Colin,

Particularly in the United States, you don't get much diversity of viewpoint
on radio.  And I'm enough of a cynic to think that most U.S. newspapers
report pretty much the same news as the radio.  That said, I think you can
still get some different perspectives with radio if you listen to enough
shortwave, but again, you have to go outside the U.S. to find out anything
useful.

Steve

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 17:01
Subject: Re: Clear channel


> wasted time?
> I can literally know, in detail all of the days top headlines as well as
> about 3 or 4 different world views from 4 different continents in less
then
> 5 minutes.
> If a person spends any time at all on the net,you learn how to get past,
or
> simply ignore, or not even see all the time wasting stuff.
> And I wouldn't call roiters, the BBC, newyork times, washington post, CBC,
> newspapers from india, asia, south america and africa, as well as a
thousand
> other wire services  exactly bs or unreliable.
>
> You must bbe in a market where there are multiple AM and FM news stations
> which do perhaps offer different points of view, but for those of us who
> live in areas where the stations are limited to 1 or 2, then that option
is
> not availible, and its got nothing to do with laziness.
> The radio really isn't the most efficient and educational medium anymore
as
> it once was.
> Perhaps at one time, the radio was the only, or at least the best way to
> find out about issues and news and everything else, but it certainly
doesn't
> hold a candle to the internet.
> The idea that radio is still the best is old school and probably bassed on
a
> generational point of view, wherein most people of the older generations
> grew up listening to the radio and have come to trust it as the only
> reliable and credible source for their news and the best pipe line for new
> ideas and thought provoking discussions.
> Its not!
> 73
> Colin, V A6BKX