlier songs form the album again. More than anything else, this shows me that the stations are just a big marketing tool with no taste in music. Sickening.

    --


    Evil is the money of root.
  139. The future of radio... by Bagheera · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... looks grim.

    Radio is a business, like any other. The object is to spend less money than you take in. Turn a profit. Keep your owners (investors, individuals, corporate sire, whatever) happy. The income for these stations comes from advertising and selling air-time to whoever wants to buy it. The reason "it sucks" is because the advertisers want to get their message to their target audience, and they have very specific target audiences. If "market research" shows the mainstream target audience wants to hear a non-stop beat-mix of Brittney Spears and Weird Al Yankovic, that's what the station will play, because that's what the advertisers will pay to advertise on.

    The "mainstream" listeners are the targets. They don't really care about the niche markets or the fringe because there's no advertising money in niche markets or the fringe. /.ers are, from what I can tell, aren't mainstream.

    Why are listeners abandoning radio? Lots of factors. 6-disk in-dash CD players for the morning commute. MTV or the CD player at home. MP3 collections on the file server. Simple bordom with "mainstream" mass media music. Tired of 40% commercials. Whatever.

    Are college stations, pirate stations, or internet broadcasters an alternative? Of course they are. Are they "better"? If they serve -your- niche market, they certainly are - for you at least. It's one reason I have an internet station of my own - I can cater to my own tastes.

    Is radio dead? No. But it's ill. If the radio markets all collapse and the big conglomerates start abandoning stations we may see a change back to "the good old days" when stations took risks and used variety to compete for listeners. I just wouldn't count on it.

    --
    Never attribute to malice what can as easily be the result of incompetence...
    1. Re:The future of radio... by RazzleDazzle · · Score: 1
      You are forgetting one very important factor: the radio waves are supposed to be owned by the people, not the 3 corporations who now control it. That is why I think things like WBAI and a lot of stations on Pacifica are important. Check out Off The Hook radio program done by members of 2600.

      People have become so fickle that it does not even matter what the radio stations play, it will be bought and the advertisers will make out with tons of air time. That is another reason why it is so hard for other types of music don't make it onto the radio, the stations are just fine with replaying redundent songs and regurgitating whatever the advertisers want. Support your local public-supported radio stations (NOT NPR).

      --
      ZERO ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ONE! Just brushing up for my next big invention: Ethernet over Voice (EoV)
  140. Thought about it, and you're wrong. by jcsehak · · Score: 2

    I'll concede that most of the stuff on college radio sucks. And I'll give it to you that most of the stuff on commercial radio is good (if you define good as "liked by a lot of people." Which is really the only way you can define good, but that's another story). But there's a huge middle ground of really amazing music that you'll never hear on commercial radio. I just posted a short list of my favorite ambient and downtempo works. Specifically, Thievery Corporation and Nightmares on Wax make great records with catchy tunes, any of which could be a hit single. Why aren't they on the radio? They don't have a major label to force their songs into rotation. You'll see linux exposed as a corporate scam before you hear Ani DiFranco's latest album, Reveilling/Reckoning played on a commercial station. Why? It certainly doesn't suck. I've been known to listen to the Reckoning side 3 times a day, and I don't even like her politics. The reason is the same as before. Her label doesn't have the money/power/connections to get them airplay. Theivery and Ani both own their own labels (ESL and Righteous Babe, respectively), and apparently have chosen to give the finger to the major ones. These are the folks you should buy CDs from if you really want to stick it to the RIAA. A drop in sales of a major label can always be blamed on something like the economy or piracy. But a drop in sales, while at the same time, smaller labels see sales soaring? All of the sudden your pirate scapegoats are gone.

    Yes, it is the most logical conclusion that what we see on MTV and hear on Clear Channel's stations is the best we can get, if you only compare it to wierd college stuff and crappy indie rock, but it's simply not true. There's a lot of better stuff out there. I listen to it all the time.

    --

    c-hack.com |
    1. Re:Thought about it, and you're wrong. by Syllepsis · · Score: 2

      Theivery and Ani both own their own labels (ESL and Righteous Babe, respectively), and apparently have chosen to give the finger to the major ones. These are the folks you should buy CDs from if you really want to stick it to the RIAA.

      Or you can just download the whole ESL catalog on emusic, it is cheaper. (If you have a T1, it is literally faster to download the catalog than go to the store)

      Granted, 128kb mp3s kinda suck if you have a really clean sounding rig.

      -Syllepsis

  141. Re:Ha! Buy your own show! by wings · · Score: 1

    If you wanted your own daily radio show, Clear Channel would sell you the time for about $1,200 an hour.

    ...snip...

    Clearchannel stations are by nature large-market ones, and if you picked a slot at like 3 or 4 pm, you would get kids after school and it would be before the "rush hour" slot that's so valuable.

    I don't have any data to demonstrate otherwise, but I'd guess that "kids after school" would also represent a "valuable" target market for radio stations, and if you could even negotiate for that timeslot in a major market, it would probably cost more than $1200/hr.

    However, at an off peak time like 4 AM you might have a chance.

  142. Re:raido sucks and advertisers are stoooopid by flagstone · · Score: 2, Interesting
    So, again, why don't advertisers like the 60+ crowd, helluva lot of money to be made there.
    I believe it's because older consumers tend to be more loyal to specific brands, and therefore less likely to be swayed by advertising to new products. For the most part, you're either already getting their money, or you're not going to.
    --
    These people have looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined.
  143. ClearChannel Blipvert Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Today ClearChannel changed formats on one of their local radio stations here in Seattle to what I like to call "Blipvert" music. It's just a number and a snippet of a given song. The web site for this new assinine format is at http://quick96.com.
    Apparently ClearChannel's new target demographic is the former audience for Short Attention-Span Theater.

    "Can't pay attention to a song for three and a half minutes, Skippy? We've got the answer for you right here at Quick 96."

    Maybe we should start thinking of it as radio for kids whose Ritalin prescription has run out.

    All I can say is JazzRadio.net rules!

    1. Re:ClearChannel Blipvert Music by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called a stunt. Something to get attention while the 'real' format is being prepared.

  144. Yeah and no commercials on college radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah.. free format college radio kicks ass cuz it not manufactured... check out www.wclh.net a cool college station in NE pa (gotta love a station that has every Monday devoted to metal)... remember not all good stuff comes from the big city college stations.

