What You Think | radioinfo

What You Think

User Opinion Story
Anthony The Koala
26 August 2019 - 7:01am
It is not the first time that social media conducted a campaign against Alan Jones' program. The "Destroy The Joint"/"Sack Alan Jones" were social media campaigns conducted against the Alan Jones program in 2012. It was reported then that 2GB lost $80000 in revenue as a result of the social media campaign:
Source: https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article/only-rationality-will-destroy-alan-jones--joint#
Source: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/revealed-the-faces-behind-the-alan-jones-pursuit/news-story/31b8cb3c8e55f0335cf1a4337e72fa1e?

After a few weeks of 'ad-free' programming, the advertisers returned to 2GB. The current social media campaign appears to have more bite with half the advertisers withdrawing their custom from 2GB. The advertisers may well resume their sponsorship in a few weeks. Time will tell.

These advertisers are not there for charity. They're out there to attract customers to their business against others in the same category of product or service. If for example Mercedes Benz ('MB') withdraw their advertising, does that mean people will buy an Audi or BMW because of the absence of MB's advertising? MB or any advertiser will want to tout for business by advertising somewhere else. Or it could resume advertising on 2GB.

It is not what you say, rather how you say it. This includes behaviours within the employ, "...put the person in a chaff bag", "....Juliar" outside the employ but identifying with the employer, "....her father died of shame..."

The behaviours are like the school behaviour discussion I made elsewhere on this site. It was where I said that student's behaviour of a (private) may well affect the reputation of the school within and outside school hours. It follows that an employee's behaviour affects the reputation and turnover of a business entity within and outside working hours.

Thus I agree with the author that if a particular politician or policy maker is WRONG, you can still say that the person is wrong without inflammatory remarks. If a commentator disagrees with a leader by saying "....sock...it...down her throat" or by hounding and humiliating a CEO for not publicising a horse race on a public building then the commentator deserves a rap on the knuckles and deserves a loss of advertising revenue.

Instead, the above examples could have been dealt with the commentator saying "....the NZ Prime Minister was wrong in this policy.....and other explanations" and ".....what is the policy of projecting a commercial event such as a horse race on the Opera House....who is responsible for this policy not projecting a horse race....." respectively.

However it is inconsistent of management of wanting to dismiss Alan Jones in for further 'transgressions' of tact in 2019 when it was not dismissing Alan Jones for the same conduct in 2012. It is management policy on the fly. I mentioned that in another posting the inconsistent attitudes towards Arch Tambakis (RIP) for calling the Opposition Leader Mr John Howard a liar and Alan Jones calling the Prime Minister Julia Gillard "..Juliar". The former lost his job, the latter kept his.

On the other hand, should the whim of the crowd of social media be the 'high moral ground' of what goes to air and what does not go to air. The current 2019 social media campaign by the "Sleeping Giants" of 2019 as well as "Destroy The Joint" of 2012 may well be valid.

BUT just because opinions of social media does not accord with the political views of the commentator, should the radio station and/or commentator be boycotted because the commentator does not agree with global warming/climate change/climate emergency or any social or moral issue decided by the social media activists?

The result is that the social media activists could just as well be guilty of bullying as the commentator.

Thank you,
Anthony of exciting Belield
On commercial radio Money Talks...
Anthony The Koala
24 August 2019 - 11:45am
Although MMM dominates overall ratings in Newcastle, there is a distinct pattern Monday to Friday between 0900 and 1200. 2HD's highest rating program is the John Laws show at 8.6%. That is 2HD is the highest rating talk station in the weekday 0900-1200 period. Either side, of this timeslot, the ratings resemble the rest of the day.

While not privy to the ratings, there should be a breakdown of the ratings on the weekends in the afternoon between 1200-1800. There is continual irregularity to the format: sometimes its sporting coverage and sometimes it's talk.

Source, first table of this article, magnified at

Anthony of exciting Belfield
Triple M consolidates its lead in Newcastle : GFK survey 2
23 August 2019 - 8:13pm
Dear TK
There are only a handful of comments in the history of our site that we didn't publish and that was because they were abusive or defamatory.
We don't moderate comments for editorial bias reasons, so we are happy to publish your comment without alteration.
Comment any time, your views are just as valid as others.
SCA's Grant Blackley talks programming and business strategies
23 August 2019 - 1:52pm
Wow! More music and a single presenter in breakfast! How innovative. (What, you mean what it was like in the 70's? Oh.)

The reason the station wasn't hitting targets in breakfast was simple: crap 'talent'.

Oh yeah, lots of programming strategy here. Play more music, talk less. How ever did he come up with this idea. Just amazing! Ha!

(of course this comment will not likely be 'published' due to editorial bias, but hey, maybe you could just send it to Brad for a laugh!)
SCA's Grant Blackley talks programming and business strategies
Anthony The Koala
22 August 2019 - 5:16am
Dear StJohn,

E-Waste: It reminds me of the 'warning' on many electrical goods "no user-serviceable parts inside".

