• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

"Radio. You shouldn't have to pay for it"

> "Radio, you shouldn't have to pay for it."
> That's the NAB's latest pro-radio campaign.
>
> Free marketing suggestion to Sirius and XM to counter this
> campaign from NAB:
>
> "Radio. You shouldn't have to listen to 20 minutes of
> commercials per hour."
>
> Rant over. I feel better now.
>

We in America have had a free entertainment ride for decades. In England, there is a tax on watching supposedly "free" TV. Vans with electronic equipment capable of determining who has a TV set cruise English neighborhoods looking for TV's whose owners haven't paid that tax.

Government will always find a way to tax the people; I suppose that radio commercials...in their own way...pay for the "right" to enjoy "free" radio.

Some may disagree, but, imho, that's how we have been able...so far...to get over-the-air radio gratis.
 
Your analogy is a little flawed. In the UK, radio and TV were owned by the government since inception, reflecting the British Crown's longstanding stance that anything within the land mass of the British Isles was the property of the monarchy, and therefore was properly used to serve the king. Thus, the burden of funding its operation was placed explicitly on the public.

In the US, broadcasting began with the idea that no one could own the air, but that private operators could build stations and broadcast radio programming to serve the public on their own dime. To keep those stations going, the station owners had to have a way to fund them, and thus commercials. Much different than the UK model and, in fact, that of most of the rest of the world until very recently.

I salute the NAB - this is really a brilliant marketing campaign. But the truth is, we've always paid to listen to the radio. Either you pay with money, or you pay with time and attention - it's just a choice of which you have more of.

- Doc

>
> We in America have had a free entertainment ride for
> decades. In England, there is a tax on watching supposedly
> "free" TV. Vans with electronic equipment capable of
> determining who has a TV set cruise English neighborhoods
> looking for TV's whose owners haven't paid that tax.
>
> Government will always find a way to tax the people; I
> suppose that radio commercials...in their own way...pay for
> the "right" to enjoy "free" radio.
>
> Some may disagree, but, imho, that's how we have been
> able...so far...to get over-the-air radio gratis.
>
 
> I salute the NAB - this is really a brilliant marketing
> campaign. But the truth is, we've always paid to listen to
> the radio. Either you pay with money, or you pay with time
> and attention - it's just a choice of which you have more
> of.

Well put.

73s from 954<P ID="signature">______________
<font color='#990000'>Wild and Crazy Christmas Music! 2005-2006</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom