When we saw the title "HD Radio: Why Should You Care?" in CNET a few days ago we became very excited.
Then we read the article.
In one of the least enthusiastic articles we have read in CNET in some time, the author went methodically through a list of generic talking points.
Worse, the author starts with HD Radio's least important benefit: "Increased Sound Quality".
The popularity of MP3 files and YouTube show that fidelity is not a huge selling point for most music fans.
The new HD2 channels provided by HD Radio, which should be first on the list, ends up third under the innocuous title "Subchannels".
It was almost as if the author was forced by his new bosses at CBS to write a positive article on HD Radio.
Our advice: If you are going to put out propaganda (and it is their right to do so), at least do it right.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I'm sure that he was forced to do so - just ask Bob Savage (WYSL). Print Media seems to be bought and paid for by the NAB/iBiquity/HD Alliance - only a few negative HD Radio articles are ever written. iBiquity's Web page for news releases makes sure that the Press picks up on the latest propaganda. iBiquity and the Press are real good at recycling old news:
"Volvo First With Standard HD Radios"
11/19/2008
"Volvo announced today that it will be the first automaker to offer HD Radio as standard in all but one of its 2009 car radios, starting next month."
http://www.twice.com/article/CA6616236.html
"Volvo To Offer HD Radio In Its '09 Models"
12/3/2007
"Volvo is the first automaker to announce plans to offer HD Radio as standard equipment. The vehicles will be available in September 2008."
http://www.twice.com/article/CA6508927.html
HD Radio is nothing but a bunch of crap.
Did BigRadio want HD to jam adjacent stations? Why did they pull a flim-flam called 'In Band On-Channel'? Did they think citizens wouldn't see through that?
Jamming hurts competitors, renders billions of existing radios worth trillions of dollars worthless, makes listeners buy costly HD stooge radios, and yokes them to a few monopoly stations.
Did they realize the law of unintended consequences always voids mischief framed by decree?
Citizens rejected State Sponsored Jamming. A global economic crisis framed by corrupt 'public partners' and their agedds ogrish euro-slavemasters intervened.
Can a new regime enamored of serially failed command economies resurrect this serially superseded jammer?
Can copious albeit vapid PR - this week's R/W claims 2009 will be the HD breakthrough - make citizens buy what they don't want?
Did that old gag work for the soviets? Why do they think it'll work here?
Paul Vincent Zecchino
Manasota Key, Florida
14 December, 2008
"Lawmakers order FCC to stand down; put actions on hold"
"Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Representative Henry Waxman (D-CA) today called on FCC Chairman Kevin Martin to put the agency's actions on hold unless they are urgent or required by law. Rockefeller's and Waxman's committees both have jurisdiction over the FCC... If the FCC indeed must stand down (an FCC spokesperson said they are reviewing the order right now), then the WCS-SDARS issue - and even the HD Radio mandate - would likely be put on hold until the new administration moves in."
http://tinyurl.com/63b9wz
I hope the new admin goes after iBiquity/HD Radio - we have already been in touch with Obama's FCC transition team.
Post a Comment