Cliff Winston & "That Other Board"

[OldGringo]

And of course illegal aliens do influence ratings - both radio and television. Without illegal aliens Univision would have ratings of just a fraction of what it does today. Anyone who would say otherwise is just downright being a liar.

Per the Census, 16 million Hispanics are not born in the US. Of 36 million in total (2000), 20 million were born here. Of the 16 million foreign born, 32% are naturalized citizens, so just about 10 million are neither born here or naturalized, of which a large percent are legalized residents who are not citizens. In other words, about 6 million might be illegal. That leaves 30 million legal Hispanics.

And given the fact that more than 50% of the growth of the Hispanic population is from births (citizens) there is ample internal growth to sustain Hispanic media further into the future than we can even project.

I know how and what Arbitron calls and asks. I recently participated in a survey and gave a nice bump to my favorite stations. They certainly didn't ask if I was an illegal alien but some "invisible" people in my household may have been Hispanic. It's nice how they liked listening to conservative talkradio just like me

So you are saying you have violated specific clauses of your emplyer's Arbitron contract? That would pretty well define your character.

Arbitron what a crock of sh-t.

So the service that is accredited by the MRC and used to place tens of billions of dollars in ad money is useless to you. That defines your attitude, and negates a fundamental base for the ricing of radio.

Hey, David. Shall we pull up your posts slamming the PPM from the past now that Univision has come on board?

Sure. Please do. I was a vocal critic of the early PPM development, based on specific and detailed criteria. This was why I was on a joint ad community and radio industry panel that particpated in the development of the Philadelphia PPM and many of the comments made by the panel were incorporated into the further development of what is now going to be radio's currency.

The PPM is a much more mature product, and it incorporates much of the feedback from users, buth radio and agencies. The Stever Morris and Owen Charlebois team has done a fine job. That is why I endorsed our participation in the PPM test in Houston and our eventual subscription to the PPM service.

I was not posting about the Spanish stations in Orlando. Only about Cox's Power 95.3 - a hip-hop station that has great appeal to Hispanics.

You missed my point. Orlando and SA Hispanics have very different tastes due to national origin or heritage, so the format and the music are not "transportable" from one place to another.

The rant about banks and home buying has nothing to do with radio, so I snipped it.

 

[klifhanger]

MASTER OF GRAND ILLUSION SPEAKS" The rant about banks and home buying has nothing to do with radio, so I snipped it."

In that case neither do you.

Your self serving self embellished reference to the census of hispanic population is completed spun to give it a whole different perspective than its original content. One day you Might..I SAID "MIGHT" stick to factual information than distorting it. Now quite getting your webmaster to create links so those foolish enough to click will get spyware on top of your falsified info.

 

[OldGringo]

Your self serving self embellished reference to the census of hispanic population is completed spun to give it a whole different perspective than its original content. One day you Might..I SAID "MIGHT" stick to factual information than distorting it. Now quite getting your webmaster to create links so those foolish enough to click will get spyware on top of your falsified info.

The Census data came right off the US Census report of foreign born by region... in this cases, Latin America. There is no embillishnment to the total Hisapnic population data, the percent who are citizens and the percentage who are naturalized citizens.

As to the "webmaster" issue... I have no "webmaster" and have no idea what you are talking about, and doubt you do, either. You are just obfuscating.

 

[mostb1]

Spanish "dominant". For most people, you don't need to be "dominant" in any language except English if you are here legally.

This statement goes against every significant study of language learning ever done.

Almost every person on the planet will remain dominant in the birth tongue unless they learn another language (or two or three) before early adolesence. Once a child approaches adolesence, their ability to learn languages is vastly diminished, and pretty much eradicated by adulthood.

An imigrant who comes... or came... to the US in adulthood can certainly learn something of English, but it is generally just enough to get by. Most persons who learn another language in adulthood are doing back and forth mental translation to and from the native tongue, and are not bilingual (the ability to think in either langauge).

The year, or decade or century does not change this, nor does the country of origin.

And if don't speak English, learn it. We aren't a country of a 1000 tongues (or at least we won't be soon).

How many languages do you speak fluently. I see. Preaching morals in your underwear again, eh? The US has always had communities of immigrants based on national origin and language, ranging from the "Little Italy" and "Chinatowns" to the Polish communities in places like Chicago and Cleveland to the Cajun regions of Louisiana.

Good to see Maricopa County's Sheriff is making his illegal alien prisoners learn english so they can speak to the judge in the correct language of this land. And it isn't even on the taxpayers dime as it's payed by collect phone call fees.

This is another example of ignorance of the way language is learned.

