playonATcomcast.net
That explains a lot, if you can't tell the difference between
corporate control and democracy. Music and news are hardly
democratized -- what planet do you live on? It's pretty much
impossible to have a hit record without an enormous promotional
budget, and no one can get their version of the "news" on TV without
being a million dollar corporation.


Dude - thanks to modern technology almost anyone can compose and record
Orchestral music without having to have a King or the Holy Church as a patron.
One can record and mix a 48 track recording project in one's basement, without
needing a record company, a drug lord or the mafia as a sponsor to do so.
That's what I mean by the "Democratization" of the music business - you seem to
take it all for granted. It is also true there are more outlets for
distribution now than ever, and many feel direct marketing will eventually
surpass major labels. The good news is everyone can make a CD - and the bad
news is everyone can make a CD.

Similarly cable news and the rise of web "Blogs" and web columnists like
Drudge, Salon and the like arguably reflect the same trend of
"democratization". Sure cable TV takes more money than a server does, but
compared to the Broadcast networks - with their massive budgets, established
viewing trends, brand names, market penetration and bureaus all over the world?
An enormous difference in scale my friend.

Fox News Channel had nothing 8 years ago - no news gathering
infrastructure, no programming, no studios, no talent, no brand name, no
distribution, no advertisers, no place on cable systems let alone a decent
position on the cable dial. Our budget was 1/10th of CNN's, they had 3500
employees, we hired 700, they had 30 established Bureaus abroad and in the
States and we had a total of *8*. Yet *NO* company has ever risen so far so
fast in the history of the business world - ever. And IMHO, although everyone
who has contributed to our product deserves kudos for their hard work, I cannot
help but also observe that the failure of our competitors, who possessed almost
every possible advantage over us has also contributed to our remarkable
success.

The public definitely does not decide which stories FOX reports or ignores,
nor do they have any say in the tone or slant of the reporting.

You are very very wrong in this assumption. Why do you think we cover
every damn car chase that somes down the pike, to the exclusion of more serious
programming? Because the ratings spike by a factor of 3 or more when we do so,
they track what stories viewers are interested in very, very closely. Our Fox
News Channel logo is 3 dimensional and revolves because viewers complained that
the logo was burning into their screens, so we made a logo that would be more
"fan friendly". No one takes more viewer calls or reads as much email on air
as we do either. Viewer interest absolutely drives our coverage and our
product, and we do so with respect for a wider range of views than anyone else.

You are I take it not a Broadcast audio professional, and even if you
were you might not give a damn about any of this, that is fine. Many do not.
But you might like to be a bit more circumspect in proclaiming your narrow set
of assumptions as fact, based on little else than your personal bias.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits