My buddy John Anderson from DIYMedia.org sent this email to me (see my comments following his email)- Just so anyone reading this blog knows... if you email me regarding this blog and it's contents, it's fair game for use in this blog. Email from John Anderson:
Ah, my zealous one. there is too a value in so-called "vanity radio."
Please do remember that not all may aspire to the level of
sophistication that you do in station operation, nor are all willing to
take the risks of such unabashed operations. That does not, however,
make such hit-n-run type stations less valuable.
***They demonstrate the technology and the fact that this form of civil
disobedience is pretty damn easy and can be done by just about
anyone.***
That is valuable. So, it might not reflect a depth and breadth of "the
community," and the size of the audience is (generally) smaller, but
that's the drawbacks of limited operation. Given the choice of all or
nothing, I would of course choose all.
Thankfully, that is a fictitious choice - there is a "some" in between,
and that is the so-called "vanity station," and there are a lot more of
those types of pirates out there than there are the likes of you. In my
mind it's all part of a movement, so dissin' comrades doesn't seem cool
to me.
I am all for folks assuming the level of risk they are comfortable
with. Some sets of circumstances (like, say, a sense of fiscal
autonomy) allow for the taking of greater risks. It is the taking of
the risk that is paramount. The duration of the broadcast is secondary.
I would like to see a distributed-node time-sharing frequency model
developed - multiple hit-n-run pirates coordinate their broadcasts to
fill multiple hours on a single frequency. Station A fires up on the
frequency from, say, noon to 4pm, when they sign off Station B signs on
the same freq, going from 4 to 8, and then station C does 8 to
midnight. It would break the risk up into manageable bits for the those
less ballsy than you - and would also provide a heretofore-unseen level
of redundancy in case of official friction (provided there's a material
sense of solidarity between the stations), unless the FCC suddenly got
smart.
Anyway, yer blog kicks ass - keep it up, it'll make for a great archive
over time!
-John
========================
I think John is dead on right and if I dissed the vanity radio guys, that was NOT the intent. If anyone took offense, please accept my apologies now. Frankly, that's how I started. And the reasons where VERY simple: I couldn't listen to commercial radio anymore so I set up my own station, and I'd always wanted to be on the radio. No social agenda. No sense of community. No platform for local artists and ideas. That all came later. Where I started it was simple: Man.. this is fuckin COOL. And damn was it ever. Still is. It also happens, for me, to have a deeper cause and a broader intent now. But it started out as Vanity Radio for a guy in his basement for me.
Anyway, tiny operations of a few people (or even one person) are great and I agree with John that it's a big part of what pirate radio is about. One of our crew lives up in the mountains and has a little station he calls High Country radio. Great setup, tiny power mostly for him to listen to himself when he's working around the property, but every so often he cranks it up to 150 watts or so and blankets the mountains with High Country Radio. Some times he's there. Sometime's he's not. Like a ghost in some ways....That's part of what it's about.
I also really liked the distributed node time sharing frequency model idea in his last paragraph. If you've got several pirates in one area, that's worth looking into. It's also something we should look into as a pirate station. The only real issue then is finding a PLACE for those 2nd and 3rd transmitters (4th and 5th too... if you want to go on during the day).
Thanks for the comments and for keeping the record straight John.
Monk@kbfr.org
Ah, my zealous one. there is too a value in so-called "vanity radio."
Please do remember that not all may aspire to the level of
sophistication that you do in station operation, nor are all willing to
take the risks of such unabashed operations. That does not, however,
make such hit-n-run type stations less valuable.
***They demonstrate the technology and the fact that this form of civil
disobedience is pretty damn easy and can be done by just about
anyone.***
That is valuable. So, it might not reflect a depth and breadth of "the
community," and the size of the audience is (generally) smaller, but
that's the drawbacks of limited operation. Given the choice of all or
nothing, I would of course choose all.
Thankfully, that is a fictitious choice - there is a "some" in between,
and that is the so-called "vanity station," and there are a lot more of
those types of pirates out there than there are the likes of you. In my
mind it's all part of a movement, so dissin' comrades doesn't seem cool
to me.
I am all for folks assuming the level of risk they are comfortable
with. Some sets of circumstances (like, say, a sense of fiscal
autonomy) allow for the taking of greater risks. It is the taking of
the risk that is paramount. The duration of the broadcast is secondary.
I would like to see a distributed-node time-sharing frequency model
developed - multiple hit-n-run pirates coordinate their broadcasts to
fill multiple hours on a single frequency. Station A fires up on the
frequency from, say, noon to 4pm, when they sign off Station B signs on
the same freq, going from 4 to 8, and then station C does 8 to
midnight. It would break the risk up into manageable bits for the those
less ballsy than you - and would also provide a heretofore-unseen level
of redundancy in case of official friction (provided there's a material
sense of solidarity between the stations), unless the FCC suddenly got
smart.
Anyway, yer blog kicks ass - keep it up, it'll make for a great archive
over time!
-John
========================
I think John is dead on right and if I dissed the vanity radio guys, that was NOT the intent. If anyone took offense, please accept my apologies now. Frankly, that's how I started. And the reasons where VERY simple: I couldn't listen to commercial radio anymore so I set up my own station, and I'd always wanted to be on the radio. No social agenda. No sense of community. No platform for local artists and ideas. That all came later. Where I started it was simple: Man.. this is fuckin COOL. And damn was it ever. Still is. It also happens, for me, to have a deeper cause and a broader intent now. But it started out as Vanity Radio for a guy in his basement for me.
Anyway, tiny operations of a few people (or even one person) are great and I agree with John that it's a big part of what pirate radio is about. One of our crew lives up in the mountains and has a little station he calls High Country radio. Great setup, tiny power mostly for him to listen to himself when he's working around the property, but every so often he cranks it up to 150 watts or so and blankets the mountains with High Country Radio. Some times he's there. Sometime's he's not. Like a ghost in some ways....That's part of what it's about.
I also really liked the distributed node time sharing frequency model idea in his last paragraph. If you've got several pirates in one area, that's worth looking into. It's also something we should look into as a pirate station. The only real issue then is finding a PLACE for those 2nd and 3rd transmitters (4th and 5th too... if you want to go on during the day).
Thanks for the comments and for keeping the record straight John.
Monk@kbfr.org
Comments