WRUR should be placed in the right handsThe question quoted at the end of the Campus Times article “WRUR Plans Big Changes” (9/9/2004) is a completely valid one. As a former Program Director of WRUR, I would like to share a few comments.First, the main issue is not, and has never been, an issue of content.It is an issue of wattage. WRUR currently broadcasts at 3,000 watts (according to the WRUR Web site and my personal recollection). It does not, and never has, reached more than a tiny fraction of the Rochester metropolitan area. Specifically, the signal does not carry well to the large residential tracts of the Rochester area that are north and southeast of the city. I recall that reception was always weak, even on campus.At some level, everybody involved has got to face up to the fact that WRUR will never have a significant listenership unless its power is increased dramatically. WRUR is a low power station, and decisions should be made with that in mind.Second, I am upset to hear that WRUR is filling the time with a National Public Radio feed. I think that I am one of the few people in my demographic to detest NPR. Why do I detest National Public Radio? Am I a diehard Republican? Quite the opposite. I oppose monopolies and the forced homogenization of American culture.Many people are able to understand the danger of allowing Clear Channel Communications, Inc. to buy up enormous amounts of the radio bandwidth available in America. I have seen them criticized in the main stream media for creating “no play” lists during the conflict between the US and Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as for their handling of FCC pressure on Howard Stern.However, I have not seen very much criticism of National Public Radio, even though they have accomplished essentially the same thing. The public radio landscape used to be wonderfully diverse, eclectic, unprofessional and often times bizarre. NPR has, by and large, eliminated that diversity by streaming a homogenized feed to a mind-boggling number of stations. It seems you can hear “Morning Edition” from just about every square inch of this country. I see this as a (non-governmental) threat to our shared freedom of expression. In a country where your choices for drive time radio are increasingly limited to the highly formulaic “Morning Edition” or two local “celebrities” who are supposed to be funny, but are just horribly inane, I would like to hear a death-metal show, or music from the twenties, or just about anything else. I think that the city of Rochester needs diversity on WRUR much more than WRUR needs listeners.Last, I would like to ask – what are professors at UR are doing to bring in patents and revenue? What products are being spun off from their research? My questions, asked with my tongue in cheek, are actually questions that I am sure the UR administration is asking quite seriously. And they are extremely unfortunate questions. Again, America has for some time been moving away from an acceptance of intellectual pursuit for its own sake toward a model where all activity must have a capitalistic economic benefit. And, again, I consider myself to be more of a capitalist than most. But we should allow some sectors of our society to operate without the constraint of making money. We should trust, with some oversight, that the professors at UR are doing their best to improve humanities collective knowledge of the world around us. And, equally, we should trust, with some oversight, that WRUR student DJs will create programs that represent their best aesthetic sensibility.It is fine to choose DJs who are responsible enough to actually show up for their shows. And I understand that there are FCC regulations about profanity that must be adhered to. However, beyond those two things, the selection of DJs should be made on the basis of their understanding of, and passion for music or other programming. Basing that selection process on popularity or listenership is equally dangerous to making tenure decisions based on how many innovative products UR professors can market.While the ivory tower is often scorned, it should have a place in our society. I learned more in four years at WRUR than I did in all of my classes combined. My experiences there taught me freedom and a deep respect for the Bill of Rights, and they also made me extremely cynical. I fought these same battles as Program Director, and some of them I lost. I challenge the current students to continue the battle. The pendulum, though heavy, can be made to swing the other way.david iversonClass of 1992
Saying hello still importantI just read Mr. Kutcher’s article “Do not Greet All You Meet” and found it very humorous, yet disturbing at the same time. You are definitely on the money with the over-use of AOL Instant Messenger instead of physical contact. But, what about saying “Hi” to people while walking by? Isn’t it a nice feeling to have someone say “Hi” to you?I’m a student at the Rochester Institute of Technology and I feel like I’m the only person that says hello to other people. Now, I know that people are happier after I say “Heeeyyyy,” of course with a smile. I think it’s important to acknowledge people that you’ve “bumped” into before because it just makes better community. Although short conversations may not hold a place in your society, I think they’re a good opener to learn more about a person. Besides, I would hope if I saw you at a party and had a small conversation that you would say “Hi” to me if I walked by you. If not, I would feel totally ignored. Now, I know you’re probably thinking that someone shouldn’t base their feelings on the actions of other people, but, it’s human nature. It would make me feel non-existent if someone didn’t remember talking to me. Although this happens to me infrequently, it would still make me feel awful. In short, instead of having those short conversations that you so bear, maybe you should learn more about someone instead of pre-judging them just because they took the time to remember you!Julie fetzerRochester Institute of Technology Student