You know it would be one thing if you posted something that wasn't exactly correct but you post many things that are the EXACT OPPOSITE from the TRUTH and expect us to believe they are factual. In my world that is called a lie and the person is called a liar. In this thread alone I've exposed countless deceptions of yours 180 degrees from the truth. The funniest thing is once I've exposed them (many times with links) you run away from your past statements. This thread more than ever shows why each and every one of your posts needs to be scrutinized and in many cases challenged. You are not honest and are downright misleading others. But thankfully there are people like me to expose you. I hope others will continue to challenge you with correct facts, as needed.

 

[mostb1]

I am sorry I ever particapted in this thread, look at what has become of it.

I will state these three things.

1. I do not know if any name changes will happen and it doesn't matter.

2. Cliff Winston never did much for KJLH in it's 30 years, so why should that be expected at 100.3?

3. Secondly, remember who owns 100.3, Radio One. RO has already trashed this station and lost a HUGE hispanic core, the Hispanics do not want to come back to a station that doesn't care about them, and further more, they're in debt. A HUGE debt in fact, and they already had to sell off a Boston outlet, and I won't be suprised to see LA go either, and here's where it won't make Glenn happy, a Spanish broadcaster acquires 100.3 and flips it to something serving that community. Certainly won't be Emmis or Citadel, eh? Emmis as you stated don't pay that kind of money and if you think Citadel does, you are a ......., in fact they're trying to get the ABC asking price lowered right now, so I know for a fact they won't shell 300 million, but the Spanish guys will, why? Because they have the audience, look at the amazing successes of KSCA, KLAX, KBUE, and KXOL, all of these stations were acquired at then recording breaking prices and have returned their investments time and time again.

So in short, Mabye Mojo, Winston won't do Jack squat, and 100.3 en esponal in 2007. And you B1 will probably be still protesting at Home Depot, but they don't listen to you unless you have money and you found God. And from the sound of things, I don't think you have either.

Have a nice brown day.

I'm quite happy to be an American Patriot. We are on our way to restoring this nation to the glory of its past and honoring the wishes of its forefathers. We have the momentum but much work is left to be done. I have everything I need, thanks. And I attend church each and every week. Thanks for your concern.

Have a nice LEGAL day.

 

[OldGringo]

Almost every person on the planet will remain dominant in the birth tongue unless they learn another language (or two or three) before early adolesence. Once a child approaches adolesence, their ability to learn languages is vastly diminished, and pretty much eradicated by adulthood.

An imigrant who comes... or came... to the US in adulthood can certainly learn something of English, but it is generally just enough to get by. Most persons who learn another language in adulthood are doing back and forth mental translation to and from the native tongue, and are not bilingual (the ability to think in either langauge).

The year, or decade or century does not change this, nor does the country of origin.

You know it would be one thing if you posted something that wasn't exactly correct but you post many things that are the EXACT OPPOSITE from the TRUTH and expect us to believe they are factual. In my world that is called a lie and the person is called a liar. In this thread alone I've exposed countless deceptions of yours 180 degrees from the truth. The funniest thing is once I've exposed them (many times with links) you run away from your past statements. This thread more than ever shows why each and every one of your posts needs to be scrutinized and in many cases challenged. You are not honest and are downright misleading others. But thankfully there are people like me to expose you. I hope others will continue to challenge you with correct facts, as needed.

I see. So, you are saying that language learning ability does not decline with age.

Simply untrue. There are literally thousands of studies, doctoral theses, books and articles that show how langage learning abilities decline as a function of age, with adults seldom able to achieve bilingualism and mostly limited to rudimentary skills of simple communication.

 

[mostb1]

Almost every person on the planet will remain dominant in the birth tongue unless they learn another language (or two or three) before early adolesence. Once a child approaches adolesence, their ability to learn languages is vastly diminished, and pretty much eradicated by adulthood.

An imigrant who comes... or came... to the US in adulthood can certainly learn something of English, but it is generally just enough to get by. Most persons who learn another language in adulthood are doing back and forth mental translation to and from the native tongue, and are not bilingual (the ability to think in either langauge).

The year, or decade or century does not change this, nor does the country of origin.

You know it would be one thing if you posted something that wasn't exactly correct but you post many things that are the EXACT OPPOSITE from the TRUTH and expect us to believe they are factual. In my world that is called a lie and the person is called a liar. In this thread alone I've exposed countless deceptions of yours 180 degrees from the truth. The funniest thing is once I've exposed them (many times with links) you run away from your past statements. This thread more than ever shows why each and every one of your posts needs to be scrutinized and in many cases challenged. You are not honest and are downright misleading others. But thankfully there are people like me to expose you. I hope others will continue to challenge you with correct facts, as needed.