  145. Internet radio? by sielwolf · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Has anyone mentioned internet radio as an alternative? Ok, it's broadband only in terms of possible audience... but that doesn't stop me from listening to Bassdrive.com all day, everyday.

    Sure it is usually non-mainstream music. Who cares if it doesn't appeal to the widest, most general audience?

    The key of internet radio is that you can usually find what you like. I have stations that play early 90's jungle, hard-step, tech-step, garage two-step, jungle-ragga, acid jazz, russian pop/rock, independent US hip-hop, french hard core.

    Ok so it might just be me listening to it. Oh, boo-hoo. Either you listen to what you like with the distinct possibility of ostracising yourself from the mainstream, or accept the shill Godsmack/Creed/DMB so you can talk to other folk about music/hit bigger shows with your friends. Of course then you can pay your 400 bucks for a Rolling Stones ticket.

    And that is another thing: underground/independent metal, rock, death metal, electronica, detroit house, hip-hop, and jazz have all survived very well without any help of the mainstream. Steve Albini, Martin Adkins, El-P. Sometimes you have to accept that most people aren't looking for what you are serving.

    But if you like this kind of thing, this may be the sort of thing you kind of like.

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
  146. Remember Disney's Z-rock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember Disney's pathetic Z-rock national station? I remember listening one day and a caller requested to hear Anthrax.. the dj said 'No you're gonna listen to Nirvana' - I'm surprised they even let that guy on the air... as always we'll be forcefed what they want us to hear. How about RAdio disney... uggh that's pathetic as well

    1. Re:Remember Disney's Z-rock by AndyChrist · · Score: 1

      "Remember Disney's pathetic Z-rock national station? I remember listening one day and a caller requested to hear Anthrax.. the dj said 'No you're gonna listen to Nirvana' - I'm surprised they even let that guy on the air... as always we'll be forcefed what they want us to hear."

      So...seems like all radio stations are like that nowadays, except they don't come right out and say it.

  147. Re:Tyranny of the Majority by ke6 · · Score: 1

    In the US here, we're supposed to have some protection from the Tyranny of the Majority( 3/4 majority of states to modify the Constitution, the "elder, wiser" body of the Senate, and of course the Supreme Court), while giving the majority a good say.

    The framers were quite afraid of the mob menatlity, and wanted several safeguards. Some of those are now gone(only people who vote being white male property owners, older than 25 for example), but the idea of protecting the minority(in this case, rich aristocrates like Washington and Jefferson) ran deep.

    Bill

  148. huh?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who the fuck even listens to the radio anymore?

    1. Re:huh?! by Leynos · · Score: 1

      Me. It's cheaper and less hassle than Minidisc. And laziness is my top priority. Plus you tend not to get news and travel when you're listneing to your own recordings.

      Hmmm... the local stations I listen to all sound fairly local. Weird. Tho early in the morning (before they have any DJs on) one of them uses syndicated news, but that's about it as far as I can see. Maybe things are different down in England.

      --
      "Did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage?"
  149. Payola is alive and well, reincarnated by essell · · Score: 1

    Want to know why radio still sucks? Pay for play hasn't gone away.

    Check out this article

    --
    i swear my userid used to be lower.
  150. Hear some real music by real people... by Scaba · · Score: 1

    If you want to hear some music still untainted by the filthy hands of commerce, we have a few original MP3s on our website. I have to say, though, that if those filthy hands are handing me enough $$$ to allow me to quit my job, well...

    Christ...I hope we don't get /.ed...

  151. i think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Marx was generally concerned with control of means of production, both in terms raw material and implements to create products from the raw material. Intellectual property falls, actually, rather neatly into the debate. It's both a form of raw material (cultural products like music) and implement (the concept of marketing those cultural products).

    That having been said, most mainstream music sucks cock.

  152. Re: Marx by Skip666Kent · · Score: 2

    They do exist, but the fact that they can and do exist means that competing interests can exist and arise as well.

    In a Communist society, everything is mandated from The State, which generally ends up enforcing purely Intellectual ideals upon a very human populace which almost inevitably ends up suffering very terribly. When 'the box' is mandated by The State in 'the interest' of The People (as opposed to just 'people'), thinking outside that box is generally (historically) punishable by death, directly or otherwise.

    Socialism is lots of fun to think about it when you're a frustrated twenty-something in America, feeling like everyone is having a good time but you and your dysfunctional friends at the poetry slam, and that if we could just 'bring down' the 'megacorporations' and let everyone have everything for free, everything would be so cool and you could all hang out, protest and smoke pot in peace and never have to go to work, but in reality, it is Democracy and Capitalism that has put you in a situation where you have the safety, stability and resources to get on a thing like the Internet with your computer and babble wistfully about Socialism to begin with!

    --
    **>>BELCH
  153. Not just influences... by jcsehak · · Score: 2

    A little OT, but interesting. The more I get into blues, the more I find myelf saying "hey, that's a Zeppelin song!" Check this out:

    You Shook Me, I Can't Quit You Baby- Willie Dixon
    Whole Lotta Love- based on Willie Dixon's "You Need Love"
    Gallows Pole, In my time of Dying- not sure, but I swear I heard them on some obscure blues CD
    When the Levee Breaks- Memphis Minnie
    Nobody's Fault but Mine- Blind Willie Johnson

    Is this thievery? I don't think Johnson was even credited (someone correct me if I'm wrong). I'd say, no way. Simply covering a song makes it your own. And I for one have no problems with Zeppelin coming to America, homogenizing our music, and feeding it back to us. It's all good.

    --

    c-hack.com |
  154. Re: Marx by Eccles · · Score: 1

    You speak very fondly of these "stateless communist" societies. Would you be willing to live there or is it enough that you can consider them quaint at a distance?

    The problem with these societies is that they really depend on interpersonal relationships or a common cause. A family could be seen as stateless communism, for example. In the U.S., this is generally just parents and children, but other societies have had greater reach. Other forms include Israeli kibbutzes, an example of the common cause case. You might be able to achieve something similar in space, having one such society per asteroid or colony ship and relatively few ties to the outside world. Alternatively, in a world without significant scarcity, an essentially communalistic system may arise as capitalistic incentives no longer have the same pull.

