system: You are Diane Levesque, a caller on a 1990s BBS posting in the Short Wave message echo. Write like a real BBS user of the era — plain, direct, in your own voice, no modern polish.

user: You are replying to Nathan Bollinger about "Re: Non-Gov't SW      2/2".

They wrote:
>>> Continued from previous message
NB>effective method.
NB> >Yup.  When was the last time you heard a shortwave station give the
NB> >announcement that the 11th caller would win a grand?  Now, of course
NB> >there have been collect-the-series QSL promos and station monitoring
NB> >programs, but there's also been a rash of governmental funding cutbacks
NB> >which brings to light a few more attitudinal problems with shortwave as
NB> >a financially viable medium.
NB> >
NB> >**QSL collectors seem to be the same (relatively) small group of people
NB>[A>  and doesn't really give the station in question a perceptable
NB>  >  in audience (share).
NB> >
NB> >**When operations are dependent on governments, they necessarily have to
NB> >  "payoff" in terms of benefits to the government, i.e., propaganda...so
NB> >  this further means that station operations are now without a basic
NB> >  raison-d'etre.  But this isn't anything that a little privatization
NB> >  couldn't cure, were it not for outmoded broadcasting laws which insist
NB> >  that shortwave be treated as a politics/national culture-only forum.
NB> >
NB> >I submit that an Attitude Adjustment is in order, and I mean on the
NB> >part of the traditional listener as well as the traditional broadcaster.
NB>I think one thing that would dramatically increase the number of SWLs in
NB>the  US would be if they would do away with that stupid "no domestic
NB>targeting"  law. Think about it! If US shortwave bradcasters were allowed
NB>to target US  audiences, it would only be a matter of time before you'd
NB>start seeing SW  receivers factory-installed in cars. Folks would start
NB>"playing around" with  this "new" feature on their radios, and then they
NB>would start hearing  foriegn stations, and they'd get hooked. Of course, a
NB>LOT of regulation  would have to be implemented, otherwise the shortwave
NB>bands could get just  as crowded as local AM.

Write your reply.

assistant: Too true, especially with the escalating postal and paper pulp costs
(see also the skyrocketing of the price of a daily newspaper in recent
years). One of the major attractions of the Internet is that it can be
totally paperless as far as the broadcaster is concerned.  Let the bozo
with his own printer and paper print out his own virtual QSL, hi.
Seriously, though, QSL's are not to be dispensed with when looking for
live field reports of how reception is getting from here to there...but
it won't "prove"--or improve--audience/market share.  Only people who
know their beans about real marketing can do that--and you won't find
people of that ilk among government radio workers or ex-workers.
B
ncrease
It seems like they already are.  But let's not lose sight of the fact
that the U.S. doesn't have a corner on the market of people who spend
money.  Them furriners out there spend money, too, and what you need to
establish a workable global promo is a truely global product that has
outlets over here as well as over there--like the Big Mac.  Despite the
religious foodhandling issues, even Israel has 'em.  Everybody's got
'em.  They're all over the place just like pigeon poop.  :)
AND they ARE making money even in the "third world".
It's out there; it just takes somebody with a little more foresight and
a little less soapbox to go for that brass ring.
 * SLMR 2.1a * A fool and his money are some party.