I see. So, you are saying that language learning ability does not decline with age.

Simply untrue. There are literally thousands of studies, doctoral theses, books and articles that show how langage learning abilities decline as a function of age, with adults seldom able to achieve bilingualism and mostly limited to rudimentary skills of simple communication.

You must be senile as I am referring to everything in this thread not a just a single post that you have written that I have exposed as a downright LIE. Geez...

 

[mostb1]

Spanish "dominant". For most people, you don't need to be "dominant" in any language except English if you are here legally.

This statement goes against every significant study of language learning ever done.

Almost every person on the planet will remain dominant in the birth tongue unless they learn another language (or two or three) before early adolesence. Once a child approaches adolesence, their ability to learn languages is vastly diminished, and pretty much eradicated by adulthood.

An imigrant who comes... or came... to the US in adulthood can certainly learn something of English, but it is generally just enough to get by. Most persons who learn another language in adulthood are doing back and forth mental translation to and from the native tongue, and are not bilingual (the ability to think in either langauge).

The year, or decade or century does not change this, nor does the country of origin.

And if don't speak English, learn it. We aren't a country of a 1000 tongues (or at least we won't be soon).

How many languages do you speak fluently. I see. Preaching morals in your underwear again, eh? The US has always had communities of immigrants based on national origin and language, ranging from the "Little Italy" and "Chinatowns" to the Polish communities in places like Chicago and Cleveland to the Cajun regions of Louisiana.

Good to see Maricopa County's Sheriff is making his illegal alien prisoners learn english so they can speak to the judge in the correct language of this land. And it isn't even on the taxpayers dime as it's payed by collect phone call fees.

This is another example of ignorance of the way language is learned.

Joe Arpaio is a GREAT American. He should be Homeland Security chief. And this is an EXCELLENT way of making those who not only don't belong here but who have been arrested for a crime, learn the English language. ALL court proceedings should be conducted in one language only, ENGLISH. No interpreters or documents in ANY other language. We are NOT a Spanish speaking country. Great story on this http://www.azstarnet.com/news/152612

If you want to come to America and be allowed by us to become a legal resident and possibly become a citizen, you should know the ENGLISH language FLUENTLY. You cut off ALL associations with your former homeland, assimilate and become an American. No legal documents or government services of any kind should ever be in any language other than ENGLISH. Otherwise, don't expect to come here. We don't want or need you.

 

[OldGringo]

If you want to come to America and be allowed by us to become a legal resident and possibly become a citizen, you should know the ENGLISH language FLUENTLY. You cut off ALL associations with your former homeland, assimilate and become an American. No legal documents or government services of any kind should ever be in any language other than ENGLISH. Otherwise, don't expect to come here. We don't want or need you.

This has never been the way in America.

The Gaelic speaking Irish, the Germans, the Italians, the Poles, the Chinese, the refugees of W.W. II, and many more came here speaking basically no English. The first generation learned only the basic English needed to work at mostly entry-level jobs, while the wife stayed at home and took care of the family, who learned the native tongue at home and English on the street and in school.

"We don't want you" is a broad statement. You are not speaking for me, and for many millions of Americans who may want significant immigration reform, but who do not mask their bigotry and hatred under the guise of immigration reform.

 

[BACKnUSSR]

I had to comment on this on:

Per the Census, 16 million Hispanics are not born in the US. Of 36 million in total (2000), 20 million were born here. Of the 16 million foreign born, 32% are naturalized citizens, so just about 10 million are neither born here or naturalized, of which a large percent are legalized residents who are not citizens. In other words, about 6 million might be illegal. That leaves 30 million legal Hispanics.

And given the fact that more than 50% of the growth of the Hispanic population is from births (citizens) there is ample internal growth to sustain Hispanic media further into the future than we can even project.

It's quite an asssumption that the "more than 50%" of the Hispanic population will grow up to support and sustain Hispanic media. The children born here will be much more fluent in english. Might not they grow up to listen to stations owned by CBS, Emmis, Entercom and dare I say it...Clear Channel?
Young folks tend to rebel and not listen to their "daddy's station". The KIIS-FM's Movin's and Power 106's of tomorrow will be battling for the children of the spanish language listeners of today.

I think the future of Hispanic media is a bit uncertain, because while some media companies tend to reach out to all races and groups..... others simply do not.



PS: Why do so many threads end up becoming discussions of immigration?

 

[OldGringo]

You must be senile as I am referring to everything in this thread not a just a single post that you have written that I have exposed as a downright LIE. Geez...

