What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
109 Comments
- sinurgy, on 10/12/2007, -5/+86Not until they are brought down, plain and simple!
- opnickc, on 10/12/2007, -18/+93"How many damn Ubuntu threads have to be started in one day.
Yes, Ubuntu rocks. We get it. Can we MOVE THE ***** ON now?"
"How many damn PS3 threads have to be started in one day.
Yes, the PS3 sucks. We get it. Can we MOVE THE ***** ON now?"
"How many damn Wii threads have to be started in one day.
Yes, the Wii rocks. We get it. Can we MOVE THE ***** ON now?"
and now. . .
"How many damn RIAA threads have to be started in one day.
Yes, the RIAA sucks. We get it. Can we MOVE THE ***** ON now?"
Is the idea of voting for stories you like and not ones you don't really that difficult? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+70More (young) people should listen to NPR. Not only is it more interesting, but their programming is at least different from listening to other radio stations that play the same 8 songs every hour. I used to think it was for old people until I actually sat down and listened to it one day in college. Hooked every since.
- AdonisEffect, on 10/12/2007, -1/+65Help NPR fight the good fight:
http://www.npr.org/about/place/corpsupport/majordonor.html
because the RIAA thinks it's cool to sue 13 year old girls. - ayeroxor, on 10/12/2007, -6/+65"I thought NPR was anti- war."
You're a ***** moron. No national non-commerical journalist conglomerate, comprised of hundreds or thousands of individuals, can be "pro" or "against" anything. Some journalist may be for, and some may be against. But how can the whole be one or the other without commercial influence? - Trevino, on 10/12/2007, -2/+48No, not while they have some much control over the music industry and continue to screw consumers over.
- mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+36@omgwtfroflmaox2,
My 18 y/o daughter listens to NPR. She even likes Prairie Home Companion and This American Life.
One thing about "liberal" NPR though, their support of US soldiers is far above that of any other news radio. - zengonzo, on 10/12/2007, -9/+43"I like listening to NPR programming, but as a libertarian, I don't see it as a good thing for our government to be funding a non-essential service such as radio when its clear commercial entities can do it too."
Might I ask why you enjoy listening to NPR instead of the many other commercial stations available?
Do you not imagine that there is something special in that formula that allows NPR to provide the programming that it does? - amoirae, on 10/12/2007, -8/+40Beaver6813: Um... the BBC is funded by tax revenue as is NPR. No difference,
- AllnightChemist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+29@turpenine
Do you get internet well in your area? - DarkPrincess74, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29I want to start my own war on acronyms
- ayeroxor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+30They are non-commercial and their funding is controlled by the government. But other than that, yeah, you're right. Completely different.
- bdurkin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+26lmao
- RadicalEntity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19The RIAA is walking the green mile, and making as much of a racket as possible on the way out. They're pushing their already defunct role in the music economy to the absolute breaking point.
Let it die, oh please, let it die. - mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18No, they say "You're listening to NPR, National Public Radio". What's your point?
- WarpFox, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20I could have swore all NPR played was indie label. I listen to them all the time and have NEVER EVER heard anything close to Kelly Clarkson.
- amoirae, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Much like Judy Tenuta, drmangrum prefers to stay at home and complain.
- Beaver6813, on 10/12/2007, -15/+33In fairness the BBC aren't really funded by the government, tax payers have to pay TV Licensing fees which are supposed to cover most of the BBC's expenditures.
- mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Here's a list of RIAA members http://www.riaa.com/about/members/default.asp . Just because some label is "indie" doesn't mean it isn't a member of RIAA.
- glycolized, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16"If NPR is so great as some people say, why don't they just go commercial instead of asking the taxpayer to pay?"
Shut up you ignorant ***** - you and a dozen others in this thread. NPR only gets about 1% of it's annual budget from Federal tax dollars.
Unlike digger 30trip, who has been stomping all over this thread, I'll give some links to back up my arguments.
http://www.npr.org/about/privatesupport.html
Last paragraph here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6973-2003Nov6?language=printer
Shove it up your ass. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Don't worry about NPR funding. That's trivial. Worry about the billions of dollars for the "dark" government budget. AKA "we're spend your tax dollars for black ops and won't tell you what we're up too.
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Wow... A sensible Blog Post that was well researched and presented nicely...
- Matteos, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12If you would have followed the link in the article to the source info you would have read this...
"The liability for Pandora in the new rate's first year, he calculated, could pass $3.5 billion because the ruling includes a $500 minimum per channel, and Pandora functions by having its 6 million users set up as many as 100 of their own music channels." - ldhertert, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13That's one of the best written articles I've ever read that was posted on digg. Clear headed, (IMHO) unbiased, good points, and to the point. Thanks for submitting.
