Some recent news stories you may have missed

By Don Keith

Several related stories in the news today you may have missed:

1) Citing the presence of a small number of racist or violent police officers on their forces, state legislatures and city governments in several areas have begun the process of defunding or eliminating entirely the police departments over which they have jurisdiction. Most will allocate the money previously allotted for police to social service and drug intervention programs, maintaining such interdiction programs will eliminate all crime and that armed police will no longer be necessary.

2) Noting that a small percentage of all major league baseball players perennially have a batting average below .100, the League will dismantle professional baseball in this country entirely, eliminating the personal suffering of and constant pressure on these vulnerable players. Money that would have gone to MLB will now be used to build batting cages in centrally-located areas and to pay instructors to teach kids how to hit the curve ball.

3) Because almost 40,000 people die in auto accidents each year on highways in the USA, the NTSB has begun a multi-billion-dollar program to bulldoze every single mile of roadway in the country. The original plan was to use any leftover funds to provide every man, woman and child in the country a bicycle, However, it was learned that almost 800 people die in bicycle accidents each year. Although practically all of those fatalities were from autos hitting cyclists, the NTSB said, "Even one person dying on a bicycle is too many."

They will, instead, outlaw bicycles and provide every man, woman and child in America a walking stick, pending accurate statistics on how many non-traffic-related walking fatalities occur each year. There was some discussion about simply ordering everyone to stay home, but since that policy is already in effect, it would have little impact on the problem.

4) Because a percentage of all elected and appointed government officials--including those serving in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, state legislatures, and city governments--are corrupt, dim-witted or certifiably insane, it has been determined that every single one of them will be removed from office, just to be sure the right ones are gone and can do no more damage. Since that is cited as the reason to get rid of all police officers just to eliminate the bad ones, it should work just fine for all politicians, too.

Elections will be scheduled for some future date...or not. The consensus is that the media has all the answers anyway and should be able to step in and run the government just fine until we get around to elections.One suggestion is that elections not be held until some scientific way is developed to determine if a candidate has at least some modicum of common sense. The problem there is that anyone who desires to run for political office is clearly devoid of common sense in the first place.

The decision of how to eventually re-elect a government will now rest with a panel of academics from Harvard, Yale, Stanford and Malcom X University, representatives of several community organizing groups, and contributors to Fox News, CNN and MSNBC. The group has already announced that the committee to plan the agenda for the first agenda-planning committee meeting will begin discussions sometime in the near future at a location to be determined by the location-determination committee.

Next verse - same as the first

 
by Don Keith

(Blogger Note: I apologize for not having posted in a while. And give credit to COVID-19 that I'm finally socially isolated enough that I have time to do so now. My excuse is a good one: I've been busy as a supermarket hand soap re-stocker! We've completed post-production on the documentary "Colors of Character," trying to meet with various folks about distribution opportunities for the film (no thanks to CoronaVirus!), finishing up with George Wallace our next book in The Hunter Killer Series of military thrillers, and working on some other exciting movie projects. Plus the grandkids are out of school during the pandemic and we grandparents are official fallback for daycare. Still, media and technology rapidly change - and has done so since I started this long blogger note - so here's my latest observation. Your thoughts?)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My friends at InsideRadio (and I do have some good friends who work there) are out with an article about a recent research study that even this outlet sees as troubling for the over-the-air broadcast news source. See, InsideRadio typically looks for positive spin on anything pertaining to radio. But it's difficult to put any such lipstick on this pig.

The study by Edison Research reports that, of the people surveyed, 68% report having at least one radio in their homes. Not bad, huh? Well, consider that quite recently, that number approached 100% of all households.  As the article says, "That’s down from 79% in 2016, 90% in 2012 and 96% in 2008. The average home now has 1.5 radios, down from double that number in 2008." 

Again, I must state that I am pro-broadcast-radio. I spent many years of my life in the medium and still believe it can be one of the most powerful there is when it comes to offering entertainment, information, companionship, and advertising that reaches consumers closest to point-of-sale. But this trend is not only surprising but downright frightening...to me, to broadcasters, to listeners, to advertisers. Especially when almost one-third of respondents report having NO radios in their homes.

I don't think I need to rehash why I think people are less and less likely to have radios (or to listen to the ones they do have). It's a natural effect of having multiple sources of streaming music and info available from myriad types of technology. And clearly those sources are offering folks what they want, when they want it, and by the means that they want to consume it. Even if traditional radio is still ubiquitous and relatively easy to access, all those other free or cheap sources of what people want to listen to have simply overwhelmed the medium. And for that, I blame two things: technology and broadcasters.

At a time when listeners have so many options, over-the-air broadcasters abdicated. They panicked. They chopped the very things that made them unique...entertaining personalities, local news, geographically curated music, community involvement, and more. Instead, they now do exactly what online music streamers do - offer "long sets of today's top songs" - but with many more commercials interrupting them and without the ability to program those music streams precisely to the listeners' taste.

News and information? We used to brag, "Read yesterday's news in today's newspaper. See today's news on TV tonight. Or hear the news now on WXXX!" Most news/talk stations now are better known for nationally-syndicated talk shows and not for covering local news stories. Even those news stations that employ a news staff of some kind still lag TV for instantaneous coverage of local events...with pictures. And TV stations that now offer many hours of local newscasts, each day, not just at 7 and 11. (There is an economic reason for that, too, you know. Local newscasts offer much more opportunity for insertion of all those commercials than "Ellen" or "The Price is Right" do. So putting on news makes more money than running syndicated or network shows. As with radio, with viewership/listenership down, and with commercials priced by how many people see or hear them, broadcasters can't add more minutes to the hour so they add more commercials.)

Is it too late for radio? If the trend continues - and I see no reason why it won't - soon less than half the households in the USA will even have a radio in their casa. And with almost every new car model about to come internet-ready and 5G compatible, why would we expect to have in-car listening to the radio go any way but south?  If I am streaming Spotify as I shave in the morning, and if, once I start my commute, my in-car choice is either continuing to hear MY songs or listen to some lame morning show or a stream of music that plays a very limited list of formatted music that may or may not fit what I really want to hear, which will I choose? And if Google tells me the weather and top news and Siri lets me know if there is a wreck on the freeway (I have to wait to hear that on my local radio station, and then it may be old and inaccurate info), what's my incentive to suffer through ten commercials and a trying-too-hard-to-make-me-laugh morning radio team (most of whom are voice-tracking a half dozen other shows on stations around the country when they leave the air locally, so they can make a living)?

And how long will it be before mega-station broadcasters like iHeart decide they really no longer need that tower on the hill or big transmitter and can rely on their online mechanism to reach people and sell advertising? It's happening already. Look at how many AM licenses are being surrendered voluntarily because they can't or won't pay the power bill to keep the stations on the air, or the property where the tower(s) is/are located is more valuable than their airtime is.

Please give me a reason to listen to that old-fashioned device on the shelf in the kitchen or in the middle of my car dash!  Please don't try to outstream the streamers! Please give me the companionship and entertainment value that only live, local radio can offer! That no mouse click or "Hey, Alexa.." can offer.

Please don't continue to try to cut your way to prosperity!

Are we so involved in chronicling our lives that we are missing living them?

By Don Keith

I often tell my wife that we watched our kids grow up through the viewfinder of this or that film or video camera. And it is not far from the truth. Then I receive this spot-on correspondence from Becky Robinson of the company Weaving Influence.

