From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Sun May 1 10:03:33 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Sun May 1 10:04:37 2005 Subject: Air America References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050427193043.0262d790@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <008801c54e56$9e9d7380$1404fea9@xyz> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Donna Halper" > ...with suburban WLIB in NY (I used to > work there-- I'm very familiar with the areas they cover, and the ones they > don't). And you're going to let that hang? ;-) When did you work there? What was the format? (On air?) Also, since you are especially familiar with the signal and it's limitations, where DO they cover well...and what DON'T they cover. JP From kc1ih@mac.com Sun May 1 11:25:25 2005 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sun May 1 11:25:31 2005 Subject: Air America In-Reply-To: <008801c54e56$9e9d7380$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050427193043.0262d790@pop.registeredsite.com> <008801c54e56$9e9d7380$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: > ...with suburban WLIB in NY (I used to > work there-- I'm very familiar with the areas they cover, and the ones they > don't). I grew up in the NY suburbs, and I never thought of WLIB as a suburban station. I thought they were located in Harlem, in the "upper" part of Manhattan. We're not confusing this with WLIR, which was in Garden City, Long Island? -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From dan.strassberg@att.net Sun May 1 16:37:07 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Sun May 1 16:37:21 2005 Subject: Air America References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050427193043.0262d790@pop.registeredsite.com><008801c54e56$9e9d7380$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <001101c54e8d$8e43f220$19eefea9@dstrassberg> Many years ago (until sometime in the '60s, I think) WLIB's transmitter was located in northern Queens. IIRC, you could see the tower as you approached the Bronx-Whitestone Bridge from the Bronx side. The station operated with 1 kW-L ND-L L-WOWO. The signal was very poor in much of New York City. I grew up on the northwest Bronx, not far from Yonkers, no more than about six miles from the old WLIB Tx. Reception was abysmal. Then WLIB moved its Tx to the Jersey Meadowlands and increased power to 10 kW-L DA-L L-WOWO using a three-tower array to protect WOWO during critical hours and during the 45 minutes between New York sunset and Fort Wayne sunset. The Tx is located right near WOR, WEPN, WBBR, and now also WSNR (which moved in many years later). WLIB has one of the best-situated transmitters in the New York market and the 10 kW day signal is adequate to cover the market quite decently. WLIB is no WOR or WINS for sure, but it has a solid signal in the five boroughs as well as close-in parts of northern NJ, Westchester and Rockland counties, the eastern portions of Fairfield County CT, and northern Nassau County. When ICBC, the company that owns WLIB, succeeded in having WOWO powered down at night, WLIB added night service with 30 kW. Believe it or not, though, desipte reducing power from 50 kW to 9.8 kW and changing its night pattern to further reduce its signal to the east, WOWO still delivers enough of a night signal to metro New York to limit WLIB's NIF signal mainly to the five boroughs--and only about 80% of their area--and parts of northern NJ. WLIB must also protect the former facilities of CHTN, which moved from 1190 to 720 at least 15 years ago, but is still notified to the US on 1190. As a result, WLIB's night pattern has a null over northern Queens and the south Bronx. My guess is that reception of WLIB in that area is poor on most nights. ICBC, Salem Communications (which owns the former WGKA, a daytimer on 1190 in Atlanta), and the owners of WOWO have drafted an interference-reduction agreement that would allow the Atlanta station to operate full-time, would allow WLIB to modify its night pattern somewhat (decrease the severity of the null toward Prince Edward Island), and would allow WOWO to increase its night power to 15 kW That agreement has been hung up for many years and there does not seem to be much chance of its being implemented anytime soon. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Weil" To: ; "Donna Halper" Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 11:25 AM Subject: Re: Air America > > > ...with suburban WLIB in NY (I used to > > work there-- I'm very familiar with the areas they cover, and the ones > they > > don't). > > I grew up in the NY suburbs, and I never thought of WLIB as a > suburban station. I thought they were located in Harlem, in the > "upper" part of Manhattan. > > We're not confusing this with WLIR, which was in Garden City, Long Island? > > -- > Larry Weil > Lake Wobegone, NH From RadioColchester@aol.com Sun May 1 05:04:22 2005 From: RadioColchester@aol.com (RadioColchester@aol.com) Date: Sun May 1 17:00:59 2005 Subject: WJIB 740 Message-ID: <1f1.3acf8c02.2fa5f596@aol.com> I just wanted to congratulate Bob Bittner, he continues to do even better in the Arbitrons. It truly shows that, "It's not the signal that matters, but the programming" when WWZN and WXKS can't pull the same ratings. Paul B. Walker, Jr. Station Manager WTIR-AM 1300 Cocoa, Florida From scott@fybush.com Sun May 1 17:01:46 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun May 1 17:01:28 2005 Subject: Air America In-Reply-To: <001101c54e8d$8e43f220$19eefea9@dstrassberg> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050427193043.0262d790@pop.registeredsite.com> <008801c54e56$9e9d7380$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050501165122.0295ff48@gwind.pair.com> At 04:37 PM 5/1/2005 -0400, Dan Strassberg wrote: >Many years ago (until sometime in the '60s, I think) WLIB's transmitter was >located in northern Queens. IIRC, you could see the tower as you approached >the Bronx-Whitestone Bridge from the Bronx side. The station operated with 1 >kW-L ND-L L-WOWO. The signal was very poor in much of New York City. I grew >up on the northwest Bronx, not far from Yonkers, no more than about six >miles from the old WLIB Tx. Reception was abysmal. The site was in the Hallet's Cove area of Astoria, Queens, on a pier that extended into the East River. I'm not sure it would have been visible from the Whitestone, but I can imagine it would have been quite visible from the Triborough. I seem to recall the tower still standing in the early 90s, when it could also be clearly seen from the east side of Manhattan - it was almost directly across from UN headquarters. I went looking for it a few years ago and found that the concrete pier and tower footings were still there, but the transmitter building and tower were long gone. Useless trivia: the site was briefly reactivated in 1967, just a few weeks after WLIB had moved over to Lyndhurst, as a temporary site for WCBS after the High Island WCBS/WNBC tower was taken down by a small plane. The only East River AM site still standing is one tower of the old WNYC 830, in Greenpoint, Brooklyn; I understand that the city now uses it for police 2-way radio. I still need to get down there and examine it more closely someday. >Then WLIB moved its Tx to the Jersey Meadowlands and increased power to 10 >kW-L DA-L L-WOWO using a three-tower array to protect WOWO during critical >hours and during the 45 minutes between New York sunset and Fort Wayne >sunset. The Tx is located right near WOR, WEPN, WBBR, and now also WSNR >(which moved in many years later). WLIB has one of the best-situated >transmitters in the New York market and the 10 kW day signal is adequate to >cover the market quite decently. WLIB is no WOR or WINS for sure, but it has >a solid signal in the five boroughs as well as close-in parts of northern >NJ, Westchester and Rockland counties, the eastern portions of Fairfield >County CT, and northern Nassau County. I'll agree with you for the most part about the five boroughs, but WLIB gets killed in Westchester (and even more so in CT and on Long Island) by the abysmal ground conductivity of Manhattan. Without the 50 kW punch of WABC or WOR (especially aided by the directionality of the latter), the signal just peters out as it tries to cross that solid rock of granite. I'd be surprised if it delivers much more than 3-4 mV/m in real life to places like Stamford CT or Garden City LI. That's OK for car radio reception, but it can't penetrate apartment buildings or be useful on cheap radios. It's a very good signal on the west side of Manhattan, at least, so they get the advantage of strong service to what ought to be a target base of listeners on the Upper West Side and down in the Village. (Though, as I've noted in previous posts, I doubt whether that audience really has the affinity to AAR that one might expect.) >When ICBC, the company that owns WLIB, succeeded in having WOWO powered down >at night, WLIB added night service with 30 kW. Believe it or not, though, >desipte reducing power from 50 kW to 9.8 kW and changing its night pattern >to further reduce its signal to the east, WOWO still delivers enough of a >night signal to metro New York to limit WLIB's NIF signal mainly to the five >boroughs--and only about 80% of their area--and parts of northern NJ. WLIB >must also protect the former facilities of CHTN, which moved from 1190 to >720 at least 15 years ago, but is still notified to the US on 1190. As a >result, WLIB's night pattern has a null over northern Queens and the south >Bronx. My guess is that reception of WLIB in that area is poor on most >nights. Correct. And it's almost nonexistent in fast-growing suburban areas like Rockland County, where I stay when I'm down that way. It's also essentially nonexistent almost anywhere in northern NJ, which is a huge hindrance when compared with WABC or WOR, which just smother the area in signal, day and night. >ICBC, Salem Communications (which owns the former WGKA, a daytimer on 1190 >in Atlanta), and the owners of WOWO have drafted an interference-reduction >agreement that would allow the Atlanta station to operate full-time, would >allow WLIB to modify its night pattern somewhat (decrease the severity of >the null toward Prince Edward Island), and would allow WOWO to increase its >night power to 15 kW That agreement has been hung up for many years and >there does not seem to be much chance of its being implemented anytime soon. IIRC, the holdup is some litigation over a rival power-increase proposal from the 1190 in Kansas City, which is now Radio Disney. And I think there was an issue with an 1190 in the Palm Beach, Florida area as well... s From sid@wrko.com Sun May 1 17:38:29 2005 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Sun May 1 17:38:55 2005 Subject: Air America Message-ID: >>The site was in the Hallet's Cove area of Astoria, Queens, on a pier that extended into the East River. I'm not sure it would have been visible from the Whitestone, but I can imagine it would have been quite visible from the Triborough. I seem to recall the tower still standing in the early 90s, when it could also be clearly seen from the east side of Manhattan - it was almost directly across from UN headquarters.<< Uh, might want to check that again, Scott. The only piece of Queens "directly across from UN headquarters" (E 44th Street and 1st Avenue in Turtle Bay) is the area just north of Newtown Creek, usually known as Long Island City. Astoria is across from Harlem (and separated from it by Randall's Island, Hell Gate and the East River), nowhere near UN HQ. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom Boston LLC WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WMKK - WRKO - WVEI 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Boston MA 02135-2040 Phone: 617-779-5369 Fax: 617-779-5379 E-Mail: sid@wrko.com From ssmyth@psu.edu Sun May 1 17:51:19 2005 From: ssmyth@psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Sun May 1 17:51:16 2005 Subject: Red Sox game stream Message-ID: <200505012151.RAA16408@webmail1.cac.psu.edu> Whenever I've been logging onto MLB.com and trying to listen to the Red Sox audio stream, I've noticed the stream drops out a lot -- for 2-3 seconds at a time, causing me to miss entire pitches/plays. This is the ONLY network feed I've had a problem with all year. Usually I end up just listening to the opposing team's feed, it's that annoying. I've occasionally noticed this on WEEI's live stream, too. Is there anyone at Entercom that might be able to explain what the deal is? From sid@wrko.com Sun May 1 20:02:48 2005 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Sun May 1 20:02:57 2005 Subject: Red Sox game stream Message-ID: >>Whenever I've been logging onto MLB.com and trying to listen to the Red Sox audio stream, I've noticed the stream drops out a lot -- for 2-3 seconds at a time, causing me to miss entire pitches/plays. This is the ONLY network feed I've had a problem with all year. Usually I end up just listening to the opposing team's feed, it's that annoying. I've occasionally noticed this on WEEI's live stream, too. Is there anyone at Entercom that might be able to explain what the deal is?<< We have contacted MLB's streaming people about this after multiple complaints from listeners. It appears they are using some sort of noise gate which is incorrectly set. Unfortunately this is something we cannot fix ourselves, as the feed from the ballparks to MLB.com goes direct to them, without coming to the originating station first, so we have no control over it. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom Boston LLC WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WMKK - WRKO - WVEI 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Boston MA 02135-2040 Phone: 617-779-5369 Fax: 617-779-5379 E-Mail: sid@wrko.com From scott@fybush.com Sun May 1 21:21:57 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun May 1 21:21:34 2005 Subject: Air America In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050501211915.029877c0@gwind.pair.com> >Uh, might want to check that again, Scott. The only piece of Queens >"directly across from UN headquarters" (E 44th Street and 1st Avenue in >Turtle Bay) is the area just north of Newtown Creek, usually known as >Long Island City. Astoria is across from Harlem (and separated from it >by Randall's Island, Hell Gate and the East River), nowhere near UN HQ. Sid's right. I was thinking of the old WNYC-830 in Greenpoint, which is visible from the FDR Drive south of the UN HQ (it's directly opposite 22nd Street in Manhattan). The WLIB site was at Vernon Blvd. and 30th Drive in Hallets Cove, opposite the northern tip of Roosevelt Island (and E. 84th Street beyond.) It must have been a heck of a signal at Gracie Mansion back in the day... s From billings@suscom-maine.net Sun May 1 23:25:26 2005 From: billings@suscom-maine.net (Daniel Billings) Date: Sun May 1 23:25:23 2005 Subject: Air America References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050501211915.029877c0@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <000701c54ec6$9560b000$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Fybush" To: "Sid Schweiger" ; Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 9:21 PM Subject: Re: Air America > Sid's right. I was thinking of the old WNYC-830 in Greenpoint, which is > visible from the FDR Drive south of the UN HQ (it's directly opposite 22nd > Street in Manhattan). > > The WLIB site was at Vernon Blvd. and 30th Drive in Hallets Cove, opposite > the northern tip of Roosevelt Island (and E. 84th Street beyond.) It must > have been a heck of a signal at Gracie Mansion back in the day... The world's leading expert on radio towers is wrong? Say it ain't so! From scott@fybush.com Mon May 2 12:55:55 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon May 2 13:03:40 2005 Subject: Something other than WRKO on 680? Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050502125529.0293a768@gwind.pair.com> Garrett - this is bouncing on me from the list for some reason. Can you pass it along to the list for me? s --- For those of you who DX and have only one entry on 680 in your logbooks - CFTR 680 Toronto ("680 News") appears to be operating non-directionally, or nearly so, tonight. It's blasting into Rochester, and when I just called Garrett in Framingham, he had only to turn his radio on to hear it, well over WRKO. For those of you who are John Kennedy or Sid Schweiger - this may be cause for concern. s From wollman@csail.mit.edu Mon May 2 13:04:39 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon May 2 13:04:37 2005 Subject: Mailing-list submission problems Message-ID: <17014.23975.511070.840295@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> If you've had problems sending messages to the mailing-list, I think I've now resolved them. (An alias wasn't copied over when I upgraded my machine.) -GAWollman From wollman@csail.mit.edu Mon May 2 13:17:37 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon May 2 13:17:35 2005 Subject: Something other than WRKO on 680? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050502125529.0293a768@gwind.pair.com> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050502125529.0293a768@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <17014.24753.386543.711093@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > For those of you who DX and have only one entry on 680 in your logbooks - > CFTR 680 Toronto ("680 News") appears to be operating non-directionally, or > nearly so, tonight. We observed this the past two nights, but the message didn't get out when Scott originally sent it. One would hope they would be aware of the situation and have it fixed (or power reduced) by tonight, but it's probably still worth listening tonight. -GAWollman From sid.whitaker@unh.edu Mon May 2 13:38:16 2005 From: sid.whitaker@unh.edu (sid.whitaker@unh.edu) Date: Mon May 2 13:38:18 2005 Subject: And something other than WZAN on 970? In-Reply-To: <17014.24753.386543.711093@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050502125529.0293a768@gwind.pair.com> <17014.24753.386543.711093@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <20050502133816.mhsi25ntkc4kwsk0@webmail.unh.edu> On 970 in southern Maine, long the domain of WZAN, I picked up what appeared to be WESO Southbridge, Mass. a few nights ago. I heard satellite country, with an ID that (muffled) sounded like WESO, fighting it out with Leykis on WZAN, about 20 miles south of WZAN. WESO is listed as running 21w, ND, at night. And while I'm at it, how about 810 CJVA Caraquet NB, which (like CFTR) appears to be operating non-directionally at night, rendering a certain upstate-NY 50kw blowtorch completely unlistenable in Maine. Sid Quoting Garrett Wollman : > < said: > >> For those of you who DX and have only one entry on 680 in your logbooks - >> CFTR 680 Toronto ("680 News") appears to be operating non-directionally, or >> nearly so, tonight. > > We observed this the past two nights, but the message didn't get out > when Scott originally sent it. One would hope they would be aware of > the situation and have it fixed (or power reduced) by tonight, but > it's probably still worth listening tonight. > > -GAWollman > From scott@fybush.com Mon May 2 13:59:43 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Mon May 2 13:59:20 2005 Subject: And something other than WZAN on 970? In-Reply-To: <20050502133816.mhsi25ntkc4kwsk0@webmail.unh.edu> References: <17014.24753.386543.711093@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <5.1.0.14.0.20050502125529.0293a768@gwind.pair.com> <17014.24753.386543.711093@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050502135757.02a62ce8@gwind.pair.com> At 01:38 PM 5/2/2005 -0400, sid.whitaker@unh.edu wrote: >On 970 in southern Maine, long the domain of WZAN, I picked up what >appeared to >be WESO Southbridge, Mass. a few nights ago. I heard satellite country, >with an >ID that (muffled) sounded like WESO, fighting it out with Leykis on WZAN, >about >20 miles south of WZAN. WESO is listed as running 21w, ND, at night. > >And while I'm at it, how about 810 CJVA Caraquet NB, which (like CFTR) appears >to be operating non-directionally at night, rendering a certain upstate-NY >50kw >blowtorch completely unlistenable in Maine. One of the members of the National Radio Club is compiling what we call "Saul's List," keeping tabs on the stations that seem to regularly be heard far beyond where they should be reaching, night in and night out. CJVA's on there, as are the 720 in PEI and the 780 in Nova Scotia. And my nighttime enjoyment of WWKB has been hindered lately by KRHW, Sikeston MO, which is supposed to be a narrow pencil beam at 1600 watts going straight north from Sikeston to Cape Girardeau, but which sounds an awful lot like it's using 5 kW and its loose day pattern all night long... s From lglavin@lycos.com Wed May 4 16:37:45 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Wed May 4 16:37:57 2005 Subject: Endicott College Will Be A Hard Hat Area Message-ID: <20050504203745.8BE7F86B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Just noting that among the FCC actions earlier this week was the approval of WNSH's plan to boost its daytime power to 50,000 watts DA-D while deleting WPEP-AM Taunton from the face of the Earth. WNSH operates from the campus of Endicott Jr College in Beverly, and sometime soon I imagine construction and rigging equipment will be appearing to do the work. The school will be closed I assume for the summer, unless it offers summer school courses...thus the coming months would be the ideal time for this project. The current ND "tower" is barely visible from an adjacent parking lot...will three towers make a stronger impression? -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed May 4 17:15:44 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Wed May 4 17:16:01 2005 Subject: Endicott College Will Be A Hard Hat Area References: <20050504203745.8BE7F86B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <002901c550ee$73488c20$19eefea9@dstrassberg> Allegedly, the three towers are there already and have been for several years. No tower construction is planned. Probably just new transmission lines and new fences further from the towers to comply with safety regulations on human exposure to RF energy. Maybe there will be a new ground system after the existing radials vaporize or melt ;>) The application says that the ground radials are on top of bear solid rock--probably the poorest conductivity of any "soil" beneath an AM ground system anywhere--although maybe some rooftop systems are as bad. OTOH, the rooftop systems (except for KTNQ/KTLK--which can be argued don't really have a rooftop ground system) are all for low-power stations. Since Keating Willcox, who owns WNSH, reads this list, we may get an answer soon about the fences and the diameter of the ground radials. I believe that #14 AWG copper wire is the industry standard. Dan Strassberg, Contributing Editor EDN Magazine | Reed Electronics Group | www.edn.com Fax 707-215-6367 | StrassbergEDN@att.net *** CONTACT ME BEFORE ATTEMPTING TO SEND ATTACHMENTS LARGER THAN 1 Mbyte *** ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laurence Glavin" To: Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 4:37 PM Subject: Endicott College Will Be A Hard Hat Area > Just noting that among the FCC actions earlier this week was the > approval of WNSH's plan to boost its daytime power to 50,000 > watts DA-D while deleting WPEP-AM Taunton from the face of the Earth. > WNSH operates from the campus of Endicott Jr College in Beverly, > and sometime soon I imagine construction and rigging equipment will > be appearing to do the work. The school will be closed I assume for > the summer, unless it offers summer school courses...thus the > coming months would be the ideal time for this project. The current > ND "tower" is barely visible from an adjacent parking lot...will three > towers make a stronger impression? > -- > _______________________________________________ > NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. > http://datingsearch.lycos.com > > From lglavin@lycos.com Wed May 4 17:39:39 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Wed May 4 17:39:40 2005 Subject: Endicott College Will Be A Hard Hat Area Message-ID: <20050504213939.C3D8DE5BC7@ws7-2.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Dan Strassberg" >To: "Laurence Glavin" >Subject: Re: Endicott College Will Be A Hard Hat Area >Date: Wed, 4 May 2005 17:15:44 -0400 > > Allegedly, the three towers are there already and have been for several > years. No tower construction is planned. Probably just new transmission > lines and new fences further from the towers to comply with safety > regulations on human exposure to RF energy. I made a trip out there when gasoline was cheaper, and could only see one tower. As I noted, the transmitter site is surrounded by fencing and a gully, so you just can't walk up to it. If there are two more sticks on that property, they eluded me. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From jjlehmann@comcast.net Wed May 4 22:49:39 2005 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Wed May 4 22:55:43 2005 Subject: Endicott College Will Be A Hard Hat Area In-Reply-To: <20050504203745.8BE7F86B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <200505050255.j452tIqp024130@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> It's really a shame that Taunton is losing its only radio station (WSNE probably doesn't even know where Taunton is). I wish WPEP could've moved to another frequency or something. Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA >-----Original Message----- >From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@rolinin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston- >radio-interest-bounces@rolinin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Laurence >Glavin >Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 4:38 PM >To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Endicott College Will Be A Hard Hat Area > >Just noting that among the FCC actions earlier this week was the >approval of WNSH's plan to boost its daytime power to 50,000 >watts DA-D while deleting WPEP-AM Taunton from the face of the Earth. >WNSH operates from the campus of Endicott Jr College in Beverly, >and sometime soon I imagine construction and rigging equipment will >be appearing to do the work. The school will be closed I assume for >the summer, unless it offers summer school courses...thus the >coming months would be the ideal time for this project. The current >ND "tower" is barely visible from an adjacent parking lot...will three >towers make a stronger impression? >-- >_______________________________________________ >NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at >once. >http://datingsearch.lycos.com > From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu May 5 04:02:53 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu May 5 04:02:50 2005 Subject: Taunton Gazette on WPEP facing deletion Message-ID: <1fbbbced05050501023fe55c51@mail.gmail.com> http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14472456&BRD=1711&PAG=461&dept_id=24237&rfi=6 excerpt: TAUNTON - Radio station WPEP 1570 AM, the city's homegrown - and lone - broadcast voice could soon be silenced for good. The Federal Communications Commission on April 27 approved a proposal application from the owner of WNSH AM of Beverly - which operates on the same 1570 AM frequency - to boost its daytime power from 500 watts to 50,000 watts. In order for the Beverly station to increase its wattage WPEP will have to relinquish its use of the 1570 frequency, to avoid interfering with the stronger signal. All signs are that the out-of-state licensee and owner of WPEP has all along been a willing partner to the deal From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu May 5 04:23:09 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu May 5 04:23:07 2005 Subject: Endicott College Will Be A Hard Hat Area In-Reply-To: <20050504203745.8BE7F86B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20050504203745.8BE7F86B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <1fbbbced05050501236016bb9a@mail.gmail.com> >From today's Taunton Gazette: http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14472456&BRD=1711&PAG=461&dept_id=24237&rfi=6 From dan.strassberg@att.net Thu May 5 06:27:41 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (dan.strassberg@att.net) Date: Thu May 5 06:27:02 2005 Subject: Taunton Gazette on WPEP facing deletion Message-ID: <050520051027.22555.4279F51C00071E7B0000581B2160376316099D0A0D9C9C0E9D9B9CD2020E0B@att.net> I'm pretty sure that WSNE 93.3, though commonly regarded as a Providence station, is licensed to Taunton--and always has been. Hence, by its own rules, the FCC must reject arguments that WPEP's going dark will end "local" radio service to Taunton. -- dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 -------------- Original message from Bob Nelson : -------------- > http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14472456&BRD=1711&PAG=461&dept_id=2423 > 7&rfi=6 > > excerpt: > TAUNTON - Radio station WPEP 1570 AM, the city's homegrown - and lone > - broadcast voice could soon be silenced for good. > The Federal Communications Commission on April 27 approved a proposal > application from the owner of WNSH AM of Beverly - which operates on > the same 1570 AM frequency - to boost its daytime power from 500 watts > to 50,000 watts. > > > In order for the Beverly station to increase its wattage WPEP will > have to relinquish its use of the 1570 frequency, to avoid interfering > with the stronger signal. All signs are that the out-of-state licensee > and owner of WPEP has all along been a willing partner to the deal > From hykker@grolen.com Thu May 5 07:44:29 2005 From: hykker@grolen.com (SteveOrdinetz) Date: Thu May 5 07:43:51 2005 Subject: Taunton Gazette on WPEP facing deletion In-Reply-To: <050520051027.22555.4279F51C00071E7B0000581B2160376316099D0 A0D9C9C0E9D9B9CD2020E0B@att.net> References: <050520051027.22555.4279F51C00071E7B0000581B2160376316099D0A0D9C9C0E9D9B9CD2020E0B@att.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20050505074141.01af7698@pop3.grolen.com> dan.strassberg@att.net wrote: >I'm pretty sure that WSNE 93.3, though commonly regarded as a Providence >station, is licensed to Taunton--and always has been. Hence, by its own >rules, the FCC must reject arguments that WPEP's going dark will end >"local" radio service to Taunton. I'd be curious how much "local" programming WPEP airs in the first place. Most of these low-powered AMs have long since become almost totally bird-fed. Makes for a good story about those evil out-of-town owners, but hardly accurate reporting. I'd also be curious about how many people in Taunton are even aware that the station exists. From n1qgs@yahoo.com Thu May 5 17:13:51 2005 From: n1qgs@yahoo.com (John Bolduc) Date: Thu May 5 17:13:55 2005 Subject: Taunton Gazette on WPEP facing deletion In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050505211351.62671.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > TAUNTON - Radio station WPEP 1570 AM, the city's homegrown - and lone > - broadcast voice could soon be silenced for good. Isn't the Anastos Media Group the same group that for a short time revived the old WOTW calls signs in Nashua on 900 AM. John B Derry NH From markwats@comcast.net Thu May 5 17:21:37 2005 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Thu May 5 17:21:44 2005 Subject: Taunton Gazette on WPEP facing deletion References: <20050505211351.62671.