- RadioFreeOpium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13"I like listening to NPR programming, but as a libertarian, I don't see it as a good thing for our government to be funding a non-essential service such as radio when its clear commercial entities can do it too."
yeah, clear commercial entities can do the same thing if by "same thing" you mean biased rants and by "clear commercial entities" you mean corporate swine like clear channel - nestafett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I think the original post was a joke, I hope.
I would think the poster would know the difference between a literal and figurative war, i hope - meltingrobot, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15That's exactly what I was thinking. Nobody is stopping NPR from switching to all indie label music. I would bet that about every indie label they approached would let them play any of their music for free to get the promotion.
- unicronband, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Why is there so much ***** talking about NPR? Oh my god, the government spends money on Public Radio?!?!? Would the world really be that much better if private companies took over all of the governments functions? Private fire departments? "Yeah, we'll have a fire truck out as soon as your insurance information clears and we have your co-pay."
- Matteos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Its not like you are missing out on much...
- EndersGame, on 10/12/2007, -15/+24***** THE RIAA
- pbull, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8@warpfox:
The RIAA has it's claws in deep... there's a lot of old blues, jazz, folk -- which are mainstays on my local NPR station -- that are owned by RIAA labels. It's not all top 40 bubblegum pop. - eonblue, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10"The NPR web site offers annual reports, IRS 990 forms, and audited financial statements. According to the most recent 2005 financial statement, NPR makes just over half of its money from the fees and dues it charges member stations to receive programming, although some of this money originated at the CPB itself, in the form of pass-through grants to member stations. About 2% of NPR's funding comes from bidding on government grants and programs (chiefly the Corporation for Public Broadcasting); the remainder comes from member station dues, foundation grants, and corporate underwriting. Typically, NPR member stations raise about one-third of their budget through on-air pledge drives, one-third from corporate underwriting, and one-third from grants from state governments, university grants, and grants from the CPB itself.
The 2% figure above refers only to money contributed by the federal government directly to NPR. Additional government money makes its way to NPR indirectly. This is because the government (again chiefly the Corporation for Public Broadcasting) provides some funding to NPR member stations, the states (and via the states state universities) in addition to the funding provided to NPR itself. Since the these member stations contribute to NPR (in the form of dues and programming fees), the federal government's portion of NPR's budget is significantly higher than 2%, and the total government expenditure is higher still.[citation needed]
Over the years, the portion of the total NPR budget that comes from government has been decreasing. During the 1970s and early 1980s, the majority of NPR funding came from the government. Steps were being taken during the 1980s to completely wean NPR from government support, but the 1983 funding crisis forced the network to make immediate changes. More money to fund the NPR network was raised from listeners, charitable foundations and corporations, and less from the government."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Npr - powerpants, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Be not afraid, for it is only the middleman who is dying. We no longer need record labels to get the music from the musicians to the fans. Just set up your website with free downloads and a paypal link for tips. It's like busking in cyberspace except you don't have to nod whenever someone drops a buck.
- mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8That's what I don't get. As a supporter of NPR, I appreciate the contribution of the gov't but as it gets smaller and smaller, I wonder why they don't just drop it altogether. It's clear that it's able to sustain itself now. Why even bother with taking federal money?
- mancat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It's a mandatory station identification. As per FCC mandate, every local radio station has to make the announcement on a regular basis during the daily broadcast. It's required to happen at least once every hour. It also applies to syndicated national broadcasts that are re-broadcasted on said local stations. So, you might be listening to KUOW in Seattle (an NPR affiliate), and not only are they required to identify themselves as KUOW on a regular basis, but broadcasts from the national NPR feed that are being spliced in, must also identify themselves as originating from NPR.
Yes it gets annoying. - 10mm, on 10/12/2007, -12/+19Republicans want to defund NPR, because, lets be honest, they are center left, sometimes further left.
And I say this as a conservative (not republican) and NPR listener.
I'm not sure, but I'd be very surprised if the RIAA was a 'right wing' supporter. But, they're definitely a profit-before-politics organization. - xjesuschristx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Gotta put food on the table somehow, My point is the music market is scary and may not be condusive towards being able to eat, pay rent, etc.
- bernie_a, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6If you actually listened to NPR you would know that its "You're" not "Your". And yes they say it a lot, but thats 2 seconds, while ads are getting longer and longer on commercial radio.
- DavidDigg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Very simple: because they value their independence. They are a non-profit corporation, which means they cannot be bought or sold, and their existence is not entirely dependent on a set of advertisers. There are people in this world who would rather provide programming for the greater good than pander to the lowest common denominator in our society or just play music all day. And there are people who are willing to give money to help those people realize their mission.
- Matteos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6The perfect example of RIAA math -
FTA
Speaking about Pandora "...will see its payments increase to an estimated $3.5 billion"
Later in the article - "...advertising revenues from online music broadcasting have grown rapidly over the past few years... ...to $500 million last year, giving Webcasters enough resources to cover the new royalty rates."