You may have noticed that earlier this week, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp had a glitch when it came to uploading and viewing images. A quick Google search for “Facebook image issues” resulted in a number of articles and tweets about the issue, along with calls to “stay tuned” for updates. And while I appreciate the frustration of not being able to share images - especially when it’s part of your job - I couldn’t help but think about how the world has changed! What if, instead of fanatically following the progress of Facebook engineers to get images back online, we put our smartphones down and gazed out at the ocean instead? Rather than aiming to get the perfect shot to share, how about laying in the grass with our kids and enjoying the fireworks? What if we just ate the hotdog instead of Instagramming it? In recent years, I’ve become less inclined to share via social media, despite coaching our clients to show up consistently, partly because I want to be more tuned in to what’s happening around me. What if social media’s downtime is actually a reminder to us to unplug every once in a while as well? I’d say it’s something to consider.

"Well said, Becky!" I yell, even as I am making a post about her thoughts here on my blog...

Amid all the celebrating on this July 4th...

By Don Keith

It is not boastful nationalism to call attention on this day to a bold, successful experiment that has actually made this planet far better than it would have been otherwise. History has been littered with brutal empires, despotic dictators, and corrupt royalties that dominated practically all of the world's people, and in the 1700s it appeared that would always be the case.

Then, a brave group of very bright men took ideas from the ancient Greeks and applied them to a "new world" that at the time was ruled by a distant king as part of a far-flung empire. After boldly declaring that men (and women) should live free and determine their own fate and fortune, that men and women were free to live, worship, and thrive as they desired so long as they did not infringe on the rights of others, and that this new country would employ a democratic form of government, governed by the people and not a "divinely-appointed" king or queen or a dictator, the United States of America was born...not to dominate the earth, not to build empires, not to threaten with its might but to offer other people across the globe a powerful, shining example of what could be. That experiment gave hope for freedom and prosperity through democracy and an economic system that, together, would raise the living standards, recognize individual rights, and provide an existence not then available to most of the world's people.

Yes, there have been rough spots and necessary change (slavery, civil war, women's rights, civil rights), but it was that very form of government and rule by the people that made those vital adjustments possible...if not always painless. It is true that democracy can be messy. Certainly a distant king or a brutal dictator or a socialist regime would have never allowed such. Government is decidedly neater and quieter under such iron-fist rule. And even as so many bemoan our "division" or our "economic inequality," we need to take a moment to reflect on how wonderful it is that we can even debate such points without being arrested or censored. But also remember that because of those brave men and our persistent form of democracy and thanks to our powerful free-enterprise system, we continue to raise the standard of living not only of our own citizens but of people around the planet. And that everyone can see that they, too, can demand their own rights be granted. Nobody is storming the borders of Venezuela or North Korea or Iran, trying to get into those countries.

And that's just another reason we should shoot our fireworks and eat our barbecue and celebrate this day with renewed vigor. Because this noble experiment continues to demonstrate the correctness of its ideals and the power of its ideas, We may never get it totally perfect, but it has certainly worked out well so far for our country and to those others around the world that emulate it. Even as we continue to try to get it even more perfect, we should acknowledge how great we have it. We should vow to better educate ourselves, be open to hearing opposing ideas, remain open-minded and fair, evaluate our representatives on ideas, not personality or promises, and do everything we can to continue the intent of those bright, brave men who started this whole thing. We can and we must. I'm confident we will.

To me, that is worth celebrating!

Bull feathers!

by Don Keith
N4KC

Here's a post just for my amateur radio friends. I've been enjoying a back-and-forth debate with another ham radio guy who has some very strong--but seriously misguided and misinformed--opinions on our hobby and our national organization, the American Radio Relay League. Here is my latest response to him. I think most amateur radio folks will understand what I'm saying without my having to include the other guy's arguments.

(If you do want to see the ongoing conversation, click HERE and scroll toward the bottom of the thread.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert,

Regardless the field of endeavor, things have to change to keep up with society, its wants and needs. Yes, ham radio experienced solid growth as baby-boomers were impressed with the almost magical ability to communicate worldwide by radio. Gen-Xers and Millennials are not quite so amazed since they have a device on their belts and in their purses that enable them to do that anytime they wish. We do have to show them all the other aspects of our wonderful hobby if we hope to attract their interest and allegiance, and we have to do that in a landscape in which billions of dollars are being spent and the latest technology employed to accomplish that goal for so many other pursuits and products.