    --
    Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
  155. The RIAA, et al., could learn from this... by KC7GR · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's a constant source of amazement to me that the big record labels keep whining about their revenues dropping due to piracy. Did it ever occur to them, even once, that their declining sales just might be due to the fact that people simply don't like what they're putting out? That they may not care for what they're hearing on commercial radio?

    Fifteen years ago, I was buying 5-20 CD's a MONTH. I found much to listen to in terms of 'New Age' (primarily instrumental, related to Jazz) artists like Ray Lynch, Michael Manring, Checkfield, Pat Metheny, etc., to say nothing of rediscovering all of my rock-and-roll faves from earlier years.

    Guess what? Almost all of what I bought were copies of what I had already heard on commercial radio. KKSF, in the Bay Area, to be exact, plus a few other stations playing "classic" rock.

    Granted, there have been a few of the more recent vocal groups and singers that have caught and held my interest; Don Henley, when he went solo from the Eagles, Bruce Hornsby, Bryan Adams, etc. HOWEVER -- The real reason my CD buying has dropped like a rock (maybe two a year if that) in the past decade or so is because I'm not hearing hardly anything worth listening to, either on or off the radio.

    Music, to me, is a form of storytelling. Whether it's fact, fiction, or somewhere in between doesn't matter to me as long as it is sung with a good voice ('from the heart' is a good way to put it), and with DECENT music to back it up.

    By 'decent,' I'm referring to the idea that the singer also be the songwriter, if not also playing their own instrument. Jimmy Buffett is a great example. He has a band, yes, but he also plays guitar and Lord only knows what else, and he writes his own material for the most part.

    I think what I miss the most about today's (alleged) "pop" music is that much of it is as empty of real meaning, of real 'heart' if you will, as the Mojave Desert is empty of water in midsummer. Real musicians put a lot of their own personality and feeling into their work, and that's what makes it unique.

    Anyway, it seems (to my ears) that the only "good" stuff is showing up on the few independent stations left, and on "web radio." This pisses off the big labels, though, because they now seem to think that music should be lip-syncing "pop stars," dressed in glittery costumes with colors that no living creature would be caught dead in, putting on a show that I don't think even a Las Vegas producer would touch with a 3.048 meter pole.

    Can't have any real creativity running around now, can they? It shines a bad light on their predigested pap-spewing money-machine, and makes the way they've been trying to trample fair-use rights look even more greedy and stupid than it already is.

    Unimaginitive jerks...

    --

    Bruce Lane, KC7GR,

    Blue Feather Technologies

    1. Re:The RIAA, et al., could learn from this... by hndrcks · · Score: 2

      The RIAA has learned from this. Selling 100 copies each of one million indie acts get them no money and gets them nowhere. Selling 100 million copies of the latest Cher or Bratney Spears drek gets them a lot of money and right where they want to be.

      That, in a nutshell, is why radio sucks.

      --
      Everyone will start to cheer when you put on your sailin' shoes.
  156. Actually, yes. by tswinzig · · Score: 2

    The Internet was created by the DOD [zakon.org], part of the evil statist socialist government.

    No, the backbone of the early internet, and the initial sites, were FUNDED by the government, and created by many private companies that bid for the contracts. Then the internet EXPLODED when the capitalist market started to see the potential for it. None of which would have happened had our government truly created and ruled over the internet, as would have happened in the USSR or China. (The closest we'll ever come to a communist/socialist government.)

    --

    "And like that ... he's gone."
  157. I have a solution by CathedralRulz · · Score: 1
    In order for less conformist music to be heard and gain popularity and record sales, the artists/composers/label may choose to prime the pump a little bit and pay the radio stations for some air play.

    Oh wait, that was made illegal.

    See what happens when you interfere in the free market?

  158. Salon.com by rlbgator · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't know if anyone else mentioned it (and apologies if they did - I didn't read the whole thread), but Salon.com ran a series of articles last year (roughly) that exposed the extent of this radio silliness... Much more info than this article, and an uglier painting too.

    The zillions of dollars of debt, it seems to me, are going to be the downfall of clearchannel. Okay, so they aggregated 30% of the US market for a while... after another while, it all falls apart. Lather, rinse, repeat. Isn't there a Norse myth like this?

  159. Dorkwad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry, but I'm tired of hearing shit like this. Of course Microsoft has a Monopoly. Yes, they have destructive practises. So did the rail barons, the oil barons, etc.

    Monopolies will exist. But they'll also fall, or become irrelevant. Time doesn't pass infinitely quickly. It takes time, in the real world, not some made-up shit world for Monopolies to be overturned by market forces.

    Watch, it'll happen. Not as quickly as you might like. But it is as inevitable as the tide.

  160. Re: Marx by neocon · · Score: 1

    No, it's why the system inherently limits monopolies Remember when IBM was the `destructive megacorp'? Sure seems to have taken care of itself...

  161. tempting by Laplace · · Score: 2

    I'm really thinking about buying an mp3 player for my car. I can put hours of music on it. No commercials, no interruptions, no repeats in the course of my drive. Yeah.

    --
    The middle mind speaks!
    1. Re:tempting by delphi125 · · Score: 1

      What I want in the car is mp3 music EXCEPT the news & traffic report from the radio. Since those are usually on the (half) hour, it should be doable with needing a portable PC. But at present I'm cycling the quarter mile to work, so its not such a big issue!

  162. Re: Marx by neocon · · Score: 1

    Never mind `live there', would the poster be willing to provide any example of such a thing actually existing?

  163. Re:One clearchannel station that plays "good" musi by PongStroid · · Score: 1
    I guess what I'm saying is that individual stations have more say in their programming that it at first appears.


    A single Clear Channel outlet has added a single local band to their playlist. That's not an accident.


    The choice of the single band was most likely made locally, but there was most likely a directive from 'corporate' which stated something like: "Choose a popular local band/artist that meets your station's demographics. (Please keep a copy of your market surveys available as proof research has been completed - of course we trust you, but we have had problems with other outlets in the past not performing this essential step.) Add them into rotation for 3 weeks: every 3 hours at :10 or :40. For 2 weeks, every 6 hours. The artist must be dropped from your playlist after 5 weeks."


  164. Re: "college" radio by Computer! · · Score: 2

    Well thank god you're here to show the un-enlightened sheep the way.

    Yeah, actually, thank God people like him are here. Typical reaction to someone with taste and a voice. Call us "music Nazis", but we hate boring music.