Reducing CO2: In the context of broadcasting, the biggest emitter of CO2 are the ABC who use transmitters of 50kW for metropolitan MW stations when commercial stations' transmitters are 5kW. The same could be said of some rural ABC transmitters at 100kW when the local commercial station is on 2kW. That is for AM transmitters only. That does not take account that ABC's FM transmitters consume more power than its commercial counterparts especially in rural areas.

HF DRM-capable transmitter: StJohn, when you mentioned that BA have at least one DRM-capable HF transmitter. Since 2017 the ABC has abolished SW transmissions via Radio Australia ('RA'): transmissions are delivered by satellite and IP streaming. With the DRM-capable HF transmitter, would DRM HF transmissions resume? That would be a matter of ABC policy. Consideration should be made especially for our Asian and Pacific neighbours in regards to the cost of DRM receivers. The corollary is that with DAB+ receivers still more expensive than the ubiquitous AM/FM despite 10 years of DAB+. Similarly how much is a DRM+ will it cost for a DRM receiver for citizens of our Asian and Pacific neighbours compared to the ubiquitous AM/FM/SW receiver?

StJohn, thank you again for informing us,

Anthony of exciting Belfield
Commenting on digital radio
Wendy Jane
21 August 2019 - 12:05pm
What a fabulous and life-affirming story. Well done to Hope 103.2 for bringing hope to so many. Sydney’s Hope 103.2 listeners restored sight to more than 8000 people
21 August 2019 - 12:26am
Yesterday, I have written to the ACMA to bet them to publish on their website when they will publish the submissions for "The future delivery of Radio in Australia".

Analog TV were ubiquitous and we switched to digital, why not radio? Just remember that there is a lot less electronics in a radio than a TV. Remember that analog radio particularly AM radio is causing lots of carbon dioxide to be produced in Australia except Tasmania, who use hydropower.

The reason e-waste is recycled is the value of the recovered metals. Remember that many phones are replaced not only to change the generations, remember that CDMA, 2nd generation phones have been recycled because the telco's stopped running those networks as well as fashion.

As far as upgrading transmitters is concerned, there are still plenty of old transmitters which use a lot more electricity than new ones even in analog modes. Also old transmitters it is hard to get parts. So compare the damage to the environment of carbon dioxide caused by increased electricity consumption over many years.

The through the air loss of a signal for DAB+ is 12 times that for band 1 DRM+ The comparison between DRM+ in the FM band is 4 times that for band 1.

Remember that the patent cost decreases per receiver, depending on the number of receivers produced by a company. This is why an analog switchoff date needs to be set to get the public to buy many receivers quickly.

The patent has runout on COFDM modulation so the CSIRO no longer gets payments from manufacturers including Wifi manufacturers. The CSIRO sued computer manufacturers for not paying patents, and were paid more than $400 million.

Commenting on digital radio
Anthony The Koala
20 August 2019 - 11:14pm
Dear StJohn,
Thank you again for the information regarding DRM.
Just a couple of points on analogue and digital transmissions and policy and IP and not getting ripped off.

Analogue and digital transmissions - policy and updating new codecs.
(a) Simulcasting both analogue and digital. When I mentioned simulcasting of analogue and digital radio transmissions, I did infer an analogue transmission cut-off date. You hit the "nail on the head" with the analogy of the introduction of digital TV from 2001 and the analogue cutoff date of 2013 and that we did not look back since adopting digital TV.
(aa) In regards to analogue TV. I recall our house was near the former AGL gasometers in Enfield/South Strathfield which have since been demolished. When the gasometers were operable, the received analogue transmissions contained a lot of ghosting. During electrical storms, the video's AM signal would deteriorate resulting in a noisy picture. I don't look back to analogue signals. Though I did miss watching dx signals on WIN 4 Wollongong, NBN 3 Newcastle, and the occasional glimpse of TVNZ on VHF Channel 0.

(aa) Technological change in codecs. In the analogue days, the analogue codecs for TV was a monochrome compatible PAL, NTSC or SECAM and its variants for nearly 60 years (starting with NTSC in 1954). It was stable. Similarly in radio, we've had AM for 100 years and FM for nearly 80 years (invention, adoption 60 years). Manufacturers, broadcasters and users had a reliable method of transmission.

In the last 20-30 years there have been changes in digital audio codecs, for example MP2, MP3 and HE-AAC. Each codec was an improvement on the other such that more 'relevant' (remember it's lossy and redudant info is removed) information could be transmitted for a given fidelity.