The ARRL is clearly working hard to address the needs and wants of all ages of potential hams. Were you a member, you might be more aware of what they are doing, as well as their recent efforts to better learn what would work and how to deliver that experience to those interested in joining us.

You mention a few things you think the League is wrongly doing or not doing to keep the hobby vibrant and relatable. Sponsoring contests? Well, I'd bet the ARRL has nothing to do with 75% of all contesting. But Sweepstakes, the DX contests, VHF/UHF events, and Field Day are among the most popular out there. And if you don't see how radiosport might be a strong draw for generations that grew up on video games, then I'll probably never be able to change your mind anyway. If contests are not popular, they would go away. They don't. They are more popular than ever, based on number of entries.

Try to help hams overcome CCRs/HOAs or all the hands-free-driving legislation? Again, if you were a League member...or bothered to read any of the independent news services that report on amateur radio...you would know about a long, long list of League initiatives as well as a plethora of expensive lobbying and legal maneuvering the ARRL has undertaken in those very areas?

Demonstrate the hobby to young people? Holy cow! Even if your head is stuck in the sand, you have to be aware of the many activities the League sponsors and promotes for youth, including scholarships to college, operating events, and a strong push through affiliated clubs. They are also finally doing research to develop an actionable plan to attract a continuing influx of hams of all ages. And this is at the urging of members, first and foremost, but also to benefit everyone, not just members.

(Loaded question, Robert: What have YOU done to demonstrate the hobby to young people? How have you helped those facing issues with covenants, HOAs, or having a mobile radio? Have you contacted your representatives locally and in Sacramento on these issues? Are you a member of a club out there in The People's Republic of Kalifornia?  If not, why not? Have you thought about starting a club that would do outreach to those you believe would make happy, contributing hams? Or urged the club you belong to to do such since you are of the opinion that the hobby dies when we baby-boomers go SK.)

And once again, you cite the old belief that the ARRL's only effort toward growing the hobby is dumbing down the test so my Labrador retriever can become an Extra Class ham. And even that effort is solely to sign up more members, sell more books, and make more money for the fat cats in Connecticut.

To which I say, "Bull feathers!" I maintain the League has done more to build and promote the hobby since I started typing this response than you and other misguided detractors have done...well...ever! Take a minute and visit www.arrl.org. Give it a look. See what is going on. Then tell me the only thing that bunch in Newington does is cash checks and smoke expensive cigars.

I have never maintained the ARRL is perfect, that every action is correct, that it should not be improved. Like you, I am aware of the demographics of our hobby and what the new-licensee numbers are. But so is the League. And if you were willing to keep yourself better informed, you would know what they are proposing to do about it. There are some dedicated folks who do a lot, whether paid or not, to make this hobby better and attract every single soul out there who might have an interest in it. That's why I support them by being a member, by communicating with my Section Manager and Division Director and letting them know what my concerns are. Not by blasting all things ARRL in some chat forum.

You say the League should be doing those things you mention INSTEAD OF pushing contests? Or dumbing down the tests? (Have you taken a General or Extra practice exam lately, Robert?  How'd you do? If you aced that Extra one, you may want to go ahead and upgrade from Advanced. There is a ton more of 75 meters you could use if you did.)

Read, listen, and make yourself aware and you will see that not only is it NOT an either/or proposition, but these are things our national organization takes very seriously and is doing every single day...with the guidance of its members...to improve all things for all hams, not just League members. That is, when they take a break from promoting all those contests and coming up with easy exam questions!

Now, excuse me but all this diatribe-swapping is cutting into my on-air time. There may be some contest going on I need to work. Or a new, young ham I would like to welcome to the hobby before curmudgeons like you convince them we're all about to be as rare as sunspots and they'd be better off sticking with their video games and Smartphones.

