In a refreshing change from the "XM vs SIRIUS" discussion you usually see in media outlets, CNN today has a piece on the benefits of the services from the eyes of two subscribers. There's no arguing or name calling, just a very personable way of highlighting how both XM and SIRIUS are unique - from each other, and especially from terrestrial radio.

Read the article from the eyes of a terrestrial radio listener. See how many items you can count in the "favorite channels" question that aren't available on AM/FM.

[CNN.com] 

The Washington Post today featured an incredibly accurate column on the RIAA's lawsuit against XM. This paragraph says it all:

You'd think an industry that has managed to turn out so much mediocre music for so many years, done so much to lower moral standards and lost so much business to illegal file-sharing would have something better to do than attack some of the few distributors that are actually expanding the market and charging for music. But the prospect that the industry might not extract every last penny out of the new satellite radio services and their customers is simply unacceptable to the Recording Industry Association of America.

(cue slow clap)

Satellite Radio is the only media outlet that actually gives less "popular" music genres a chance to be heard in the car (where a majority of radio listening - and music discovery - occurs). In NYC, you can't find a single Country Music station. In my area, there isn't a single decent Jazz station in sight (sorry, "Blues" does not equal "Jazz"). The Satellite Radio Industry gives these genres airtime, which ultimately leads to increase sales (something the RIAA is complaining they're losing out on).

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

[more on the Washington Post]