Similarly in digital TV, a digital TV sold between 2001 and 2012, despite being digital may not receive the new high definition channels and auxiliary channels because the codecs were not available. But the new codecs such as H.264 enable more relevant (recall it's lossy) video and audio information to be transmitted for a given video and audio quality, sources: https://www.smh.com.au/technology/hd-tv-new-channels-may-not-be-supported-by-your-television-20151201-glccvr.html and https://www.acma.gov.au/theACMA/engage-blogs/engage-blogs/Interference/MPEG-4-video-Unravelling-the-standard . Today, TVs have the HEVC = HE.265 to decode 4k transmissions whether by broadcast or VOD.

The result is that the digital standards for codecs change resulting in some receivers not being able to decode pictures and audio. Put it another way, unless the TV receiver can adopt the new codec, one will have to purchase a set top box capable of decoding the latest decoder.

Could the same problem occur with digital radio or TV transmissions where a clever bunch of scientists devise a new and efficient codec for transmitting more information? What if for example if there is an improvement to the HE-AAC format for DAB+ or DRM?

The rhetorical question, is it good policy to allow for changes in newer codecs making modern receivers inoperable? Alternatively, should there be provision for transmitters and receivers to enable any future adoptable codec via a software update?

IP for codecs and don't get ripped off.
(b) IP for codecs. StJohn, while Fraunhofer was responsible for the MP3 format, it is not responsible for the development of the HE-AAC format. As I mentioned in the previous posting, the HE-AAC was developed by many developers not just Fraunhofer.

HE-AAC is not one codec but a suite of technologies that are developed by a number of entities that enable the transmission of audio via broadcast and IP streaming. To purchase a suite of HE-AAC technology, it is licensed through one 'consortium' "Via Corporation", sources: http://www.via-corp.com/licensing/aac/overview.html and see "What technologies are covered ...." heading under http://www.via-corp.com/licensing/aac/faq.html

For digital TV whether broadcasting or VOD, it is not a matter of "it's just an HEVC/H.265 codec..." it's a suite of codecs, see heading "Patent holders" at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding.

My last remark is if any 'small person' develops any technology that improves on the previous technology that the 'small person' is not ripped off by large corporations with abundant financial resources to litigate. Let's not forget the tragedy of the late Herbert W Armstrong, the inventor of FM who was ripped off by larger corporations.

However what happened to Mr Armstrong shouldn't stop a 'small person' from developing a new method to improve the previous art base/technology. The issue of IP protection and risk management of ideas leaking into the marketplace is another issue.

Anthony of exciting and dynamic Belfield
Commenting on digital radio
20 August 2019 - 12:53pm
Simulcasting it is not effective in causing people to buy new receivers. A cutoff date is. Look at the our change to Digital TV. Simulcasting started in 2001 and receiver sales only took off in the 2010 - 2013 when the public were warned of an analog switchoff were occurring. I doubt a soul would want to go back to analog now! In Norway they progressively switched off all national networked FM transmitters over a year, leaving only low powered local FM stations. Within one year the ratings had returned to normal. Simulcasting, particularly AM simulcasting is wasteful in electricity and maintenance charges.
E waste recycling was covered in the ABC TV program "War on waste". The recycle these products for the metals. It is not economic to recycle components, particularly when many are old and may now not meet original specifications.

Broadcast Australia has 4 MF and 1 or 2 HF DRM compatible transmitters, most newer AM transmitters can be converted to DRM. The main criteria is that the signals must not go through a capacitor, thus loosing the DC reference.

FM transmitters can be converted to DRM+.

Remember also that a digital TV transmitter has a 7 MHz bandwidth which is full of similar signals to DAB+/DRM+. A good linear transmitter could carry more than DAB+/DRM transmission channel, using multiple content servers and modulators with sharp output filters. After all how can the full range of DAB+ programs radiated for the ABC/SBS into regional Australia. You would not wish to put 6 DRM+ transmitters on each site!
Fraunhofer needs to be paid for the development of its compression software/firmware. Hence the patent. DAB+ is already using HE AAC v2 in Australia, the latest upgrade comes at a cost to content server makers and receiver manufacturers. The scientists and engineers need to be paid to keep making these significant advances.

Commenting on digital radio
Anthony The Koala
20 August 2019 - 7:38am
2SER-fm is a great inclusive environment. I was involved at both the Macquarie and UTS studios.

Part of my volunteer experience involved making programs. It included teaching people how to operate the panel, learning about editing tools. In addition I was involved in with the chief engineer Mr Bruce Guinn improving the distribution of 'carts'. I learnt new skills in programming a computer. Unfortunately for 2SER Mr Guinn left 2SER for work in a commercial station and the project was abandoned.

In conclusion, there are a lot of transferable skills volunteering especially with one's God-given talents.

Anthony of exciting and dynamic Belfield
2SER's on a roll? No, that should read: Honour Roll


radioinfo ABN: 87 004 005 109  P O Box 6430 North Ryde NSW 2113 Australia.  |  All content © 2012. All Rights Reserved.