73,

Don N4KC
www.donkeith.com
www.n4kc.com
www.facebook.com/donkeith
 
 

"Radio Days"

By Don Keith

A friend of mine recently sent me an old magazine article that proclaimed that the time before World War II should be declared as "Radio Days." The article went on to say that anything related to the medium after the war was downhill, killed off by television. I agree that the '20s and '30s was a magical time for broadcasting, typified by the Woody Allen movie "Radio Days." 

I actually believe each generation has its own "radio days." For me, it was the top 40 radio of the '60s and album rock of the early '70s. My radios were in the dashboard of my VW bug or a smaller Radio Shack AM/FM portable, battery-powered receiver, but with a speaker big enough I could hear the songs.  I further believe radio had two golden ages, the '20s and '30s, as this article describes, and the 60s and 70s, when top 40 and creative deejays saved radio from the onslaught of TV.

(I wrote an article that ran in the December issue of American Legion Magazine about a big broadcast on Christmas Eve 1943, the first time all four radio networks simulcasted a single entertainment program. Bob Hope hosted and they used shortwave to bring in servicemen at many points around the globe...the most ambitious use of remote broadcasting ever attempted, though to mixed results. It ended with a fireside chat from President Roosevelt. But the point of the article was to show the power of radio at the time, to boost morale on a special day in the midst of a brutal war. You can read the article HERE if you are interested.)

Now, this generation probably won't even know the word "radio," and their source of music and entertainment is an iPhone or Pandora or YouTube. Music is not "presented," curated for them, or delivered in a way in which it is part of a "show" or has a host who was telling listeners why they should hear the song about to play. And it is not put together in such a way that the music flows from one song to another so each song "fits." It's not heard on good radios with big speakers so the music sounds good. Sounds good and can be FELT!

Instead, it is "streamed," one song unrelated to the other, selected for them by a computer algorithm, a formula based on what other songs the person typically listens to, almost certainly eliminating the chance the listener will be introduced to new music and artists he or she might actually enjoy, but is culled by the algorithm.  And unless the listener wants to Google the artist, he or she might hear the song and not even know who sang it, who wrote it, why it was sung or written, who played on the session, what other songs the artist might have written or recorded, how popular it might be with other listeners, or whether or not the artist might be coming to town soon for a live concert. The listener is almost totally detached from the stream, thus rendering it little more than background noise.

That's what I think today's music listeners are missing!  Their "radio days" will be "streamed-music-on-an-iPhone days." And that is sad.

Drinking that free Bubble-Up and eating that rainbow stew

by Don Keith

I know I am supposed to discuss rapid technological change and its effect on media, society and Amateur Radio on this blog. But sometimes I simply have to venture out when something compelling enough grabs my attention.

See, a couple of interesting things landed in my in-box today that I wanted to share. First, there was a story about one of the possible Democratic presidential candidates who promises to give every man, woman and child in America a free $1000 every year, no strings attached. No, not a tax rebate or a welfare plan. 47% of Americans don't pay any income tax anyway, and he does not want them to be left out of that FREE money.

The candidate proposes to pay for that trillion or so dollars a year with a value-added tax on every item sold in the US, theoretically to be paid by those greedy capitalists who suck up all the money and hide it from the rest of us so we can't earn any of it. Never mind that any VAT will be paid by the very consumer that gets that free thousand bucks, not by the manufacturers, importers, creators, or sellers.

Then, moments after I read that ridiculous mess, I got an article that tried to figure out why so many Americans are suddenly becoming infatuated by the lure of free stuff from the federal government...a ploy straight out of the socialism playbook. Yes, it takes a few minutes to read the article, but if you really care about the future of our country (and, what naturally follows, the future of the rest of the planet), then go to all the trouble to read it.

Then, get ready to line up for your free thousand dollars, free cellphone, free internet, free healthcare, free college education, and, as that great poet Merle Haggard says, start "drinking that free Bubble-Up and eating that rainbow stew."