Then you should learn to edit the cites in your posts, as you answered one about langauge acquisition.

The rest of the stuff you call lies consists of actual facts, the sources of which I have given you. A good example is your insistence that Univsion's radio division (which has consistently produced better margins than any other division) will be sold... when public statements to the contrary have been issued. Or saying that I am against the PPM when I have been on Arbitron committees to help develop it. Or your totally whacked population figures for US Hispanics when the true data is right on the U.S. Census website. Or claiming Clear Channel was not involved in deciding on the spin-offs from AMFM that would permit the merger to be approved. Or that Clear does not own the "Beat" service mark nationally.

 

[OldGringo]

It's quite an asssumption that the "more than 50%" of the Hispanic population will grow up to support and sustain Hispanic media. The children born here will be much more fluent in english.

First, the existing Spanish dominant population will sustain at least the current level of Spanish langauge broadcasting for decades, although it will age. This is not an issue, as at present the Hisapnic population is very young, and it will be along time before it ages outside of sales demos.

Second, Hispanic broadcasters like Univsion, SBS, Entravision, BMP and others program to more than Spanish dominant Hispanics. Reggaetón stations are a good example, as they appeal to second generation Hispanics and are "Spanglish" speaking. Other examples are hip hop stations like The Beat in San Antonio or Kiss in Albuquerque, which are targeted at more English dominant Hisapnics, but which have a mainly Hispanic focus in all aspects. Another example is the Movin / Jammin blend on KTFM in San Antonio where BMP's Bob Perry is skillfully targeting third and fourth generation Hispanics with a product uniquely tailored to them.

Might not they grow up to listen to stations owned by CBS, Emmis, Entercom and dare I say it...Clear Channel?

Clear has launched about 30 Spanish stations in the last couple of years, so they are already in. CBS has a deal with SBS under which several FMs have gone Spanish for CBS such as the ones in Tampa and DC.

There is always going to be some advantage to the specialist approach with a company run with Hispanics in mind and not as an afterthought.

Young folks tend to rebel and not listen to their "daddy's station".

This is vastly less true in the Hispanic world where it is generally very acceptable to enjoy the same music as one's parents and even grandparents. It is common at station events to see multigenerational groups all going wild over one artist... especially in regional Mexican music. Certainly there are specific kinds of music, like Spanish rock and pop that appeal to naarrower groups, but much of the music is very broad.

When you have stations like Recuerdo (in 12 markets) with an average listener age of 34 listening to music that ranges form the 60's to the 90's you know that age and era distinctions are nowhere as accentuated in this community.

The KIIS-FM's Movin's and Power 106's of tomorrow will be battling for the children of the spanish language listeners of today.

And where to they go? Power or Latino, mostly. In fact, Latino's reggaetón format stole half of Power's Hispanics. So there are Hispanic formats in English or Spanglish that are much tighter with young Hispanics than general market stations can be.

I think the future of Hispanic media is a bit uncertain, because while some media companies tend to reach out to all races and groups..... others simply do not.

LA is currently over 60% Spanish dominant, meaning there are about 25 shares for Spanish stations. Music tasted do not change over time, even if a person learns English and assimilates a bit... so this huge group is going to sustain the Spanish langauge stations for a long time, while newer youth formats just for Hispanics evolve.

PS: Why do so many threads end up becoming discussions of immigration?

... because people who do not like Hispanics or other immigrants play the immigration card to further an agenda of bigotry.

 

[SuperRadioFan]

PS: Why do so many threads end up becoming discussions of immigration?

... because people who do not like Hispanics or other immigrants play the immigration card to further an agenda of bigotry.

Why can't you just say it this way, David?:

because people who do not like Hispanics or other immigrants play the illegal immigration card to further an agenda of bigotry.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeh always the race card. Puhleese give that a rest, will you? I thought you said one time that politically you were to the right of Ghengis Khan? But your statements on this issue show that you're rubbing elbows with that closet conservative Antonio Villaraigosa IMO. :

And to answer BacknUSSR's question, these threads devolve into this issue because without a steady supply of illegal immigrants coming into California from south of the border who are of course Spanish-Dominant, the ratings for many Spanish-language stations would go south to an extent. How can anyone dispute that? All one has to do is compare population demographics of the LA market from 30 years ago vs today and then compare the number of Spanish-language radio stations 30 years ago in LA to the number existing today. Any intelligent person can draw the expected conclusion.

Why is this important to some of us? Putting aside all the security, social, and economic impacts this migration affects and just restricting it to radio, some of us are English-speaking only and our choices in over the air radio listening have dropped appreciably. Even NYC has fewer Spanish language radio stations %-wise than the LA market.