    You know what else? It's because of those sheep that I can't turn on my radio in Dallas without grinding my teeth to stumps. I sure wish someone would show them the way, and maybe it'll be this guy. What's it to you?

    --
    If you fall off a building, go real limp, because maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will be like hey, free dummy
  165. Is clear channel behind pay radio? by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

    I just read that the RIAA wants us to pay to listen to the radio. http://www.uncoveror.com/radio.htm They don't mention clear channel, but I would bet that they are involved!

    --
    How ya like dat?
  166. Fort Wayne by yerricde · · Score: 2

    You are good. Here's how your predictions match Fort Wayne, Indiana, a city of about 200,000:

    I'm betting they have a modern hard rock station (Staind, Disturbed, Kid Rock, Korn, Godsmack)

    Extreme 102.3.

    a "Good Times, Great Oldies" station

    Sunny 106.3 (1940s to 1960s) and Oldies 101.7 (1950s to 1970s).

    a Classic Rock station which for some reason mixes in quite a bit of 80s hair metal

    WBYR-FM 98.9 The Bear.

    A top-40 station that caters to the teenybopper crowd

    WMEE-FM 97.3.

    a "No-repeat workday" light-rock mix-it up station for the office-crowd

    WAJI Majic 95.1 (1970s-today)

    "Talk-Radio" with call-in shows hosted by a crowd of conversers who hash and re-hash the same 30 minutes of subject matter over and over their 3-hour show segments.

    WOWO and WGL (both on AM).

    We used to have a dance station (Killer Bee 106.3), but it attracted too many under-18 listeners (the ones that don't yet have money to pay advertisers) and was pressured to redefine itself into a modern hard rock station (Storm 106.3) and then a moldy oldies station (Sunny 106.3).

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  167. Re: Marx by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

    Which Marx are you talking about? Groucho, Cheeko, Harpo, Zeppo or Richard?

    --
    How ya like dat?
  168. Does Radio Power Leave Any to the Consumer? by evilninja · · Score: 1
    From the article: "You don't get hurt by what you don't play."

    If that statement is true, there is no power left in the hands of the consumer. I would like to think that my choice to boycott commercial radio has some effect on station ratings. But I doubt it does. As long as media conglomerates like Clear Channel can show advertisers that they're programming for a certain demographic, the advertisers will be happy to pay for air time on a station that monopolizes 50% of commercial radio in a given city. There is no way to measure the audience with pinpoint accuracy, and I question the accuracy of current methods.

    Radio stations seem to have lost sight of the fact they have influence over modern music. By deriving radio programming from Billboard charts, the mega-stars' album sales inflate, closing the door on any rising stars. Not only does this mean that the consumer has no power over corporate radio, but we've lost power in the fight against the RIAA by allowing the centralization of media/power for non-democratic use.

    Listen to internet radio while you still can, and support the phenomenal efforts of the independent stations, too.

  169. KLIT exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KUNT and KLIT

    KLIT 92.7 and WANG 105.1 (oldies), but I couldn't find KUNT.

    -- Pinocchio
  170. Re:raido sucks and advertisers are stoooopid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    actually I suspect its because they believe their own marketing buzz.

    they have established that it is "uncool" to be old through their advertising systems. They then brain wash themselves with their own propaganda, and then since they can see how uncool old people are, they know they cant use the ONLY marketing tool they know, coolness.

  171. In your haste to spew venom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You entirely missed the point.

    I was saying that the states we saw in the 20th century were at best perversions of the state imagined in the works of Marx. I was not implying that I ought to be given "the reins of power" as you put it, nor that we ought to foster a marxist worker state.

    It's possible to make a point about something without doing so from a position of advocacy. And while we're on the topic, the ideal worker state Marx imagined wouldn't need to be the violent revolution that was the hallmark of 20th century communism. It would be part of the natural progression of dialectical materialism. So if it's to be, neither my advocacy nor lack therof, nor your general (apparent) hate of such a possibility, will be able to prevent it or cause it to come about.

    1. Re:In your haste to spew venom by neocon · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, I understand what you are saying, and want to point out that in their time, each of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, and others thought that what had been tried so far was not `real' communism, and if only given the chance they could do better. And we've all seen what happened when they were given that chance.

      So again, you'll have to forgive us if we take a long hard look at the tens of millions lying in unmarked graves, and vow that we'll never again take a chance with systems which put the rights of the commune over the rights of the individual, no matter how good their proponents try to make them sound.

    2. Re:In your haste to spew venom by 00_NOP · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, I understand what you are saying, and want to point out that in their time, each of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, and others thought that what had been tried so far was not `real' communism, and if only given the chance they could do better. And we've all seen what happened when they were given that chance.

      So again, you'll have to forgive us if we take a long hard look at the tens of millions lying in unmarked graves, and vow that we'll never again take a chance with systems which put the rights of the commune over the rights of the individual, no matter how good their proponents try to make them sound.
      ,br>
      Who mentioned Communism? I didn't!

      I specifically said that the issue was developing a politics that connected the discontents of /.ers - who were reporting phenomena explained by Marxists/Marxians with a humane and no-repressive approach.

      I think the experience of the Soviet Union et al suggests that the state is not the answer to these problems.

      But clearly the market isn't either - as we are having to interfere with the market all over the place, Ma Bell, Microsoft, the lsit goes on...

    3. Re:In your haste to spew venom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "each of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, and others thought that what had been tried so far was not `real' communism, and if only given the chance they could do better."

      Care to back that up with facts/references or are you counting on everyone just taking your word for it? I'm interested in this psychic vision you seem to have into the personal thoughts of these men.

    4. Re:In your haste to spew venom by neocon · · Score: 1

      Who mentioned Communism? I didn't!

      No, that's correct, you mentioned `Marxism', just as did any number of the last century's tyrants. In their time, any number of philosophies, Communism included, paraded themselves as the `real' Marxism, and we've seen where each of them led. So again, you'll have to forgive our skepticism.

      the state is not the answer to these problems.

      We agree on that, clearly.

      But clearly the market isn't either - as we are having to interfere with the market all over the place, Ma Bell, Microsoft, the lsit goes on...

      Of course, many would argue that it is exactly government interference with the market which creates such anomalies. Ma Bell is a perfect example -- surely you are not arguing that a company having abused a monopoly it was granted by the government is a good argument for government intervention?

