Bernard Chasan:

>person out on the plains somewhere, or in the inner city for that matter,
>will hear these broadcasts and perhaps be inspired

That is why public radio has any governmental funding at all.  Even the
purse-string holders who hate NPR are easily convinced that it's the
only thing keeping us from a hip-hop takeover.

>into the world of art and music.  (The Public Radio barbarians have
>already restricted these broadcasts, apparently in the belief that "Wait,
>wait, don't tell me "is way more important than the creations of mostly
>dead white males

But some dead white males are Benjamins.  Earlier this year, I got a
circular from Connecticut Public Radio (which I support annually, and
modestly).  I can't get to the exact numbers, but it was quite close
to "45% of our airtime is classical music, which generates 17% of our
donations." You (all "yous" herein are global; I'm not whaling on Bernard)
can read that a few ways:

(1) More people value All Things Considered than they do the opera or
the symphonies.  I don't consider that an unreasonable position.  (I
also don't commute to work, so my radio experience is different from
that of many Americans.)

(2) Connecticut Public Radio is doing a horrible job of presenting
classical music.  (More and more of it comes from Minnesota, which is
quietly conquering public radio worldwide.) I don't think this is the
case.

(3) If they stay too close to "Lunch with Mozart", they'll bore some
people, but if they play too much Ligeti they'll aggravate more traditional
listeners (as well as those who think the time would be better spent on
Birtwistle or somebody).  So they have a limited market, and even within
that limited market it's mathematically impossible to please everybody.
I'd hate to have to program a station for us.  We're fussy.

But 45/17 is a slap shot.  If you were running a public radio station,
what would you do with those numbers?

Eddie J, a Connecticut Nutmegger proud and free, and only very slightly
boring and stuffy