 

[OldGringo]

Yeh always the race card. Puhleese give that a rest, will you? I thought you said one time that politically you were to the right of Ghengis Khan? But your statements on this issue show that you're rubbing elbows with that closet conservative Antonio Villaraigosa IMO. :

Unfortunately, Glenn is trying to introduce the immigration reform issue into the discussion of LA radio. Much of his posting in the last few days has a vitriolic flavor that really has nothing remotely related to radio, such as the discussion of who can open bank accounts.

And to answer BacknUSSR's question, these threads devolve into this issue because without a steady supply of illegal immigrants coming into California from south of the border who are of course Spanish-Dominant, the ratings for many Spanish-language stations would go south to an extent. How can anyone dispute that? All one has to do is compare population demographics of the LA market from 30 years ago vs today and then compare the number of Spanish-language radio stations 30 years ago in LA to the number existing today. Any intelligent person can draw the expected conclusion.

I disagree. Ratings will grow if more people come, but they will not go down for many many years if te flow is reduced (there will always be family reunification, and other legal immigrants from Mexico). The market is what it is today, and there will be 25 or more shares for Spanish and Spanglish for longer than I care to project. And the fact that the only non-immigrant growth in the LA metro comes from Hispanic births (non-Hispanic is in decline, in fact) will provide plenty of listening... probably for more time than today's radio is a viable business model.

Why is this important to some of us? Putting aside all the security, social, and economic impacts this migration affects and just restricting it to radio, some of us are English-speaking only and our choices in over the air radio listening have dropped appreciably. Even NYC has fewer Spanish language radio stations %-wise than the LA market.

NY has less than a third of the spanish dominant 12+ population that LA does, so there is a pretty good station count indexing. NY has 6 Spanish stations, and LA has about 16 (excluding brokered in both markets). Radio tends to serve populations in proportion to their size, so this makes great sense.

Those who are Spanish speaking have far less formats to pick from than English speakers, so it works both ways.

 

[zumahans]

But David, those of us who are native english speakers in our native land find our formats disappearing.

I embrace mutliculturalism, but the markeyplace fragmentation of U.S. english formats has opened the door to foreign language formats, that displace important cultural institutions like country music radio, or AAA, or whatever else is about to disappear into spanish.

Look what it triggers: Mostb1's racist rants are just the tip of the anger.

 

[SuperRadioFan]

The market is what it is today, and there will be 25 or more shares for Spanish and Spanglish for longer than I care to project. And the fact that the only non-immigrant growth in the LA metro comes from Hispanic births (non-Hispanic is in decline, in fact) will provide plenty of listening... probably for more time than today's radio is a viable business model.

You make it sound like 2nd gen Hispanics will listen mostly to Spanish language radio and watch mostly Spanish-language TV. Is that perception really accurate? Please don't fall back on the "Spanglish" option

 

[OldGringo]

The market is what it is today, and there will be 25 or more shares for Spanish and Spanglish for longer than I care to project. And the fact that the only non-immigrant growth in the LA metro comes from Hispanic births (non-Hispanic is in decline, in fact) will provide plenty of listening... probably for more time than today's radio is a viable business model.

You make it sound like 2nd gen Hispanics will listen mostly to Spanish language radio and watch mostly Spanish-language TV. Is that perception really accurate? Please don't fall back on the "Spanglish" option

2nd generation tend to listen to some Spanish radio and some English, and some are more to one side than the other, depending on the childhood environment. The real option is Spanglish, such as Latino in LA, or the UVN Kalle stations or Mega in Houston... a mix of the two languages the way second generation Hispanics speak among themselves... this is in fact the biggest option.

 

[mostb1]

I am snipping the immigration stuff that is irrelvant to radio. Our moderators have already been most clear that this is not the place for this.

Illegals do not get proprotionally represented in Arbitron or, worse, Nielsen. So their listening is not reflected in ratings.

True, for Arbitron, but even you cannot accurately measure how they effect radio, either as consumers, or by influencing "legals" to listen. If a few non-speaking "illegals" inhabite a residence also occupied by a legal Arbitron diary keeping family.....might the listening habits be reflected there?

Also, do you see any coincidence timewise in the ratings success of non-english broadcasting stations and the explosion of illegal immigration in the past several years?

There is certainly a relevant radio discussion here (although, probably not in the Cliff Winston thread).

If you have studied economics, you know any society has a residual level of functional unemplyment. The USA is currently near that level, so there are not 10 or 11 million unemplyed to take the jobs illgals may be doing.