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003a01c551b8$6db13710$6f918318@Mark> John Bolduc wrote: > Isn't the Anastos Media Group the same group that for a short time revived > the old WOTW calls signs in Nashua on 900 AM. Yes it is. Mark Watson From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Tue May 10 13:50:28 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Tue May 10 13:51:19 2005 Subject: WBUR off air? Message-ID: <028401c55588$c2b237e0$1404fea9@xyz> Is WBUR off the air? I seem to be recieving a dead carrier.... (Then again, it could just be something strange in my neighborhood.) JP From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue May 10 14:28:13 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue May 10 14:28:08 2005 Subject: Herald: WNSH juices up to 50,000 watts Message-ID: <1fbbbced05051011285d5eff26@mail.gmail.com> http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=82427 The article quotes WPEP's general manager as saying they hope to relocate to another freq. Where, on the expanded band? excerpt: A small Beverly radio station that broadcasts oldies on the AM dial has received approval from federal regulators to increase its daytime transmission power to 50,000 watts from its current 500 watts. The stronger signal will boost WNSH-AM (1570)'s coverage area to a much wider swath of the North Shore, and potentially as far north as Southern New Hampshire. The station, owned by Keating Willcox and his Willow Farm Inc., will not have a Boston signal. From Kaimbridge@programmer.net Tue May 10 14:28:32 2005 From: Kaimbridge@programmer.net (Kaimbridge M. GoldChild) Date: Tue May 10 15:02:16 2005 Subject: New(?) Boston Pirate On 102.9; 94.5 Testing IBOC Message-ID: <4280FD50.FCF69398@Programmer.Net> First noted Thursday morning around 450am at South Station's GMF, mixed in with all of the Pru xmtr's signal overload wasteland, a new--?--pirate on 102.9, with "slow groove" Motown type oldies (like ABC's "The Touch" music net). When I checked again later that evening, (english) Caribbean/Reggae was noted, then back to the Motown oldies in the overnight (a long playing loop/CD?). This seems to be the evening/overnight sched: Caribbean/Reggae (english and spanish and/or french) in the evenings and "automated" "Motown oldies" in the overnights (though I think last night they stuck with C/R). Also as someone noted last night on an FM Dx list, WJMN-94.5 has begun testing its IBOC! P=( ~Kaimbridge~ ----- Wanted?Kaimbridge (w/mugshot!): http://www.angelfire.com/ma2/digitology/Wanted_KMGC.html ---------- Digitology?The Grand Theory Of The Universe: http://www.angelfire.com/ma2/digitology/index.html ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** From lglavin@lycos.com Tue May 10 17:58:45 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Tue May 10 17:58:46 2005 Subject: Alex Beam Comments On WGBH Radio Changes Message-ID: <20050510215845.3671E3384B@ws7-3.us4.outblaze.com> There's a general columnist at the Boston Globe named Alex Beam, and today, May 10th, he weighed in on announced changes at WGBH-FM Boston. (They're adding an hour of "Morning Edition" from 8:00 am til 9:00 am Monday through Friday; and picking up the rerun of "Weekend Edition" from 10:00 am until noon Saturdays and Sundays after WBUR is through with them.) The weekday change is of little significance...they play multiple short pieces in that hour anyway; the 10:00 am to noon change on weekends is tragic and should not be allowed to stand. This probably means no long-form pieces on those days, like Mahler Symphonies or Bach or Handel Oratorios. For the Globe article, read: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/living/articles/2005/05/10/more_news_is_good_news_at_wgbh_radio/ For an interesting backgrounder from the archives of "The Weekly Standard" magazine, read: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/184uadtr.asp -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From n1qgs@yahoo.com Tue May 10 22:07:40 2005 From: n1qgs@yahoo.com (John Bolduc) Date: Tue May 10 22:07:41 2005 Subject: WSMN Nashua being used by fire department for training Message-ID: <20050511020740.68881.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Listening to my scanner today (fire scanner, not image scanner) I heard Nashua NH Fire Rescue doing Rapid Inverntion Team (RIT) Training. This usually involves filling the building with theatrical smoke and simulating rescues. I imagine if this goes the way of normal fire department training, in about a week, they will start to set several small fires and put them out. I'm speculating a total burn down within the month. John B Derry NH From markwats@comcast.net Tue May 10 22:17:19 2005 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Tue May 10 22:17:40 2005 Subject: WSMN Nashua being used by fire department for training References: <20050511020740.68881.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008701c555cf$91b2c2d0$6f918318@Mark> John Bolduc wrote: > Listening to my scanner today (fire scanner, not image scanner) I heard > Nashua NH Fire Rescue doing Rapid Inverntion Team (RIT) Training. This > usually involves filling the building with theatrical smoke and simulating > rescues. Good to hear that WSMN is still serving the community despite being dark : - ) Mark Watson From francini@mac.com Tue May 10 23:01:00 2005 From: francini@mac.com (John J. Francini) Date: Tue May 10 23:00:56 2005 Subject: WSMN Nashua being used by fire department for training In-Reply-To: <20050511020740.68881.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20050511020740.68881.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Do you know if everything of value to putting WSMN back on the air has been removed, such as the transmitter, station electronics, and the record library? One would hope they weren't doing that with all that stuff still there... Also, what about the tower lighting system? I noted that shortly after the signal went dark, so did the tower lighting. A few days later the lighting returned -- probably forced to re-light them because of the proximity to Nashua Airport. Does the tower lighting get its power feed from the station proper? Or is there a plan to take the towers down, assumedly in a way that they could be re-erected elsewhere? John Francini At 19:07 -0700 5/10/05, John Bolduc wrote: >Listening to my scanner today (fire scanner, not image scanner) I heard >Nashua NH Fire Rescue doing Rapid Inverntion Team (RIT) Training. This >usually involves filling the building with theatrical smoke and simulating >rescues. I imagine if this goes the way of normal fire department >training, in about a week, they will start to set several small fires and >put them out. I'm speculating a total burn down within the month. > >John B >Derry NH -- ---- John Francini +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | "I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is called a disgrace; | | that two are called a law firm; and that three or more become a Congress.| | And by God I have had _this_ Congress!" | | -- John Adams | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ From sid@wrko.com Tue May 10 23:16:45 2005 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Tue May 10 23:16:58 2005 Subject: WSMN Nashua being used by fire department for training Message-ID: >>I noted that shortly after the signal went dark, so did the tower lighting. A few days later the lighting returned -- probably forced to re-light them because of the proximity to Nashua Airport.<< Not the sole reason at all. Any tower that's required to be lit does not have that requirement lifted just because the transmitter feeding that tower is turned off. The only legal ways for the lights to be turned off permanently are either a new determination of "no hazard" from the FAA or the dismantling of the tower. Tower lighting is an FCC hot-button issue, and I'm guessing someone from WSMN got a very angry call from someone in either the FCC's Boston district office or the FAA regional center (also in Nashua) when they found out the lights were off. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom Boston LLC WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WMKK - WRKO - WVEI 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Boston MA 02135-2040 Phone: 617-779-5369 Fax: 617-779-5379 E-Mail: sid@wrko.com From hykker@grolen.com Wed May 11 06:53:01 2005 From: hykker@grolen.com (hykker@grolen.com) Date: Wed May 11 07:51:48 2005 Subject: WSMN Nashua being used by fire department for training In-Reply-To: References: <20050511020740.68881.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1145.4.233.200.157.1115808781.squirrel@4.233.200.157> John J. Francini wrote... > Do you know if everything of value to putting WSMN back on the air > has been removed, such as the transmitter, station electronics, and > the record library? One would hope they weren't doing that with all > that stuff still there... I would suspect that like most stations that died a slow, lingering death anything of value had been long since pillaged. Isn't the transmitter located at the base of the towers, not at the house? From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Wed May 11 15:42:53 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Wed May 11 16:16:32 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP Message-ID: <001601c55666$3149cbe0$1404fea9@xyz> Does anyone know the "deal" that WNSH struck with WPEP to get them to "surrender it's license"? Just curious as to 'what it would take' to 'get that done'.... JP From scott@fybush.com Wed May 11 17:00:46 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed May 11 17:00:23 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <001601c55666$3149cbe0$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> At 03:42 PM 5/11/2005 -0400, Joseph Pappalardo wrote: >Does anyone know the "deal" that WNSH struck with WPEP to get them to >"surrender it's license"? > >Just curious as to 'what it would take' to 'get that done'.... I don't know that the agreement itself is part of the public record; it's not filed with the WNSH application, although there is a paragraph in the application that reads as follows: "The licensee of standard broadcast station WPEP, 1570 kHz, Taunton, Massachusetts (Facility Id 61601) has entered into an agreement with Willow Farm which conditionally provides for the surrender of the WPEP license prior to the commencement of operation by Willow Farm of the facilities requested herein." Keep in mind that Willow Farm - Keating's company - used to own WPEP as well, and it's not unreasonable to think that the sale of WPEP to Anastos may have come with some sort of informal agreement down the road to make the WNSH upgrade possible. There's nothing about it in the asset purchase agreement filed with the WPEP sale back in 2001. s From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Wed May 11 17:43:21 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Wed May 11 17:44:21 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <00f401c55672$78826880$1404fea9@xyz> > ...has entered into an agreement with Willow Farm which > conditionally provides > for the surrender of the WPEP license prior to the commencement of > operation by Willow Farm of > the facilities requested herein." Well, since the licensee is "surrendering" it's license, what would stop someone (anyone) from applying for that license? I would imagine they (FCC) would look more kindly on someone wanting to provide local service to the community....than to make way for an "out of town" station to extend it's signal. I could imagine all sorts of public persons (selectment, councilmen, etc.) that could/would rally their support behind someone trying again to provide local service. Lastly, with all the people who have been begging for "community radio service" and LPFM, etc ....it seems odd to me that there are all these "community" based AM stations that people are signing off and turning in licenses. Interesting that it seems to makes more sense to sign them off....at the same time there are so many people clamoring for LPFM and other community based radio stations. From wollman@csail.mit.edu Wed May 11 17:57:55 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed May 11 17:57:53 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <00f401c55672$78826880$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> <00f401c55672$78826880$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <17026.32739.200277.295347@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Well, since the licensee is "surrendering" it's license, what would stop > someone (anyone) from applying for that license? In principle, nothing. But: - They would have wait for the next major window. - They would have to meet interference standards with respect to the upgraded WNSH station. - They would have to apply for a feasible 24-hour facility (WPEP was a daytimer). > I would imagine they (FCC) would look more kindly on someone wanting to > provide local service to the community....than to make way for an "out of > town" station to extend it's signal. All the FCC cares about is relative population "served". (You can argue that this is a bad standard, but in the current legal climate, the FCC would have a difficult time sustaining a challenge to any other standard. So the long slow erosion of PICON continues.) -GAWollman From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed May 11 17:59:22 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Wed May 11 17:59:43 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <006501c55674$b4508ca0$19eefea9@dstrassberg> WPEP's GM has stated (for whatever it's worth) that WPEP will not go dark but will move to a new frequency. The only frequencies that MIGHT be open are in ex-band. Not far from Taunton are two ex-band allocations that were never built. (No CPs were ever granted, AFAIK.) I'm referring to the application of what was then WTRY 980 in Troy NY to move to--was it 1690? and the application of what was then--I think--WWNH 930 in Rochester NH to move to 1700. Although either of these allocations could probably be moved to Taunton without causing much more or less interference than it would have caused in its original location, does either one work given the very strict spacing requirements the FCC has established for ex-band? Beverly is closer to Rochester NH than Taunton is. Hmmm. If indeed the FCC were willing to move the Rochester NH allocation, would Keating have done better by letting WPEP stay put on 1570 and moving WNSH to 1700? With 10 kW-ND-D and a clear salt-water shot from Endicott College to Boston, WNSH could have served a lot of the City of Boston during daylight hours. Maybe the idea is to get 1700 allocated to Taunton and THEN apply for a Taunton/Beverly frequency swap. Ya think? If it weren't for an application filed during the AM filing window for 1580 in Cordaville MA (really a neighborhood in Framingham), WPEP might be able to move to 1580--although such a move would probably not work with WARV. I doubt whether Cordaville will be granted, much less built, because Cordaville doesn't fulfill the requirements for an independent community and Framingham already has two full-time commercial stations: WKOX and WROR (plus the non-comm at Framingham State). Still, I don't believe that the FCC has yet denied the Cordaville app. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Fybush" To: "Joseph Pappalardo" ; Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 5:00 PM Subject: Re: WNSH/WPEP > At 03:42 PM 5/11/2005 -0400, Joseph Pappalardo wrote: > >Does anyone know the "deal" that WNSH struck with WPEP to get them to > >"surrender it's license"? > > > >Just curious as to 'what it would take' to 'get that done'.... > > I don't know that the agreement itself is part of the public record; it's > not filed with the WNSH application, although there is a paragraph in the > application that reads as follows: > > "The licensee of standard broadcast station WPEP, 1570 kHz, Taunton, > Massachusetts > (Facility Id 61601) has entered into an agreement with Willow Farm which > conditionally provides > for the surrender of the WPEP license prior to the commencement of > operation by Willow Farm of > the facilities requested herein." > > Keep in mind that Willow Farm - Keating's company - used to own WPEP as > well, and it's not unreasonable to think that the sale of WPEP to Anastos > may have come with some sort of informal agreement down the road to make > the WNSH upgrade possible. There's nothing about it in the asset purchase > agreement filed with the WPEP sale back in 2001. > > s > From scott@fybush.com Wed May 11 18:09:12 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed May 11 18:08:47 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <00f401c55672$78826880$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> At 05:43 PM 5/11/2005 -0400, Joseph Pappalardo wrote: > > ...has entered into an agreement with Willow Farm which > > conditionally provides > > for the surrender of the WPEP license prior to the commencement of > > operation by Willow Farm of > > the facilities requested herein." > >Well, since the licensee is "surrendering" it's license, what would stop >someone (anyone) from applying for that license? WPEP is a "class D" station - essentially a daytimer, with no protected nighttime service. The FCC stopped issuing new class D licenses more than a decade ago, so any application for a new station with WPEP's current facilities would be rejected out of hand. In addition, since the FCC has granted WNSH's upgrade, any application for WPEP's current facilities would now interfere with the WNSH signal and would be rejected on those grounds. And in any case, you can only apply for a new AM station when the FCC opens a window for such applications. The last such window was open last year, and that one was the first in more than three years. s From scott@fybush.com Wed May 11 18:55:55 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed May 11 18:55:32 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <006501c55674$b4508ca0$19eefea9@dstrassberg> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511183932.02a87ad8@gwind.pair.com> >WPEP's GM has stated (for whatever it's worth) that WPEP will not go dark >but will move to a new frequency. WPEP's GM is saying what he's got to say to keep a good face on things and keep whatever advertisers the station has buying time until the bitter end. I know several WPEP staffers were trying to fight the closure, but most of them have now left the station. And it's ultimately in the hands of whoever owns the license - and the licensee has indicated to the FCC that he's willing to give up the license, so that's the end of the story. >The only frequencies that MIGHT be open >are in ex-band. Not far from Taunton are two ex-band allocations that were >never built. (No CPs were ever granted, AFAIK.) I'm referring to the >application of what was then WTRY 980 in Troy NY to move to--was it 1690? >and the application of what was then--I think--WWNH 930 in Rochester NH to >move to 1700. Although either of these allocations could probably be moved >to Taunton without causing much more or less interference than it would have >caused in its original location, does either one work given the very strict >spacing requirements the FCC has established for ex-band? WTRY was assigned 1640, if memory serves. I'm pretty sure, in any event, that the only X-band channels that DON'T work for spacing in Taunton are 1660, 1680 and possibly 1690. But the question is purely academic - there's absolutely no precedent for a daytimer that's not the only service to its community getting an X-band allocation. Legally, Taunton will continue to be served by WSNE after WPEP goes dark, and for the FCC to begin examining the question of whether WSNE is "really" a Taunton station opens up a very messy can of worms that I'm pretty sure the Commission has no interest in addressing. There are a lot of signal-impaired AMs out there that would dearly love to move to the X-band. WRCR 1300 Spring Valley NY, a class D station with 500 watts day and lightbulb power at night, has said that they're interested in going to 1700, where they would better serve Rockland County at night. Their claim is that WRCR is the only English-language station in Rockland and thus deserves a full-time signal. But again, the FCC does NOT want to get involved in programming issues, and WRKL 910 New City is also in Rockland with a full-time signal, albeit in Polish. Point is, *if* WPEP applied for the X-band (even though no window for X-band applications has been announced), the FCC would have plenty of reasons to reject it and no very good ones for granting the application, knowing it would touch off a flood of apps from other AMs trying to expand lousy signals. >Beverly is closer to Rochester NH than Taunton is. Hmmm. If indeed the FCC >were willing to move the Rochester NH allocation, would Keating have done >better by letting WPEP stay put on 1570 and moving WNSH to 1700? With 10 >kW-ND-D and a clear salt-water shot from Endicott College to Boston, WNSH >could have served a lot of the City of Boston during daylight hours. Maybe >the idea is to get 1700 allocated to Taunton and THEN apply for a >Taunton/Beverly frequency swap. Ya think? Overly speculative. I think Keating just wants more power on 1570, and the loss of WPEP in the process is, unfortunately, incidental. >If it weren't for an application filed during the AM filing window for 1580 >in Cordaville MA (really a neighborhood in Framingham), WPEP might be able >to move to 1580--although such a move would probably not work with WARV. I >doubt whether Cordaville will be granted, much less built, because >Cordaville doesn't fulfill the requirements for an independent community and >Framingham already has two full-time commercial stations: WKOX and WROR >(plus the non-comm at Framingham State). Still, I don't believe that the FCC >has yet denied the Cordaville app. There's no FCC policy that permits only one commercial station in a community, nor even any preference for first AM service to a commiunity, and in any event there are no strict city-of-license definitions for AM the way there are for FM allocations. IF the Cordaville app is otherwise grantable (and I haven't looked closely enough at it to say one way or another), it will work its way through the application process accordingly. I don't recall whether there were other mutually-exclusive filings on or near 1580. From lawyer@attorneyross.com Wed May 11 23:48:13 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Wed May 11 23:48:27 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> References: <001601c55666$3149cbe0$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <428299BD.6060.62DB50@localhost> On 11 May 2005 at 17:00, Scott Fybush wrote: > Keep in mind that Willow Farm - Keating's company - used to own WPEP > as well, and it's not unreasonable to think that the sale of WPEP to > Anastos may have come with some sort of informal agreement down the > road to make the WNSH upgrade possible. There's nothing about it in > the asset purchase agreement filed with the WPEP sale back in 2001. I wonder what sort of agreement would induce someone to buy a station with a requirement to shut the station down on demand. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Thu May 12 02:07:32 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Thu May 12 02:09:24 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <018301c556b9$071ff300$1404fea9@xyz> > In addition, since the FCC has granted WNSH's upgrade, any application for > WPEP's current facilities would now interfere with the WNSH signal and > would be rejected on those grounds. I suppose people in Taunton might have been able to challenge the WNSH upgrade application...if they had known about the stipulation that they would lose their local station. (The WNSH application has already been granted at this point, right?) > And in any case, you can only apply for a new AM station when the FCC opens > a window for such applications. The last such window was open last year, > and that one was the first in more than three years. "Special Circumstances" might be a premise that for consideration of an application. (Since it is not for a 'new' station, but to continue service to the community....a community that is losing it's station.) Especially since community members and leader were probably not made aware of the impact of an upgrade to a station in Beverly would mean to their town. (Most broadcast organizations have DC Lawyers on retainer to troll thru applications, to spot things like this. But, solicitors and selectmen probably do not.) jp From scott@fybush.com Thu May 12 11:25:47 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Thu May 12 11:25:26 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <018301c556b9$071ff300$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com> At 02:07 AM 5/12/2005 -0400, Joseph Pappalardo wrote: > > In addition, since the FCC has granted WNSH's upgrade, any application for > > WPEP's current facilities would now interfere with the WNSH signal and > > would be rejected on those grounds. > >I suppose people in Taunton might have been able to challenge the WNSH >upgrade application...if they had known about the stipulation that they >would lose their local station. (The WNSH application has already been >granted at this point, right?) But the question still remains - on what grounds would it have been challenged? "People in Taunton" don't hold the WPEP license. Anastos Broadcasting does. It paid the money to buy the station, and if it wants to enter into a deal to shut the station down, that's a valid and legal business transaction, too. There's FCC precedent for allowing a station to be compensated for reducing power or going dark to improve overall service to the public by allowing another station to increase power. (Look at what happened - can it already be more than a decade ago? - with WLIB and WOWO.) "People in Taunton" had several opportunities to buy WPEP over the years. They didn't want to take the risk, so first Keating Willcox and then Anastos stepped forward with the money. That's business. (And to answer the question about why Anastos would want to buy WPEP only to then agree to shut it down - remember that WPEP came as part of a package with most of the rest of Keating's stations, including WSNH in Nashua and WNRI in Woonsocket. It's not unreasonable to think that WPEP was not the most attractive part of that package.) > > And in any case, you can only apply for a new AM station when the FCC >opens > > a window for such applications. The last such window was open last year, > > and that one was the first in more than three years. > >"Special Circumstances" might be a premise that for consideration of an >application. (Since it is not for a 'new' station, but to continue service >to the community....a community that is losing it's station.) But in the eyes of the FCC, Taunton is not losing radio service. The situation would be somewhat different if WSNE were not licensed there - but it is, and since the FCC doesn't consider programming issues and WSNE meets whatever minimal standards currently exist for service to its community of license, there are no "special circumstances" that would hold water here. The FCC takes the window process very seriously. Every applicant could come up with some sort of "special circumstances"; the use of windows keeps everything on a reasonably even keel nationwide. And in this case, there's no evidence to suggest that the licensee of WPEP really has any interest in keeping the business going. The talk of moving to another frequency seems to me to be mostly wishful thinking on the part of some of the station's staffers and perhaps a smokescreen to keep current listeners and advertisers happy for however many months or years the station remains on the air. >Especially since community members and leader were probably not made aware >of the impact of an upgrade to a station in Beverly would mean to their >town. (Most broadcast organizations have DC Lawyers on retainer to troll >thru applications, to spot things like this. But, solicitors and selectmen >probably do not.) To play devil's advocate here, if the civic leaders of Taunton are that concerned about maintaining local radio coverage, they should have bought their own station. Yes, WPEP provided a useful civic service, but it's still a private business and the owner of that business has the right to decide what will become of it. If it's more profitable to let the frequency get bought out by Beverly, do the civic leaders of Taunton have the right to prevent WPEP's owners from making that profit? They're not the ones who took the risks inherent in buying a small AM station in this day and age. It's nice, certainly, to have the presence of a local radio station covering civic events - but it's not an entitlement. The way the broadcast rules are written these days, the FCC is mandated to provide a "fair and equitable" distribution of broadcast service, but there are no programming mandates requiring those signals to cover city council, school committee or lost dog reports. So Taunton's left with just WSNE as "local" service - how is that any different from "Framingham's" WKOX/WROR, "Natick's" WBIX, "Dedham's" WAMG, etc. etc. etc.? s From ssmyth@psu.edu Thu May 12 11:47:29 2005 From: ssmyth@psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Thu May 12 12:29:45 2005 Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? Message-ID: <200505121547.LAA29181@webmail12.cac.psu.edu> This 1570 talk has me reflecting on what happened to the WLAW 1270 CP of a while back. I believe it was licensed to North Dartmouth, and I believe the owners (the Karams?) let it lapse after running into NIMBYism regarding the tower site. To play Devil's Advocate (and appease the "Save WPEP" crowd): If the 1270 CP was still alive, would the Taunton 1570 facilites work? (To be honest, I don't even know what WPEP's facilities are... ND? DA? DA-2? For some reason, "daytimer" sticks out in my head.) Would that be considered a "major change" by proposing to use the 1570 stick(s), even if the distance isn't too far as the crows fly? And how would that affect the proposed 1270 pattern? Just some random questions... From dan.strassberg@att.net Thu May 12 13:16:59 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Thu May 12 13:18:11 2005 Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? References: <200505121547.LAA29181@webmail12.cac.psu.edu> Message-ID: <000d01c55716$6c26b420$19eefea9@dstrassberg> I think Taunton is much too close to WMKI and probably also too close to WRNI for 1270 to work there. WPEP is ND-U. 1 kW-D/227W-N. The 185' tower is plenty tall enough for 1270--almost 86 degrees at 1270, but IIRC, WLAW had proposed quite an elaborate DA--probably four towers, and even that that would be unlikely to be adequate given the proximity to WMKI and WRNI. Nice try. No cigar. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Smyth" To: Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:47 AM Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? > This 1570 talk has me reflecting on what happened to the WLAW 1270 CP of a while > back. I believe it was licensed to North Dartmouth, and I believe the owners > (the Karams?) let it lapse after running into NIMBYism regarding the tower > site. > > To play Devil's Advocate (and appease the "Save WPEP" crowd): > If the 1270 CP was still alive, would the Taunton 1570 facilites work? (To be > honest, I don't even know what WPEP's facilities are... ND? DA? DA-2? For some > reason, "daytimer" sticks out in my head.) > Would that be considered a "major change" by proposing to use the 1570 stick(s), > even if the distance isn't too far as the crows fly? > And how would that affect the proposed 1270 pattern? > > Just some random questions... > From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Thu May 12 14:54:03 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Thu May 12 14:57:34 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> > > But the question still remains - on what grounds would it have been challenged? > > "People in Taunton" don't hold the WPEP license. Anastos Broadcasting does. Taunton community leaders and oficials (Mayor, etc), could make a case for consideration, due to the fact that two "out of town" operators negotiated to take away their radio service. > (Look at what happened - can it > already be more than a decade ago? - with WLIB and WOWO.) But this was the same owner of both stations, wasn't it? Secondly, WOWO didn't dissappear, it simply altered it's pattern. > "People in Taunton" had several opportunities to buy WPEP over the years. Did they? My guess is the majority of Taunton didn't even know it was for sale. (Never mind that it was part of a Beverly application to shut it down.) > >"Special Circumstances" might be a premise that for consideration of an > >application. (Since it is not for a 'new' station, but to continue service > >to the community....a community that is losing it's station.) > > But in the eyes of the FCC, Taunton is not losing radio service. The > situation would be somewhat different if WSNE were not licensed there - but > it is, and since the FCC doesn't consider programming issues and WSNE meets > whatever minimal standards currently exist for service to its community of > license, there are no "special circumstances" that would hold water here. WSNE is an higher powered FM station which serves a much larger audience/area. No amount of WSNE programming originates from Taunton. > The FCC takes the window process very seriously. Every applicant could come > up with some sort of "special circumstances"; the use of windows keeps > everything on a reasonably even keel nationwide. Good lawyers can make the case for just about anything. You can indict a ham sandwich. You can sue *anybody* for just about *anything*. A good comm lawyer can petition the FCC for just about anything. Again, it would not need a 'window' for a new license. Just a petition to deny the facilities upgrade. (Which, no doubt, should've been done long ago, had inetested parties been aware of the deal.) From wollman@csail.mit.edu Thu May 12 15:20:37 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Thu May 12 15:20:33 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com> <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <17027.44165.563532.332190@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > WSNE is an higher powered FM station which serves a much larger > audience/area. FCC rules say that stations serve specific communities, not "much larger areas". > No amount of WSNE programming originates from Taunton. That hasn't been relevant to the FCC in many years. There are only two specific[*] requirements for a station to service its community: 1) It must irradiate that community with a specific electric field intensity a specified number of hours a week. 2) It must mention the name of that community hourly, as close to the hour as feasible, at a natural break in program material. -GAWollman [*] Meaning specific to the community; something that they must do which relates to that community and not to other communities in the same market. From Rogerkola@aol.com Thu May 12 14:50:31 2005 From: Rogerkola@aol.com (Rogerkola) Date: Thu May 12 15:38:01 2005 Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? References: <200505121547.LAA29181@webmail12.cac.psu.edu> Message-ID: <008001c55723$79a73400$6823a8c0@Sales2> How bad is the adjacent channel IBOC hash down there from Radio Disney AM 1260? 1270 would be completely useless up here on the North Shore. Roger WA1KAT ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Smyth" To: Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 11:47 AM Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? > This 1570 talk has me reflecting on what happened to the WLAW 1270 CP of a > while > back. I believe it was licensed to North Dartmouth, and I believe the > owners > (the Karams?) let it lapse after running into NIMBYism regarding the tower > site. > > To play Devil's Advocate (and appease the "Save WPEP" crowd): > If the 1270 CP was still alive, would the Taunton 1570 facilites work? (To > be > honest, I don't even know what WPEP's facilities are... ND? DA? DA-2? For > some > reason, "daytimer" sticks out in my head.) > Would that be considered a "major change" by proposing to use the 1570 > stick(s), > even if the distance isn't too far as the crows fly? > And how would that affect the proposed 1270 pattern? > > Just some random questions... > > From scott@fybush.com Thu May 12 16:11:21 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Thu May 12 17:11:18 2005 Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? In-Reply-To: <200505121547.LAA29181@webmail12.cac.psu.edu> References: <200505121547.LAA29181@webmail12.cac.psu.edu> Message-ID: <54462.66.36.29.158.1115928681.squirrel@webmail2.pair.com> > This 1570 talk has me reflecting on what happened to the WLAW 1270 CP of a > while > back. I believe it was licensed to North Dartmouth, and I believe the > owners > (the Karams?) let it lapse after running into NIMBYism regarding the tower > site. That's correct - the CP has indeed lapsed. > To play Devil's Advocate (and appease the "Save WPEP" crowd): > If the 1270 CP was still alive, would the Taunton 1570 facilites work? (To > be > honest, I don't even know what WPEP's facilities are... ND? DA? DA-2? For > some > reason, "daytimer" sticks out in my head.) > Would that be considered a "major change" by proposing to use the 1570 > stick(s), > even if the distance isn't too far as the crows fly? > And how would that affect the proposed 1270 pattern? Even if it would work (and I think Dan's right that it wouldn't), it would be considered a major change. The only changes you can make that are minor are changes in power, changes in frequency by +/- 10 or 20 kHz, and changes of transmitter site or antenna configuration. Changing COL (in this case, North Dartmouth to Taunton) counts as a major change. s From scott@fybush.com Thu May 12 17:14:02 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Thu May 12 17:13:59 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com> <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <58517.66.36.29.158.1115932442.squirrel@webmail5.pair.com> >> But the question still remains - on what grounds would it have been > challenged? >> >> "People in Taunton" don't hold the WPEP license. Anastos Broadcasting > does. > > Taunton community leaders and oficials (Mayor, etc), could make a case for > consideration, due to the fact that two "out of town" operators negotiated > to take away their radio service. As Garrett has pointed out, as far as the FCC is concerned, Taunton will continue to have radio service. What's programmed on that service is not the FCC's concern so long as it's not obscene or indecent (at least before 10 PM) and as long as the legal ID is read once hourly. Like it or not, the deal between Anastos and WNSH is legal. There is no precedent and no authority for the FCC to do what it's suggesting you do. It would literally take Congressional action to change the FCC's rules to allow them to stop the deal at this point. Not gonna happen. >> (Look at what happened - can it >> already be more than a decade ago? - with WLIB and WOWO.) > > But this was the same owner of both stations, wasn't it? > > Secondly, WOWO didn't dissappear, it simply altered it's pattern. The WLIB/WOWO situation was nearly identical to this one where ownership is concerned - WLIB's owner, Inner City Broadcasting, bought WOWO and then immediately sold it to Federated Media with a condition that the buyer pursue the downgrade application in Fort Wayne. Likewise, Willow Farm owned WNSH and WPEP, then sold WPEP with a condition that the buyer agree to the WNSH upgrade and the deletion of WPEP. Willing seller, willing buyer. There are other examples of stations being taken dark to facilitate upgrades at other stations. ABC bought WFRO (900) in Fremont, Ohio and took it silent to enable WFDF (910) to move from Flint, Michigan to the Detroit suburbs. Infinity bought the 1540 signal in Aptos, California to enable an upgrade of KYCY (1550) in San Francisco. WWRL (1600) in New York bought and silenced WQQW (1590 Waterbury CT), WLNG (1600 Sag Harbor NY) and WERA (1590 Plainfield NJ) to improve its signal. WERA was the only licensed service to Plainfield. The FCC nevertheless approved the arrangement. For it to reverse this much precedent would, as noted above, require a Congressional mandate. >> "People in Taunton" had several opportunities to buy WPEP over the >> years. > > Did they? My guess is the majority of Taunton didn't even know it was for > sale. (Never mind that it was part of a Beverly application to shut it > down.) I'm talking about the two prior sales, from the Colajezzis to Willow Farm and the sale to the Colajezzis prior to that. It's not incumbent upon a privately-owned radio station to publicize that it's for sale. That said, the station was listed with brokers on both of those occasions. It may not have been as blatant as a big "For Sale" sign outside the studios on Taunton Green, but again, it's a private business. If I want to sell my car, it's up to me to decide how and if to advertise it and what offer, if any, to accept. In this case, anyone sufficiently interested in owning a radio station could have found out easily enough that WPEP was on the market. In any case, the sale of a radio station requires public notice. There would have been announcements on WPEP's airwaves and in the paper at the time the FCC was considering each sale, and THAT would have been the time to object (though I'm still not sure there would have been any legal grounds for doing so.) > WSNE is an higher powered FM station which serves a much larger > audience/area. > > No amount of WSNE programming originates from Taunton. Garrett has already answered this point. From the FCC's perspective, WSNE and WPEP are equivalent services for Taunton. >> The FCC takes the window process very seriously. Every applicant could > come >> up with some sort of "special circumstances"; the use of windows keeps >> everything on a reasonably even keel nationwide. > > Good lawyers can make the case for just about anything. > > You can indict a ham sandwich. > > You can sue *anybody* for just about *anything*. > > A good comm lawyer can petition the FCC for just about anything. > > Again, it would not need a 'window' for a new license. > > Just a petition to deny the facilities upgrade. > > (Which, no doubt, should've been done long ago, had inetested parties been > aware of the deal.) What is it that you're suggesting should happen here? Are we talking about simply stopping the WNSH upgrade or about finding new facilities for WPEP? In the case of the former, there was a time to file a petition to deny, and IIRC there were in fact several such petitions. But if the application is technically sound, which it was, and otherwise legal, which it is, and if both parties to the application give their consent, which they did, then those petitions won't get very far, which they didn't. In the case of the latter, it would indeed require a window for a new license (since the current licensee of WPEP has no interest in continuing the operation, and even if that were somehow possible it would require a major change, for which no window is open.) A "good comm lawyer" would tell you that you're banging your head against a very thick wall if you file an application at a time when no window is open. No amount of filings or petitions can change that. The FCC's procedures may seem arbitrary, but in reality they're not. Follow the rules to the letter and you'll get what you want. The trick is knowing what the rules are, and THAT's where you need a good comm lawyer. From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Fri May 13 03:47:48 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Fri May 13 03:52:18 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com><01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> <58517.66.36.29.158.1115932442.squirrel@webmail5.pair.com> Message-ID: <009f01c55790$8e53f060$1404fea9@xyz> > As Garrett has pointed out..... > > Like it or not, the deal between Anastos and WNSH is legal. There is no > precedent and no authority for the FCC to do what it's suggesting you do. Well, I don't believe you and Garret are lawyers...for that matter, neither am I. But you do get the award as the FCC-geeks of the list. ;-) You can submit a petition to deny" for any reason at all. (Doesn't mean it will be acted upon.) So, it doesn't apply to the 'window' rule that keeps getting bandied about. The FCC has been known to do many things that surprise people, especially when politicians (and lawyers) get involved. I keep remembering how a vendetta by Tip O'Neil, basically drove RKO General out of the the broadcasting business for very little reason. In any event, the CP has been granted....and the subject is moot. However, there's no telling what a petition to deny might have brought to this situation. Usually it depends on the resolve and financial resources of those pursuing it. From dan.strassberg@att.net Fri May 13 07:35:15 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Fri May 13 07:36:00 2005 Subject: WPEP to 1530? Message-ID: <001301c557af$ec3de5e0$19eefea9@dstrassberg> A post at radio-info.com says that WPEP will move to 1530--presumably without altering 1530's facilities because a move to Taunton would probably cause prohibited overlap with WADK 1540 in Newport RI, which is about five miles closer to Taunton than it is to the 1530 site. 1530 is licensed to Middleborough Center. The transmitter is 7.2 miles from the WPEP transmitter, but with a non-CH daytime power of 2.2 kW, 1530 should put a listenable signal (even if not 5 mV/m) into Taunton. 1530's CH power is 936W, which should make it a bit harder to hear in Taunton and the night power is a whopping 2W, which must make 1530 completely inaudible in Taunton at night. HOWEVER, 1530 is a class D AM, so a conceivable plan would move the low-power night operation to the WPEP site. There is NO requirement that Class D AMs deliver any signal whatever at night to their COLs. So 1530 could serve Taunton (if you call 2W serving) at night and not deliver any detectable signal to Middleborough. WPEP's tower is less than 200' high, so it presumably does not require illumination. Therefore, the cost of keeping the tower up solely for the 2W night operation would be limited to painting and other maintenance. 1530 currently airs programming for the blind and visually impaired, but elsewhere, such programming is on FM SCA channels that require special FM receivers to hear. I suspect that WSNE or one of the Providence FMs might be convinced to donate an SCA channel to this service. Or maybe the owners of WPEP might be willing to pay an FM something to carry the service just to get the locals--and Joe Pappalardo--off their backs. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 From hykker@grolen.com Fri May 13 07:58:59 2005 From: hykker@grolen.com (SteveOrdinetz) Date: Fri May 13 07:58:14 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com> <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20050513074519.01b24448@pop3.grolen.com> Joseph Pappalardo wrote: > > > > "People in Taunton" don't hold the WPEP license. Anastos Broadcasting >does. > >Taunton community leaders and oficials (Mayor, etc), could make a case for >consideration, due to the fact that two "out of town" operators negotiated >to take away their radio service. How much "radio service" did WPEP provide in the first place? IIRC, it was mostly second-tier satellite talk. It's not like Taunton has fallen into some black hole where there's nothing on the radio anymore. If the "community leaders & officials (mayor, etc.)" were all that concerned, why didn't they buy the station several owners ago? Sounds more like political posturing to me. > > "People in Taunton" had several opportunities to buy WPEP over the years. > >Did they? My guess is the majority of Taunton didn't even know it was for >sale. (Never mind that it was part of a Beverly application to shut it >down.) MY guess is that the "people in Taunton" didn't even know the station even existed. >WSNE is an higher powered FM station which serves a much larger >audience/area. > >No amount of WSNE programming originates from Taunton. And very little of WPEP's does either. My point here is that many of these stations have long since outlived their usefulness. How many people missed WSMN when it went dark? While it's nice to be nostalgic for the days when people flocked to their "local" station simply because it was the local station are long gone. Just because the station was a valued part of the community 30 years ago doesn't mean it remains so today. From scott@fybush.com Fri May 13 11:10:27 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri May 13 11:10:06 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <009f01c55790$8e53f060$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com> <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> <58517.66.36.29.158.1115932442.squirrel@webmail5.pair.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050513110533.029ccd78@gwind.pair.com> >In any event, the CP has been granted....and the subject is moot. > >However, there's no telling what a petition to deny might have brought to >this situation. > >Usually it depends on the resolve and financial resources of those pursuing >it. I think we're getting closer to agreement on this - except for one point: there WERE petitions to deny, and they were denied, as they should properly have been. And keep in mind that if worse had come to worse, there would have been nothing preventing what I'll call the "nuclear option," with apologies to Capitol Hill: the parties involved could have withdrawn the WNSH application, THEN returned the WPEP license for cancellation (which is not something that can have a petition to deny filed against it - there's nothing to prevent a licensee from deciding to no longer be a licensee). The WNSH app could then have been re-filed, and how could any objection stand against it at that point, given that the Taunton license would then have ceased to exist. (And in the absence of another filing window for new AMs/major changes, there's no way anyone could refile for the Taunton facilities in the meantime.) Not saying it would have been the nicest thing to do - but as an "FCC geek" of high standing (though not, as Joseph points out, a lawyer), this is sometimes how it's done when push comes to shove. s From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Fri May 13 12:50:49 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Fri May 13 12:52:05 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com><01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz><58517.66.36.29.158.1115932442.squirrel@webmail5.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050513110533.029ccd78@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <01be01c557db$f87070e0$1404fea9@xyz> > >In any event, the CP has been granted....and the subject is moot. > > > >However, there's no telling what a petition to deny might have brought to > >this situation. > > > >Usually it depends on the resolve and financial resources of those pursuing > >it. > > I think we're getting closer to agreement on this - except for one point: > there WERE petitions to deny, and they were denied.... Who submitted the petitions to deny? > ...as they should properly > have been. That's debatable From scott@fybush.com Fri May 13 12:57:21 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri May 13 12:56:56 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <01be01c557db$f87070e0$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com> <01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz> <58517.66.36.29.158.1115932442.squirrel@webmail5.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050513110533.029ccd78@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050513125519.029a0810@gwind.pair.com> >Who submitted the petitions to deny? I stand mildly corrected - they were "informal objections" to the grant of WNSH's CP: AM STATION APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR CHANGE TO A LICENSED FACILITY GRANTED ----------------------------------------------------------------------- MA BP-20031114AGR WNSH 22798 WILLOW FARM, INC. Minor change in licensed facilities E 1570 KHZ BEVERLY, MA Informal Objection filed 1/30/04 by HERVE PARENT Joint Opposition to Informal Objection filed 3/12/04 by Willow Farm & Anastos Media Group Informal Objection filed 2/9/04 by Maureen Harrison Informal Objection filed 3/24/04 by James H. Fagan Opposition to Informal Objections filed 4/23/2004 INFORMAL OBJECTION FILED 4/6/04 BY ROBERT G. NUNES, MAYOR INFORMAL OBJECTION FILED 6/8/04 BY ELAINE GRAVEL INFORMAL OBJECTION FILED 6/22/04 BY MR. & MRS. KENNETH GASSON Engineering Amendment filed 11/08/2004. > > ...as they should properly > > have been. > >That's debatable And we've been having fun debating it (at least I have.) But I'm still waiting for a reason that's consonant with current FCC policy and precedent to deny this transaction... s From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Fri May 13 13:13:03 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Fri May 13 13:14:00 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050511165900.029d5af0@gwind.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050511175353.029b10c0@gwind.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050512110743.02a9f270@gwind.pair.com><01ec01c55724$58284340$1404fea9@xyz><58517.66.36.29.158.1115932442.squirrel@webmail5.pair.com><5.1.0.14.0.20050513110533.029ccd78@gwind.pair.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050513125519.029a0810@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <025701c557df$08d00060$1404fea9@xyz> > And we've been having fun debating it (at least I have.) But I'm still > waiting for a reason that's consonant with current FCC policy and precedent > to deny this transaction... Well, for one, the informal complaints don't carry much weight. (as this case shows). This is where it would behoove a petitioner to to get a comm lawyer involved. That's their expertise. Loopholes and lobbying included. I'm not sure they would give me the same answers you are giving. (You are not a lawyer, and neither am I.) At that point it would probably come down to who had the resolve and the financial wherewithall to pursue. And my guess is that there is/was nobody so bothered by losing WPEP that would spend the time, effort and money to see it through. JP From radiojunkie3@yahoo.com Fri May 13 15:25:27 2005 From: radiojunkie3@yahoo.com (Peter Q. George) Date: Fri May 13 15:25:29 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050513192527.76127.qmail@web50810.mail.yahoo.com> JUST MY $0.02 on this..... These informal objections were either filed by people who have either no real "standing" in the community (except for the Mayor of Taunton) OR, these people simply did not know the "ins and outs" of how the FCC works. Speaking from experience, these "informal objections" have no merit and usually are denied out of hand. But, if these people were truly concerned about losing WPEP's service, they probably should have hired an FCC attorney (that's no cheap deal, for sure) and made a FORMAL PETITION to DENY. Good luck there. As for any pro-bono..... "you get what you pay for".... need I say more? I personally feel that WPEP COULD get an X-band slot, if they (Anastos) feel a compelling interest to do some FCC paperwork and show the interest of the community. But, from what I have observing.... they simply want to "take the money and run"... 1570/Taunton is not long for this world. I'll be honest in asking, WHY would Willow Farm want to put a 50,000 watt signal that "feeds the fishies" and very little else? The electric bill will be staggering for the amount of potential listenership gain (if any). The night time signal will still be what it is now. Only the applicant knows for sure. GOOD luck..... 73, Peter Q. George (K1XRB) Whitman, Massachusetts --- Joseph Pappalardo wrote: > > > And we've been having fun debating it (at least I > have.) But I'm still > > waiting for a reason that's consonant with current > FCC policy and > precedent > > to deny this transaction... > > Well, for one, the informal complaints don't carry > much weight. (as this > case shows). > > This is where it would behoove a petitioner to to > get a comm lawyer > involved. That's their expertise. Loopholes and > lobbying included. > > I'm not sure they would give me the same answers you > are giving. (You are > not a lawyer, and neither am I.) > > At that point it would probably come down to who had > the resolve and the > financial wherewithall to pursue. And my guess is > that there is/was nobody > so bothered by losing WPEP that would spend the > time, effort and money to > see it through. > > JP Peter Q. George (K1XRB) Whitman, Massachusetts "Scanning the bands since 1967" radiojunkie1@yahoo.com radiojunkie3@yahoo.com *********************************************************** Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html From scott@fybush.com Fri May 13 16:09:24 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri May 13 16:18:27 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <20050513192527.76127.qmail@web50810.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6667> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050513154835.02a5ebe0@gwind.pair.com> >I personally feel that WPEP COULD get an X-band slot, >if they (Anastos) feel a compelling interest to do >some FCC paperwork and show the interest of the >community. But, from what I have observing.... they >simply want to "take the money and run"... >1570/Taunton is not long for this world. And I respectfully disagree about the X-band slot. The only reason WPEP is going dark on 1570 is that its licensee finds it more economically attractive to accept an offer to voluntarily surrender the license. There is no emergency situation (loss of a leased transmitter site, let's say) that makes continued operation of WPEP on 1570 impossible, just an economic judgment on the part of the licensee that it's more lucrative to take the station silent than to continue operating it. So if WPEP came to the FCC and asked to move to, say, 1670, my contention is that it would have a very weak case. The "interest of the community" doesn't apply here, since any move to 1670 would be a voluntary one (and since Taunton would not, in any event, lose radio service.) From the FCC's point of view, then, an application to move to 1670 would be treated just as any other major change application would be. As I've pointed out, there is currently a freeze in place on major change applications. Even the window that opened in early 2004 specifically excluded applications for the X-band. In fact, there's no better example of consistency in FCC policy than the X-band. There have been NO authorizations for the X-band - not a one - other than those stemming from the initial "improvement factor" list of eligible stations compiled in the early 90s (for which WPEP might well have been a candidate had it applied, which I don't believe it did) and the small handful of stations authorized under "note 1" of 47CFR73.30, which was indeed an example of some very powerful political pork at work. Here's the link to 47CFR73.30: http://kauko.hallikainen.org/FCC/FccRules/2005/73/30/ There's no provision there for authorizing a new X-band operation outside a window, and indeed there have been no authorizations outside the initial window. And you know what? I'm actually rather proud of the way the FCC has handled the X-band. There has been considerable pressure on the Commission to liberalize the X-band rules and allow more stations on there, and for once the Commission has taken its time and avoided the temptation to jam the dial overly full, the way the rest of the AM and FM dials have become. Until the Commission can come up with a way to rationally and efficiently manage the many, many stations who'd like to move to the X-band, they're biding their time. Note, too, that the Commission is legally bound, thanks to the Communications Act of 1996, to subject competing applicants for commercial broadcast facilities to an auction process. So that procedure would apply to any eventual X-band window as well, further complicating any theoretical X-band move for WPEP. >I'll be honest in asking, WHY would Willow Farm want >to put a 50,000 watt signal that "feeds the fishies" >and very little else? The electric bill will be >staggering for the amount of potential listenership >gain (if any). The night time signal will still be >what it is now. Only the applicant knows for sure. I don't know exactly what Keating has in mind, but I can guess. Yes, a huge chunk of the WNSH signal will feed the fishies - but it will still be a very respectable signal over much of the North Shore, even a considerable ways inland, by day. There's potential there to build a nice regional signal that's "Not Boston. Not New Hampshire. Just the North Shore." (There's also the factor that an engineering friend of mine refers to as the "Letterhead 50" - it looks ever so impressive, as the old WMEX or WLKW could tell you, to be able to put "50,000 Watts" on the stationery.) Dan Strassberg has speculated that the deletion of WPEP could open the way for class B night facilities at WNSH. Still minimal, to be sure, but more than 85 watts, in any event. And perhaps Dan can tell us whether the eventual deletion of WSMN might allow for WNSH to push a little more signal inland? I'm thinking it couldn't hurt... s From lglavin@lycos.com Fri May 13 17:12:44 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Fri May 13 18:34:25 2005 Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? Message-ID: <20050513211244.4C48F86B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Scott Fybush" >To: "Sean Smyth" >Subject: Re: 1270 WLAW CP? > > That's correct - the CP has indeed lapsed. > > Even if it would work (and I think Dan's right that it wouldn't), it would > be considered a major change. The only changes you can make that are minor > are changes in power, changes in frequency by +/- 10 or 20 kHz, and > changes of transmitter site or antenna configuration. Changing COL (in > this case, North Dartmouth to Taunton) counts as a major change. > > s When the CP for 1270 in Dahtmouth was withdrawn, I posted a suggestion that WADK 1540-AM in Newport, RI should consider amending the particulars to suit a transmitter a bit farther south of Greater New Bedford. WADK was going through the labors of Hercules to try to go fulltime at 1540 with no luck, and here was this frequency "up for grabs" it seemed to me. Mr. Strassberg disagreed. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From scott@fybush.com Fri May 13 18:12:47 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri May 13 18:47:29 2005 Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? In-Reply-To: <20050513211244.4C48F86B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050513180614.02a6e118@gwind.pair.com> >When the CP for 1270 in Dahtmouth was withdrawn, I posted a >suggestion that WADK 1540-AM in Newport, RI should consider >amending the particulars to suit a transmitter a bit farther >south of Greater New Bedford. WADK was going through the >labors of Hercules to try to go fulltime at 1540 with no luck, >and here was this frequency "up for grabs" it seemed to >me. Mr. Strassberg disagreed. The issue there, again, is that pesky window question for major changes. WADK's app to add night power on 1540 is considered a minor change and can be filed at any time. A move from 1540 to 1270 would be a major change, and could only be filed during a window. The big problem, I think, with moving WADK to 1270 would be 1290 in Providence. Class B stations 20 kHz apart, as WADK on 1270 and WRNI on 1290 would be, cannot have overlapping 5 mV/m contours. That's not a problem with 1270 in Dartmouth, since WRNI's signal doesn't go in that direction. But thanks to the conductivity over Narragansett Bay, WRNI's 5 mV/m contour shoots right down the water and covers much of Newport, including the WADK transmitter site. So Dan's right on this one. The frequency that DOES work in Newport is 1370 - and indeed, the window included at least one application for a new 1370 that would more or less revive the facilities of the now-defunct WKFD Wickford. s From hykker@grolen.com Fri May 13 19:44:34 2005 From: hykker@grolen.com (SteveOrdinetz) Date: Fri May 13 19:43:45 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050513154835.02a5ebe0@gwind.pair.com> References: <6667> <5.1.0.14.0.20050513154835.02a5ebe0@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20050513194013.01b38250@pop3.grolen.com> Scott Fybush wrote: >So if WPEP came to the FCC and asked to move to, say, 1670, my contention >is that it would have a very weak case. The "interest of the community" >doesn't apply here, since any move to 1670 would be a voluntary one (and >since Taunton would not, in any event, lose radio service.) How much weight does this argument have with the FCC these days, especially in an urban area with dozens of available signals? It's not like many of these small signal AMs are providing much of service to the community (or at least specifically the COL) these days anyway. Indeed, the whole concept of COL seems a bit quaint these days. From Jibguy@aol.com Fri May 13 20:01:14 2005 From: Jibguy@aol.com (Jibguy@aol.com) Date: Fri May 13 20:01:54 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP - why a power increase? Message-ID: <9d.5fd6d65b.2fb699ca@aol.com> In a message dated 5/13/2005 3:27:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, radiojunkie3@yahoo.com writes: I'll be honest in asking, WHY would Willow Farm want to put a 50,000 watt signal that "feeds the fishies" and very little else? The electric bill will be staggering for the amount of potential listenership gain (if any). The night time signal will still be what it is now. Only the applicant knows for sure. My guess is that there is an additional reason that no one has thought of yet. Maybe the calls will change to WNVA, WNOV, etc...and serve the western shores of Nova Scotia. It's been done before... (WTOR, north of Buffalo). Maybe Keating Wilcox is from, or family is from that area. There is no AM station anywhere left on the western part of Nova Scotia. But maybe not, the economy is lagging (being kind) up there, so it certainly would not be a financial success. Well at least, WNSH-1570 would be heard well in every little gift shop from Salem to Rockport, even ones inside buildings built the radio-unfriendly materials. ---Bob Bittner From dlh@donnahalper.com Fri May 13 21:12:31 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Fri May 13 21:44:36 2005 Subject: 1270 WLAW CP? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050513180614.02a6e118@gwind.pair.com> References: <20050513211244.4C48F86B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050513210745.026623f0@pop.registeredsite.com> >it was said-- >The issue there, again, is that pesky window question for major changes. >WADK's app to add night power on 1540 is considered a minor change and can >be filed at any time. A move from 1540 to 1270 would be a major change, >and could only be filed during a window. Having consulted WADK, the other issue is how long they've been at 1540-- nearly 50 years, if my math is correct. And with their audience being older and very conservative, I believe ownership has been reticent to make any drastic changes in frequency. But the move that made no sense to me was made a few years ago when their FM, then called WOTB, which was at 100.3 and nearly reached Providence with a decent signal, moved to 99.3 and now barely gets into Providence, although the station is really strong in parts of Connecticut. But I thought with a jazz format, aiming your signal at Providence would be a good idea, but alas, nobody asked me... From wollman@csail.mit.edu Fri May 13 22:34:22 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Fri May 13 22:34:20 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20050513194013.01b38250@pop3.grolen.com> References: <6667> <5.1.0.14.0.20050513154835.02a5ebe0@gwind.pair.com> <6.0.3.0.0.20050513194013.01b38250@pop3.grolen.com> Message-ID: <17029.25518.853482.569616@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Indeed, the whole concept of COL seems a bit quaint these days. It may seem quaint, but it's the only method the FCC has. -GAWollman From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat May 14 21:19:33 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat May 14 21:19:55 2005 Subject: NexGen 101 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050514210459.026a27c8@pop.registeredsite.com> I wrote an article for Radio Guide about two years ago on ProphetSystem's NexGen, which got some good reviews but was out of the price range of smaller stations. Now, supposedly, there is a more affordable version of NexGen, and I was wondering if any of you know anything about it. (Of course, the company says NexGen 101 is the best thing that ever got invented, so I am seeking a more balanced view as I update my article...) From lglavin@lycos.com Sun May 15 13:16:51 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Sun May 15 13:16:55 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP - why a power increase? Message-ID: <20050515171651.625A5CA06F@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Jibguy@aol.com To: radiojunkie3@yahoo.com, joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com, boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: WNSH/WPEP - why a power increase? Date: Fri, 13 May 2005 20:01:14 EDT > Noted in passing: isn't this the first posting by the jibguy to the B.R.I.G. since the Jane Swift (cue the helicopter sfx) administration? -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Sun May 15 13:27:10 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Sun May 15 13:27:09 2005 Subject: Never Trust Jay Severin! Message-ID: <20050515172710.33F56E5BC7@ws7-2.us4.outblaze.com> For some reason, a few days ago Jay Severin opined that FM talk 969 was the best place to go for "Meet the Press", not your local NBC TV outlet. He even said "MtP" airs "live" Sundays at noon. Duh...how could it be live 30 minutes after it ended on channel 7 or 10 or 6 (in the FM 969 coverage area) or channel 4 where he lives? But today (05/15) it was less fresh than usual: in fact it was LAST WEEK'S show! (Tim even wished Mary Matalin a happy mother's day). Now here's my usual routine...I tend to watch "Fox News Sunday" as it is presented on channel 25; tape George Stephanopoloupopoluplous's "This Week" and "Face the Nation" with Father Time for later viewing. Then I listen to "MtP" on WTKK. Now I'll have to tape "MtP' off cable tonight or in the early am on channel 7. WTKK has completely messed up my Sunday (minus-LTAR) schedule. So never trust Jay Severin again (if you ever did). Laurence Glavin -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon May 16 09:51:49 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon May 16 09:51:52 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air Message-ID: <1fbbbced0505160651fc2450a@mail.gmail.com> The Newsweek scandal has been talked about on WRKO this morning. Heard John DePetro read a statement from Mike Elder saying that the station has dropped its longtime Sunday night show Newsweek On Air after it was revealed that the magazine inaccurately reported that copies of the Quran were flushed down the toilet at Gitmo Bay. It may have led to the deaths of 15 people. (DePetro mentioned that he was actually listening to "another station, a competitor on the FM dial", and he heard Newsweek's Jonathan Alter and the host laughing about the incident.) WRKO's website now says "TBA" for Sunday nights from 9 to 10 pm. From sgitschier@cfl.rr.com Mon May 16 09:35:07 2005 From: sgitschier@cfl.rr.com (Sandra) Date: Mon May 16 10:25:32 2005 Subject: WNSH/WPEP - why a power increase? References: <9d.5fd6d65b.2fb699ca@aol.com> Message-ID: <000801c55a1c$13b6ac10$0200a8c0@AL> The only reason I haven't seen yet for taking 1570 WNSH to 50kw on the list (unless I missed a post) is: For the station's resale value. WNSH is worth $X currently, and $Y with even just a 50kw construction permit. I could be wrong... Enticing for leased programming folks - who don't know better, that they were going on a 50kw station. Example: RJM Communications (now folded / principal passed away due to health problems) bought then-5kw 1570 WYHI (now WVOJ) Fernandina Beach, FL for just $225k (assets, real estate, license). They bumped it up to 10kw days under a minor modification. Then applied to move the COL closer to Jacksonville, FL - Orange Park, and bumped up to 50kw days, 3.3kw nights. With the 50kw CP there were lots of suitors with bigger $ wanting to get thier hands on the station. Due to health problems (stroke, etc) Mr. Morrison's CP had lapsed. Station sold off before his death for $330k. Station is under contract now, packaged with 970 WNNR Jacksonville (1kw/167w) for 2.1 million! Ron Gitschier Palm Coast, FL ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 8:01 PM Subject: Re: WNSH/WPEP - why a power increase? > In a message dated 5/13/2005 3:27:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, > radiojunkie3@yahoo.com writes: > I'll be honest in asking, WHY would Willow Farm want > to put a 50,000 watt signal that "feeds the fishies" > and very little else? The electric bill will be > staggering for the amount of potential listenership > gain (if any). The night time signal will still be > what it is now. Only the applicant knows for sure. > My guess is that there is an additional reason that no one has thought of > yet. Maybe the calls will change to WNVA, WNOV, etc...and serve the > western > shores of Nova Scotia. It's been done before... (WTOR, north of Buffalo). > Maybe > Keating Wilcox is from, or family is from that area. There is no AM > station > anywhere left on the western part of Nova Scotia. But maybe not, the > economy > is lagging (being kind) up there, so it certainly would not be a financial > success. Well at least, WNSH-1570 would be heard well in every little > gift shop > from Salem to Rockport, even ones inside buildings built the > radio-unfriendly > materials. > ---Bob Bittner > From dlh@donnahalper.com Mon May 16 12:11:29 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (dlh@donnahalper.com) Date: Mon May 16 12:11:24 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air Message-ID: <200505161611.j4GGBUAg027280@mail7.atl.registeredsite.com> Bob N. wrote-- > John DePetro read a statement from Mike Elder saying that the station > has dropped its longtime Sunday night show Newsweek On >Air after it > was revealed that the magazine inaccurately reported >that copies of > the Quran were flushed down the toilet at Gitmo Bay. Umm, I do hope my friends on the right won't go off the deep end over what is a very tragic story. But first, a few facts-- the story may still turn out to be true: the problem is that Newsweek used only one source, a normally reliable one they said, but now it can't be confirmed with anybody else. Given the *extreme secrecy* over how the detainees are being treated, there may yet prove to have been some further psychological abuses, of the Abu Ghraib variety but now suddenly, the Pentagon refuses to talk. That having been said, I hope this won't turn into rants against the allegedly liberal media-- Newsweek is far from liberal. The deaths of people in fundamentalist countries is a tragedy but it often happens, as a result of clergy who stir people up and misquote certain things to enflame the crowd. I am not defending Newsweek, but this tragic error in reporting is not the end of the world and I would hate to see it serve as fodder for conservative talk show hosts. Bob also wrote-- >and he heard Newsweek's Jonathan Alter and > the host laughing about the incident.) Umm, I find that hard to believe. I've known Alter for a long time and like most reporters at Newsweek, he is very embarrassed and upset by what happened. Taking things out of context and then ranting about them may make for a good talk show, but let's not take a bad situation and make it even worse. From raccoonradio@myway.com Mon May 16 13:44:00 2005 From: raccoonradio@myway.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon May 16 13:44:04 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air Message-ID: <20050516174400.575743966@mprdmxin.myway.com> I haven't read Newsweek in years so can't quite say what their political leanings are but they're still owned by the left-leaning Washington Post Company (and perhaps tow the line for them)... DePetro (and Roger Hedgecock, filling in for Rush) said that it falls in line with liberal media bias. >>Umm, I find that hard to believe. I've known Alter for a long time and like most reporters at Newsweek, he is very embarrassed and upset by what happened. Taking things out of context and then ranting about them may make for a good talk show, but let's not take a bad situation and make it even worse. Yes but DePetro said he had heard that (probably said it, in part, to discredit the I-man/his guests) and whether or not it's true, I don't know. Talk hosts listening to _other_ stations? Horrors! :) (Though Howie has admitted that when he drives home he "listens to the rock station on FM, the one that carries the other Howard..." _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com From dan.strassberg@att.net Mon May 16 14:01:56 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Mon May 16 14:02:10 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air References: <20050516174400.575743966@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: <002c01c55a41$5d606660$19eefea9@dstrassberg> It's TOE the line. http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-toe2.htm -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Nelson" To: ; Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 1:44 PM Subject: Re: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air > > I haven't read Newsweek in years so can't quite say what their political leanings are but they're still owned by the left-leaning Washington Post Company (and perhaps tow the line for them)... DePetro (and Roger Hedgecock, filling in for Rush) said that it falls in line with liberal media bias. > > > >>Umm, I find that hard to believe. I've known Alter for a long time and like most reporters at Newsweek, he is very embarrassed and upset by what happened. Taking things out of context and then ranting about them may make for a good talk show, but let's not take a bad situation and make it even worse. > > Yes but DePetro said he had heard that (probably said it, in part, > to discredit the I-man/his guests) and whether or not it's true, > I don't know. Talk hosts listening to _other_ stations? Horrors! :) > (Though Howie has admitted that when he drives home he "listens to > the rock station on FM, the one that carries the other Howard..." > > _______________________________________________ > No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. > Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com > > From lglavin@lycos.com Mon May 16 16:45:19 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Mon May 16 16:45:19 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air Message-ID: <20050516204519.43F86CA08E@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: dlh@donnahalper.com >To: "Bob Nelson" , boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Re: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air >Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 12:11:29 -0400 > > Bob also wrote-- > > and he heard Newsweek's Jonathan Alter and > > the host laughing about the incident.) > > Umm, I find that hard to believe. I've known Alter for a long time > and like most reporters at Newsweek, he is very embarrassed and > upset by what happened. Taking things out of context and then > ranting about them may make for a good talk show, but let's not > take a bad situation and make it even worse. The program in question was "Imus in the Morning" and some of the laughter was occasioned by banter AROUND this controversy... the Iman was urging Alter who lives not far from the studio now in NJ to come over and take his punishment rather than keep talking over the phone. And bring Isikoff (sp?) with him. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From brimatt1@aol.com Mon May 16 17:10:24 2005 From: brimatt1@aol.com (brimatt1@aol.com) Date: Mon May 16 17:11:08 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air In-Reply-To: <20050516204519.43F86CA08E@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20050516204519.43F86CA08E@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <8C72872CFACFDC0-D80-E7F5@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> I heard the interview on Imus...It was with Howard Fineman, not Alter. John Kennedy -----Original Message----- From: Laurence Glavin To: dlh@donnahalper.com; Bob Nelson ; boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Mon, 16 May 2005 15:45:19 -0500 Subject: Re: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air >----- Original Message ----- >From: dlh@donnahalper.com >To: "Bob Nelson" , boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Re: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air >Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 12:11:29 -0400 > > Bob also wrote-- > > and he heard Newsweek's Jonathan Alter and > > the host laughing about the incident.) > > Umm, I find that hard to believe. I've known Alter for a long time > and like most reporters at Newsweek, he is very embarrassed and > upset by what happened. Taking things out of context and then > ranting about them may make for a good talk show, but let's not > take a bad situation and make it even worse. The program in question was "Imus in the Morning" and some of the laughter was occasioned by banter AROUND this controversy... the Iman was urging Alter who lives not far from the studio now in NJ to come over and take his punishment rather than keep talking over the phone. And bring Isikoff (sp?) with him. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Mon May 16 17:21:57 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Mon May 16 17:21:58 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air Message-ID: <20050516212157.258D03384B@ws7-3.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- From: brimatt1@aol.com >To: lglavin@lycos.com, dlh@donnahalper.com, raccoonradio@gmail.com, boston-radio->interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Re: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air >Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 17:10:24 -0400 > > I heard the interview on Imus...It was with Howard Fineman, not Alter. > > John Kennedy > Imus interviewed Alter in the 6:30 am thru 7:00 segment; Fineman came later. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From dlh@donnahalper.com Mon May 16 17:22:25 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Mon May 16 17:22:44 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air In-Reply-To: <20050516174400.575743966@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050516171620.028edc88@pop.registeredsite.com> At 01:44 PM 5/16/2005 -0400, Bob Nelson wrote: >I haven't read Newsweek in years so can't quite say what their political >leanings are but they're still owned by the left-leaning Washington Post >Company (and perhaps tow the line for them)... DePetro (and Roger >Hedgecock, filling in for Rush) said that it falls in line with liberal >media bias. Umm, and of course DePetro and Rush's surrogate would be totally objective about this, wouldn't they? Let's get real about it-- Newsweek, Time and U.S. News are all owned by corporations; all have long traditions of covering the news (Time since 1923, Newsweek since about 1936, and ditto for U.S. News-- sometime in the late 30s), and all try to do the best they can, no matter who their owner might be. I've seen no "liberal bias" in Newsweek to speak of; some of their columnists are liberal, but some are conservative-- it's pretty evenly divided. But their news coverage is normally very thorough and accurate. If you want liberal bias, try The Nation. But if you want conservative bias, try the Weekly Standard. The reality is that every magazine will make a mistake now and then. Most of the time, it proves nothing about bias and everything about journalists being human. From billings@suscom-maine.net Mon May 16 19:20:52 2005 From: billings@suscom-maine.net (Daniel Billings) Date: Mon May 16 19:20:57 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air References: <20050516204519.43F86CA08E@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> <8C72872CFACFDC0-D80-E7F5@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <002901c55a6d$e7697370$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> ----- Original Message ----- From: To: ; ; ; Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 5:10 PM Subject: Re: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air >I heard the interview on Imus...It was with Howard Fineman, not Alter. Both Alter and Fineman were on Imus this morning. I agree with Donna on this one. Reporters get things wrong from time to time. They made a mistake here but they didn't kill anyone. I do not think the U.S. press should be worrying about how nutcases react to what they write. -- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine From sid@wrko.com Mon May 16 19:39:43 2005 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Mon May 16 19:39:51 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air Message-ID: >>I agree with Donna on this one. Reporters get things wrong from time to time. They made a mistake here but they didn't kill anyone. I do not think the U.S. press should be worrying about how nutcases react to what they write.<< I agree too, but apparently someone got to the editors at Newsweek. They retracted the story in its entirety. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom Boston LLC WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WMKK - WRKO - WVEI 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Boston MA 02135-2040 Phone: 617-779-5369 Fax: 617-779-5379 E-Mail: sid@wrko.com From billings@suscom-maine.net Mon May 16 20:00:23 2005 From: billings@suscom-maine.net (Daniel Billings) Date: Mon May 16 20:00:18 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air References: Message-ID: <003d01c55a73$6c760560$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sid Schweiger" To: Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 7:39 PM Subject: Re: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air > I agree too, but apparently someone got to the editors at Newsweek. > They retracted the story in its entirety. I think that is because they could no longer claim they had support for the story. By the way -- the reporter who wrote the stort was the person who broke the Monica Lewinsky story. From billo@shoreham.net Mon May 16 20:58:15 2005 From: billo@shoreham.net (Bill O'Neill) Date: Mon May 16 20:58:24 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air In-Reply-To: <002901c55a6d$e7697370$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> References: <20050516204519.43F86CA08E@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> <8C72872CFACFDC0-D80-E7F5@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> <002901c55a6d$e7697370$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> Message-ID: <428941A7.9050504@shoreham.net> Daniel Billings wrote: > I agree with Donna on this one. Reporters get things wrong from time > to time. They made a mistake here but they didn't kill anyone. > > I do not think the U.S. press should be worrying about how nutcases > react to what they write. I agree that there's bad precedent set when messing with the Fourth Estate. As for Newsweek's bad reportage not killing anyone, I guess we'll never know; if I had my name on that story, however, it wouldn't easy sleeping nights for some time to come. Blowing a story like this plays into the hands of those who believe that the press is spending more resources on begging to be relevant than in telling us what they see. Bill O'Neill -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.11 - Release Date: 5/16/2005 From billings@suscom-maine.net Mon May 16 21:26:42 2005 From: billings@suscom-maine.net (Daniel Billings) Date: Mon May 16 21:26:40 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air References: <20050516204519.43F86CA08E@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> <8C72872CFACFDC0-D80-E7F5@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> <002901c55a6d$e7697370$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> <428941A7.9050504@shoreham.net> Message-ID: <000701c55a7f$7b973260$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill O'Neill" To: "Daniel Billings" Cc: ; ; ; ; Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 8:58 PM Subject: Re: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air >As for Newsweek's bad reportage not killing anyone, I guess we'll never >know; if I had my name on that story, however, it wouldn't easy sleeping >nights for some time to come. Words alone don't kill. The idiots who reacted to the words by rioting are responsible for the deaths. From billo@shoreham.net Mon May 16 22:49:20 2005 From: billo@shoreham.net (Bill O'Neill) Date: Mon May 16 22:49:28 2005 Subject: WRKO: Newsweek Off Air In-Reply-To: <000701c55a7f$7b973260$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> References: <20050516204519.43F86CA08E@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> <8C72872CFACFDC0-D80-E7F5@mblk-d38.sysops.aol.com> <002901c55a6d$e7697370$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> <428941A7.9050504@shoreham.net> <000701c55a7f$7b973260$62ee05cf@yourm3vezyx8af> Message-ID: <42895BB0.1000506@shoreham.net> Daniel Billings wrote: > Words alone don't kill. The idiots who reacted to the words by > rioting are responsible for the deaths. Indeed, however, major media have amazing impact on unstable political conditions such as the Middle East. Those idiots (and you are being kind) are just as predictable today as they were 30 years ago - certainly the killers have no shortage of stimuli. It was just a matter of time (pun intended) that insurgents would trigger more bloodshed. All that said, the journalist who drove that story, although not even indirectly responsible for the mayhem that his story triggered, must be considering leaving that fine piece of work out of his portfolio. I hope he smoked a sweet cigar when he broke the Lewinski story because I think he just ran out of matches. Bill O'Neill -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.11 - Release Date: 5/16/2005 From kwillcox@wnsh.com Tue May 17 12:47:13 2005 From: kwillcox@wnsh.com (Keating Willcox) Date: Tue May 17 12:44:05 2005 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.2.20050517124207.04ba0d90@mail.comcast.net> First, thanks for the kind and largely accurate comments made last week regarding WNSH. Second, everyone here should be listening to John Loftus reporting on the superb John Batchelor show on RKO. John Loftus has spoken with the principals and Newsweek's error was that the prisoners themselves were doing the Koran destruction, and there was another incident, not involving the Koran. The reporter's source got confused between the two, and made an error. Sincerely, Keating Willcox ~/~ WNSH AM 1570 Beverly 'playing the best music ever recorded' kwillcox@wnsh.com www.wnsh.com 978-921-1570 FAX 978-468-1954 376 Hale Street, Beverly, MA 01915 From dlh@donnahalper.com Tue May 17 13:00:10 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Tue May 17 13:00:29 2005 Subject: (no subject) In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20050517124207.04ba0d90@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> >Keating wrote-- >Second, everyone here should be listening to John Loftus reporting on the >superb John Batchelor show on RKO. John Loftus has spoken with the >principals and Newsweek's error was that the prisoners themselves were >doing the Koran destruction, and there was another incident, not involving >the Koran. The reporter's source got confused between the two, and made an >error. Yes but stories of brutish and bigoted tactics by interrogators HAVE been verified in the past. Given what was done at Abu Ghraib and what has been done in extreme secrecy at Guantanamo Bay by interrogators who in one case used sexually suggestive tactics (like putting fake menstrual blood on a detainee and then not permitting him to wash before prayer), and given that released prisoners HAVE asserted that their holy book was mocked and desecrated as a tactic to break their will, there is a larger question here. It's easy to pile on and blame Newsweek, but riddle me this: if prisoners ("detainees") can be held for 3 years with no charges and nobody is permitted to see how they are being treated, doesn't this lend itself to abuse? I don't care if these are the worst people in the history of humanity-- the fact that we are not allowed to know what is being done to them so many years after 9/11 is not healthy for a country that is supposed to be a democracy. If they are guilty of something, charge them and send them to trial. If they are not guilty, send them back to their countries. But the media are the watchdogs of a democratic society. Not allowing them to do their job, and then condemning them if they get something wrong, is hypocritical. All political leaders try to keep the press at bay at one time or another. But in this case, it's a bad situation and Newsweek's error, compounded by excessive secrecy from this administration, is just fueling radicals in other countries who will use any excuse to riot. From rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net Tue May 17 13:23:54 2005 From: rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net (rogerkirk) Date: Tue May 17 13:23:53 2005 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <200505171323.AA1031602758@mail.ttlc.net> Keating Willcox wrote: >everyone here should be listening to John Loftus reporting on the >superb John Batchelor show on RKO. Thank you, Keating. I haven't heard any ringing endorsements of his show on this list yet. In fact, whenever talk shows come up, his name is curiously absent. I personally like his show - I just wic\sh it were on earlier in the evening. Some days, I work late - just to listen while driving home. Since he doesn't take calls, there's no challenge to what he says. How big IS his audience? What are hs demo's? From wollman@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu Tue May 17 18:10:29 2005 From: wollman@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Tue May 17 18:11:35 2005 Subject: Save That Date! Message-ID: <200505172210.j4HMATBc011776@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Please save Wednesday evening, June 6, for another in our irregular series of Boston-Radio-Interest/friends-of-NERW dinners. Plans are not yet final, but we expect to announce a reasonably-priced dinner spot in the west-suburban area soon. Full details to follow in a few days. -GAWollman From scott@fybush.com Tue May 17 19:00:07 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue May 17 19:53:24 2005 Subject: Save That Date! In-Reply-To: <200505172210.j4HMATBc011776@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050517185652.02fb4db8@gwind.pair.com> At 06:10 PM 5/17/2005 -0400, Garrett Wollman wrote: >Please save Wednesday evening, June 6, for another in our irregular >series of Boston-Radio-Interest/friends-of-NERW dinners. Plans are >not yet final, but we expect to announce a reasonably-priced dinner >spot in the west-suburban area soon. Full details to follow in a few >days. That should read "Wednesday evening, June 8," first off... Expanding on that thought - this means, as you'd suspect, that the Itinerant Fybushes will again be in New England. Not only will the lovely Lisa and toddlin' young Ariel be at the dinner, but it also means that Garrett and I will be on the road visiting stations near and far. We're hoping, in particular, to make some stops in parts of NH and ME that we haven't visited in a while (likely Monday/Tuesday June 6-7), as well as RI (likely Thursday the 9th) and hey BillO, keep Friday night the 3rd open, as we expect to be in your neck o' the woods. Watch that e-mail - and we look forward to seeing all of you soon... s From fox893@yahoo.com Tue May 17 20:00:06 2005 From: fox893@yahoo.com (Cooper Fox) Date: Tue May 17 20:00:07 2005 Subject: WBLM Spot In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050518000006.1823.qmail@web54604.mail.yahoo.com> Has anyone seen the new WBLM TV spot? It's better than the last one they had. About the same quality as the Frank spots, but a lot less generic. The WBLM spot doesn't have that pure testamonial feel. I also noticed that they were doing a TV promotion with either Fox or WB... Or was it UPN? They all blend together for me. Are they finally striking back against Frank and The Bone's flanking manuever? Magic 104 North Conway, NH V: (603)356-8870 F: (603)356-8875 ***Commercial Production Demo at: http://cooperfox.voice123.com Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html From radiotony@comcast.net Tue May 17 20:20:12 2005 From: radiotony@comcast.net (radiotony) Date: Tue May 17 20:20:18 2005 Subject: (no subject) References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <00ce01c55b3f$5c518200$6600a8c0@tony> While I don't know this to be true, I wasn't at Gitmo, there have been a number of allegations about similar incidents to the about the Quran issue and Gitmo. A number of the reports have been filed by former prisoners at Gitmo. One incident, reported in the NYT, May 1, 2005, alleges that American soldiers threw Qurans down in a pile and stepped on them in March 2002. This prompted a hunger strike. Here is a fair use quote: "A former interrogator at Guantanamo, in an interview with the Times, confirmed the accounts of the hunger strikes, including the public expression of regret over the treatment of the Korans." Former Gitmo prisoners reported similar allegations to the The Guardian out of the UK reported similar allegations on Dec. 3, 2003, and the Daily Mirror, on March 12, 2004. The toilet incident was reported in the Washington Post in a 2003 interview with a former detainee from Afghanistan. There are other stories as well on the Web with link sourcing of previous claims in other articles. These allegations are nothing new and Newsweek is hardly to blame for the rage of the Islamic world for one paragraph. To keep this on the media and radio front, what really surprises me is the life this who thing has taken on the air. It has been on the air for days now. It's had more legs than the revelation from the British memos that PROVE the Bush administration lied about Iraq. That wasn't anywhere on the radio and yet this thing has not died. This administration, which has basically lied about everything since they have been in there, hasn't repaired any of the damage their actions have done to the world. Newsweek's source may have backed off the claim but that doesn't mean that they were inaccurate or lying in their report. They went with the story they had at the time. I don't think Newsweek should do anything. Best, Anthony Schinella News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region with thoughtful community radio http://www.wkxl1450.com http://politizine.blogspot.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Donna Halper To: Keating Willcox ; boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 1:00 PM Subject: Re: (no subject) Yes but stories of brutish and bigoted tactics by interrogators HAVE been verified in the past. Given what was done at Abu Ghraib and what has been done in extreme secrecy at Guantanamo Bay by interrogators who in one case used sexually suggestive tactics (like putting fake menstrual blood on a detainee and then not permitting him to wash before prayer), and given that released prisoners HAVE asserted that their holy book was mocked and desecrated as a tactic to break their will, there is a larger question here. It's easy to pile on and blame Newsweek, but riddle me this: if prisoners ("detainees") can be held for 3 years with no charges and nobody is permitted to see how they are being treated, doesn't this lend itself to abuse? I don't care if these are the worst people in the history of humanity-- the fact that we are not allowed to know what is being done to them so many years after 9/11 is not healthy for a country that is supposed to be a democracy. If they are guilty of something, charge them and send them to trial. If they are not guilty, send them back to their countries. But the media are the watchdogs of a democratic society. Not allowing them to do their job, and then condemning them if they get something wrong, is hypocritical. All political leaders try to keep the press at bay at one time or another. But in this case, it's a bad situation and Newsweek's error, compounded by excessive secrecy from this administration, is just fueling radicals in other countries who will use any excuse to riot. From hykker@grolen.com Tue May 17 20:30:52 2005 From: hykker@grolen.com (SteveOrdinetz) Date: Tue May 17 20:29:52 2005 Subject: (no subject) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> References: <6.2.0.14.2.20050517124207.04ba0d90@mail.comcast.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20050517202458.01b24e10@pop3.grolen.com> Donna Halper wrote: >Yes but stories of brutish and bigoted tactics by interrogators HAVE been >verified in the past. Given what was done at Abu Ghraib and what has been >done in extreme secrecy at Guantanamo Bay by interrogators who in one case >used sexually suggestive tactics (like putting fake menstrual blood on a >detainee and then not permitting him to wash before prayer), and given >that released prisoners HAVE asserted that their holy book was mocked and >desecrated as a tactic to break their will, What rather irks me about this is that there seems to be a double standard. Where's the worldwide outrage when Americans are brutishly treated or murdered, or our flag is burned? Yet, when Americans do these things we're somehow the lowest form of scum. As I recall, Muslim governments have destroyed religious objects of other faiths, yet somehow we're supposed to revere theirs? From wollman@csail.mit.edu Wed May 18 12:14:15 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Wed May 18 12:14:13 2005 Subject: Save That Date! In-Reply-To: <200505172210.j4HMATBc011776@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> References: <200505172210.j4HMATBc011776@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <17035.27095.528488.411066@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < Please save Wednesday evening, June 6 That should of course be Wednesday, June 8. -GAWollman From gary@garysicecream.com Wed May 18 12:23:03 2005 From: gary@garysicecream.com (Gary's Ice Cream) Date: Wed May 18 12:54:26 2005 Subject: Save That Date! In-Reply-To: <17035.27095.528488.411066@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <200505181654.j4IGsVbl023091@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Or it could mean Monday, June 6. -----Original Message----- From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@rolinin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@rolinin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Garrett Wollman Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 12:14 PM To: bri@bostonradio.org Subject: Save That Date! < Please save Wednesday evening, June 6 That should of course be Wednesday, June 8. -GAWollman From raccoonradio@gmail.com Wed May 18 14:01:35 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Wed May 18 14:01:29 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? Message-ID: <1fbbbced0505181101241aca1d@mail.gmail.com> http://www.bostonradiowatch.com Hello sports fans; noticed that this week's Boston Radio Watch says the Celts are trying to deal with Entercom. They're not at liberty to reveal just which property will wind up with the Green. So we can only speculate at this time that, should the deal get done, we may get some Savage pre-emptions, or the station that "plays everything" will start playing hoop, too, or... Also it's said the format/lineup of ESPN 890 is mere weeks from being announced. From rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net Wed May 18 14:21:52 2005 From: rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net (rogerkirk) Date: Wed May 18 14:21:46 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? Message-ID: <200505181421.AA436207776@mail.ttlc.net> Bob Nelson wrote: >...Celts are trying to deal with Entercom. They're not at liberty to >reveal just which property will wind up with the Green. So we can only >speculate at this time that, should the deal get done, we may get some >Savage pre-emptions... Could that also mean John Batchelor pre-emptions, too? From raccoonradio@gmail.com Wed May 18 14:36:19 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Wed May 18 14:36:13 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? In-Reply-To: <200505181421.AA436207776@mail.ttlc.net> References: <200505181421.AA436207776@mail.ttlc.net> Message-ID: <1fbbbced05051811362aa54c39@mail.gmail.com> On 5/18/05, rogerkirk wrote: > Could that also mean John Batchelor pre-emptions, too? Maybe, especially if they're playing out West. Meanwhile John Molori's Media Blitz says that WWZN feels their chances of retaining the Celts are 50/50, and they also won't rule out spending big money to get the Sox (contract recently renewed through the end of 2006 by WEEI). http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/blitz/ From nostaticatall@comcast.net Wed May 18 15:42:04 2005 From: nostaticatall@comcast.net (David Tomm) Date: Wed May 18 15:42:07 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? In-Reply-To: <1fbbbced05051811362aa54c39@mail.gmail.com> References: <200505181421.AA436207776@mail.ttlc.net> <1fbbbced05051811362aa54c39@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Yeah, and the chances of the Sox going to 1510 are about the same as Rush Limbaugh becoming a Democrat. It ain't gonna happen, no matter how much money Paul Allen throws at them. If anything, the Sox would want a station with at least the same amount of coverage as WEEI or more, not less. Infinity stations have begun to sour on paying big bucks for sports teams radio rights since Mel Karmazin left, so WBZ may not be as big of a player for the Sox games as some may think. Still, they may be in the mix along with Greater Media's WTKK. At the end of the day though, I'd be very surprised if the Sox aren't on WEEI in 2007. --Dave Tomm "Mike Thomas" On May 18, 2005, at 2:36 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > > Meanwhile John Molori's Media Blitz says that WWZN feels their chances > of retaining the Celts are 50/50, and they also won't rule out > spending big > money to get the Sox (contract recently renewed through the end of > 2006 by WEEI). > > http://www.bostonsportsmedia.com/blitz/ > From ssmyth@psu.edu Wed May 18 16:30:24 2005 From: ssmyth@psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Wed May 18 16:30:18 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? Message-ID: <200505182030.QAA15175@webmail7.cac.psu.edu> On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:42:04 +0000, David Tomm wrote: > If anything, the Sox would > want a station with at least the same amount of coverage as WEEI or > more, not less. For this reason, I wish the far-out proposition of tossing the Sox on 1520 had some merit (and actually would happen). Until then, I'm stuck paying for MLB.com's audio package. From scott@fybush.com Wed May 18 16:41:18 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed May 18 16:40:49 2005 Subject: WKMY 91.1 on air? Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050518164016.02f64068@gwind.pair.com> I'm hearing reports that WKMY 91.1 Winchendon is now on the air with the satellite-delivered "K-Love" contemporary Christian format. Anyone out that way hearing it? (Here's a hint: they do their legal ID at about 52 minutes after the hour, not at the top.) (Hmm, he wonders wickedly: has WBUR turned on its IBOC yet?...) s From raccoonradio@gmail.com Wed May 18 16:50:22 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Wed May 18 16:50:16 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? In-Reply-To: <200505182030.QAA15175@webmail7.cac.psu.edu> References: <200505182030.QAA15175@webmail7.cac.psu.edu> Message-ID: <1fbbbced05051813507dd3bb@mail.gmail.com> Yes, I'd doubt that 1510 could land the Sox. When they were on that freq before didn't they have to be simulcast on 99.1 just so people could hear them? I, too would expect WBZ or WTKK to have a better chance of landing them. On 5/18/05, Sean Smyth wrote: > On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:42:04 +0000, David Tomm wrote: > > If anything, the Sox would > > want a station with at least the same amount of coverage as WEEI or > > more, not less. > > For this reason, I wish the far-out proposition of tossing the Sox on 1520 had > some merit (and actually would happen). > > Until then, I'm stuck paying for MLB.com's audio package. > > From jjlehmann@comcast.net Wed May 18 16:47:36 2005 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Wed May 18 17:21:00 2005 Subject: WKMY 91.1 on air? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050518164016.02f64068@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <200505182121.j4ILL5UN070787@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> >I'm hearing reports that WKMY 91.1 Winchendon is now on the air with the >satellite-delivered "K-Love" contemporary Christian format. Anyone out that >way hearing it? (Here's a hint: they do their legal ID at about 52 minutes >after the hour, not at the top.) > >(Hmm, he wonders wickedly: has WBUR turned on its IBOC yet?...) Yes, they did a few months ago. WSMU's signal is hurt by it as well. Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA From scott@fybush.com Wed May 18 16:35:08 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Wed May 18 17:28:28 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? In-Reply-To: <200505182030.QAA15175@webmail7.cac.psu.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050518163404.03042018@gwind.pair.com> At 04:30 PM 5/18/2005 -0400, you wrote: >On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:42:04 +0000, David Tomm wrote: > > If anything, the Sox would > > want a station with at least the same amount of coverage as WEEI or > > more, not less. > >For this reason, I wish the far-out proposition of tossing the Sox on 1520 had >some merit (and actually would happen). As in Buffalo's WWKB? I'd love it - but I don't think most Buffalonians would give a good beef on weck about it. (And if you don't know what a beef on weck is, ask a Buffalonian... :-) s, who had one for lunch (a beef on weck, that is, not a Buffalonian) From dan.strassberg@att.net Wed May 18 19:00:17 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Wed May 18 19:00:32 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? References: <200505182030.QAA15175@webmail7.cac.psu.edu> <1fbbbced05051813507dd3bb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001b01c55bfd$605a20a0$19eefea9@dstrassberg> A simulcast on 1330 AM took place before 1510's move to Waltham, when 1510 was still running 5 kW at night from Squantum AND the State St South office complex had just been constructed immediately to the west of the 1510 Tx site, turning the previously awful night signal to the west into a totally horrendous signal. I believe that the Sox were on 99.1 when Campbell Sports had the Boston-area rights. 99.1 was owned by Campbell and 1510 was merely an affiliate. That's not to say that the Sox would find the present 50-kW 1510 night signal acceptable. An affiliate would be needed southwest of Boston and another northwest of Boston. WCAP would be ideal for the northwest affiliate. WBIX might work for southwest and would actually cover MetroWest better at night than WEEI does, which would come as a pleasant surprise to a large number of fans. However, I agree with the person who said that the Sox on 1510 is about as likely as Rush Limbaugh becoming a Democrat. Chances are that by the time the 2007 season rolls around, 1510 will be doing SS and might beat out WROL for the Spanish rights if WROL doesn't yet have its 5 kW night signal on the air. The odds of that signal being on the air in time for the 2007 season are slim. The FCC has not yet issued a CP. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Nelson" To: "Sean Smyth" ; Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 4:50 PM Subject: Re: BRW: Celts to Entercom? > Yes, I'd doubt that 1510 could land the Sox. When they were on that > freq before didn't they have to be simulcast on 99.1 just so people > could hear them? I, too would expect WBZ or WTKK to have a better > chance of landing them. > > On 5/18/05, Sean Smyth wrote: > > On Wed, 18 May 2005 15:42:04 +0000, David Tomm wrote: > > > If anything, the Sox would > > > want a station with at least the same amount of coverage as WEEI or > > > more, not less. > > > > For this reason, I wish the far-out proposition of tossing the Sox on 1520 had > > some merit (and actually would happen). > > > > Until then, I'm stuck paying for MLB.com's audio package. > > > > > From lawyer@attorneyross.com Wed May 18 23:15:41 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Wed May 18 23:15:17 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? In-Reply-To: References: <1fbbbced05051811362aa54c39@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <428BCC9D.25961.5CA101@localhost> On 18 May 2005 at 15:42, David Tomm wrote: > Yeah, and the chances of the Sox going to 1510 are about the same as > Rush Limbaugh becoming a Democrat. It ain't gonna happen, no matter > how much money Paul Allen throws at them. If anything, the Sox would > want a station with at least the same amount of coverage as WEEI or > more, not less. Infinity stations have begun to sour on paying big > bucks for sports teams radio rights since Mel Karmazin left, so WBZ > may not be as big of a player for the Sox games as some may think. > Still, they may be in the mix along with Greater Media's WTKK. At the > end of the day though, I'd be very surprised if the Sox aren't on WEEI > in 2007. But some time in the 1970s, the Sox =did= go from 850 (WHDH) to 1510 (WITS). -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From Jibguy@aol.com Thu May 19 00:40:28 2005 From: Jibguy@aol.com (Jibguy@aol.com) Date: Thu May 19 00:40:31 2005 Subject: WNSH 50kw Message-ID: <81.27eeefa3.2fbd72bc@aol.com> In a message dated 5/17/2005 12:44:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, kwillcox@wnsh.com writes: First, thanks for the kind and largely accurate comments made last week regarding WNSH. ----------------------------------------- So, you gonna tell us WHY the 50kw? :-) Inquiring radio-geeks want to know....... ---BB From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Thu May 19 01:52:34 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Thu May 19 01:55:30 2005 Subject: WNSH 50kw References: <81.27eeefa3.2fbd72bc@aol.com> Message-ID: <039701c55c37$32ced6a0$1404fea9@xyz> From: > > Inquiring radio-geeks want to know....... > > ---BB Inquiring minds also want to know how Bob Bittner is suddenly able to post to the list again! ;-) Hallaluia! JP From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu May 19 03:18:47 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu May 19 03:18:42 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? In-Reply-To: <428BCC9D.25961.5CA101@localhost> References: <1fbbbced05051811362aa54c39@mail.gmail.com> <428BCC9D.25961.5CA101@localhost> Message-ID: <1fbbbced05051900183614413f@mail.gmail.com> Was there one point where certain Sox games were simulcast on WWEL 107.9? Complete list of Red Sox flagship stations (radio and TV) over the years: http://www.redsoxdiehard.com/players/broadcasters.html According to that list, the Sox' last year at WHDH 850 was 1975. From 1976-82 they were at 1510 (WMEX, then WITS as in the "WITS end of the dial"). WPLM-FM 99.1 from 1983-89. Then WRKO and the current WEEI. I remember the WPLM days--they used to have a billboard over the left field pole. As for WITS, it stood for Information, Talk and Sports, and I remember one newspaper cartoon showing a couple WITS sports talk hosts (forget which ones) and the caption was "The WIT-lesS Wonders" From sid@wrko.com Thu May 19 08:41:46 2005 From: sid@wrko.com (Sid Schweiger) Date: Thu May 19 08:42:45 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? Message-ID: >>But some time in the 1970s, the Sox =did= go from 850 (WHDH) to 1510 (WITS).<< That move occurred with a condition: That WITS was to move their transmitter to a better site (they were still in Quincy at the time) where they could cover all of the Boston metro. They moved it, all right, but the resulting coverage did not satisfy the Red Sox, and WITS was not considered for renewal when their contract was up. Sid Schweiger IT Manager, Entercom Boston LLC WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WMKK - WRKO - WVEI 20 Guest St / 3d Floor Boston MA 02135-2040 Phone: 617-779-5369 Fax: 617-779-5379 E-Mail: sid@wrko.com From Jibguy@aol.com Thu May 19 08:57:26 2005 From: Jibguy@aol.com (Jibguy@aol.com) Date: Thu May 19 08:57:43 2005 Subject: WNSH 50kw Message-ID: In a message dated 5/19/2005 1:55:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com writes: Inquiring minds also want to know how Bob Bittner is suddenly able to post to the list again! ;-) Hallaluia! I don't know why. I actually mistakenly had in mind that I was on Radio-info.com and made my post, and it worked here on the BRIG. - Maybe AOL users can now use this list without any fancy keystrokes. ----BB From revdoug1@verizon.net Thu May 19 09:32:11 2005 From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown) Date: Thu May 19 09:28:14 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? References: Message-ID: <008201c55c77$2a106bb0$6501a8c0@pastor2> That brings up a question: WITS was Boston's first station to do a mix of news, talk and sports (it was an NBC affiliate for a while), and it did what I thought was a pretty credible job. Why did it fail? Doug ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sid Schweiger" To: Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 8:41 AM Subject: Re: BRW: Celts to Entercom? > >>But some time in the 1970s, the Sox =did= go from 850 (WHDH) to 1510 > (WITS).<< > > That move occurred with a condition: That WITS was to move their > transmitter to a better site (they were still in Quincy at the time) > where they could cover all of the Boston metro. They moved it, all > right, but the resulting coverage did not satisfy the Red Sox, and WITS > was not considered for renewal when their contract was up. > > > > Sid Schweiger > IT Manager, Entercom Boston LLC > WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WMKK - WRKO - WVEI > 20 Guest St / 3d Floor > Boston MA 02135-2040 > Phone: 617-779-5369 > Fax: 617-779-5379 > E-Mail: sid@wrko.com > From john@minutemancomm.com Thu May 19 09:44:00 2005 From: john@minutemancomm.com (John Mullaney) Date: Thu May 19 11:29:19 2005 Subject: BRW: Celts to Entercom? In-Reply-To: <008201c55c77$2a106bb0$6501a8c0@pastor2> Message-ID: <200505191344.j4JDiA5P078249@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> I believe WITS had severe financial problems as a result of what then was considered a huge price for the Red Sox contract at that time. Jack Campbell who already had the rights for the Bruins Radio Network struck a deal with the Red Sox ownership to bail WITS out of there contract. WRKO was never happy with being an affiliate but at the time didn't want to pay for the rights. Campbell eventually lost the rights back to WRKO several seasons later who held them till the 1st Baseball strike. -----Original Message----- From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@rolinin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston-radio-interest-bounces@rolinin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Doug Drown Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 9:32 AM To: Sid Schweiger; boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Subject: Re: BRW: Celts to Entercom? That brings up a question: WITS was Boston's first station to do a mix of news, talk and sports (it was an NBC affiliate for a while), and it did what I thought was a pretty credible job. Why did it fail? Doug ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sid Schweiger" To: Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 8:41 AM Subject: Re: BRW: Celts to Entercom? > >>But some time in the 1970s, the Sox =did= go from 850 (WHDH) to 1510 > (WITS).<< > > That move occurred with a condition: That WITS was to move their > transmitter to a better site (they were still in Quincy at the time) > where they could cover all of the Boston metro. They moved it, all > right, but the resulting coverage did not satisfy the Red Sox, and WITS > was not considered for renewal when their contract was up. > > > > Sid Schweiger > IT Manager, Entercom Boston LLC > WAAF - WEEI AM/FM - WMKK - WRKO - WVEI > 20 Guest St / 3d Floor > Boston MA 02135-2040 > Phone: 617-779-5369 > Fax: 617-779-5379 > E-Mail: sid@wrko.com > From ssmyth@psu.edu Thu May 19 13:38:00 2005 From: ssmyth@psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Thu May 19 13:37:54 2005 Subject: WITS (was: BRW: Celts to Entercom?) Message-ID: <200505191738.NAA23319@webmail4.cac.psu.edu> On Thu, 19 May 2005 09:44:00 +0000, "John Mullaney" wrote: > I believe WITS had severe financial problems as a result of what then was > considered a huge price for the Red Sox contract at that time. Jack Campbell > who already had the rights for the Bruins Radio Network struck a deal with > the Red Sox ownership to bail WITS out of there contract. WRKO was never > happy with being an affiliate but at the time didn't want to pay for the > rights. Campbell eventually lost the rights back to WRKO several seasons > later who held them till the 1st Baseball strike. Interesting diversion from the original topic... Anyone remember the figure WITS tossed at the Sox for the rights? I'm guessing 1510 wasn't owned by Max Richmond by then, given the cheap stories we've seen recounted by alums on this list. From escapen@msn.com Thu May 19 14:33:47 2005 From: escapen@msn.com (Stephen Capen) Date: Thu May 19 14:57:12 2005 Subject: Mike, Jack, it's all hot air(waves) Message-ID: Harkening back to some posts on this subject in April: The Jack format claims to embrace blues and classical music as well -- totally absent, on the 93.7 slot at least. But even the music played on Mike skims the surface, being sold like Staples Office Supply's "That's easy" ("We play everything") when it's obviously untrue. A piece by Ben Fong-Torres from his "Radio Waves" column in the San Francisco Chronicle on the format points out that the Los Angeles station, formerly Arrow 93.1, fired all its DJs (ring a bell?) and adopted the Jack format, promoting it by saying "guess you won't need [an iPod] anymore." But the fact is, the playlist grew from about 400 songs to just 1200. It's a format devised a few years ago in Canada, and I do believe they're still calling the shots on what's played. As a newcomer to this group, I'd like to say greetings to all involved here, at a time when radio is heading for some tumultuous changes. Cheers, Stephen From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu May 19 14:59:03 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu May 19 14:58:58 2005 Subject: Globe: The River goes against the tide Message-ID: <1fbbbced05051911596cd9cbf6@mail.gmail.com> http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2005/05/19/the_river_goes_against_tide/ excerpt: "Why music DJs are disappearing isn't a mystery. ''It's the almighty dollar," notes Lucas, pointing to the increasing tendency of stations to use automated or centralized ''voice tracking" instead of live, local DJs. Nor is the new no-DJ ''Jack" format, as aired on WMKK, entirely to blame." From wollman@csail.mit.edu Thu May 19 15:03:09 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Thu May 19 15:03:05 2005 Subject: Mike, Jack, it's all hot air(waves) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17036.58093.64699.380860@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > It's a format devised a few years ago in Canada, and I do believe > they're still calling the shots on what's played. Actually, it's a format devised a few years ago in New York by some friends of Scott's, IIRC at least one of whom was working for RCS (makers of Selector) at the time. It started out as a stream, and was then adopted by the Canadian stations (under license). -GAWollman From raccoonradio@gmail.com Thu May 19 15:11:59 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Thu May 19 15:11:53 2005 Subject: Mike, Jack, it's all hot air(waves) In-Reply-To: <17036.58093.64699.380860@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> References: <17036.58093.64699.380860@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <1fbbbced05051912116fb354d8@mail.gmail.com> Boston Radio Watch mentioned the genesis of "Jack" and where the name came from: http://home.comcast.net/~rockmont/March_27_2005.htm "...originated by radio programmer Bob Perry on his on-line radio stream called 'Jack-FM' in 2001. Perry, who uses his on-the-air name "Cadillac Jack Garrett", experimented with throwing together a list of Top 40 songs from different periods and music genres and playing them in no particular order". From mlaurence@mindspring.com Thu May 19 16:17:11 2005 From: mlaurence@mindspring.com (Mark Laurence) Date: Thu May 19 16:17:08 2005 Subject: Globe: The River goes against the tide In-Reply-To: <1fbbbced05051911596cd9cbf6@mail.gmail.com> References: <1fbbbced05051911596cd9cbf6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <97d2014dae5ff69411633f717a04b33d@mindspring.com> On May 19, 2005, at 2:59 PM, Bob Nelson wrote: > http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2005/05/19/ > the_river_goes_against_tide/ > > excerpt: > "Why music DJs are disappearing isn't a mystery. ''It's the almighty > dollar," notes Lucas, pointing to the increasing tendency of stations > to use automated or centralized ''voice tracking" instead of live, > local DJs. Also worth quoting from the same article, Nashville consultant Robert Unmacht: "''No one has been able to tell me of one all-music, no-air-talent station that is leading in the ratings that was able to stay talent-less for long,' says Unmacht. 