[BC] format diversity

[WFIFeng@aol.com]

In a message dated 06/27/2006 12:19:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
FrankGott at aol.com writes:

 > But Bernie, not everybody likes vanilla.  The concept of having, oh, let's
 >  say 20 strong signals in an area is not to offer 20 varieties of top 40.
 > The intent is to offer a variety of different formats.  Let the listener
choose.
 >

Come to this area, and this is exactly what you will find. Of 50 listenable
signals, ~20 are "Top 40". (Add to this mix the 5 receivable copies of one
station, because they have so many overlapping translators, and want 
still more!)

In a message dated 06/26/2006 2:26:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
jjohnson at goodnews.net writes:

 > That's good to know! I have nothing against religion or religious
 >  broadcasters. It is just that diversity is waning on the broadcast
 >  spectrum.

In this area, between AM & FM, there are about one hundred *listenable*
signals on an average radio. Of those 100, There are *three* English-language
stations carrying a "religious" format. There is one Spanish. Many 
markets have a
much greater percentage of "religious" stations than this... of 30 to 40
listenable AM & FM signals, they may have 5 or 6 in English.

 > Often, as in this case, universities and colleges are dumping
 >  their public radio stations for financial reasons. Radio is no longer
 >  considered an asset to educational institutions.

When there are 4 or 5 different stations, (not counting x-lators) all
carrying NPR, where's the diversity in that?

Even though most of what they play I find utterly appalling, they should let
the students run it rather than "the Bird". I guess the problem stems from not
getting enough students interested in the thing to begin with. That's a sad
situation, right there.

Willie...