On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:06:51 -0600, -MIKE- wrote:


I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.

The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
completely ignored.



Wow. I thought I was the only Camp OU club member in the group. I used to
live in Scott Quad when a couple guys in the dorm got the idea of broadcasting
radio via the dorm electrical circuits. They used a room back by the entrance
to the steam tunnels. That made it dry, nice and warm, and you could get to
just about any building on campus without getting wet on a rainy day, which is
how I found the room they were using in the first place.

This evolved into ACRN (All Campus Radio Network) in 1969-70 when they got the
school to help fund it. Prior to that they paid for it out of their own pockets
as I recall. They first incorporated some nearby dorms, and eventually expanded.
It was still using the wiring for broadcasting when I left the dorms. From your
post, it sounds like it has evolved into a major undertaking.

I wonder how the original founders would take it. I always had the impression
they started this as a hobby on a shoestring. I'm sure they would have taken
commercials though. They were always needing cash.

The next time you hit the town, hoist one for me at the Union or the CI.
Actually, if it's at the Union, go ahead and have one of the steamed coney dogs
for me too. The coney sauce they used way back when was the best coney sauce
in the world. If it is the same stuff, have two.

Regards,
Roy

On 11/19/10 10:22 PM, Roy wrote:
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 19:06:51 -0600, wrote:


I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.

The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
completely ignored.



Wow. I thought I was the only Camp OU club member in the group. I used to
live in Scott Quad when a couple guys in the dorm got the idea of broadcasting
radio via the dorm electrical circuits. They used a room back by the entrance
to the steam tunnels. That made it dry, nice and warm, and you could get to
just about any building on campus without getting wet on a rainy day, which is
how I found the room they were using in the first place.

This evolved into ACRN (All Campus Radio Network) in 1969-70 when they got the
school to help fund it. Prior to that they paid for it out of their own pockets
as I recall. They first incorporated some nearby dorms, and eventually expanded.
It was still using the wiring for broadcasting when I left the dorms. From your
post, it sounds like it has evolved into a major undertaking.

I wonder how the original founders would take it. I always had the impression
they started this as a hobby on a shoestring. I'm sure they would have taken
commercials though. They were always needing cash.

The next time you hit the town, hoist one for me at the Union or the CI.
Actually, if it's at the Union, go ahead and have one of the steamed coney dogs
for me too. The coney sauce they used way back when was the best coney sauce
in the world. If it is the same stuff, have two.

Regards,
Roy

ACRN is still alive and well and was in the same building as my office.
I don't know a lot of what's up lately, since I've been gone from there
for more than a decade.

I believe both pubs you mention are still serving and the steam tunnels
are still cranking it out. 20 degrees outside and you'd still see dorm
room windows open, blowing air *inside* their rooms to cool off. :-)


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

In article ,
says...

On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
Michael Kenefick wrote:
Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.

Bill

I'm not talking about viewers time.
I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.

I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.

The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
completely ignored.

University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
be able to sell advertising.


That doesn't make it right or legal.

It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
things.


They get plenty of training.

Yes, they do, in college.

Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
raising cattle.

So? In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
"broadcasting" majors.

In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.

Many engineers will tell you the same thing. Why don't we just do away
with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
_really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.

But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.

It's a ****-poor metaphor. If colleges are to train people they have to
be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
things. If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
decent education.

Jeez. Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting **** on
by "college boys".

On Nov 20, 2:39*am, "Josepi" wrote:
How does one go about getting one of them there "political licenses"

Get n the horn to Hades?

and how much do you reckon they cost?

Soul and/or dignity.


Then we should go after a "poetic licence". Hard to believe people have to
pay to write poetry!

Some people SHOULD pay to write poetry. Revenue put towards subsequent
health-care demands.

Maybe in the UK. They have to pay to listen to a radio.

No.

On 11/20/10 4:02 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
Michael Kenefick wrote:
Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.

Bill

I'm not talking about viewers time.
I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.

I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.

The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
completely ignored.

University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
be able to sell advertising.


That doesn't make it right or legal.

It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
things.


They get plenty of training.

Yes, they do, in college.

Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
raising cattle.

So? In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
"broadcasting" majors.


You're right. Selling ads on college radio is the only experience
available to business majors. How silly of me.


In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.

Many engineers will tell you the same thing. Why don't we just do away
with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
_really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.


You really like to stretch things, huh?


But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.

It's a ****-poor metaphor.

Actually it's a really good metaphor because it's illustrates, directly,
taxpayer dollars competing with private sector dollars.


If colleges are to train people they have to
be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
things. If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
decent education.

Jeez. Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting **** on
by "college boys".


I'm guessing you could stretch a piece of bubblegum about a hundred feet.
I think that statement reveals some issues you're dealing with, not me.


To the point since you seem to obtuse to grasp it (maybe you should have
payed more attention in college), taxpayer funded or heavily subsidized
institutions such as PBS, should not be competing commercially with the
private sector.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

In article ,
says...