Huh?
So on what planet does 500,000,000 = 3,500,000,000. - nestafett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@30 actually if you listen to npr you will find them very unbiased. I have been an avid listener for years and found them to be very open to showing both sides. for example, it was npr that got me thinking that Bush's social security plan may be an alright solution (although ive since changed my mind)
yes there is a slight bias, but it depends on what show your listening to, and that is human. there is no news organization in existence where I could not find bias.
and whats with your ending about how horrible their life has become?? wtf are you talking about? you know nothing of that persons life from a 2 or 3 sentence post. - Cyberdactyl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Historically, here’s the RIAA’s single biggest mistake; Shutting down Napster’s free P2P servers.
Why? Napster WAS the Microsoft of P2P. They owned 95+% of the file sharing community throughout the US and possibly the world. The RIAA could have. . . SHOULD have . . worked with the music industry and Napster. Napster could have been the best, single source, marketing tool opportunity in decades. If they had simply required members to share simple information such as demographic, general geographic location, interests, etc. it would have provided a plethora of critical marketing information. The RIAA then should have worked to curtail only the most egregious abusers. . those selling copyrighted music, etc.
Instead the RIAA took a bat to the bee hive, scattering the so-called “file sharing criminals” to the winds.
Now, instead of a single valuable source of marketing information, they now deal with several P2P apps and billions of files flung to the wind.
If anything, the RIAA hurt the music industry FAR more than little Susie at Berkley wanting a copy of Christina Aguilera’s Candyman. - theRealKlaatu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The refrigerator has arrived, and the RIAA is the ice man.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6They play the occasional mainstream clip as a lead-in or fade-out, and periodically, a song is referenced in a broadcast. I believe that even if the song is ref'd in a story, they still have to pay the royalty if it's played on the air. IANAL though, so that's not gospel.
I wonder how much of these royalty business is coming from the classical music selection? Here in Cinci there's an all-classical public station, and that music has to be owned by somebody, right? - Depthfunction, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The insanity that is the RIAA's policies towards the internet and its users won't change until the RIAA gets over its paranoia about file sharing. They need to understand that file sharing isn't going away--whether by p2p, bittorrent, or some other yet-to-be-invented technology. File sharing and "piracy" is a fact of life and it won't change. The RIAA companies need to adjust their business models so that they take maximum advantage of the benefits of online distribution and promotion. This internet radio fiasco is evidence that they still don't get it. Maybe they never will.
Lately, it seems like watching the RIAA fighting online music is like watching the Titanic slowly, but surely, sink into the deep dark sea. - clempka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@mutatron
That is a list by the RIAA, but apparently they aren't very truthful with it. Fat Wreck Chords (a record label owned by one of the guys from NOFX) isn't a part of the RIAA according to their site, but they're on that list.
Here's FRC's FAQ: http://www.fatwreck.com/community/faq
"What the ***** is the RIAA and is Fat part of it?
They are the Recording Industry Association of America. Are we a member? Not only no, but ***** NO! We spent three years having our label’s name (which was mispelled) removed from their members list. A year went by, then our name showed up again on their ***** list! Who are these sonsabitches?! Needless to say, we’re in the process of having our name removed again, but they aren’t being too cooperative."
Just because they're on the list, doesn't mean they're a part of the RIAA.
So... yeah. ***** the RIAA, or something. - bergur1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@mutatron
I used to hate it when my parents played it over the radio but now that I can choose what I can listen to it makes it so much better. My dad listens to car talk, my mom listens to the religious one, and I listen to the technology one along with song of the day. - tech42er, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Well, the government should not fund a radio station with the taxpayers' money! However, if they insist, then why not listen to it? After all, we're paying for it.
/libertarian or classical liberal...something along those lines
Ans screw the RIAA! - bennnno, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Most NPR radio stations only get a small cost of there service provided by the government. i know in southern california KPCC gets less then 2% of operating costs form the government.
- clickmyface, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) gets about a billion dollars a year from the Canadian government. Now, lets remember, this means from citizens tax dollars.
The CBC happens to also be one of the most government critical media outlets in Canada. Why? Because they are an independent entity recognized as a social institution. Their funding does not depend on how well they please politicians. Through their Broadcasting Act, canadian broadcast airwaves MUST serve the people.
In the U.S. the airwaves belong to the public and are regulated by a publicly funded comission, the FCC, and by acts of our elected officials in Congress. The FCC is one of the most heavily lobbied group in our country because mass media is the backbone for our society. Our media system has been set up so that the audience is advertisers and what pleases them. If an advertiser doesnt like a news topic or a television show, they pull their funding. It's not freedom of speech if it's based on cencorship. That's not in the best interests of the public. Having free avenues of speech funded by the public is the definition of freedom of speech. Commercial media is not. -
Show 51 - 100 of 110 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is