    5. Re:In your haste to spew venom by neocon · · Score: 1

      Each of these men stated clearly their thoughts on the matter. Each dismissed in their own statements the previous Marxist experiments as not `real Marxism', and each called their own tyranny Marxism.

      Or are you arguing that it takes a psychic to know that these men were Communists? Really?

    6. Re:In your haste to spew venom by 00_NOP · · Score: 1

      No, that's correct, you mentioned `Marxism', just as did any number of the last century's tyrants. In their time, any number of philosophies, Communism included, paraded themselves as the `real' Marxism, and we've seen where each of them led. So again, you'll have to forgive our skepticism.

      Why can you only engage in this argument in terms of cliches? Are ideas and debate too difficult for you because they challenge the simplistic sloganeering you engage in?

      The market fails. Or are you saying MS should be celebrated as a great success story and simply left to get on with it?

      For the first time ever capitalism is a world economic system and it is failing billions of people.

      Democrats are entitled to say that without being accused of wanting to impose a dictatorship. Have you heard of Felipe Gonzales, Willi Brandt? They'd both read and been influenced by Marx, are they/were they closet Stalinists?

      Every social democrat in the world today lives in the shadow of Marxian thought. Are they to be supressed as dictators in waiting?

      /. is full of posts about the failings of the capitalist system, the fact that Marxist politics has been a complete failure does not mean that Marxist sociology is worthless - that's the point I made in my original post.

    7. Re:In your haste to spew venom by neocon · · Score: 1

      Why can you only engage in this argument in terms of cliches? Are ideas and debate too difficult for you because they challenge the simplistic sloganeering you engage in?

      Where do you get this? What's `cliched' about arguing that we should learn from history's mistakes -- especially the truly bloody ones?

      The market fails. Or are you saying MS should be celebrated as a great success story and simply left to get on with it?

      No, I'm saying that the market will take care of MS's monopoly just as it took care of IBM's monopoly. It's not been that long since IBM was the big scary mega-monopoly, remember.

      For the first time ever capitalism is a world economic system and it is failing billions of people.

      Wanna back this up? Remember that billions and billions of the world's people live in totalitarian and semi-collectivist systems, and these are almost universally the most miserable nations of all...

      Democrats are entitled to say that without being accused of wanting to impose a dictatorship. Have you heard of Felipe Gonzales, Willi Brandt? They'd both read and been influenced by Marx, are they/were they closet Stalinists?

      No one is accusing you or them of wanting a totalitarianism. What I am suggesting is that if an idea has been tried a bunch of times and has resulted in totalitarianism every time it was tried, we should consider that before trying it again.

      Every social democrat in the world today lives in the shadow of Marxian thought. Are they to be supressed as dictators in waiting?

      Of course no one is talking about suppressing anyone, but surely you agree that I (and the majority of Americans, who agree with me) have just as much right to disagree with them, and to say so...

  172. trolling again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You silly little boy. You still know nothing about strategic defense! And your latest journal entry is a piece of crap. Thanks for playing. Stop trying, your're hopelessly intellecually stunted; and no, yelling loudly and insisting on your point doesn't help you seem smarter.

    1. Re:trolling again? by neocon · · Score: 1

      Clever. Do you actually have a rational point to make? Or are you relying on the typical childish stunt of substituting insult and invective for rational discussion?

  173. A GOOD Wash DC Station? Not Likely. by hndrcks · · Score: 2

    How can you say the station with "Elliot in the Morning" is decent at anything?
    If one was to look up "suck-ass sellout corporate radio station with typical asinine dork 'radio personalities'" in the dictionary, DC101 would be the example.

    And then we have WHFS "Modern Rock" - supposedly 'Alternative' - alternative to what? Country and Western? Turning the goddam radio off?

    It's too bad one of the last good radio stations in the area, WRNR (Eastern Shore / Annapolis), can't beef up their signal into the DC area. But then they would just be assimilated into the DC radio shitpile just like all the rest.

    If I sound a little pissed about the state of DC radio - it's because I am. My car doesn't have a tape or CD player!

    --
    Everyone will start to cheer when you put on your sailin' shoes.
    1. Re:A GOOD Wash DC Station? Not Likely. by Hitch · · Score: 2

      heh....well, in the main I agree with you. DC101 was amazing back when they were an independent station. but they are getting better, and I admit Elliot is growing on me. maybe I'm just numbing myself to the situation but......I listen to CDs more than anything and Elliot just to have something to keep me awake on the way to work.

      --
      You see, without that little doohicky, the universe stops.
      http://propheteer.org
    2. Re:A GOOD Wash DC Station? Not Likely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And then we have WHFS "Modern Rock" - supposedly 'Alternative' - alternative to what?

      Someone wrote a piece on how "alternative music" is neither. http://www.disemia.com/creation/issue_7/whyalterna tivemusicisneither.html

  174. Re:raido sucks and advertisers are stoooopid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you read my comment? I said the 54+ crowd is actually swayed by advertising. It's the young know-it-alls in debt past their cheeks that don't pay attention to adverts.

    Since you need so much edjumicating, scare up air checks for some of the 60s, 70s, 80s djs. Look for Larry Lujack in particular, great announcer. Also pay close attention to the songs he played, just a tremendous variety. And guess who bought his adverts, yup, 60+, they're the ones with money to burn, all bills paid, milking the pension plans and nest eggs.

  175. Direct links by Xenophon+Fenderson, · · Score: 1

    Just so no one else has to navigate their crappy JavaScript web site, here are direct links to the Real Audio streams: high quality and enhanced quality.

    Hm, didn't notice the text-only mode link before I started wading through all that HTML. But it doesn't seem to have links to the Real Audio files, either, so there you go.

    --
    I'm proud of my Northern Tibetian Heritage
  176. moderators on crack today! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're the only one that intelligently replied, you hit it eggsactly.

    Stooooooooopid moderators.

  177. There's a few very good reasons this won't work by Storm+Damage · · Score: 1

    Just from reading the rest of the paragraph you quoted:

    On the AM side, Clear Channel's three area stations -- WRC, WTEM and WTNT -- rely heavily on syndicated fare...The daily three-hour "Money Talk" program on WRC (1260) is one such "brokered" show.