On 11/20/10 4:02 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
Michael Kenefick wrote:
Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.

Bill

I'm not talking about viewers time.
I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.

I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.

The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
completely ignored.

University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
be able to sell advertising.


That doesn't make it right or legal.

It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
things.


They get plenty of training.

Yes, they do, in college.

Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
raising cattle.

So? In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
"broadcasting" majors.


You're right. Selling ads on college radio is the only experience
available to business majors. How silly of me.

So where else do they get experience selling radio advertising?

In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.

Many engineers will tell you the same thing. Why don't we just do away
with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
_really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.


You really like to stretch things, huh?

You're the one arguing that college is irrelevant.

But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.

It's a ****-poor metaphor.

Actually it's a really good metaphor because it's illustrates, directly,
taxpayer dollars competing with private sector dollars.

It ignores the purpose of the expenditure.

If colleges are to train people they have to
be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
things. If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
decent education.

Jeez. Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting **** on
by "college boys".


I'm guessing you could stretch a piece of bubblegum about a hundred feet.
I think that statement reveals some issues you're dealing with, not me.

You're the one saying that college doesn't teach anything useful and so
colleges should not be allowed to provide activities that give students
real-world experience in the activities they will perform in the
workplace.

To the point since you seem to obtuse to grasp it (maybe you should have
payed more attention in college), taxpayer funded or heavily subsidized
institutions such as PBS, should not be competing commercially with the
private sector.

You are conflating student-operated radio stations with PBS now.

On 11/20/10 2:00 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/20/10 4:02 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
Michael Kenefick wrote:
Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.

Bill

I'm not talking about viewers time.
I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.

I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.

The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
completely ignored.

University activities often fall in special categories. A student radio
station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. Part of
running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
business end of running a radio station. Ergo to do its job it has to
be able to sell advertising.


That doesn't make it right or legal.

It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
things.


They get plenty of training.

Yes, they do, in college.

Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
raising cattle.

So? In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
"broadcasting" majors.


You're right. Selling ads on college radio is the only experience
available to business majors. How silly of me.

So where else do they get experience selling radio advertising?


Google: internship.


In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.

Many engineers will tell you the same thing. Why don't we just do away
with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
_really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.


You really like to stretch things, huh?

You're the one arguing that college is irrelevant.


Check that...you could stretch a piece of bubblegum a mile.

Ok, maybe took your bait on this whole thread... I doubt it. But if
you're serious with that statement, you really need a remedial class in
reading comprehension. :-)


But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.

It's a ****-poor metaphor.

Actually it's a really good metaphor because it's illustrates, directly,
taxpayer dollars competing with private sector dollars.

It ignores the purpose of the expenditure.

If colleges are to train people they have to
be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
things. If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
decent education.

Jeez. Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting **** on
by "college boys".


I'm guessing you could stretch a piece of bubblegum about a hundred feet.
I think that statement reveals some issues you're dealing with, not me.

You're the one saying that college doesn't teach anything useful and so
colleges should not be allowed to provide activities that give students
real-world experience in the activities they will perform in the
workplace.


I said neither of those things.
That's like coming to the conclusion that if I said the college meal
plans should cut back on foods high in saturated fats, that I said
colleges don't provide any healthy foods in their meal plans.


To the point since you seem to obtuse to grasp it (maybe you should have
payed more attention in college), taxpayer funded or heavily subsidized
institutions such as PBS, should not be competing commercially with the
private sector.

You are conflating student-operated radio stations with PBS now.


No, I'm comparing the two. I never said they were the same thing.

wow.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Nov 20, 4:05*pm, -MIKE- wrote:
On 11/20/10 2:00 PM, J. Clarke wrote:





In ,
says...

On 11/20/10 4:02 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 4:40 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/19/10 5:09 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 11/18/10 6:27 PM, Bill wrote:
Michael Kenefick wrote:
Mike, I agree with most everything you said. However, you can't argue
that PBS doesn't compete with other channels for the viewers time. The
Woodsmith Shop is the only show I record on DVR.

Bill

I'm not talking about viewers time.
I'm talking about commercial sponsorship.

I worked at the Ohio University School of Telecommunications. We were in
the same broadcast building a facilities as WOUB PBS radio and television,
and worked very closely together. We also had student run, university
funded radio stations, which is essentially the same thing as public
broadcasting-- a radio station subsidized by public tax dollars.

The student radio station would sell advertising to local merchants and
other companies, just like the local commercial stations. The owners of
the local commercial stations took serious issue with this, as well they
should have. Most merchants have a set percentage in their budget for
advertising. They will only spend X% on advertising. You have a publicly
subsidized radio station now competing private stations for a cut of
that percentage. That is wrong and I'm fairly certain, illegal, but gets
completely ignored.

University activities often fall in special categories. *A student radio
station is (or should be anyway) intended to teach students how to run a
radio station, not just to provide entertainment to students. *Part of
running a radio station is the business side of it and if the student
station can't sell advertising then it can't provide experience in the
business end of running a radio station. *Ergo to do its job it has to
be able to sell advertising.

That doesn't make it right or legal.

It's right because new employees for the broadcasting industry have be
trained, and legal because universities get a free ride on all sorts of
things.

They get plenty of training.

Yes, they do, in college.

Besides, broadcast sales has about as much
to do with broadcasting as running being a waitress has to do with
raising cattle.

So? *In case it has missed your notice, most colleges have business
schools and working at the college radio station is not restricted to
"broadcasting" majors.

You're right. *Selling ads on college radio is the only experience
available to business majors. *How silly of me.

So where else do they get experience selling radio advertising?

Google: internship.

In any case, any salesman in the real world will tell you that they
learned virtually nothing in school that helped them with sales.

Many engineers will tell you the same thing. *Why don't we just do away
with college altogether and go entirely with on-the-job training?
However, since by your logic the sales people at the college station are
such bumbling incompetents that they couldn't sell water to a dying man
in the desert, they obviously can't sell any advertising so they aren't
_really_ competing with other radio stations, so there is no problem.

You really like to stretch things, huh?

You're the one arguing that college is irrelevant.

Check that...you could stretch a piece of bubblegum a mile.

Ok, maybe took your bait on this whole thread... I doubt it. *But if
you're serious with that statement, you really need a remedial class in
reading comprehension. *:-)





But all that is moot, and I'm sorry you guys can't seem to help getting
caught up in the metaphor, instead of the topic.

It's a ****-poor metaphor.

Actually it's a really good metaphor because it's illustrates, directly,
taxpayer dollars competing with private sector dollars.

It ignores the purpose of the expenditure.

If colleges are to train people they have to
be able to do certain things, even if you personally don't like those
things. *If colleges are worthless then do away with the colleges, don't
whine at them for doing what they think they have to do to provide a
decent education.

Jeez. *Lemme guess--you never went to college and keep getting **** on
* *by "college boys".

I'm guessing you could stretch a piece of bubblegum about a hundred feet.
I think that statement reveals some issues you're dealing with, not me..

You're the one saying that college doesn't teach anything useful and so
colleges should not be allowed to provide activities that give students
real-world experience in the activities they will perform in the
workplace.

I said neither of those things.
That's like coming to the conclusion that if I said the college meal
plans should cut back on foods high in saturated fats, that I said
colleges don't provide any healthy foods in their meal plans.

To the point since you seem to obtuse to grasp it (maybe you should have
payed more attention in college), taxpayer funded or heavily subsidized
institutions such as PBS, should not be competing commercially with the
private sector.

You are conflating student-operated radio stations with PBS now.

No, I'm comparing the two. *I never said they were the same thing.

wow.

--

* -MIKE-

* "Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
* * *--Elvin Jones *(1927-2004)
* --
*http://mikedrums.com
*
* ---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"Yo, Mike" *gently taps him on the shoulder and passes him a single
malt.*

You are playing right into his hand. That's what he does. As a subtle
troll, he's pretty efficient, but he can't stop himself from
streeeeetching and introducing strawmen and red herrings into the
argument.

On 11/20/10 5:22 PM, Robatoy wrote:

"Yo, Mike" *gently taps him on the shoulder and passes him a single
malt.*

You are playing right into his hand. That's what he does. As a subtle
troll, he's pretty efficient, but he can't stop himself from
streeeeetching and introducing strawmen and red herrings into the
argument.

I believe you are accurate with your assessment.
Enjoying a Yazoo Onward Stout straight from the growler.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

Love those two guys - creative get "arounds" to work!

Martin

On 11/15/2010 3:27 PM, Sonny wrote:
I suppose some of you have seen this, but it's worth a rerun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRg8rJUXwQc

Sonny

....Or he owns a "poetic licence"


"Just Wondering" wrote in message
...
Your statement that "I've got a deal for you on some swamp land over in
Arizona," if true, would mean that (a) you own (or at least have
authority to sell on behalf of the owner) some swamp land in Arizona,
and (b) the asking price is low enough that I could buy the land and
resell it at a decent profit. That would interest anyone who is
interested in making a buck.

But I take your statement that you've god a deal for me on swamp land in
Arizona to mean that you actually had no such deal because there is no
swamp land in Arizona, but that when I posted, "To be fair, it was
Congress not Reagan who cut PBS funding, and it was not "to make them go
away," it was (a) giving a nod to the notion that funding PBS was not
the proper role of the federal government, and (b) a token (i.e.
minuscule) reduction of the federal budget," I was mistaken in my facts.
As it turns out, Arizona has plenty of swamp land, which I just
proved. It is you, not I, who was mistaken on both points.