[BC] SBE Focus

[Larry Bloomfield]

On question Mario -  What are you doing to improve SBE?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Larry Bloomfield, KA6UTC
Bloomfield Enterprises, LLC
1980 25th St., Florence, OR  97439-9717
(541) 902-2424 - Home/Office
WWW.Tech-Notes.TV  -- See you on the Road Show.




Mario Hieb wrote:

> My beef (again) is that SBE is chartered as a professional 
> organization (with a responsibility to the membership) and not a 
> representative/lobbyist/activist/apologist of the broadcast licensee, 
> the NFL, NAB, etc.
>
> These organizations can afford high-priced attorneys, lobbyists and 
> consultants to look out for their interests. SBE should focus 
> exclusively on the needs of the individual engineer, and there are many.
>
> SBE's focus should be on three things:
>
> 1. SBE members.
> 2. SBE members.
> 3. SBE members.
>
> After this, the focus should be on:
>
> 4. Professional development of SBE members.
> 5. Engineering education.
> 6. Salary issues.
> 7. Professional ethics.
> 8. Safety, life and property issues.
>
> Yeah, it's cool to hang out with the big boys, but they don't pay the 
> dues and many SBE members are getting perturbed.
>
>
> Mario
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> At 11:06 PM 5/11/2005, you wrote:
>
>> Message: 26
>> Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 23:09:04 -0400
>> From: "Mike McCarthy" <mre at ais.net>
>> Subject: Re: [BC] SBE
>> To: Broadcast Radio Mailing List <broadcast at radiolists.net>
>> Message-ID: <200505120309.j4C394CB095329 at mail1.mx.voyager.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>>
>> I'm on the FCC committee. We don't comment on all matters which come
>> before us.  We also don't expend much of the society's resources
>> either. Most of the work is done by e-mail and electronic means...which
>> are virtually zero cost. I fail to see your argument about mis-using
>> society resources.
>>
>> We do file comments on matters of technical substance which apply
>> universally to all licensees in either of the services or modes and/or
>> where a precedent could set a very BAD example. We don't enter into
>> standards debates other than to possibly concur with the proposed
>> stndard if we feel it's the right thing.
>>
>> It has been the long standing hallmark of the society to address
>> matters of interference and coorination so as to prevent such.  SBE
>> collaberates with the NAB, MSTV, and other industry groups on comments
>> where a universal voice is appropriate. Case in point, SBE fought the
>> proposed on-channel warning system by pointing out alternative channels
>> and modes which already exist for that application and to point out the
>> falicy onin their system.
>>
>> We joined with MSTV on fighting MSS and getting all of the MSS
>> proponents, then Nextel to pay for relocation expenses to all incumbant
>> uses of 2 Ghz ENG cahnnels.
>>
>> The FCC approached us on assisting them in cleaning up Part 74
>> issues.  And except for the Part 101 coordination and video assisted
>> cameras for making movies, the SBE's industry comments and suggestions
>> prevailed in that effort.
>>
>> So Mario...what's your beef with SBE this week?  Long time readers know
>> you are not their biggest supporter.  But I'm sure Ray Benedict would
>> like to know since you are a member.
>>
>> MM
>
>
> -
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: 
> http://www.radiolists.net/
>