'They change their minds . . . after the novelty wears off.'" From lglavin@lycos.com Thu May 19 16:51:05 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Thu May 19 16:51:04 2005 Subject: WNSH 50kw Message-ID: <20050519205105.1396086B10@ws7-1.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: Jibguy@aol.com >To: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com, boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Re: WNSH 50kw >Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 08:57:26 EDT > > > Hallaluia! > I don't know why. I actually mistakenly had in mind that I was on > Radio-info.com and made my post, and it worked here on the BRIG. - > Maybe AOL users > can now use this list without any fancy keystrokes. > ----BB There was a general news story last week that AOL had made some changes to its e-mail system including making it available for FREE. Maybe at the same time it became more compatible with other ISP's. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Thu May 19 17:02:11 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Thu May 19 17:02:10 2005 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <20050519210211.23413C610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: radiotony >To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Re: (no subject) >Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 > > To keep this on the media and radio front, what really surprises me > is the life this who thing has > taken on the air. It has been on the air for days now. It's had > more legs than the revelation from the > British memos that PROVE the Bush administration lied about Iraq. > That wasn't anywhere on the > radio and yet this thing has not died. This administration, which > has basically lied about everything > since they have been in there, hasn't repaired any of the damage > their actions have done to the world. > Newsweek's source may have backed off the claim but that doesn't > mean that they were inaccurate > or lying in their report. They went with the story they had at the > time. I don't think Newsweek should > do anything. > > Best, > Anthony Schinella > News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 > Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region > with thoughtful community radio > http://www.wkxl1450.com > http://politizine.blogspot.com > ----- Original Message ----- From: Donna Halper Air America Radio has really been flying with the Downing Street memo trying to insinuate it into the general discourse. One host wants Democrats in touch with Howard (cue the Wilhelm sfx) Dean to mention it when he appears on "Meet the Press" to be televised this coming Sunday (when it will air on 960 FM Talk is yet to be determined). -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From dan.strassberg@att.net Thu May 19 16:30:02 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Thu May 19 17:41:54 2005 Subject: WITS (was: BRW: Celts to Entercom?) References: <200505191738.NAA23319@webmail4.cac.psu.edu> Message-ID: <005f01c55cbb$8d500ac0$19eefea9@dstrassberg> !510 was not owned by the Richmonds at any time that it had the WITS calls (or any calls other than WMEX). As WITS, the station was owned by Mariner Communications of Cincinnati, a company that, at one point, owned some or all of WLW. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Smyth" To: "John Mullaney" Cc: Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 1:38 PM Subject: WITS (was: BRW: Celts to Entercom?) > On Thu, 19 May 2005 09:44:00 +0000, "John Mullaney" wrote: > > I believe WITS had severe financial problems as a result of what then was > > considered a huge price for the Red Sox contract at that time. Jack Campbell > > who already had the rights for the Bruins Radio Network struck a deal with > > the Red Sox ownership to bail WITS out of there contract. WRKO was never > > happy with being an affiliate but at the time didn't want to pay for the > > rights. Campbell eventually lost the rights back to WRKO several seasons > > later who held them till the 1st Baseball strike. > > Interesting diversion from the original topic... > > Anyone remember the figure WITS tossed at the Sox for the rights? I'm guessing > 1510 wasn't owned by Max Richmond by then, given the cheap stories we've seen > recounted by alums on this list. > From billo@shoreham.net Thu May 19 17:57:08 2005 From: billo@shoreham.net (Bill O'Neill) Date: Thu May 19 17:57:12 2005 Subject: (no subject) In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net> Donna Halper wrote: > in one case used sexually suggestive tactics They've perennially chanted "Death to America," blew up the towers and want to do more stuff. And when they do, it'll not be retaliation for some publicized pledge-week idiocy, but to complete their larger mission, to create the United States of Parking Lot. > as a tactic to break their will, Their "will" won't break by humiliation, but, perhaps, they will realize how fortunate they are to not have been treated as they, themselves, would if the tables were turned. > 3 years with no charges and nobody is permitted to see how they are > being treated, doesn't this lend itself to abuse? Yes. > I don't care if these are the worst people in the history of > humanity-- the fact that we are not allowed to know what is being done > to them so many years after 9/11 is not healthy for a country that is > supposed to be a democracy. Absolutely. We should know. And we don't. Also unhealthy are dirty bombs in the hands of people who want to blow us up because of who we are and what we, for the most part, believe. > If they are guilty of something, charge them and send them to trial. > If they are not guilty, send them back to their countries. Yes. > But the media are the watchdogs of a democratic society. Not allowing > them to do their job, and then condemning them if they get something > wrong, is hypocritical. The media have a job to do. If Uncle Sam is making their job difficult, then work harder. Train harder. Devote more money to news divisions. > Newsweek's error, compounded by excessive secrecy from this > administration, is just fueling radicals in other countries who will > use any excuse to riot. I agree that radicals do riot, but they need no excuses. They will capitalize on bad decisions by all "Estates" of the American system to use such as convenient cover. And the American media will provide plenty of new material in case they get used to humiliation. Bill O'Neill -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.13 - Release Date: 5/19/2005 From rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net Thu May 19 18:54:52 2005 From: rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net (rogerkirk) Date: Thu May 19 18:54:46 2005 Subject: Globe: The River goes against the tide Message-ID: <200505191854.AA93323436@mail.ttlc.net> Bob Nelson pointed to a Globe Article: >http://www.boston.com/ae/tv/articles/2005/05/19/the_river_goes_against_tide/ > When I clicked on the URL, the article in question came up with a prominent advertisement. The ad's main graphic was a rendition of a "Do Not Disturb" sign hanging on a lever-type door handle. Alas, at first glance, the lever handle looks like the flush lever on a commode - directly under the words "My Massachusetts." Sorry to be off-topic, but I just had to share the irony. From paulranderson@charter.net Thu May 19 21:29:29 2005 From: paulranderson@charter.net (Paul Anderson) Date: Thu May 19 22:43:07 2005 Subject: WKMY 91.1 on air? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050518164016.02f64068@gwind.pair.com> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050518164016.02f64068@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: On May 18, 2005, at 4:41 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > I'm hearing reports that WKMY 91.1 Winchendon is now on the air with > the satellite-delivered "K-Love" contemporary Christian format. Anyone > out that way hearing it? Yes, they are on the air. I heard their ID before the hour this morning even though my reception was not good at the time. Driving home on Route 2 heading west tonight, I picked up pieces of the station around Fitchburg. It did not become listenable until Gardner and did not become clear until Templeton. From there I headed south towards Barre and the station was totally gone by the time I left Templeton into Hubbardston. I wonder why Winchendon, a town of less than 5,000 people, has two radio stations: WKMY and WOQL (97.7 FM). WKMY can probably reach Athol and maybe Orange, and the outskirts of Gardner, but I can't imagine they can be heard in Fitchburg or Keene. They certainly have a small potential audience. Paul From ssmyth@psu.edu Thu May 19 23:20:54 2005 From: ssmyth@psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Thu May 19 23:51:37 2005 Subject: WKMY 91.1 on air? Message-ID: <200505200320.XAA09796@webmail4.cac.psu.edu> On Thu, 19 May 2005 21:29:29 +0000, Paul Anderson wrote: > I wonder why Winchendon, a town of less than 5,000 people, has two > radio stations: WKMY and WOQL (97.7 FM). 97.7 is moving (Keene, I believe?), which will help facilitate 97.7's move to the north. From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Fri May 20 01:21:56 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Fri May 20 01:25:21 2005 Subject: Globe: The River goes against the tide References: <1fbbbced05051911596cd9cbf6@mail.gmail.com> <97d2014dae5ff69411633f717a04b33d@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <056d01c55cfc$2b2535a0$1404fea9@xyz> > Also worth quoting from the same article, Nashville consultant Robert > Unmacht: > > "''No one has been able to tell me of one all-music, no-air-talent > station that is leading in the ratings that was able to stay > talent-less for long,' says Unmacht. 'They change their minds . . . > after the novelty wears off.'" I'm reminded of when "The Wave" started in LA. No Jocks....they actually had little "skits" (believe it or not) between some of the music. It was going to be a 'radically different radio station'. A year or so down the pike (to this day I believe), they have morphed into one of the typical "Smooth Jazz" formats that populate the country. (I think WNUA Chicago started off with this same hype.) From revdoug1@verizon.net Fri May 20 07:31:37 2005 From: revdoug1@verizon.net (Doug Drown) Date: Fri May 20 08:27:59 2005 Subject: WKMY 91.1 on air? References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050518164016.02f64068@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <000e01c55d2f$80323fb0$6501a8c0@pastor2> I think WKMY will probably do fairly well within a limited sphere. I'm from Gardner originally, I still visit down there frequently, and I'm a clergyman, so I know the area's "spiritual demography" quite well. There are lots of evangelical churches in the Gardner-Winchendon-Athol area, and while the North County has two other Christian stations (WCMX and WFGL), neither has a contemporary Christian music format ---they're more oriented around preaching and Bible teaching. I would guess WKMY will complement them and gain its own niche. By the way, WGAW appears to be gaining more visibility locally after years of being pretty much moribund. It's a nice thing to know that Gardner has its own uniquely local voice again. Doug ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Anderson" To: "Boston Radio Interest" Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 9:29 PM Subject: Re: WKMY 91.1 on air? > On May 18, 2005, at 4:41 PM, Scott Fybush wrote: > > > I'm hearing reports that WKMY 91.1 Winchendon is now on the air with > > the satellite-delivered "K-Love" contemporary Christian format. Anyone > > out that way hearing it? > > Yes, they are on the air. I heard their ID before the hour this > morning even though my reception was not good at the time. > > Driving home on Route 2 heading west tonight, I picked up pieces of the > station around Fitchburg. It did not become listenable until Gardner > and did not become clear until Templeton. From there I headed south > towards Barre and the station was totally gone by the time I left > Templeton into Hubbardston. > > I wonder why Winchendon, a town of less than 5,000 people, has two > radio stations: WKMY and WOQL (97.7 FM). WKMY can probably reach > Athol and maybe Orange, and the outskirts of Gardner, but I can't > imagine they can be heard in Fitchburg or Keene. They certainly have a > small potential audience. > > Paul From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Fri May 20 10:39:05 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Fri May 20 10:41:18 2005 Subject: Celtics may be making waves around the dial Message-ID: <00dd01c55d49$d01d3ce0$1404fea9@xyz> "The Celtics' decisions aren't all on-court for the coming season. On the media front, they've got to sort out their radio situation, preferably sooner rather than later, to allow sales departments to get to work. Meanwhile, it's a great time to speculate on what might happen." More at: http://www.boston.com/sports/articles/2005/05/20/celtics_may_be_making_waves_around_the_dial?mode=PF From wollman@csail.mit.edu Fri May 20 11:25:54 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Fri May 20 11:25:51 2005 Subject: (no subject) In-Reply-To: <428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> <428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net> Message-ID: <17038.386.973289.610410@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Just a reminder that Iraq is off-topic for this mailing-list.... -GAWollman From scott@fybush.com Fri May 20 12:23:40 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Fri May 20 13:46:27 2005 Subject: WKMY 91.1 on air? In-Reply-To: <000e01c55d2f$80323fb0$6501a8c0@pastor2> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050518164016.02f64068@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050520122213.02e83e88@gwind.pair.com> At 07:31 AM 5/20/2005 -0400, you wrote: >I think WKMY will probably do fairly well within a limited sphere. I'm from >Gardner originally, I still visit down there frequently, and I'm a >clergyman, so I know the area's "spiritual demography" quite well. There >are lots of evangelical churches in the Gardner-Winchendon-Athol area, and >while the North County has two other Christian stations (WCMX and WFGL), >neither has a contemporary Christian music format ---they're more oriented >around preaching and Bible teaching. I would guess WKMY will complement >them and gain its own niche. WKMY has nothing to do with Winchendon, really. It's just a convenient primary station that can then feed chains of translators in the commercial band, which can't take the K-Love programming directly off the satellite but can rebroadcast Winchendon over the air or via translator-to-translator relay. That's how the game's played these days, sadly... s From raccoonradio@gmail.com Fri May 20 14:39:14 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Fri May 20 14:39:07 2005 Subject: Reporter swears at O&A hecklers, gets fired Message-ID: <1fbbbced05052011394a8b6c38@mail.gmail.com> http://www.wnbc.com/news/4511119/detail.html TV reporter Arthur Chi'en has been fired for shouting the "F" word at two hecklers during his live report at a subway train station. Chi'en was doing a story about Metro Card scammers when two men began shouting about radio shock jocks Opie and Anthony.(snip) Fans of Opie and Anthony are reveling in Chi'en's firing. They have mounted a campaign to annoy TV reporters. From mlaurence@mindspring.com Fri May 20 15:20:12 2005 From: mlaurence@mindspring.com (Mark Laurence) Date: Fri May 20 15:20:09 2005 Subject: Reporter swears at O&A hecklers, gets fired Message-ID: <21297006.1116616812862.JavaMail.root@wamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> According to the New York Post, the swearing didn't happen during Chi'en's live report. He finished the report, then turned around and asked "what the F are you doing." He obviously thought he was off the air, but the cameras were still live at the time. Poor judgment, bad timing, but your version makes it sound like a career-ending total meltdown, while the Post (as well as the story you link to) makes it sound more like a costly mistake. Mark -----Original Message----- From: Bob Nelson Sent: May 20, 2005 2:39 PM To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Subject: Reporter swears at O&A hecklers, gets fired http://www.wnbc.com/news/4511119/detail.html TV reporter Arthur Chi'en has been fired for shouting the "F" word at two hecklers during his live report at a subway train station. Chi'en was doing a story about Metro Card scammers when two men began shouting about radio shock jocks Opie and Anthony.(snip) Fans of Opie and Anthony are reveling in Chi'en's firing. They have mounted a campaign to annoy TV reporters. From lglavin@lycos.com Fri May 20 17:36:19 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Fri May 20 17:36:18 2005 Subject: Celtics may be making waves around the dial Message-ID: <20050520213619.6FC5DC610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Joseph Pappalardo" >To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Celtics may be making waves around the dial >Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 10:39:05 -0400 > > "The Celtics' decisions aren't all on-court for the coming season. On the > media front, they've got to sort out their radio situation, preferably > sooner rather than later, to allow sales departments to get to work. > Meanwhile, it's a great time to speculate on what might happen." > > More at: > > > http://www.boston.com/sports/articles/2005/05/20/celtics_may_be_making_waves_around_the_dial?mode=PF The Celtics broadcasts are reported to appear at the FORTY-FIFTH position on a typical night! Who knew there were 45 signals available in Boston at night. I wonder if WJIB-AM's rating was HIGHER than WWZN's at the same time? Five wats vs. 50,000 (with a higher RMS with nighttime DA). -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Fri May 20 17:38:55 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Fri May 20 17:38:53 2005 Subject: No More (No Subject) Posts Please Message-ID: <20050520213855.22BCCC610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> When posting to the B.R.I.G. please put SOMETHING in the subject line. I just clicked on a "(No Subject)" and it was a disgusting Spam offering. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Fri May 20 17:43:49 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Fri May 20 17:43:48 2005 Subject: Reporter swears at O&A hecklers, gets fired Message-ID: <20050520214349.02E8EC610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Bob Nelson" >To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Reporter swears at O&A hecklers, gets fired >Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 14:39:14 -0400 > > http://www.wnbc.com/news/4511119/detail.html > > TV reporter Arthur Chi'en has been fired for shouting the "F" word at > two hecklers during his live report at a subway train station. > > Chi'en was doing a story about Metro Card scammers when two men began > shouting about radio shock jocks Opie and Anthony.(snip) Fans of Opie > and Anthony are reveling in Chi'en's firing. They have mounted a > campaign to annoy TV reporters. I think part of the problem is the felt need by TV News Directors to have reporters standing in front of a building or other such entity, even if the actual video was done hours or days earlier. If Arthur had done a complete news package and only had to introduce it, he could have done it in-studio, and he'd still be on WCBS's payroll. Sometimes Dan Rea is standing on an empty street on WBz-TV's oops CBS 4's early news to announce a story taped the night or afternoon before. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Fri May 20 18:02:13 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Fri May 20 18:02:12 2005 Subject: Bill Moyers' Speech on C-Span Saturday Morning Message-ID: <20050520220213.123BF3384B@ws7-3.us4.outblaze.com> I just checked the C-Span1 schedule, and Bill Moyers' speech delivered last Sunday night is due to be repeated Saturday morning, May 21st at 10:00 edst. I saw it last Monday night, and even if you're not a Bill Moyers fan, and didn't particularly care for the "Now" PBS show, you ought to consider viewing it tomorrow or tape/and or TIVO it. You've probably never seen Bill Moyers quite like this, and he makes quite a few interesting points. It's about an hour and 5 minutes in length...with C-Span1 I usually set the timer a little earlier and later than the window... the early morning talk show is advertised as 7:00 am until 10:00, but could run over. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lawyer@attorneyross.com Sat May 21 00:46:24 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sat May 21 01:03:57 2005 Subject: (no subject) In-Reply-To: <17038.386.973289.610410@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> References: <428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net> Message-ID: <428E84E0.23277.5F36ED@localhost> On 20 May 2005 at 11:25, Garrett Wollman wrote: > Just a reminder that Iraq is off-topic for this mailing-list.... > > -GAWollman Just as well, since we'll be invading Iran soon anyway. ;-> -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From lawyer@attorneyross.com Sat May 21 00:46:24 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sat May 21 01:03:59 2005 Subject: No More (No Subject) Posts Please In-Reply-To: <20050520213855.22BCCC610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <428E84E0.30217.5F3805@localhost> On 20 May 2005 at 16:38, Laurence Glavin wrote: > When posting to the B.R.I.G. please put SOMETHING in the > subject line. I just clicked on a "(No Subject)" and it was > a disgusting Spam offering. For a little while, yesterday and the day before, the list was automatically inserting "BRW" in each subject line. That is certainly helpful with filtering. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Sat May 21 01:25:17 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Sat May 21 01:34:02 2005 Subject: (no subject) References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com><428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net> <17038.386.973289.610410@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <02bd01c55dc6$8c0d0b20$1404fea9@xyz> From: "Garrett Wollman" > Just a reminder that Iraq is off-topic for this mailing-list.... Unless it is Iraqi radio that you can pick up in Boston. ;-) JP From stephanie@gordsven.com Sat May 21 01:37:44 2005 From: stephanie@gordsven.com (Stephanie Weil) Date: Sat May 21 01:37:41 2005 Subject: (no subject) In-Reply-To: <02bd01c55dc6$8c0d0b20$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com><428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net> <17038.386.973289.610410@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <02bd01c55dc6$8c0d0b20$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: On Sat, 21 May 2005, Joseph Pappalardo wrote: > Unless it is Iraqi radio that you can pick up in Boston. ;-) Wow! That's some good sky-wave then! 0.0 -- stephanie weil new york city From raccoonradio@gmail.com Sat May 21 03:18:13 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat May 21 03:18:07 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night Message-ID: <1fbbbced05052100186f839a8e@mail.gmail.com> At the end of the Howie Carr show, Howie introduced his regular caller Kevin Whalen, aka "Kevin From Danvers". Kev will have the Sunday night pre-Drudge slot that had been Newsweek on Air (8-9 pm). I guess he's a blogger and will talk about the new media/blogosphere/views "not often heard", etc. He mentioned guests the first few weeks will include the Wall St. Journal's James Taranto and talk host Hugh Hewitt (isn't/wasn't he on WTTT 1150?) Boston Radio Watch said that the show, Pundit Review Radio, used to air on WBIX and he has a link to the creator's blog. BRW also hints that ESPN 890/1400 may wind up signing on during July 4th weekend. (http://www.bostonradiowatch.com ) From raccoonradio@gmail.com Sat May 21 03:20:09 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat May 21 03:20:03 2005 Subject: Reporter swears at O&A hecklers, gets fired In-Reply-To: <20050520214349.02E8EC610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20050520214349.02E8EC610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <1fbbbced050521002061f3beb6@mail.gmail.com> by the way if the name Arthur Chi'en sounds familiar, he used to work for WBZ-TV (Howie Carr mentioned it and I think I recall him working for CBS4) From raccoonradio@gmail.com Sat May 21 03:25:52 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat May 21 03:25:47 2005 Subject: oops, time slot error... Message-ID: <1fbbbced05052100254df6647@mail.gmail.com> Oops, the time slot for the show I mentioned (Pundit Review, replacing Newsweek on Air on WRKO) should be 9-10 pm not 8-9 pm. From raccoonradio@myway.com Sat May 21 03:33:14 2005 From: raccoonradio@myway.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat May 21 03:33:13 2005 Subject: Reporter swears at O&A hecklers, gets fired Message-ID: <20050521073314.978C812D0D@mprdmxin.myway.com> oops, make that Fox 25! (yikes, my memory's got a black hole in it tonight) >>by the way if the name Arthur Chi'en sounds familiar, he used to work for WBZ-TV (Howie Carr mentioned it and I think I recall him working for CBS4) _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com From radiotony@comcast.net Sat May 21 07:45:58 2005 From: radiotony@comcast.net (radiotony) Date: Sat May 21 07:46:07 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night References: <1fbbbced05052100186f839a8e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001e01c55dfa$a9172280$6600a8c0@tony> While it is kinda neat to have a radio show about blogging, is it really a show about blogging or a show about conservative bloggers who beat up supposed liberals? Looking at Kevin's page, it seems like a whole bunch of blather about the liberal media conspiracy, something many of us know doesn't exist. As well, his blog guests listed for the first few shows are all conservative. Is there ever going to be balance? Can you really be a "pundit reviewer" and only bash liberals? And why is it that WRKO chose to put another conservative on the air? Was there no one who was down the middle who could have been hired or even a little left of center, since everything on WRKO is conservative? How about Dan Kennedy? While I am no fan of the "lamestream" media, as I said in a previous post, all this Newsweek stuff is a bunch of hooey. I know, it's futile and frustrating, but this is getting just a bit ridiculous. Well, alright, at least it is a local show and we can always hope that Kevin's show becomes a bit balanced. Best, Anthony Schinella News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region with thoughtful community radio http://www.wkxl1450.com http://politizine.blogspot.