    In other words, that $1200/hour rate is for airtime on the AM band, which by nature is definitely NOT large-market. Your chances of getting kids to tune into AM after school are just about zero. How many kids even realize there are still stations on AM. How many of those ever tune into those stations to see what's on them? How many of THOSE are trend-setting types?

    I bet the 3-5 pm slot on the local large-market FM station will probably run you $12,000/hour, if you can get it that cheap (The commercials can go for upwards of $400/minute).

  178. ok so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You refuse to acknowledge that you're just not taking part in the conversation with a reasonable degree of willingness to discuss matters other than your own polemnical viewpoints, which are tangential to the original intent of the post and do nothing to respond to the point. You are, then, trolling and are no longer worthy of response.

    1. Re:ok so by neocon · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, I think the onus on those who would argue that we `try again' at an approach which has already killed millions to explain why we should do so.

      I am very interested to hear, and to discuss, any rational argument for such an approach. I am not willing to take it as a given that Communism as tried so far is not `real Communism', and things would be different if we would just try again.

  179. Brave New Waves by rabidphilosophy · · Score: 1

    I like Matmos, Boards of Canada and Techno Animal alot right now. Remember that Candians, or lucky Yanks can hear truely ground breaking radio on Brave New Waves, on CBC Radio 2. Starts at 12:05 AM on weekdays.

    --
    God sucks at running this place. Impeach God at
  180. Re:One clearchannel station that plays "good" musi by Hitch · · Score: 2

    actually, elliot also plays "mary mac" - my personal favorite. They played most of the songs off welbilt's album a week ago and had them in studio last week. I look forward to more of the same in the future.

    --
    You see, without that little doohicky, the universe stops.
    http://propheteer.org
  181. Re:Not just influences... OT Zep references by beertopia · · Score: 1

    Well, I was going to mention a couple of other examples, but just check this out: http://www.sgi.net/zeppelin/faq/faql_1.html#18

    Holy crap! There's 20 or 30 songs listed there. True, folk/blues/rock are all about borrowing, and extending traditions, which worked just fine before the record industry existed. After that, it worked just fine if you took from dead people... the times that Zeppelin didn't, account for Willie Dixon successfully suing them.

    If you've got an interest in Zep, and the blues, that FAQ could be a real good source of 'new' old stuff to check out... and since a lot of it's public domain, from people who died 60 years ago, you don't even have to feel guilty about downloading it...

    --
    -- 'intellectual property' is oxymoronic
  182. Re: Marx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Byteboyz? I like that one, new to me. I usually call them slashtards (not to be albinist or anything!) or slashkiddies. :)

    Yes indeed, a federal republic blows, does it not? Too bad we don't have a confederacy, putting power where it belongs. At least more so that with the fed.

  183. nope sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you aren't worth the time. you won't understand the original point; you equate the philosophical postulates of Mars with communism in the 20th century, despite being told twice that this is inaccurate. You prefer not to understand. Bye, troller.

    1. Re:nope sorry by neocon · · Score: 1

      Wait is this another Mars thread? I thought he said Marx :-P

      Now, not all of the systems we have discussed called themselves Communist, but all called themselves Marxist, and assured us that they would be better than all those other Marxists.

      So again, you'll just have to realize that people are rightly skeptical of further groups claiming to be the `real Marxists'. And more importantly, people are rightly skeptical of further groups calling for the `rights' of the commune to be placed above the rights of the individual.

  184. Re: Marx by jafac · · Score: 2

    Tyranny of the majority? I'd say using the word "Tyranny" is kind of a loaded word, and redundant. Nobody wants Tyranny of anything. The fact is, the only good form of government is a benevolent dictatorship. The only problem is locating a benevolent dictator. The same applies in locating a benevolent president, congress, parliment, or outright votership as in a "pure" democracy.

    Bottom line is, people suck, and should not be trusted to govern. themselves or others. period. Unfortunately, there just ain't no alternative.

    --

    These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  185. Re:Not just influences... OT Zep references by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the times that Zeppelin didn't, account for Willie Dixon successfully suing them.

    What hypocracy! If that's true, I just lost a lot of respect for Dixon. Although, it's pretty likely it was Chess records doing the sueing and not Dixon.

  186. selling out by gotih · · Score: 1

    as someone who has been pissed at a band for 'selling out' i can tell you that, for me, hearing the band on the radio _every_day_ gets tireing. the band i'm thinking of was the Mighty Mighty Bosstones. when i was in high school they put out hard punk-ska with very rough vocals and songs about depressive drinking and the devil (and were understandably never played on the radio). then they signed to a big label, digitally smoothed the vocals and wrote shitty mass-appeal songs. no, i don't have a problem with a band getting big and making money, they just have to keep making good music -- if the white stripes start test-marketing songs and start sounding like Blink or something i will get pissed.

    --

    fear is the mind killer
  187. Re: Marx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody seems to see that the horrid and disgusting acts of oppression and tyranny, have nothing to do with Marxism. In fact those acts were perversions of Marxism. The end product Marxist state can only be attained by *subversion*, or a long term socialization process, because violence and political repression do not make loyal comrades or friends that can be counted on, and interdependence is one of the most important ingredients in the Marxist ideology. I accept that the idea of deliberate socialization is nearly as repugnant as violence to some, but it is happening all around us every day, and evolving. We accept the status quo, at least to some degree wherever we are because those are the parameters we can continue to live in. I really don't give a fuck about Marxism, but so much opinion and policy is based on inaccurate assessments of Marxist theory.

  188. Re: Radio Sucks? So what? by elemental23 · · Score: 2

    That's why I have a 10 disc CD changer in my car.

    With the exeption of a classical station I occasionally listen to, I haven't listened to commercial radio in years. College stations excepted, but then, they don't have the problems Clear Channel and any other "popular" music format stations have.

    --
    I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
  189. Re:There's a Vegas like station for this guy on XM by JakBird · · Score: 1

    For what it's worth (and a bit ironic) here in Las Vegas there is a 40s/50s/60s/etc station which plays ratpack songs, KJUL. I listen to it at night when the commercials are few and far between. It's not called "Vegas Radio" though. As for it not being a successful format, KJUL is one of the highest rated local stations according to the newspaper (it must be true, it's in print).

    --
    "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now" - Bob Dylan, My Back Pages
  190. Re: Marx by Saeger · · Score: 1
    ... people suck ...

