[BC] HD Radio -- Folks we have to get it right!

[Robert Meuser]

You need to separate two items. One is the creation of content. We can 
talk all day about what is good and what is bad but content is content.  
Then there is the distribution of said content. Radio is but one way to 
do this. At this point in time it is a real time linear experience and 
will fall more and more out of people's life style.

You can put that content out in other forms and it may catch those who 
live non linear lives, but THAT is not radio. When I say radio I include 
analog, digital, XM and Sirius.

R


Cornelius Gould wrote:

>Rich Wood Wrote:
>  
>
>>Since we still dominate, I think the news of our death is greatly
>>exaggerated. Apologies to Mark Twain. We aren't dead and aren't
>>likely to go for quite a while. There's no medium that beats us as an
>>industry. I believe it's still true that more people listen to radio
>>in a day than watch TV.
>>    
>>
>
><snip>
>
>Yes...right now, things are fine.  I'm speaking of the next wave of
>potential listeners.  The ones in College now, and younger. Right now,
>they don't really listen to the radio much for anything.  Most can't even
>name ONE radio station!
>
>Can we capture their interest?  I don't know.  We definitely have to try
>new things, and try them soon!   As I indicated before, multichannel HD
>Radio is just one tool to use.  Others correctly pointed out that
>multichannel gives a chance to experiment with new programming ideas.
>
>Will programmers actually follow through?  I don't know.  My job is to
>provide a delivery system for it...the rest is in their hands.
>
>Once there is clear policies as to RIAA issues on on-demand music
>programming, there will be yet another opportunity for broadcasters to
>step into the lifestyles of this audience.
>
>The key here is we (as broadcasters)have got to be flexible with
>delivering entertainment to folks to be viable in the ***future***.
>
>Radio will always be around in this new age...just like the local TV
>channels are.  The big lesson to learn from TV is that they jumped into
>their competitor's space (cable and satellite TV) to remain in the game.
>
>  
>
>>OK. Verizon has a sort of national service in some major markets. I
>>think it's about 60 markets. If we were to dump all our bandwidth on
>>their system, could it handle it without compressing it down to
>>nothing? I'm not concerned about watching a 3 minute condensed
>>version of War and Peace. Verizon is advertising TV on your cell
>>phone. It turns out not to be live. It's more like a video podcast.
>>Of course, my market is too small to have service. If I go farther
>>north all cell service disappears. When do you suppose those Northern
>>New England towns will get service?
>>    
>>
>
>In Qualcomm's case, they're not using the cell service.  They're using
>former UHF-TV spectrum for this service.  I don't know if protable TV over
>mobile digital networks is anywhere near prime-time yet, but AUDIO sure
>is!
>
>I'm not being a doomsday person about Radio's future here.  Mr. Meuser is
>more along those lines! ;-D
>
>All I'm saying is that there is a need to explore new avenues to enhance
>our service to listeners, and to grow as an industry.  I still think there
>is a good future for radio...as long as we look to grow with the changes
>in the entertainment world.  All other forms of entertainment are dealing
>with the same issues...not just radio.
>
>For radio, taking advantage of non-linear programming opportunities, and
>branching out in ways that will allow us to experiment with programming
>will make sure our future stays bright, and we remain relevent in the
>listeners lifestyles.
>
>And in a very important step in that process, We need to make sure
>manufacturers don't see us as the "keystone kops" of technology, and a
>waste of their time!  If we appear to not be able to get something as
>simple as diversity delay right, and cause manufacturers to throw up their
>hands and say "see...we TOLD you guys you wouldn't get it right...and
>that's why we didn't WANT build the radios!" then we lose yet another
>opportunity.
>
>My posts aren't about they sky falling, Mr. Wood!  They're about making
>sure we as an industry don't lose out on an opportunity!  If HD Radio dies
>on its own, then fine... then it does, but hopefully not over something
>like annoying listeners (who get the new HD Radio tech voluntarily or not)
>with something so simple to solve as Diversity Delay.
>
>As I've said in previous posts, I am not even talking about AM-HD issues
>as I have extremely limited experience / exposure there. AM-HD is a
>different can of worms.  Don't add me in the pro or cons of AM-HD and
>possible interference issues.  I have no evidence one way or another to
>argue for or against HD on AM!
>
>The FM system works well, and it has features that can be of use to
>broadcasters in terms of growth opportunities.
>
>I don't expect you to agree, and you'll probably shoot this down too, but
>I said my part, taking up waaaay more time than I should just to get it
>out across several posts. I am done now, and you can feel free to shread
>this apart like all the other posts!  Now I've got a ton of work to get
>back to!
>
>Good Day!
>
>-Cornelius
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>This is the BROADCAST mailing list
>To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
>For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: http://www.radiolists.net/
>
>  
>