Longest Eduargument ever?

[mr_carlson]

David and Zumahans:

Do you two need a mediator? That thread has become hysterical.

Your argument over semantics has to be one of the longest, drawn-out Eduarguments ever on the Phoenix Radio Board.

You guys are like two rabid coyotes, fighting to the death over the same road-kill.

How about a new topic to take on a magic mushroom trip? For example:

I'll make the statement that Phoenix is the hottest city in the US, yet there's nothing good on the air. Now David can correct me: "It doesn't matter if Phoenix is the hottest city. What matters is the spiciest metro area." "El Paso, Texas is the spiciest metro area and according to my proprietary custom multilingual standard deviation formula..."(digression begins)...

Then, Zumahans can swoop in to argue, "He was just saying that Phoenix is TEMPURATURE HOT!" "How can a metro area be measured in spiciness?" "What does spiciness have to do with radio?"

--

Yes, my weekend it THAT boring.

--

By the way, this post was intended to be humorous not offensive.



<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by mr_carlson on 01/22/06 12:00 AM.</FONT></P>

 

[davideduardo]

> David and Zumahans:
>
> Do you two need a mediator? That thread has become
> hysterical.

Sorry to disagree, but believing that the size of the political juurisdiction of the city of Phoenix has any relationship at all to the kind of programming that is offered in the Phoenix Metro is one of the more absurd things I have ever seen on these boards. It's the kind of thinking that I usually expect from the generally-clueless writers-about-radio in newspapers.

Hans is another matter. He has been warned on several boards about his baseless arguments. I find, however, that he is often lacking facts... such as his claim about radio "losing many of its listeners" which is simply a lie.

I will continue to challenge lies. I will continue to try to correct absurd claims.

It's just a discussion board, anyway. If a thread ceases to interest me, I stop reading it.

 

[mr_carlson]

Whoa! It's just a little humor.

> > David and Zumahans:
> >
> > Do you two need a mediator? That thread has become
> > hysterical.
>
> Sorry to disagree, but believing that the size of the
> political juurisdiction of the city of Phoenix has any
> relationship at all to the kind of programming that is
> offered in the Phoenix Metro is one of the more absurd
> things I have ever seen on these boards. It's the kind of
> thinking that I usually expect from the generally-clueless
> writers-about-radio in newspapers.
>
> Hans is another matter. He has been warned on several boards
> about his baseless arguments. I find, however, that he is
> often lacking facts... such as his claim about radio "losing
> many of its listeners" which is simply a lie.
>
> I will continue to challenge lies. I will continue to try to
> correct absurd claims.
>
> It's just a discussion board, anyway. If a thread ceases to
> interest me, I stop reading it.
>


Easy there, David! I was brining a little humor to the board. I can't believe you're disagreeing with a joke!

I know you're knowledgeable. I also agree with you alot of the time. I agree that radio hasn't lost many listeners, but do believe that increased fragmentation will jeopardize radio's current audience levels. However, I will not argue with you. It is futile.

 

[legend_city]

Juarez is much spicier.


Take it from me, I am a paid spice genius, they fly me to Argentina to program spice racks at the local resturants.

But, of course you mean the El Paso Metroplex, because no one can just talk about El Paso. I know, I'm the expert.

And I will remind you of it in dozens of posts going forth!


lol

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Whoa! It's just a little humor.

>
> Easy there, David! I was brining a little humor to the
> board. I can't believe you're disagreeing with a joke!

Well, you just proved the one thing about the internet that seems to cause more problems than misinformation or disinformation: it is hard to tell humor from a post that is intended to be serious.

I struck out on that pitch.

>
> I know you're knowledgeable. I also agree with you alot of
> the time. I agree that radio hasn't lost many listeners,
> but do believe that increased fragmentation will jeopardize
> radio's current audience levels. However, I will not argue
> with you. It is futile.

I agree here. There was a question regarding the quality of radio now vs. the 70's or 60's where a poster said, "that is why there are no 10 share stations today." The real issue is that we have seen new stations from Docket 80-90, tons of move ins as a result of Bonita Springs and many formerly unobtrusive niche formats like classical and jazz becoming more mainstream.


When you consider that the average American listens to about an hour or so less radio a week than 20 years ago (around 5% to 7% varying by market), and there are more radio stations (look how many "made the book" in Phoenix in 1980 vs. today...) and shares will be smaller and much tighter packed together. In some markets, 1.5 points separates #1 and #15!

See? I did not argue. Because you are right.

 

[mr_carlson]

Re: Whoa! It's just a little humor.

> >
> > Easy there, David! I was brining a little humor to the
> > board. I can't believe you're disagreeing with a joke!
>
> Well, you just proved the one thing about the internet that
> seems to cause more problems than misinformation or
> disinformation: it is hard to tell humor from a post that is
> intended to be serious.
>
> I struck out on that pitch.
>
> >
> > I know you're knowledgeable. I also agree with you alot
> of
> > the time. I agree that radio hasn't lost many listeners,
> > but do believe that increased fragmentation will
> jeopardize
> > radio's current audience levels. However, I will not
> argue
> > with you. It is futile.
>
> I agree here. There was a question regarding the quality of
> radio now vs. the 70's or 60's where a poster said, "that is
> why there are no 10 share stations today." The real issue
> is that we have seen new stations from Docket 80-90, tons of
> move ins as a result of Bonita Springs and many formerly
> unobtrusive niche formats like classical and jazz becoming
> more mainstream.
>
>
> When you consider that the average American listens to about
> an hour or so less radio a week than 20 years ago (around 5%
> to 7% varying by market), and there are more radio stations
> (look how many "made the book" in Phoenix in 1980 vs.
> today...) and shares will be smaller and much tighter packed
> together. In some markets, 1.5 points separates #1 and #15!
>
>
> See? I did not argue. Because you are right.
>
Sorry if my humor wasn't obvious. I was just trying to bust your chops a bit for the die hard nature of the infamous "Phoenix vs. Metro" thread.

I'm glad we see eye to eye on the problem facing markets like Phoenix: too many signals competing for an audience who's attention span will increasingly be challenged by emerging technologies.

My analogy: It's like portion control at a restaurant. The pie slices in radio have gotten so much smaller that you have to order more than one to fill up.

 

[zumahans1]

Watch out. You forgot to put an accent on the e in Juar´ez.

 

[zumahans1]

It's always dangerous to quote an unreliable source, but:

>"When you consider that the average American listens to about an hour or so less radio a week than 20 years ago (around 5% to 7% varying by market)///"<

Game, set. match.

 

[ajhenderson]

Re: Whoa! It's just a little humor.

> My analogy: It's like portion control at a restaurant. The
> pie slices in radio have gotten so much smaller that you
> have to order more than one to fill up.

Especially if you're one of the rather large women listening to Beth and Bill.

 

[Kyle_Hojem]

The thread in question has been closed and this one is closed as well.<P ID="signature">______________

Member of the Los Angeles, Phoenix Radio, and California TV moderation team</P>