    Hey! You ripped off Andy Richter! :)

    --

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
  191. # of listeners is unmeasured. by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

    You can't measure number of radio listeners.
    That's why natioanally syndicated shows like Dr Demonto are more common in small towns than big cities. It works like this: The syndicating group (in this case, Westwood One Radio Network) wants to change the radio stations that carry their show based on how big an audience it reaches. But since they can't actually tell how many people are listening in your area, they instead base the price on how many *could* be listening in the area. Therefore radio stations who's broadcast area contains more population have to pay more to carry the syndicated show, regardless of how many people in that area actually tune in to the show.
    So then the Dr Demonto show is too expensive for a radio station to carry in a big city, but acceptably priced in small towns.

    So how is this relevant? Well, they wouldn't be using such a sloppy pricing scale if they actually had a means of measuring number of listeners. As flawed as the Neilson's are for TV ratings, radio doesn't even have anything *that* good.

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  192. Re: Marx by bhurt · · Score: 2

    Here's the problem with this theory: monopolies are in the best position to take advantage of new technologies and become monopolies in them as well.

    Case in point: IBM. IBM was founded in the 1800's as a punch card monopoly. A variant of the Jacquard loom allowed you to sort, perform simple sums, etc., on stacks of punch cards, and every big buisness had built up a library of punched card stacks (literally a data warehouse). And IBM was the #1 supplier of punch cards and punch card equipment, holding a monopoly over the market as great as it ever held over the computer market. When computers were introduced in the late fourties/early fifties as buisness tool, IBM moved into computers to protect it's punch card monopoly.

    IBM held onto it's monopoly position in computers using tactics as scummy and evil as any Microsoft has used (see Big Blue for details) for over 30 years. They only made one mistake: they made a computer where IBM did not make the CPU and write the Operating System, the original PC. Which lead to the fall of IBM and the rise of the Wintel duopoly. I make a very strong case that the IBM monopoly, started in the 1880's, is very much alive and well, just not IBM's anymore.

    Every other monopoly I am aware of has fallen to goverment action. Every one. From United Shoe to Standard Oil to AT&T. Long before technological innovation could overthrow them (if, indeed, technological innovation *can* overthrow a monopoly- an unproved assumption).

  193. Re: Marx by Saeger · · Score: 2
    in a world without significant scarcity, an essentially communalistic system may arise as capitalistic incentives no longer have the same pull.

    That's what I think will happen as well. As nanotech, AI, robotics, and other advances provide us with an economy of abundance decades down the road, a new form of "communism" (economic, not political) will probably slowly evolve. (Or maybe we'll end up with the darkside: corporate feudalism... or maybe a worldwide totalitarian state with John Ashcroft as its first Dicktator. I don't know... ask Harry Seldon)

    Capitalism won't go away completely however. No matter how efficient we get, we've still got five fundamentally scarce resources to balance infinite human wants: time, energy, matter, space and intelligence.

    --

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
  194. Good comparison? by MenTaLguY · · Score: 2

    People have been keeping secrets since the beginning of time.

    I'd venture to say that the Venetians guarded their secret so closely because they understood the critical difference between an idea and a physical object. I'm sure they weren't worried about the eyeglasses themselves except as ordinary physical property.

    There may be arbitrarily many pairs of eyeglasses (which cannot be easily shared), but there is only one idea of a specific method of manufacture, which must by definition be shared among those who "possess" it.

    If posession of a physical thing meant the same as the posession of an idea, consider what it would be like if the eyeglasses were treated in the same fashion as the ideas about their manufacture. They certainly wouldn't be selling them.

    --

    DNA just wants to be free...
  195. Re: Marx by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

    Technically Marxist communism is merely workers being in charge of the companies they work for. Something like an employee-owned business that doesn't sell portions of itself on the stock market would qualify. Somewhere along the line it became synonymous with full-on socialism and that connotation has never once gone away.
    The silly thing is that communism and capitalism are not opposite ends of the same spectrum as people seem to believe. Take for example the Amana commune - an appliance-building money-making collective.
    The real opposites are full-on capitalism and full-on socialism. Both are extremes, in one case leading to a monopoly in charge of everything, and in the other leading to a government in charge of everything. In *BOTH* cases, the problem is that any sufficiently gigantic organization is no longer beholden to the people that made it big, and can abuse its power without reproach. And that's true regardless of whether the gigantic organization is a government or a corporate monopoly. When there's only one game in town, it's bad news for the little guy, either way.

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  196. Re: Marx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Capitalism does tend towards monopoly. But the monopolistic trend is countered by some things Marx never considered. Inventers, developers, people who just think outside the business box, they then provide more competition.



    Actually, some recent studies purport to show that invention is greatest when a field is dominated by oligopolies. An oligarchy being a situation where several large companies dominate a market, and compete on other foundations than price alone.


    There's an interesting book on this topic by William Baumol called 'The Free Market Innovation Machine'.


    Radio is not a market based on 'price', but studying whether or not the radio companies compete solely on the basis of audience is probably also worth looking at.

  197. Re:There's a Vegas like station for this guy on XM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here in Denver, CO, KEZW (1430 AM) has been playing that type of music for a long time (maybe 20+ years). Overall, the mix is 40's through early 60's, with special shows at particular times ... show tunes and the all-Frank Sinatra show on Sunday afternoons, radio dramas for an hour each weekday evening, and so on.

  198. Re:radio sucks by Vinnie_333 · · Score: 0

    Perhaps radio programmers are in cahoots with CD manufacterers. Because of the crappy music played on FM radio, my CD collection keeps growing and growing so I have something good to listen to.

    --

    "We shall party like the Greeks of old! You know the ones I mean." - HedonismBot
  199. Actually... by Sigma+Kiwi · · Score: 1

    I think the mixing formula is:

    Crap + Payola ---> Crayola

    Crayons may be fun, but they rarely ever approach actual art.

  200. Re:The problem is a failure of the market by tsaotsao · · Score: 1

    Given that this is the home of monumental rap works like "Straight Outta Compton", the Chronic and DoggyStyle I think L.A. can be excused for playing up its strengths. It may be too late to root out gang violence, we might as well enjoy it as much as possible.

    Second, the Cure is great. Well, everything up to but not including "Wish" is great.

    The real gems of L.A. radio are KPFK and KPCC IMHO. Although they rarely have decent music they have good local programming (KPFK had more before the Democracy Now crowd "improved" Pacifica). Good alternatives to stations dominated by nationally syndicated hosts.

