>NB>shortwave broadcasting station is a money-losing proposition. (I'd still
 >NB>love to do it, though!) B-)
 >
 >Well hey, me too!!  But you know what, I don't think it's so much a
 >problem with the medium itself as it is the prevailing attitude toward
 >the medium as a necessarily propaganda organ, although that attitude is
 >deeply rooted in the long-running "Cold War".  Seems to me that the
 >griping of certain parties about the pre-emption of favorite programs in
 >favor of some silly ballgames hints of another avid audience out there.
 >
 >As a matter of fact, I put this question to the forum of commercial
 >broadcasters and while mostly I got the conclusion that you did, there
 >was a very interesting suggestion that a shortwave station could turn
 >profitable by covering international sports...and before you argue about
 >better coverage by satellite and cable TV, consider that the sports that
 >originate from the U.S. aren't necessarily of international interest,
 >e.g. look how long the US broadcasting entities have ignored the very
 >popular international sport of soccer.  Only in recent years has the NBA
 >spread basketball across the globe, and they've just started.  Baseball
 >is about as close as U.S. originating coverage gets to international
 >interests.  So--I think a sports shortwave station would do well
 >financially.
Sports.....YUK! But I can see your point. Broadcasting sports might bring in 
a bigger audience. I personally would like to see more music programs. That's 
might be another indication of the problems with shortwave....too much 
news/propoganda and not enough real entertainment. It's possible to tell 
other countries about your culture while still entertaining them. But an hour 
long dissertation on copper-wire production will turn folks off in a hurry.
 >
 >N[AB>I can offer no theories as to why this is happening. It's too easy to
 >blame
 >NB> it on the internet, and quite frankly, I don't think that's the 
roblem.
 >
 >Hear, hear.  Like shortwave, the internet requires expensive special
 >equipment to access, ergo not everybody accesses it.  To make money in
 >broadcasting, you need to  a) cover everybody with sets
 >                           b) claim a large part of everybody as "market
 >                              share"
 >
 >The internet just plain ole doesn't reach everybody, and that argument
 >could also be used in the cases of satellite broadcasting.  What you CAN
 >say about both the internet and satellite broadcasting is that they only
 >reach people with deep pockets.  Ya can't make no money offa broke folk.
'Fraid I have to disagree with you on one point here, Diane, and that is, 
shortwve isn't expensive, at least not to get into it the way we're 
discussing here. (That is, casual program listening.) Granted, the folks that 
would prbably benifit the most from shortwave live in poor countries where 
even a $50 portable can be out of the financial reach, but I've read of 
places where entire commuinties would gather around some guy's el-cheapo 
portable to listen to VOA of the BBC.
But you do raise an interesting point. The only way a shortwave station can 
REALLY make money is to sell ad time. And the only way they can do this is to 
prove to the advertisers that they have a large audience share that has money 
to spend. One way local stations do this is buy having those "dial-in" 
contests which you mentioned. That's not an option for international 
broadcasters, unless they're catering to a domestic audience and have a 
toll-free number. (And as you probably know, a US shortwave broadcaster 
cannot legally direct its broadcast toward a US audience.) The other way is 
to give out QSLs, and considering the fact that QSLing cost money, (for both 
the broadcaster AND the listener) that's not a very effective method.
 >
 >NB> fact that shortwave just doesn't get enough publicity. I'm 37 years 
ld,
 >                                                                     [B
 >Yup.  When was the last time you heard a shortwave station give the
 >announcement that the 11th caller would win a grand?  Now, of course
 >there have been collect-the-series QSL promos and station monitoring
 >programs, but there's also been a rash of governmental funding cutbacks
 >which brings to light a few more attitudinal problems with shortwave as
 >a financially viable medium.                                           [B
 >
 >**QSL collectors seem to be the same (relatively) small group of people
[A>  and doesn't really give the station in question a perceptable increase  
>  in audience (share).
 >
 >**When operations are dependent on governments, they necessarily have to
 >  "payoff" in terms of benefits to the government, i.e., propaganda...so
 >  this further means that station operations are now without a basic
 >  raison-d'etre.  But this isn't anything that a little privatization
 >  couldn't cure, were it not for outmoded broadcasting laws which insist
 >  that shortwave be treated as a politics/national culture-only forum.
 >
 >I submit that an Attitude Adjustment is in order, and I mean on the
 >part of the traditional listener as well as the traditional broadcaster.
I think one thing that would dramatically increase the number of SWLs in the 
US would be if they would do away with that stupid "no domestic targeting" 
law. Think about it! If US shortwave bradcasters were allowed to target US 
audiences, it would only be a matter of time before you'd start seeing SW 
receivers factory-installed in cars. Folks would start "playing around" with 
this "new" feature on their radios, and then they would start hearing foriegn 
stations, and they'd get hooked. Of course, a LOT of regulation would have to 
be implemented, otherwise the shortwave bands could get just as crowded as 
local AM.
 >
 >NB>and  I still meet folks that're a good bit older than me that have never
 >NB>even  HEARD of shortwave. Or if I mention shortave radio, they
 >NB>automatically think  "CB." Perhaps if radio manufacturers would start
 >NB>advertising their wares the  way internet providers do, emphasizing that
 >NB>you can "...explore the world.."  on less than a hundred bucks, it could
 >NB>get the hobby jump started again.
 >
 >...and that, too!  :)
 >
--- SLMAIL v4.5a  (#0226)
---------------