1) I actually have a post graduate degree in economics.
2) You are supposing that all 10 or 11 million illegals are employed. They are not.
So you might want to raise that unemployment number a bit.
3) Employed or not, illegals do not contribute back to the coffers of government, but do enjoy many
of the services provided. So by simply being present in such substantial numbers, they further
impact the economy in a negative way.

Think of it as an airplane, which can take off with approximately 10,000 lbs of weight. The "residual level of functional unemployment" that you reference may be an additional 200 lbs that wasnt accounted for but that
the aircraft can handle okay. It takes off nonetheless.
You dont want to be on that plane to find out there were another 5,000 lbs of folks hiding in the back.
It might at that point be too much for the airplane (economy) to bear.

Here are low figures for mixed households that include illegal aliens and legal residents mostly by birth from an illegal alien. Pew Hispanic numbers are generally considered low. These results are based on the 2000 census updated with estimates in 2004. For now, I would add at least 25% to these numbers, if not more.

Nearly 14 million people (including 4.7 million children) live in "mixed status" families - in which the head of the household or the spouse is in the US illegally - Pew reported last summer. This is partly because children born in the US- regardless of their parents' legal status - are automatically US citizens.

So as we see, illegal aliens do directly affect the numbers of listeners that Arbitron measures. Again, David's spin is exposed as incorrect. Which won't be a shock to anyone.

 

[mostb1]

And of course illegal aliens do influence ratings - both radio and television. Without illegal aliens Univision would have ratings of just a fraction of what it does today. Anyone who would say otherwise is just downright being a liar.

Per the Census, 16 million Hispanics are not born in the US. Of 36 million in total (2000), 20 million were born here. Of the 16 million foreign born, 32% are naturalized citizens, so just about 10 million are neither born here or naturalized, of which a large percent are legalized residents who are not citizens. In other words, about 6 million might be illegal. That leaves 30 million legal Hispanics.

And given the fact that more than 50% of the growth of the Hispanic population is from births (citizens) there is ample internal growth to sustain Hispanic media further into the future than we can even project.

I know how and what Arbitron calls and asks. I recently participated in a survey and gave a nice bump to my favorite stations. They certainly didn't ask if I was an illegal alien but some "invisible" people in my household may have been Hispanic. It's nice how they liked listening to conservative talkradio just like me

So you are saying you have violated specific clauses of your emplyer's Arbitron contract? That would pretty well define your character.

Arbitron what a crock of sh-t.

So the service that is accredited by the MRC and used to place tens of billions of dollars in ad money is useless to you. That defines your attitude, and negates a fundamental base for the ricing of radio.

Hey, David. Shall we pull up your posts slamming the PPM from the past now that Univision has come on board?

Sure. Please do. I was a vocal critic of the early PPM development, based on specific and detailed criteria. This was why I was on a joint ad community and radio industry panel that particpated in the development of the Philadelphia PPM and many of the comments made by the panel were incorporated into the further development of what is now going to be radio's currency.

The PPM is a much more mature product, and it incorporates much of the feedback from users, buth radio and agencies. The Stever Morris and Owen Charlebois team has done a fine job. That is why I endorsed our participation in the PPM test in Houston and our eventual subscription to the PPM service.

I was not posting about the Spanish stations in Orlando. Only about Cox's Power 95.3 - a hip-hop station that has great appeal to Hispanics.

You missed my point. Orlando and SA Hispanics have very different tastes due to national origin or heritage, so the format and the music are not "transportable" from one place to another.

The rant about banks and home buying has nothing to do with radio, so I snipped it.

Since Univision sells to advertisers who court illegal aliens including the banks mentioned and mortgage companies for transactions that are against United States law, it is quite relevant. More evidence of aiding and abetting by Univision.

You are not a moderator here, you are just a fanatic poster that continues to stretch the truth to downright lie and can't stand it when you are caught doing so. So snip your own b-s.

No, David, you tried to spin your own initial points about San Antonio and Orlando.. You didn't want to fess up that you were wrong when you posted that Cox doesn't program to Hispanics but I corrected you.

Since I didn't take the call from Arbitron and just gave "a suggestion" to my roommate as to what possibly to do, my hands are clean. That was the basis of my "participation". You won't find my handwriting or fingerprints on any diary (always have gloves on hand). Thank you, very much for asking, though. And no, I don't really care how tens of billions of advertising dollars is distributed as long as they go to companies that do their best to promote American values. I assure you no company that has a Spanish language radio station in Los Angeles got one second credit from any of the diaries. I'll be waiting for them to call to deliver a PPM next time.

I've already proved that you are posting PHONY census figures. Hispanic illegal aliens account for 13-19 million in the United States. As the link I provided from the liberal San Francisco Chronicle so clearly said, 10% of Mexico's population, roughly 11 million (as a low estimate), are here illegally. Last year alone possibly 10 MILLION ilegal aliens may have entered the United States, mostly from Mexico http://americanpatrol.com/COLUMNISTS/SHEEHY-DANIEL/10millionIAsDS_061020.html
SO AGAIN, YOUR NUMBERS ARE SORRILY INCORRECT and I've proven them to be so. When we remove ALL illegal aliens from the United States, many "jackpot babies" will also be going to mostly Mexico as many other OTM countries. So your estimate of births will have to be reduced since legal residents, who should not be, will also be going with them.

I have a hard time believing that you are employed by any company, broadcast or otherwise or even as an independent contractor. No one with the amount of daily posts that you have - regardless of the mistruths in them - could ever be doing their job. If you are employed, some of us should be complaining to your employer that you aren't giving full attention to your employer during business hours.

 

[mostb1]

Almost every person on the planet will remain dominant in the birth tongue unless they learn another language (or two or three) before early adolesence. Once a child approaches adolesence, their ability to learn languages is vastly diminished, and pretty much eradicated by adulthood.

An imigrant who comes... or came... to the US in adulthood can certainly learn something of English, but it is generally just enough to get by. Most persons who learn another language in adulthood are doing back and forth mental translation to and from the native tongue, and are not bilingual (the ability to think in either langauge).

The year, or decade or century does not change this, nor does the country of origin.

You know it would be one thing if you posted something that wasn't exactly correct but you post many things that are the EXACT OPPOSITE from the TRUTH and expect us to believe they are factual. In my world that is called a lie and the person is called a liar. In this thread alone I've exposed countless deceptions of yours 180 degrees from the truth. The funniest thing is once I've exposed them (many times with links) you run away from your past statements. This thread more than ever shows why each and every one of your posts needs to be scrutinized and in many cases challenged. You are not honest and are downright misleading others. But thankfully there are people like me to expose you. I hope others will continue to challenge you with correct facts, as needed.

I see. So, you are saying that language learning ability does not decline with age.

Simply untrue. There are literally thousands of studies, doctoral theses, books and articles that show how langage learning abilities decline as a function of age, with adults seldom able to achieve bilingualism and mostly limited to rudimentary skills of simple communication.

George W's comprehensive immigration reform (AMNESTY) is dead. And no, a VAST majority of Americans want the border secured, not illegal aliens to be given citizenship. So keep speaking as you wish but you are in a small minority that won't ever see the light of day. Now, sit back today and watch the border fence bill signing and have a good cry how Univision is going to experience slower growth when we force it to be built.

Please call me a Xenophobe. I would proudly wear a t-shirt with that on it.

I learned long ago that when someone has been challenged on their lies regarding illegal aliens, the next thing they say is "You are a Racist". What took you so long, David?

Now lets see some REAL Facts & Figures:

Ninety-two percent of the world's countries have at least one official language. (Source: 2002 World Almanac, 2001 U.S. Bureau of the Census Estimates)


English is the sole official language in 31 nations. An additional 20 nations recognize English as one of two or more official languages. (Source: 2002 World Almanac, 2001 U.S. Bureau of the Census Estimates)


In 2000, 21.3 million U.S. residents (8.1 percent of the U.S. population) were met the definition of limited English proficient set by the U.S. Census, meaning that they spoke English "less than very well." Of these, 11.0 million, or 4.2 percent spoke English "not well" or "not at all" (Source: Census 2000)


The number of Americans who do speak English "not at all" jumped from 1.22 million in 1980 to 3.37 million in 2000, a 176 percent increase over 20 years (Source: U.S. Census)


California leads the nation in the number of limited English proficient persons, with 6.3 million, or one-fifth of the population of the Golden State. Texas is second with 2.7 million, followed by New York, Florida and Illinois. New Jersey, Arizona, Massachusetts, Georgia and Pennsylvania round out the top 10. (Source: U.S. Census)


Since 1980, the number of U.S. residents who are limited English proficient has more than doubled, from 10.2 million to 21.3 million. In 1980, fewer than 1-in-20 Americans struggled with English. Now, nearly 1-in-12 do. (Source: U.S. Census)


In 2000, 11.9 million U.S. residents lived in linguistically isolated households, meaning that no one in the household spoke English at home or spoke English "very well". This figure is up 54 percent from 7.7 million in 1990. In all, more than 1-in-25 households in the United States is linguistically isolated. (Source: Census 2000)


