Re: Rumors re: Internet streaming

[Mark Shneyder <bostonradio@yahoo.com>]

--- Mark Laurence <mlaurence@mindspring.com> wrote:
> These attempts by industry associations and unions to fatten their 
> paychecks will result in fewer choices for Internet listening, but it 
> won't make anybody rich.  There may be a small amount of cash flow to 
> be created by the Major League Baseball service and perhaps a few 
> news stations, but few people are paying a big price for content.


The new AFTRA deal signed last year gives union members a
300% residual fee from any radio-only ad which is streamed on-line.
I don't see how a wacky compensation system for an ad created
for one specific medium and then re-distributed via a completely
different medium results in fewer choices for on-line listening. I think
on the opposite, if local market stations stop streaming
their content, they're the ones losing out and not listeners/consumers.
There are still thousands and thousands of free
streaming options with better and more entertaining content to choose
from than some of Lowry Mays' offerings. (I'd rather listen to Radio
Monte Carlo or some Latvian stations for my Top40 fix anyway).

The large radio groups were quite aware of this provision in the
new AFTRA deal. They were not left without any options -- 1) stop streaming
2) block ads from being streamed 3) insert streaming-only ads/promos(this
technology currently  exists and is already being used by a number
of stations around the country) 4) continue streaming radio-only ads and 
pay specified fees..
 
Today, Clear Channel 'temporarily' pulled the plug on streaming. Big whoop!
All it means is that the on-line listener who surfed over
to a non-streaming Clear Channel site will now find his/her way to
another free streaming site while Lowry Mays battles the union guys...
Freedom of choice in full effect...

-Mark


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/