[Swprograms] Re: More on BBC Shortwave Cuts

["Sandy Finlayson" <SFinlayson@xxxxxxx>]

Bill

I agree with your basic sentiment 100%.  

I am puzzled by how the BBC counts its listeners.  They claim that they are on the rise but with all these cuts one is left to wonder.

Sandy

-----Original Message-----
From: swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:swprograms-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bill
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2005 6:15 PM
To: Shortwave programming discussion
Subject: [Swprograms] Re: More on BBC Shortwave Cuts


Yes well...we folks in NA don't count. I guess now one is forced to get 
SIRIUS......(more money down a rathole).
but as far as I'm concerned and, I am sure I am in a minority, the BBC 
can go to hell- I won't miss them now
Bill
KA2EMZ

Ricky Leong wrote:

>Sandy Finlayson wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Looking at the frequency pages there are a lot more cuts coming the BBC on Shortwave.
>>    
>>
>
>In fact, shortwave is being played down if you look for schedules/frequencies in 
>the left-hand-side menu. In most cases, the default mode of delivery is the 
>nearest FM or MW radio station.
>In some instances, the information is downright misleading. I looked for what is 
>listed for the Montreal area. It shows shortwave broadcasts are available -- but 
>all the frequencies listed are DRM transmissions from Sackville. Explain to a 
>novice shortwave radio listener why they only hear noise on those frequencies.
>Nary a mention of conventional shortwave broadcasts aimed at the Caribbean that 
>are tunable from my location.
>Then there is this curious page:
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/schedules/031001_nofreqs.shtml
>"We usually aim to provide frequencies to cover peak listening hours in the 
>morning and evening, local time," it says.
>But it doesn't bother them to provide round-the-clock programming over satellite 
>and the Internet, even though no one might be listening.
>I'm shocked (to a degree) they're willing to waste millions of dollars/pounds on 
>forms of delivery (Internet and satellite) that are costly for the user AND the 
>broadcaster. Particularly for Internet: streaming isn't easily scalable (more 
>listeners means more bandwidth, more processing power, more "modules" on the 
>server side).
>Worst yet, we know about these changes because we have access to the Internet. 
>What about the thousands of listeners whose BBC On-Air magazine was cancelled 
>recently and who don't have access to the Internet? They'll tune their radio and 
>will hear nothing but static, not having known of impending shortwave service 
>cuts. If their aim is to whittle their shortwave audience to nothing, I'll give 
>them five stars for their efforts.
>
>Ricky Leong
>Montreal
>
>  
>

_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms

To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.


_______________________________________________
Swprograms mailing list
Swprograms@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/swprograms

To unsubscribe:  Send an E-mail to  swprograms-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.