John Wiser wrote:

>At the risk of being repetitious -- I'm coming in rather late in this
>thread, I think -- let me ask which you would rather have: Programming
>arising [at least ideally] from musical considerations, or programming
>subject to the control of a marketing manager in turn beholden to
>advertisers?

It seems we may in the long run have to choose between "programming
subject to the control of a marketing manager" and programing subject
to the control of a market manager.  Private stations like NYC's WQXR and
DC's WGMS are subject ultimately to the control of managers who have found
advertisers who have decided they want to attract the business of listeners
to classical music, while public stations like Phiuladelphia's and other's
I've read about on the Internet, are under the control of managers who have
decided their listenership is not sufficiently interested in classical
music to warrant its continuation.  In the former case, the listeners to
classical music retain some control over the station's format by keeping
the advertisers advised of their continued interest.  In the latter, the
stations' managers no longer seem to care what the outvoted minority of
their listenership wants.  DC's WETA now no longer broadcasts classical
music in the mornings or after 3 pm until later in the evening.  There is
no guarantee that classical music will not be further curtailed.

What does public funding have to do with ths? Probably not much other than
the selfish resentment at having my government finance programs I don't
want to hear at the expense of music I do want to hear.  It will certainly
be my stated reason for withholding further contributions when receiving
mailed solicitation in the future.

Walter Meyer