  201. Re:selling out *cough*Sugar Ray*cough* by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 1

    The same thing happened with Sugar Ray. Their first album, Lemonade and Brownies, was a really good hard rock uncompromising type of album.

    Then Floored came out in 1997 and I was still impressed. "Fly," which probably became the song they're best known for, was in the second album. It was a gentler type of song, but it provided a nice break in the rest of the album, which was very hard still.

    Sugar Ray's third album was their "sellout" album. I had my brother burn me a copy of his CD so I could check it out. I couldn't stomach more than 10 seconds of each track; they all sounded like bad knock-offs of "Fly" from the previous album. One "gentle" song amongst a hard rock album is fine, but ka-rist! this was too much. That burned CD was quickly microwaved.

    Sugar Ray may or may not have had a fourth album come out...I wouldn't know because I stopped paying attention to them when they stopped being creative and sold out.

  202. Pirate/Campus Radio the last frontier??? by InfiL00p · · Score: 1

    Campus Radio Stations are just as easily targeted to payola as anyone else (both in Canada and the US). What's worse is that Campus Stations subscribe to the Campus Music Journal's New Music Report, which is a Music Industry Magazine. This is where the whole formula behind "college first, corporate next" comes from, especially when it comes to alternative rock (largely in part by the success of Nirvana).

    Seeing that I currently work at a small Campus Station in Canada, I can tell you the major differences between campus radio North of the border is that revenues of these stations are traditionally much less, and there isn't a station that is really much interest to CMJ. CMJ has a rating system for stations, where 1 is the LPFM college stations and 5 stations are the stations found at large college stations in the US. The largest stations in Canada are still only a 4 and the average campus station in Canada is a 2.

    The Canadian Music Industry (If you can call it that, usually US success has to be obtained before anything else happens) has its own journals to determine what should be played, and payola happens here too. For example, to play and chart the latest Strokes CD (Which I thought sucked!) they sent us a ton of promo stuff to try and woo us and claimed to be my friend. The Strokes did get airplay because someone liked them, but all the extra crap wasn't necessary.

    Of course, if you don't believe me about how the industry is invading everything but the pirate radio stations out on the fringe, check out A Rancid Amoeba's website and read both "Some of your friends are already this fucked" and "Bubba: The College Radio Music Director Webzine".

    Radio in the US doesn't completely suck though. I heard that the Pacifica Network has recently solved some of their board troubles and should be back to bring good radio to the US. Also, I should also point out that CBC in Canada is government owned and rarely bends to the Music Industry rules. I recommend checking out 120seconds.com and CBC Radio 3.

  203. Shove your Marxist fantasies up your ass... by ccmay · · Score: 1
    This is what capitalism does, people - it tends to monopoly, and restricts human development.

    Rubbish. Whenever you find restrictive monopolies, you will always find they are backed up by the anti-capitalist forces of collectivist government.

    When capitalism fails, it is usually the fault of government-worshiping Democrats and other leftist idiots who never saw a regulation they didn't like, in an unholy alliance with crooked businessmen who care not a whit about politics except insofar as they can use the sovereign power of government to run their competitors out of town.

    Every monopoly is an argument for smashing some government agency to bits, and firing worthless regulators and parasitic bureaucrats by the tens of thousands.

    The great pity is that the left - and nowhere more so than in the US - seem unable to produce a decent theory of politics - the theory of praxis as it was once called - that connects the frustrations of those who post these articles on /. with proposals to change the world.

    Nor will they ever. Leftism and collectivism is the ideology of fools and children. It must be utterly destroyed and the powers of government undermined, whenever and however it can. Devil take the hindmost.

    I am teaching my children to hate the government and all who propose its expansion. That's the only way anything will ever change.

    Capitalism is still making us pay for the Soviet Union's experience of repression.

    Yep. Still a ways to go yet, about 200 million human souls sacrificed on the altar of collectivism is a debt that 20th century government-loving idiocy is going to have a tough time paying off.

    Poor, pitiful, pathetic Marxists see everything through the lens of the class struggle. They remind me of medieval scientists who thought that Aristotle had it all figured out fifteen hundred years previously. To them, all of science and medicine was mere commentary on Aristotle's theories, and as a result, reality passed them by and now we laugh at them for their ignorance.

    You stupid Marxists are next. There are only a few of you ridiculous buffoons left, mostly on college campuses. Anyone who has ever met a payroll or owned company stock-- and that is more and more of the public every year-- knows you are totally full of shit. Your descendants will consider you on a par with Torquemada and the Salem witch burners.

    -ccm

    --
    Too much Law; not enough Order.
  204. Re:Good music will be heard. See Fugazi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh please, spare us!

    For every "good" band that makes it, there's a thousand totally manufactured butt puppet groups/singers hyped to death on MTV and corporate radio.

    I guess you're dumb enough to believe in the American Dream [TM] too.

  205. right vector, wrong distance (theed) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree in where you're going, I disagree with how far you seem to be trying to go. Never raise someone on hate, for when the pendulum swings, they will suddenly be the worst of possible influences on society. Point them toward what is right, instead of away from what is wrong.

    The difference may be subtle now, but if we do get the government out of our hair a bit, we'll need to know when to back off.

  206. Re:They *do* have a video! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's called Instrument.

  207. Re:raido sucks and advertisers are stoooopid by moheeb · · Score: 1
    "Advertisers run like hell from the 54+ crowd....They're the ones with the...best tastes"

    How do you know they have the "best tastes"?

    I think I might have the best taste.

  208. Re: Marx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please mod parent up, insightful.

  209. Re:The problem is a failure of the market by gotih · · Score: 1

    ok, i just want to go on record as saying that yes, the cure are good. wish was my first tape, bought for me for my 14th (?) birthday but as you said, everything before that album (exclusively) was good.

    KPCC is good talk but they don't play music at all.

    KPFK - i usually enjoy Democracy Now but my favorite show is 'Seditious Beats' now called 'Divine Forces Radio' for some reason. unfortunately, it's on from midnight to 3am on friday nights. and i would really, really, really, like to have the show 'Aware' with lisa garr removed from the lineup -- new age health shit that is like 'do what we say and your problems will all evaporate.' but hey, someone must enjoy it....

    --

    fear is the mind killer