There are 322 languages spoken at home in the United States. Behind English, the most common languages are Spanish, French, Chinese, German, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Italian, Korean and Russian. (Source: Census 2000)


California has the most languages spoken at home of any state with 207. New York is second with 169, followed by Washington, Texas and Oregon. Pennsylvania, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey and Arizona round out the top 10 states. (Source: Census 2000)


English proficiency rates among immigrants vary widely by ancestry. More than 80 percent of the immigrants from several ancestry groups speak English "very well," including Egyptians (90.4 percent), Lebanese (89.5), Pakistanis (87.7), Romanians (86.5), Iranians (86.1), Thais (83.0) and Argentineans (81.6). Other ancestry groups lag far behind the overall average of 71.4 percent English proficient, including Cambodians (65.7), Vietnamese (64.4), Hondurans (53.5), Guatemalans (52.8) and Mexicans (49.9). (Source: Census 2000)


In 1999, the average employed immigrant who spoke English very well earned $40,741, more than double the $16,345 earned by immigrants who did not speak English at all. The increasing scale of English proficiency and earnings was recorded at every education level from less than high school through master's degree and beyond. (Source: Educational Testing Services, A Human Capital Concern: The Literary Proficiency of U.S. Immigrants, March 2004)


The ability to understand English was so crucial to immigrant success that foreign-born workers with moderate-to-high levels English proficiency had higher earnings than native-born workers with the same degree of English proficiency. More important, data from the National Adult Literacy Survey found that immigrants with a low degree of English proficiency earned one-half of what those with a medium degree of proficiency earned and less than one-third of highly English proficient immigrants. (Source: Educational Testing Services, A Human Capital Concern: The Literary Proficiency of U.S. Immigrants, March 2004)


Immigrants who speak English "not well" or "not at all" have median weekly earnings approximately 57 percent of those of U.S. born workers. The weekly earnings of immigrants who speak another language at home, but speak English "very well" or "well" are nearly 90 percent of those of U.S. born workers. Immigrants who speak English at home are best off, with median weekly earnings 20 percent higher than U.S. born workers. (Source: U.S. Department of Labor, How Do Immigrants Fare in the U.S. Labor Market?, Monthly Labor Review, December 1992)


The U.S. Department of Education found that those with limited English proficiency are less likely to be employed, less likely to be employed continuously, tend to work in the least desirable sectors and earn less than those who speak English. Annual earnings by non-English proficient adults were approximately half of the total population surveyed. ? (Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics; English Literacy and Language Minorities in the United States, August 2001)


The Tomas Rivera Policy Institute found that, "far and away, the most commonly cited obstacle to gaining college knowledge was the language barrier." While 96 percent of the Latino parents surveyed in the nation's three largest cities expected their children to go to college, nearly two-thirds missed at least half of the questions on a "mini-test of college knowledge." (Source: Tomas Rivera Policy Institute, College Knowledge, April 2002)


Effective English language instruction is an essential antipoverty tool for working immigrant families. Poverty and the need for public benefits, such as food stamps, are more closely related to limited English proficiency than with citizenship or legal status. (Source: Urban Institute, Immigrant Well-Being in New York and Los Angeles, August 2002)


The Canadian Government spends $260 million annually to do government business in both of the nation's official languages. This figure was 0.16% of the Canadian federal budget. If the U.S. was to spend 0.16% of the federal budget to do government business in two languages, the cost would be $3.8 billion. (Source: Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, Canada)


The Canadian Government spends $24 per Canadian resident per year to do government business in both of the nation?s official languages. If the U.S. was to spend $24 per person per year on government multilingualism, the cost would be $5.7 billion. (Source: Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, Canada)


There are 25 nations and 20 official languages in the European Union, yielding 380 translation combinations. (Source: European Commission)


In June 2004, facing a backlog of 60,000 pages awaiting translation, European Union officials were asked to limit their documents to 15 pages to avoid further burdening the system. The average document size prior to this request was 32 pages. (Source: European Commission)


There are 1,800 translators, representing eight percent of the entire staff, at the European Commission. (Source: European Commission)


In 2004, the cost of translation and interpretation at the European Commission was $720 million. It is estimated that by 2007, the cost will have risen to $1.06 billion. (Source: European Commission)


The cost of multilingual ballots and translations represented one-eighth of Los Angeles County?s $16 million expense in the Nov. 2004 general election. (Source: European Commission)


The City of San Francisco must spend $350,000 for each language that a document is translated into under the city's bilingual government ordinance. (Source: Janet Ng, Asian Week.com, June 2001)