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Bob Nelson To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 3:18 AM Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night At the end of the Howie Carr show, Howie introduced his regular caller Kevin Whalen, aka "Kevin From Danvers". Kev will have the Sunday night pre-Drudge slot that had been Newsweek on Air (8-9 pm). I guess he's a blogger and will talk about the new media/blogosphere/views "not often heard", etc. He mentioned guests the first few weeks will include the Wall St. Journal's James Taranto and talk host Hugh Hewitt (isn't/wasn't he on WTTT 1150?) Boston Radio Watch said that the show, Pundit Review Radio, used to air on WBIX and he has a link to the creator's blog. BRW also hints that ESPN 890/1400 may wind up signing on during July 4th weekend. (http://www.bostonradiowatch.com ) From hykker@grolen.com Sat May 21 09:48:00 2005 From: hykker@grolen.com (SteveOrdinetz) Date: Sat May 21 09:47:00 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night In-Reply-To: <001e01c55dfa$a9172280$6600a8c0@tony> References: <1fbbbced05052100186f839a8e@mail.gmail.com> <001e01c55dfa$a9172280$6600a8c0@tony> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.0.20050521094544.01b20360@pop3.grolen.com> radiotony wrote: >While it is kinda neat to have a radio show about blogging, is it really a >show about blogging or a show about conservative bloggers who beat up >supposed liberals? One one hand I suppose turnabout is fair play...we hear so much about liberal/leftist blogs that I suppose we ought to give equal time. OTOH, how many listeners even know what blogs are or for that matter care? Niche programming just got even narrower. From miscon@miscon.net Sat May 21 09:54:06 2005 From: miscon@miscon.net (Mission Control) Date: Sat May 21 09:54:03 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night Message-ID: <200505210954.AA21561528@miscon.net> Isn't this just what Christopher Lydon is going to do on WGBH / WUML? He's already had 3 "dry-runs" that were internet-only (I'm sure someone can find the link, but frankly I can't be bothered). And regarding "Open Source" (Lydon) I can only think that a 1-hour daily show dedicated to "blogging" will end up either being a drag, or a pet-rock fad, unless he uses those tools to access those other "voices" on the topic-of-the-day (hmmm... a new "Connection?). Now a WEEKLY program on "blogging" (like a weekly program on, oh, lets say, CARS ala Car Talk) seems a lot more reasonable. btw, WUML will be airing "Open Source" at 9AM - yes, 9 in the morning - the following day. Mike From kc1ih@mac.com Sat May 21 12:15:07 2005 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sat May 21 12:15:09 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.0.20050521094544.01b20360@pop3.grolen.com> References: <1fbbbced05052100186f839a8e@mail.gmail.com> <001e01c55dfa$a9172280$6600a8c0@tony> <6.0.3.0.0.20050521094544.01b20360@pop3.grolen.com> Message-ID: At 9:48 AM -0400 5/21/05, SteveOrdinetz wrote: >radiotony wrote: >>While it is kinda neat to have a radio show about blogging, is it >>really a show about blogging or a show about conservative bloggers >>who beat up supposed liberals? > > >One one hand I suppose turnabout is fair play...we hear so much >about liberal/leftist blogs that I suppose we ought to give equal >time. OTOH, how many listeners even know what blogs are or for that >matter care? Niche programming just got even narrower. On the other hand, reaching even a smaller group is podcasting. That is when a show is packaged as a downloadable file, to be played later at the listener's convenience on a computer or an iPod or similar device. This is getting popular enough that Sirius is starting a show of sample podcasts, on Talk Central 148 weekdays from 6 to 10 PM, Boston time (see how I made that locally relevant!). -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From wollman@csail.mit.edu Sat May 21 14:35:48 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sat May 21 14:35:44 2005 Subject: DXing the Middle East In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> <428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net> <17038.386.973289.610410@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <02bd01c55dc6$8c0d0b20$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <17039.32644.259111.402232@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > On Sat, 21 May 2005, Joseph Pappalardo wrote: >> Unless it is Iraqi radio that you can pick up in Boston. ;-) > Wow! That's some good sky-wave then! 0.0 It's not out of the question. The guys on the North Shore and on the Cape regularly hear the 1521 from Saudi, so Iraqi radio, if they had any comparable facilities, would not be too surprising. -GAWollman From escapen@msn.com Sat May 21 12:40:54 2005 From: escapen@msn.com (Stephen Capen) Date: Sat May 21 14:45:15 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night References: <1fbbbced05052100186f839a8e@mail.gmail.com><001e01c55dfa$a9172280$6600a8c0@tony><6.0.3.0.0.20050521094544.01b20360@pop3.grolen.com> Message-ID: It wouldn't be a surprise to see an 'all-podcast' format in Boston in the near future. KYOU -- "Open Source Radio" -- in San Francisco, which as KYCY was carrying syndicated shows such as Imus, appears to have kicked off its format this past week. The station will rely on pro's such as Adam Curry but it appears the bulk of the programming will be culled from all the submissions to their Web site. The station is owned by Infinity, which has plenty of room to move in the Boston market, particularly after firing their air staff. ----- Original Message ----- From: Larry Weil To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 12:15 PM Subject: Re: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night On the other hand, reaching even a smaller group is podcasting. That is when a show is packaged as a downloadable file, to be played later at the listener's convenience on a computer or an iPod or similar device. This is getting popular enough that Sirius is starting a show of sample podcasts, on Talk Central 148 weekdays from 6 to 10 PM, Boston time (see how I made that locally relevant!). From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Sat May 21 14:43:51 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Sat May 21 14:49:18 2005 Subject: DXing the Middle East References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com><428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net><17038.386.973289.610410@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu><02bd01c55dc6$8c0d0b20$1404fea9@xyz> <17039.32644.259111.402232@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <001b01c55e35$a02cdee0$1404fea9@xyz> From: "Garrett Wollman" > It's not out of the question. The guys on the North Shore and on the > Cape regularly hear the 1521 from Saudi.... Regularly? Wow... I guess you would need to null out KB and WWZN. Anyone know what hours would be best (taking into account bothe here and there?) JP From wollman@csail.mit.edu Sat May 21 15:01:28 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sat May 21 15:01:22 2005 Subject: DXing the Middle East In-Reply-To: <001b01c55e35$a02cdee0$1404fea9@xyz> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050517125204.027ce8f0@pop.registeredsite.com> <428D0BB4.8020103@shoreham.net> <17038.386.973289.610410@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <02bd01c55dc6$8c0d0b20$1404fea9@xyz> <17039.32644.259111.402232@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <001b01c55e35$a02cdee0$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <17039.34184.892.421874@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Regularly? Wow... > I guess you would need to null out KB and WWZN. The guys who do this use a Beverage antenna, and frequently an external phasing box as well. From down on the Cape, 1510 would not be a problem (it's easily knocked down with a good filter and sufficiently off-axis anyway), and the Beverage has a high front-to-back ratio (it was designed specifically to provide a way to pull out signals in one direction while nulling the opposite direction). > Anyone know what hours would be best (taking into account bothe here and > there?) Winter around sunset is the best. I used to get Algiers on 891 on an ordinary receiver in Brighton until Dedham came on. -GAWollman From brian_vita@cssinc.com Sun May 22 09:25:34 2005 From: brian_vita@cssinc.com (Brian Vita) Date: Sun May 22 09:23:40 2005 Subject: Stuck in the Orbit of Satellite Radio Message-ID: <4290884E.2060805@cssinc.com> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1061496,00.html Excerpt: Tornadoes were touching down all over Iowa, but I wouldn't have guessed it from listening to satellite radio. Outside, boiling up on both sides of Interstate 80, black prairie thunderheads sizzled with greenish lightning. Inside my car the only sound was that of an E! Entertainment biography of celebrity rock-widow Courtney Love. I reached for the dial and turned to CNN, then Fox, then NPR. Here's an interesting, albiet flawed article on satellite radio by an alleged user. I take issue with the article in which he describes a cross country trip with all kinds of local radio. I think that he must have taken that trip 10 years ago... Brian Vita From chuckigo@maine.rr.com Sun May 22 10:31:34 2005 From: chuckigo@maine.rr.com (Chuck Igo) Date: Sun May 22 11:49:58 2005 Subject: How Long Will It Be Until.... Message-ID: <000001c55eda$f4d4dec0$0300a8c0@maine.rr.com> XM or Sirrius starts selling and airing advertising - you know, like :60 & :30 commercials? I only ask as while I was at a remote at a Chevy dealer yesterday, the focus was on parts & accessories, including XM Satellite Radio. Although I did not make reference to SatRad on the air, I had the following exchange with one of the dealership's reps... He: Isn't that great? He asked pointing the XM Display Me: No, it's not. He: Why? Me: Hmmmm... I'm here to tell people to come in and purchase stuff from you. Where on the XM Selector does Oldies 100.9 come up? He: (looking) hmmmmmm Me: Right. You got stuff to sell, and you will be losing a very large portion of your target market when they are all listening to commercial free, generic Satellite radio. So, when will it be that SatRads start airing or selling spots? And when will it be that those who purchased/invested into SatRad with equipment and subscription fees will be up in arms over the proliferation of commercials on your radio? Just wonderin' I noticed Brian almost made a similar point in regards to the tornado guy. In regards to Brian's point - 10 years ago, we didn't have EAS with automatic activation. (yes, we had EAS, just not at every station and flawlessly working) - - Chuck Igo From lglavin@lycos.com Sun May 22 13:20:25 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Sun May 22 13:20:24 2005 Subject: DXing the Middle East Message-ID: <20050522172025.834C7C610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Garrett Wollman" To: "Joseph Pappalardo" Subject: Re: DXing the Middle East Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 15:01:28 -0400 > > < said: > > > Regularly? Wow... > > > I guess you would need to null out KB and WWZN. > > The guys who do this use a Beverage antenna, and frequently an > external phasing box as well. From down on the Cape, 1510 would not > be a problem (it's easily knocked down with a good filter and > sufficiently off-axis anyway), and the Beverage has a high > front-to-back ratio (it was designed specifically to provide a way to > pull out signals in one direction while nulling the opposite > direction). > > > Anyone know what hours would be best (taking into account bothe here and > > there?) > > Winter around sunset is the best. I used to get Algiers on 891 on an > ordinary receiver in Brighton until Dedham came on. > > -GAWollman Does their crawl go from left to right? -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Sun May 22 13:28:27 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Sun May 22 13:28:26 2005 Subject: Stuck in the Orbit of Satellite Radio Message-ID: <20050522172828.01C56CA078@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Brian Vita" >To: BRI >Subject: Stuck in the Orbit of Satellite Radio >Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 09:25:34 -0400 > > http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1061496,00.html > > The one item in this artice that I found truly unbelievable: that in the year 2005 CE, a public school is actually feeding kids chicken-fried steak! -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Sun May 22 15:14:07 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Sun May 22 15:14:07 2005 Subject: Globe Op-ed On "Radio's New Wave" Message-ID: <20050522191407.E707ACA078@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> Today's (05/22) Boston Sunday Globe offers an op-ed article on changes in the radio landscape. Read it at: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/05/22/radios_new_wave/ -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From raccoonradio@myway.com Sun May 22 18:51:06 2005 From: raccoonradio@myway.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sun May 22 18:51:09 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night Message-ID: <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> I don't know if there's a liberal media conspiracy, but there's more than enough left-of-center views out there with news magazines, cable networks, broadcast networks, papers like the Globe; many college professors, Hollywood, etc. Authors like Laura Ingraham, Bernard Goldberg, and Brian Anderson have pointed out the rise of conservative talk radio and Net sites (book publishing, too) came as a reaction to the sound of one hand clapping. Imagine a country where only conservative newspapers, magazines, TV and radio stations, etc., exist. Pretty scary, eh, liberals? That's basically what has been going on in this country until recently, only it's been liberals who had close to a monopoly of opinion. Any liberals out there who can honestly say they'd cry if the Herald went out of business? They'd love to be the _only_ voice out there. Conservative talk radio caught on because it was an alternative to ABC/CBS/NBC/NY Times/Bos. Globe/CNN/PBS/MSNBC, etc. Liberal talk radio got a bit of a late start but soon it may rise to be as popular if not more so. If anything some networks like MSNBC have started to air views from the other side (Joe Scarborough, for example) because they discovered that maybe they can get high ratings by putting someone on from the right. Trying to be like Fox News. But getting back to the bloggers, sure, it would be nice if this new show covers the liberal bloggers too, and maybe they will. But if not, I'm sure such coverage will/may be found on Air America, NPR, etc. I was watching CNN and they had someone on pointing out what was being said on some blogs. Every single one she mentioned was a liberal blog (and she said they were liberal blogs, too). Thankfully there's Fox News to balance things out. _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com From rogerkola@aol.com Sun May 22 21:25:55 2005 From: rogerkola@aol.com (Roger Kolakowski) Date: Sun May 22 21:25:33 2005 Subject: Globe Op-ed On "Radio's New Wave" References: <20050522191407.E707ACA078@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <000a01c55f36$5e284fa0$0200a8c0@Tanguray> What a puff piece this was...let's see, the release of MANY LPFM LOCAL licenses, "faked" local contests (a stretch), internet radio (come and gone, unless you don't like music).... If the intent was to introduce pod-casting , then let it be so, but don't besmirch the truth... Roger WA1KAT ----- Original Message ----- From: "Laurence Glavin" To: Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 3:14 PM Subject: Globe Op-ed On "Radio's New Wave" > Today's (05/22) Boston Sunday Globe offers an op-ed article > on changes in the radio landscape. Read it at: > > http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/05/22/radios_new_wave/ > > > -- > _______________________________________________ > NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. > http://datingsearch.lycos.com > > > From scott@fybush.com Sun May 22 22:41:25 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun May 22 23:39:05 2005 Subject: DXing the Middle East In-Reply-To: <20050522172025.834C7C610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050522223940.02f13e08@gwind.pair.com> Laurence asked, referring to Middle Eastern broadcasters... >Does their crawl go from left to right? Based on the times I've seen one of the cable news channels (U.S.) running video from one of the Arabic news channels, no. THEIR crawl goes from right to left. OUR crawls go from left to right! s From scott@fybush.com Sun May 22 23:42:21 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun May 22 23:41:56 2005 Subject: DXing the Middle East In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050522223940.02f13e08@gwind.pair.com> References: <20050522172025.834C7C610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050522234156.02dd6de8@gwind.pair.com> At 10:41 PM 5/22/2005 -0400, Scott Fybush wrote: >Laurence asked, referring to Middle Eastern broadcasters... > >>Does their crawl go from left to right? > >Based on the times I've seen one of the cable news channels (U.S.) running >video from one of the Arabic news channels, no. THEIR crawl goes from >right to left. OUR crawls go from left to right! And upon further review, no, no, they don't. Reverse everything above and it actually makes sense... s From wollman@csail.mit.edu Mon May 23 00:07:52 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon May 23 00:07:51 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night In-Reply-To: <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> References: <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: <17041.22296.677253.4748@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Any liberals out there who can honestly say they'd cry if the Herald > went out of business? As a liberal who grew up in a one-newspaper town, damn right I would! I may not read the Herald, or the Glob for that matter, but I know what it's like to live in a place where the print media does no more than it has to. [Not replying to the rest of your screed as it would be even more off-topic for this list.] -GAWollman From radiotony@comcast.net Mon May 23 00:10:48 2005 From: radiotony@comcast.net (radiotony) Date: Mon May 23 00:10:53 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night References: <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> <17041.22296.677253.4748@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> I agree. I'm liberal on some issues; conservative on other issues. I worked for the Herald's CNC unit. I really enjoyed the paper although I didn't always agree with the editorial page. I would never want Boston to become a one paper town. But, I do believe there should be balance and access and that isn't happening in radio. Best, Anthony Schinella News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region with thoughtful community radio http://www.wkxl1450.com http://politizine.blogspot.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Garrett Wollman To: raccoonradio@myway.com Cc: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 12:07 AM Subject: Re: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night < said: > Any liberals out there who can honestly say they'd cry if the Herald > went out of business? As a liberal who grew up in a one-newspaper town, damn right I would! I may not read the Herald, or the Glob for that matter, but I know what it's like to live in a place where the print media does no more than it has to. [Not replying to the rest of your screed as it would be even more off-topic for this list.] -GAWollman From wollman@csail.mit.edu Mon May 23 00:36:10 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon May 23 00:36:11 2005 Subject: June Dinner Details Message-ID: <17041.23994.972861.442857@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> It's time for another of our irregular series of Boston-Radio-Interest/NERW gatherings. This time we thought we've give people some advance warning of when and where, so we hope a good number of people will plan on being there. Your humble moderator is organizing the dinner, and we expect at least one person named Fybush to be in attendance as well. (Free autographs if you bring your calendars!) If you're reading this message (and the date hasn't yet passed), you're invited. Pleaes pass the word on to anyone else you know who's into radio or TV and might like to attend (fans, talent, engineers, and even salesweasels invited!). The dinner will take place at 7 PM on Wednesday, June 8, at Firefly's BBQ in Framingham. If you'd like to attend, please RSVP by Wednesday, June 1, at . For a menu, see . Directions: >From Mass. Pike (I-90): from either direction, take exit 13 (Natick). Stay right on ramp (ignore the signs that say "Fast Lane keep left" if you have Fast Lane or E-ZPass) and bear right after tolls. About a mile down the road turn right onto SR 126 North. Bear right at first light onto Old Connecticut Path; then turn hard right at the next light into the Stop & Shop. Firefly's is on the far right end of the supermarket building. >From SR 9: take the exit for SR 126 North. Go straight across SR 30 and follow the directions above. From blaine@well.com Mon May 23 01:27:52 2005 From: blaine@well.com (Blaine Thompson) Date: Mon May 23 11:30:47 2005 Subject: DXing the Middle East In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050522234156.02dd6de8@gwind.pair.com> References: <20050522172025.834C7C610F@ws7-5.us4.outblaze.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20050522234156.02dd6de8@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 22 May 2005, Scott Fybush wrote: > >video from one of the Arabic news channels, no. THEIR crawl goes from > >right to left. OUR crawls go from left to right! > > And upon further review, no, no, they don't. Reverse everything above and > it actually makes sense... Scott had it confused in terms of the way we read the TV screen :-) I'm not the expert here, but I do believe written Arabic is read right-to-left. Don't ask how I know this...it's nothing personal, but it's off-topic for me to explain :-) Blaine Thompson not in Boston and haven't visited since 1996 Fort Wayne, Indiana From bridgeofdeath@gmail.com Sat May 21 16:25:46 2005 From: bridgeofdeath@gmail.com (s s) Date: Mon May 23 11:31:04 2005 Subject: Bill Moyers' Speech on C-Span Saturday Morning Message-ID: <63d9284505052113254a7978ba@mail.gmail.com> this is available here: http://www.c-span.org/search/basic.asp?ResultStart=1&ResultCount=10&BasicQueryText=bill+moyers From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon May 23 11:34:48 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon May 23 11:34:41 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night In-Reply-To: <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> References: <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> <17041.22296.677253.4748@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> Message-ID: <1fbbbced0505230834cd1336c@mail.gmail.com> Well yes, there should be balance and liberal talkers are trying that with prog. talk/Air America. There have been efforts in the past (Mario Cuomo, Jim Hightower) but somehow they didn't click. The interesting thing is that few stations would want to cherrypick between conservative- and liberal-leaning hosts. They feel their core audience would tune out if, at 3 pm, Rush gave way to Al Franken. Or if Michael Savage were to follow Ed Schulz. Sometimes conservative talk stations have switched to AAR--the Entercom property in Rochester, NY; WHJJ in Providence, and WKVT in Brattleboro come to mind. I don't know how the first and third stations I mentioned are doing in the ratings, but WHJJ went lower and then lower. WPRO picked up listeners. As I've said before, if the Air America programs are good, why hasn't a station like WTKK or WRKO considered changing? What would happen to 'RKO if they aired Franken instead of Rush? I'd think the ratings would go down. (Maybe if they had a local show with a liberal host, and it were well done...Who knows.) It has been said that libtalk hasn't done better for various reasons--signal strength (yet I still maintain that 1200 and 1430 do very well within Rt 128 and now we have the sun till 8 pm...), or the fact that there's already a lot of liberal media out there and perhaps AAR can only pick up a small piece of the pie. Maybe they should go more "moderate" and pick up more listeners who are conservative on some issues, liberal on others, etc. If conservatives tune in to Air America and all they hear is Bush bashing, they may just chuckle and go back to their regular station. Certainly the same atmosphere was present in the 90s when Clinton-bashing rules conservatalk, and liberals felt underserved by talk radio. But they always had CNN, CBS, ABC, NPR, the Globe, etc Liberal media bias came up last night on the new blog-centered WRKO show, "Pundit Review". It was suggested that we make a distinct difference between _news_ and _opinion_. For example, someone mentioned Fox News' "Fair and Balanced" motto, "Maybe that refers to their news coverage, but Bill O'Reilly is an opinion show which is different". It was pointed out that some panel discussions on Fox News had people from both the left (Mara Liason, Juan Williams) and right (Bill Kristol, etc.) It has also been said (by Laura Ingraham, I believe) that "Fox News puts on more liberals than CNN puts on conservatives". Whatever, Fox News survived and thrived because it served to balance to left-leaning channels like CNN. There was an audience out there, and FNC grabbed it. Anyway, yes, talk radio could use more liberal shows but let them be entertaining and informative to both sides. Other than Stephanie Miller I didn't find much of interest to me on AAR. But who knows--from small acorns, mighty oaks grow. The likes of Limbaugh took a little while to get a big following,and perhaps "progressive talk" shows/stations may eventually get the same following as Rush (14 million listeners) and Hannity (13 million). Last I heard,, Franken hadn't broken the 1 million mark yet but fewer stations, weaker signals, etc. One thing's for sure: I would not want government-enforced "Fairness Doctrine" radio. It would actually backfire. While some might think "OK, you'll have stations running some conservative hosts and then equal time for liberals", it may also result in stations opting not to do controversial topics. They'd have to give equal time to liberal hosts who may not offer great ratings. So Rush would be replaced with Gardening Talk :) From ssmyth@psu.edu Mon May 23 10:59:21 2005 From: ssmyth@psu.edu (Sean Smyth) Date: Mon May 23 11:44:03 2005 Subject: June Dinner Details Message-ID: <200505231459.j4NExLF23152@webmail13.cac.psu.edu> On Mon, 23 May 2005 00:36:10 +0000, Garrett Wollman wrote: > The dinner will take place at 7 PM on Wednesday, June 8, at Firefly's > BBQ in Framingham. If you'd like to attend, please RSVP by Wednesday, > June 1, at . For a menu, see > . Great choice! I encourage everyone to order their Red Velvet cake -- that is, if your stomachs aren't full from their wonderful BBQ... From tmw207@adelphia.net Mon May 23 11:35:11 2005 From: tmw207@adelphia.net (terry) Date: Mon May 23 11:47:56 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night References: <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: <001d01c55fad$025b0e70$e17d3518@family> I can remember when we got variuos opinions on most of the radio stations in Boston and NE. We got what conservatives called liberal radio from WMEX (Jerry Williams) We got what liberals called conservative radio on WEEI. Now all we get is conservative on the major stations. Up here in Maine we do get the otherside on 870 am WLVP. But mostly the same tired hate the liberal talk from most every station on the dial. Liberal talk in Boston went down the drain when BZ fired Jerry Williams. It never returned. Jerry had to change his stripes to get a gig on Boston Radio. Terry From dlh@donnahalper.com Mon May 23 13:13:37 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Mon May 23 13:13:57 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night In-Reply-To: <1fbbbced0505230834cd1336c@mail.gmail.com> References: <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> <17041.22296.677253.4748@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050523130647.028626c0@pop.registeredsite.com> Bob wrote-- >The interesting thing is >that few stations would want to cherrypick between conservative- and >liberal-leaning hosts. They feel their core audience would tune out >if, >at 3 pm, Rush gave way to Al Franken. Or if Michael Savage were to follow >Ed Schulz. But that is exactly what WHMP in Northampton has been doing. It airs Bill O'Reilly till 3pm and then airs a delayed version of the Al Franken Show. It has some conservative shows and some liberal ones. At first, I thought it sounded odd to do it that way -- kind of like a "train wreck" on a music station (playing two songs from entirely opposite and contradictory genres back to back), but in a small community with no other access to Air America programming, I guess they figured a couple of 'liberal' shows (they also air Alan Colmes late at night) were preferable to having no such shows at all. Also, as Ed Schultz has acknowledged on the air, some stations only carry his show as a Best-Of on the weekend, airing only conservative talk the rest of the time. SO, evidently a few stations that have all conservatives are experimenting with offering the other side, but aren't sure how much to broadcast. I still say that for a democracy to work, citizens need to be informed, and like them or not, the new liberal/progressive shows offer a much needed balance to the mostly right-wing direction of radio talk. From kc1ih@mac.com Mon May 23 13:48:09 2005 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon May 23 13:48:05 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050523130647.028626c0@pop.registeredsite.com> References: <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> <17041.22296.677253.4748@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> <5.1.0.14.2.20050523130647.028626c0@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: At 1:13 PM -0400 5/23/05, Donna Halper wrote: > I still say that for a democracy to work, citizens need to be >informed, and like them or not, the new liberal/progressive shows >offer a much needed balance to the mostly right-wing direction of >radio talk. And I say, that to be informed, people need to listen to real news programs (not just headlines) before listening to the pundits with their agendas. Having the facts first helps one to sort through what is really fact, and what is changed or selectively edited to fit a particular opinion. -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From dan.strassberg@att.net Mon May 23 15:51:42 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Mon May 23 15:51:54 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night References: <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony><20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com><17041.22296.677253.4748@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu><006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony><5.1.0.14.2.20050523130647.028626c0@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <005001c55fd0$de7d0a20$19eefea9@dstrassberg> And where, exactly, do you get real news on the radio any longer? NPR is bending over backards to be "unbiased" (Read: Keep Ken Tomlinson from wiping them out). When WBZ isn't airing Bush propaganda, they are censoring out all items that don't support the Bush agenda. For mostly rip-and-read news, Air America's TOH 'casts are not bad, and Rachel Madow's 5:00 AM to 6:00 AM show is often pretty good, though she is sometimes too far left for me! I guess that leaves the BBC, which puts me to sleep, and Pacifica, which we can't get in Boston (at least not over the air), so I don't even know what Pacifica's news (if there is such) is like. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Weil" To: Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 1:48 PM Subject: Re: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night > At 1:13 PM -0400 5/23/05, Donna Halper wrote: > > I still say that for a democracy to work, citizens need to be > >informed, and like them or not, the new liberal/progressive shows > >offer a much needed balance to the mostly right-wing direction of > >radio talk. > > And I say, that to be informed, people need to listen to real news > programs (not just headlines) before listening to the pundits with > their agendas. Having the facts first helps one to sort through what > is really fact, and what is changed or selectively edited to fit a > particular opinion. > > -- > Larry Weil > Lake Wobegone, NH From wollman@csail.mit.edu Mon May 23 16:07:50 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon May 23 16:07:45 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night In-Reply-To: <005001c55fd0$de7d0a20$19eefea9@dstrassberg> References: <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> <17041.22296.677253.4748@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <5.1.0.14.2.20050523130647.028626c0@pop.registeredsite.com> <005001c55fd0$de7d0a20$19eefea9@dstrassberg> Message-ID: <17042.14358.785065.731930@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > that leaves the BBC, which puts me to sleep, and Pacifica, which we can't > get in Boston (at least not over the air), so I don't even know what > Pacifica's news (if there is such) is like. One Pacifica newscast was running daily on WMBR; it appears now to be a part of "WMBR Nightly News" at 5:30. -GAWollman From kc1ih@mac.com Mon May 23 20:02:38 2005 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon May 23 20:02:35 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night In-Reply-To: <005001c55fd0$de7d0a20$19eefea9@dstrassberg> References: <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> <17041.22296.677253.4748@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> <006a01c55f4d$66da9a10$6600a8c0@tony> <5.1.0.14.2.20050523130647.028626c0@pop.registeredsite.com> <005001c55fd0$de7d0a20$19eefea9@dstrassberg> Message-ID: At 3:51 PM -0400 5/23/05, Dan Strassberg wrote: >And where, exactly, do you get real news on the radio any longer? NPR is >bending over backards to be "unbiased" (Read: Keep Ken Tomlinson from wiping >them out). When WBZ isn't airing Bush propaganda, they are censoring out all >items that don't support the Bush agenda. For mostly rip-and-read news, Air >America's TOH 'casts are not bad, and Rachel Madow's 5:00 AM to 6:00 AM show >is often pretty good, though she is sometimes too far left for me! I guess >that leaves the BBC, which puts me to sleep, and Pacifica, which we can't >get in Boston (at least not over the air), so I don't even know what >Pacifica's news (if there is such) is like. Yea, I never said it was easy. The 6:30 network newscasts on TV are sometimes not bad, but they too are often selectively edited to avoid offending the administration, because the network reporters fear losing access. As for Pacifica, I thought their program "Democracy Now" was on WMBR and WBRS. Sometimes I catch the TV version of the program on the Worldlink channel on DirecTV. But, I wouldn't call them objective either, their reporting is definitely to the left of left. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Larry Weil" >To: >Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 1:48 PM >Subject: Re: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night > > > And I say, that to be informed, people need to listen to real news >> programs (not just headlines) before listening to the pundits with >> their agendas. Having the facts first helps one to sort through what >> is really fact, and what is changed or selectively edited to fit a >> particular opinion. >> >> -- >> Larry Weil >> Lake Wobegone, NH -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From billo@shoreham.net Sun May 22 12:16:53 2005 From: billo@shoreham.net (Bill O'Neill) Date: Mon May 23 20:46:51 2005 Subject: How Long Will It Be Until.... In-Reply-To: <000001c55eda$f4d4dec0$0300a8c0@maine.rr.com> References: <000001c55eda$f4d4dec0$0300a8c0@maine.rr.com> Message-ID: <4290B075.2090302@shoreham.net> Chuck Igo wrote: >Where on the XM Selector does Oldies 100.9 come up? >He: (looking) hmmmmmm > > Base hit! >And when will it be that those who purchased/invested into SatRad with >equipment and subscription fees will be up in arms over the >proliferation of commercials on your radio? > And they said it would never happen to cable, either. Then there was "Basic Cable" and then "Pay Channels." American Movie Classics (AMC) morphed from a spot-less to a commercial click on the dial. The money that nationals will be able to wave in the SatRad's direction will be overwhelming. Bill O' -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.15 - Release Date: 5/22/2005 From radiotony@comcast.net Mon May 23 21:11:28 2005 From: radiotony@comcast.net (radiotony) Date: Mon May 23 21:11:35 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night References: <20050522225106.2C69339A1@mprdmxin.myway.com> <001d01c55fad$025b0e70$e17d3518@family> Message-ID: <01f901c55ffd$844842e0$6600a8c0@tony> And even when we got Jerry Williams it was a mix of views. Sometimes, when "the govenors" were on, we got conversative views like Barbara Anderson wanting more libertarianism and Howie Carr going after hacks. But, we also got folks like Ralph Nader and Jerry Brown on The Dean's show too, showing us different points of view. That was the classic talk show. Today, it seems like it is overwhelmingly conservative with some of those conservatives out-and-out lying about "facts" and "figures." But, they aren't the only ones. I've read a bunch of books on media - from Bernie Goldberg's book "Bias," to Joe Conason's book "The Big Lie." Both made excellent points and then ridiculous points. I agree with Goldberg's points about the Washington, D.C. cocktail crowd being liberal on social issues and pushing that agenda in their news coverage. But when he starts going on about certain newscasters being "liberal" when we all know that someone else writes what is on the TelePrompTer and when he ignores the corporatization of the media which keeps many "liberal" stories about the state of working America, unions, etc., off the air, there is a problem. Conason makes some great points about the rightwing echo chamber regurgitated a bunch of bogus statistics to make their point but to ignore the fact that Bill Clinton got what he deserved for lying under oath costs him cred. Best, Anthony Schinella News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region with thoughtful community radio http://www.wkxl1450.com http://politizine.blogspot.com ----- Original Message ----- From: terry To: raccoonradio@myway.com ; radiotony@comcast.net ; boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 11:35 AM Subject: Re: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night I can remember when we got variuos opinions on most of the radio stations in Boston and NE. We got what conservatives called liberal radio from WMEX (Jerry Williams) We got what liberals called conservative radio on WEEI. Now all we get is conservative on the major stations. Up here in Maine we do get the otherside on 870 am WLVP. But mostly the same tired hate the liberal talk from most every station on the dial. Liberal talk in Boston went down the drain when BZ fired Jerry Williams. It never returned. Jerry had to change his stripes to get a gig on Boston Radio. Terry From raccoonradio@gmail.com Tue May 24 12:33:49 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Tue May 24 12:33:46 2005 Subject: Red Sox on WPEP? Message-ID: <1fbbbced0505240933472d8dde@mail.gmail.com> As I drove back from Cape Cod on Sunday afternoon I was tuning through the dial and heard the Red Sox on WPEP (and it _was_ them; "your new home for the Red Sox, 1570, WPEP". Oddly enough, no mention of them on Red Sox Radio network page at weei.com, and no mention of Sox being carried on the WPEP website other than "WPEP is News, Weather, Sports for Taunton". Isn't that kind of infringing on the territory of WPRO? (WPEP may go dark soon as part of the CP for WNSH going to 50kW.) From elipolo@earthlink.net Tue May 24 13:01:55 2005 From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky) Date: Tue May 24 12:57:45 2005 Subject: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night Message-ID: > From: Garrett Wollman > Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 16:07:50 -0400 > Subject: Re: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night > > One Pacifica newscast was running daily on WMBR; it appears > now to be a part of "WMBR Nightly News" at 5:30. That's Pacifica's "Free Speech Radio News". Garrett is correct, it airs on the "WMBR Nightly News", weekdays 5:30 - 6:00 PM. > From: Larry Weil > Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 20:02:38 -0400 > Subject: Re: 'RKO launches blogger's show on Sun night > As for Pacifica, I thought their program "Democracy Now" was > on WMBR and WBRS. It no longer is. It's now on WZBC 90.3 weekdays 12 noon - 1 PM. Eli Polonsky From saz1@comcast.net Tue May 24 15:56:27 2005 From: saz1@comcast.net (Ceasar Braga Jr) Date: Tue May 24 15:56:36 2005 Subject: re.Red Sox on WPEP Message-ID: <000701c5609a$accec7f0$198b6041@homec8vofwtxvb> WPRO'S night directional pattern does not cover Taunton very well. From scott@fybush.com Tue May 24 16:01:26 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Tue May 24 16:00:55 2005 Subject: re.Red Sox on WPEP In-Reply-To: <000701c5609a$accec7f0$198b6041@homec8vofwtxvb> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050524160103.032671b8@gwind.pair.com> At 03:56 PM 5/24/2005 -0400, Ceasar Braga Jr wrote: >WPRO'S night directional pattern does not cover Taunton very well. Nor WEEI's, for that matter. Guess WPEP makes a nice little fill-in for however much longer it lasts... s From jjlehmann@comcast.net Tue May 24 16:13:15 2005 From: jjlehmann@comcast.net (Jeff Lehmann) Date: Tue May 24 16:12:57 2005 Subject: re.Red Sox on WPEP In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050524160103.032671b8@gwind.pair.com> Message-ID: <200505242012.j4OKCtAi033216@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> WPEP started carrying the Sox games last season. It does do a good job at filling the hole in WPRO and WEEI's signals in Taunton. I'm not sure why it's not on WEEI's list of affiliates, but there are some other errors on that list, such as WXLM in New London being on 104.7 FM instead of 102.3. Jeff Lehmann Hanson, MA >-----Original Message----- >From: boston-radio-interest-bounces@rolinin.BostonRadio.org [mailto:boston- >radio-interest-bounces@rolinin.BostonRadio.org] On Behalf Of Scott Fybush >Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 4:01 PM >To: Ceasar Braga Jr; boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Re: re.Red Sox on WPEP > >At 03:56 PM 5/24/2005 -0400, Ceasar Braga Jr wrote: >>WPRO'S night directional pattern does not cover Taunton very well. > >Nor WEEI's, for that matter. Guess WPEP makes a nice little fill-in for >however much longer it lasts... > >s From dlh@donnahalper.com Fri May 27 04:29:41 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Fri May 27 04:30:06 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> Radio Business Report notes big gains for the Michael Savage show: "Talk Radio Network's The Michael Savage Show showed strong ratings in the Winter Book.... At WOR-AM NY, Savage leads the station with a 3.5 share 12+ in "The Big Apple" and a 2.2 share 25/54, 3.2 share 35/64 demo's. At KRLA-AM LA, Savage saw significant Winter rating increases, 60% in 25/54, 38% in 35/64, and 33% in the 12+ demo. In Boston at WRKO Savage's Winter 12+ demo increased 28% to a 5.5 share, the 25/54 demo was up 59% to a 4.3 share and the 35/64 demo was up 50% to a 6.0 share. KDWN-AM Las Vegas saw Savage up 70% in 12+ to a 4.6 share, up 167% in 25/54 to a 5.6 share, and up 192% in 35/64 to a 7.6 share. WHAM-AM Rochester, NY scored a very hefty 19 share 35/64 and an equally impressive 15 share 25/54." My question is not so much about whether any of you agree or disagree with Michael Savage. It's more about radio programming, and airing a show that features what, in my opinion, are some rather hateful rants. Savage is certainly the most controversial of all the right wing talk hosts, which in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing-- controversy can attract listeners. But what worries me is that he says some of the most bigoted things I have ever heard. So what is the reason why his show seems to be growing in popularity, and what does that say about what the public wants? From markwats@comcast.net Fri May 27 05:09:27 2005 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Fri May 27 05:09:29 2005 Subject: Changes In WCAP Newsroom Message-ID: <002201c5629b$ca165000$6f918318@Mark> WCAP (980 Lowell) news director Lou Wannemacher is retiring on Sat. May 28 after over 6 years at the station. Hartley Pleshaw will take over news duties on Monday May 30. Pleshaw was a reporter on WLLH several years ago. Mark Watson From Jibguy@aol.com Fri May 27 05:55:05 2005 From: Jibguy@aol.com (Jibguy@aol.com) Date: Fri May 27 05:55:08 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? Message-ID: <13d.14158c5a.2fc84879@aol.com> In a message dated 5/27/2005 4:31:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, dlh@donnahalper.com writes: Radio Business Report notes big gains for the Michael Savage show: ----------------------------------------------- Is it possible that opposites attract? Massachusetts, largely liberal, listens to Rush,Carr & Savage, and ignores left-leaning shows. - In other large cities/markets where they're likely to be left-leaning, same thing happens. (The bad rankings of WKOXKS cannot be JUST because of the signal). That's the optimistic view. Hope its true. ----jibguy From dlh@donnahalper.com Fri May 27 12:15:29 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Fri May 27 12:15:53 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <42972713.2020404@cssinc.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527121311.0250f010@pop.registeredsite.com> >Brian wrote-- >It is interesting that when a right leaning talk show host expresses >strong opinions its a "hateful rant" but if you change the polarity of the >opinion while keeping it as strong (ie. Al Franken or Jeannine Garoffalo) >its enlightened conversation. You missed my point, as I feared you would. This is not about Air America/good or Michael Savage/bad. It's about an article I just read that says Savage's ratings went way up while other more 'moderate' talkers seem to have levelled off. I wasn't asking about Savage and saying everyone on the left is marvellous. But you did sort of prove my point about how polarised political conversations have become everywhere, including on radio. From billo@shoreham.net Fri May 27 13:07:49 2005 From: billo@shoreham.net (Bill O'Neill) Date: Fri May 27 13:07:52 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <429753E5.8020102@shoreham.net> Donna Halper wrote: > So what is the reason why his show seems to be growing in popularity, > and what does that say about what the public wants? > I think it's about anger. There is a lot of anger out there in radio-land, frustration, hopelessness, the potential for malaise, among a lot of people of all leanings. Savage's right wing views are less of a factor than that of his demeanor. Also, he's aurally noticeable amongst the din of talk sounds. I am not talking content on this point - it's his 'caricature of himself' presentation and his bloviating stylings. How the meters move, noises the taxi cab speakers make when he's on, etc. Also, even his name, Savage, evokes something deep from within. As for growth curve in numbers, he is probably the guy people have actually listened to but never admitted it until now, now that his novelty may be waning. That leads to the next stage - it's possible that the show is reaching critical mass-appeal and will have new challenges to face as a result. Bill O'Neill -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.17 - Release Date: 5/25/2005 From elipolo@earthlink.net Fri May 27 13:33:05 2005 From: elipolo@earthlink.net (Eli Polonsky) Date: Fri May 27 13:29:04 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? Message-ID: > From: Jibguy@aol.com > CC: > To: dlh@donnahalper.com, boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org > Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 05:55:05 EDT > Subject: Re: could someone explain this to me? > > In a message dated 5/27/2005 4:31:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, > dlh@donnahalper.com writes: > Radio Business Report notes big gains for the Michael Savage show: > ----------------------------------------------- > > Is it possible that opposites attract? Massachusetts, largely liberal, > listens to Rush,Carr & Savage, and ignores left-leaning shows. - In other > large cities/markets where they're likely to be left-leaning, same thing > happens. > (The bad rankings of WKOXKS cannot be JUST because of the signal). > > That's the optimistic view. Hope its true. > > ----jibguy You're not factoring WBUR's excellent ratings into the local equation. E.P. From stevewest106@hotmail.com Fri May 27 16:08:17 2005 From: stevewest106@hotmail.com (Steve West) Date: Fri May 27 16:08:16 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: >My question is not so much about whether any of you agree or disagree with >Michael Savage. It's more about radio programming, and airing a show that >features what, in my opinion, are some rather hateful rants. Savage is >certainly the most controversial of all the right wing talk hosts, which in >and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing-- controversy can attract >listeners. But what worries me is that he says some of the most bigoted >things I have ever heard. But Donna, just about all speech is supposed to be protected under the Constitution. If the Leftists on AAR can air a skit featuring someone shooting President Bush (one thing that really IS illegal speech), why can't Savage spew some of his more hateful ramblings? Can't have one thing without allowing another, unless we wish to ban all speech. >So what is the reason why his show seems to be growing in popularity, and >what does that say about what the public wants? > Well, Please take my commetns in-context. You do bring up a very good point, which is proven, by the way... that Americans are polarized more than at any time in our past, and that there doesn't seem to be any room for a fair and balanced discussion in talk radio, but I'd argue that one can, if he/she uses facts and a respectful tone, get a fair shake on most of the conservative talk shows. Certainly not Howie Carr or Michael Savage, but most others including and especially Sean Hannity would hear them out. Aaaah, David Brudnoy is missed more each and every day. There was a man who would engage in a civil discussion with both sides... Al Franken, Randi Rhodes and others on AAR certainly are talented individuals, however, they have a problem... they are all negative, 24/7. There is NEVER, under any circumstances even one fair or kind word ever spoken about even one small issue or person connected with Conservatives. The unabashed hatred and contempt for President Bush, Christians, 2nd amendment advocates, pro-lifers and all things Republican wears people out. Even those of us who don't care for the president's policies and who do think we went to war with the wrong country are sickened by this continual bash-fest. I don't know about you guys... but I can't listen more than 5 minutes without wanting to scream. I'm no big lover of the G.O.P., but I am patriotic and take offense to most of Franken, et al's agenda. It occurs to me that 'what the public wants' changes quite often. Look at the ratings - sheesh, what a fickle audience, where today's hot radio format is outdated in little more than a year. How about ol' Doug Tracht, aka "The Greaseman". He had decent ratings till just ONE bad utterance. Bye Bye, he's not even on anyone's radar anymore (was he ever on in Boston?). I think people have a sense of humor and a tolerance for the absurd, such as some of Savage's ramblings. It's when they go too far that people quit listening and ratings drop. Apparently, on a nation-wide basis, Savage knows, or thinks he knows he can say things that boarder on racism and get away with it up to a point. Frankly, I'm amazed he's still on the air. From lglavin@lycos.com Fri May 27 17:20:40 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Fri May 27 17:20:39 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? Message-ID: <20050527212040.3C135E5BC7@ws7-2.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Steve West" >To: dlh@donnahalper.com, boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: RE: could someone explain this to me? >Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:08:17 -0500 > > > > But Donna, just about all speech is supposed to be protected under > the Constitution. If the Leftists on AAR can air a skit featuring > someone shooting President Bush (one thing that really IS illegal > speech), why can't Savage spew some of his more hateful ramblings? > Can't have one thing without allowing another, unless we wish to > ban all speech. > > > > You do bring up a very good point, which is proven, by the way... > that Americans are polarized more than at any time in our past, and > that there doesn't seem to be any room for a fair and balanced > discussion in talk radio, but I'd argue that one can, if he/she > > > Al Franken, Randi Rhodes and others on AAR certainly are talented > individuals, however, they have a problem... they are all negative, > 24/7. There is NEVER, under any circumstances even one fair or > kind word ever spoken about even one small issue or person > connected with Conservatives. The unabashed hatred and contempt > for President Bush, Christians, 2nd amendment advocates, pro-lifers > and all things Republican wears people out. Even those of us who > don't care for the president's policies and who do think we went to > war with the wrong country are sickened by this continual > bash-fest. I don't know about you guys... but I can't listen more > than 5 minutes without wanting to scream. I'm no big lover of the > G.O.P., but I am patriotic and take offense to most of Franken, et > al's agenda. > Wrong about the Franken show...he FREQUENTLY has guests from the right on and treats them as fairly as if he himself were of the same persuasion. (I glean this from the Saturday "Best of..." shows.) One example: an author whose name I can't recall who recently compared the political scene to the Comedy Central show "South Park". The colloquy was very reasonable and mutually respectful. Another example: recently right-leaning columnist William Safire retired from the New York Times, a paper that otherwise features leftist scribes. Al Franken did a segment in which he urged the NYT to replace him with a similarly Conservative pundit. By the way, the equally august Wall Street Journal did the opposite...when Al Hunt, their token liberal op-ed writer left, the WSJ replaced him with a rotating list of writers who are simpatico with their editoral bent. -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From lglavin@lycos.com Fri May 27 17:23:01 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Fri May 27 17:22:59 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? Message-ID: <20050527212301.A5BA0E5BC7@ws7-2.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: Jibguy@aol.com >To: dlh@donnahalper.com, boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: Re: could someone explain this to me? >Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 05:55:05 EDT > > (The bad rankings of WKOXKS cannot be JUST because of the signal). > > That's the optimistic view. Hope its true. > > ----jibguy What "rankings"...the dual-cast did nada and did not appear in the top twenty at all. (Something that cannot be said of WJIB.) -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From dlh@donnahalper.com Fri May 27 18:31:52 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Fri May 27 18:32:12 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527182926.026c1c08@pop.registeredsite.com> >Steve wrote-- >But Donna, just about all speech is supposed to be protected under the >Constitution. If the Leftists on AAR can air a skit featuring someone >shooting President Bush (one thing that really IS illegal speech), Umm, that's what happens when you get your news from Matt Drudge-- the skit was NOT about shooting president Bush. It was about gun control. He wrote on his site that Randi Rhodes said Bush should be shot, which she didn't say, but in our tabloid culture, that was enough to get all of the right wing media off on a rant over something didn't happen. Now, that having been said, I have absolutely heard some rants on Air America and on Democracy Radio. But let's not blame Randi for something she didn't do. From dlh@donnahalper.com Fri May 27 18:34:12 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Fri May 27 18:34:33 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527183217.02810c98@pop.registeredsite.com> >Steve also wrote-- >Al Franken, Randi Rhodes and others on AAR certainly are talented >individuals, however, they have a problem... they are all negative, 24/7. Umm, and Rush, Michael, and others from the right are soooo positive? Nah. Negativity and outrage are a talk show host's biggest verbal devices. AAR is no more negative than the folks on the right. But because you, Steve, often agree with the folks on the right, you don't regard their negativity as something bad. Just a theory. From dlh@donnahalper.com Fri May 27 18:46:21 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Fri May 27 18:46:42 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527184422.026b2900@pop.registeredsite.com> >Steve also wrote-- >The unabashed hatred and contempt for President Bush, Christians, 2nd >amendment advocates, pro-lifers and all things Republican wears people out. I don't know what you have been listening to, but I listen to Al Franken and Ed Schultz. I have never heard either one insult Christianity. In fact, both have had ministers on their shows, and both try to expose the audience to a variety of views. But yes, a lot of people who are from the left and from a moderate viewpoint feel that the ultra-right wing has hijacked the Republican party and are now trying to impose their own views on the rest of us. So, we are not supposed to comment about that? From lawyer@attorneyross.com Fri May 27 23:38:43 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Fri May 27 23:38:20 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> On 27 May 2005 at 15:08, Steve West wrote: > Al Franken, Randi Rhodes and others on AAR certainly are talented > individuals, however, they have a problem... they are all negative, > 24/7. There is NEVER, under any circumstances even one fair or kind > word ever spoken about even one small issue or person connected with > Conservatives. Obviously you haven't been listening. I haven't listened to Randi Rhodes very much, but I have listened to Al Franken, and he's not always negative at all. In fact, not to long ago, he did a joint hour with G. Gordon Liddy. > The unabashed hatred and contempt for President Bush, > Christians, 2nd amendment advocates, pro-lifers and all things > Republican wears people out. Why should it wear people out any more than the unabashed hatred and contempt for Clinton, liberals, and all things Democrat that we hear from the far right? > but I can't listen more than 5 minutes without wanting to > scream. I'm no big lover of the G.O.P., but I am patriotic and take > offense to most of Franken, et al's agenda. I suggest that you haven't listened for even that long if you find Al Franken unpatriotic. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Sat May 28 01:07:14 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Sat May 28 01:12:28 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> Message-ID: <00b801c56343$a2b42200$1404fea9@xyz> > Why should it wear people out any more than the unabashed hatred and contempt for > Clinton, liberals, and all things Democrat that we hear from the far right? Ummmm....because Clinton was deserved it? ;-) JP From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Sat May 28 01:29:27 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Sat May 28 01:31:43 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com><4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <00b801c56343$a2b42200$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <00ec01c56346$53c66a60$1404fea9@xyz> > Ummmm....because Clinton was deserved it? ;-) Trying to be witty and my grammar proves me a klutz. "...because Clinton deserved it?" JP From stevewest106@hotmail.com Sat May 28 01:38:44 2005 From: stevewest106@hotmail.com (Steve West) Date: Sat May 28 01:38:42 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527184422.026b2900@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: Hang on everybody... I asked you all to take my comments in context, not tear me apart for my observation. I know Randi Rhodes has been very one sided. Franken I've only heard a few times but due to my work schedule I'm able to catch Randi Rhodes on my breaks daily. Franken probably did do some fair bits when I wasn't listening. I don't see you guys sticking up for Rhodes. Look, I had a well thought out arguement to post here to support my comments, but much like my boston radio board, I don't allow that stuff to go on because tempers flare. So I'll back out gracefully with apologies to Garrett for stirring the pot. Sorry to offend. I don't agree with most of the opinions expressed by all on AAR but that's no reason to make enemies here. From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat May 28 02:30:04 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat May 28 02:30:25 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527184422.026b2900@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050528022431.02843500@pop.registeredsite.com> >Steve wrote-- >I don't see you guys sticking up for Rhodes. Nothing to stick up for. My point in my original post was not about one host is good and another is bad. I was just trying to do some analysis of the ratings bump Michael Savage got this past book. But whenever I ask about a conservative host, I tend to arouse the conservatives on the list who think I am being critical. That was not the reason I asked in the first place-- I just was curious about why Savage, who gets angrier and angrier, got some good numbers, and other right wing hosts did not. As for Randi Rhodes, she will be analysed as soon as AAR is on with good signals in a few more markets. I'm also keeping an eye on the progress of Ed Schultz, who seems to be on the air in more cities than AAR at this point and has attracted some media buzz-- he too is a moderate and doesn't insult anyone. I love to analyse talk show hosts, whether right wing or left wing or whatever, but I do try to avoid sweeping generalities about "the left" and "the right". And seriously, in defence of Al Franken, I find his show to be very balanced and seldom unkind. Yes he has a left-wing viewpoint, but he isn't nasty about it. He's a comedian. He tries to use humour and he tries to have a wide range of guests. I respect that. From hykker@grolen.com Sat May 28 07:37:48 2005 From: hykker@grolen.com (hykker@grolen.com) Date: Sat May 28 07:36:27 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> Message-ID: <3102.206.15.138.224.1117280268.squirrel@206.15.138.224> A. Joseph Ross wrote: > >> Al Franken, Randi Rhodes and others on AAR certainly are talented >> individuals, however, they have a problem... they are all negative, >> 24/7. There is NEVER, under any circumstances even one fair or kind >> word ever spoken about even one small issue or person connected with >> Conservatives. > > Obviously you haven't been listening. I haven't listened to Randi Rhodes > very much, but I > have listened to Al Franken, and he's not always negative at all. In > fact, not to long ago, he > did a joint hour with G. Gordon Liddy. My radio must have been broken that day. I too find AA way too negative...the left wing equivalent of a Savage, etc. The constant Bush bashing DOES get old after a while. I will admit that I don't listen to AA (Savage either for that matter) very often, or for very long...I find it annoying and I'm not a masochist. > >> The unabashed hatred and contempt for President Bush, >> Christians, 2nd amendment advocates, pro-lifers and all things >> Republican wears people out. > > Why should it wear people out any more than the unabashed hatred and > contempt for > Clinton, liberals, and all things Democrat that we hear from the far > right? I considerd the Clinton bashing of the 90s just as annoying and tedious as Bush bashing. Negativity is negativity no matter who it's directed at. > >> but I can't listen more than 5 minutes without wanting to >> scream. I'm no big lover of the G.O.P., but I am patriotic and take >> offense to most of Franken, et al's agenda. > > I suggest that you haven't listened for even that long if you find Al > Franken unpatriotic. Maybe "unpatriotic" is a bit strong, but you've got to admit that Franken and his ilk tend to be of the "blame America first" mindset. From kc1ih@mac.com Sat May 28 12:17:10 2005 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Sat May 28 12:17:11 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <3102.206.15.138.224.1117280268.squirrel@206.15.138.224> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <3102.206.15.138.224.1117280268.squirrel@206.15.138.224> Message-ID: At 7:37 AM -0400 5/28/05, hykker@grolen.com wrote: > >Maybe "unpatriotic" is a bit strong, but you've got to admit that Franken >and his ilk tend to be of the "blame America first" mindset. Which is why the troops cheered him when he went over to the middle east when he went there to entertain them last year? -- Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat May 28 13:20:08 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat May 28 13:20:32 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <3102.206.15.138.224.1117280268.squirrel@206.15.138.224> References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <5.1.0.14.2.20050527042852.028109f8@pop.registeredsite.com> <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050528131635.02681de8@pop.registeredsite.com> >it was said-- > >Maybe "unpatriotic" is a bit strong, but you've got to admit that Franken >and his ilk tend to be of the "blame America first" mindset. I can't admit that at all. Why do my friends from the right insist that anyone who criticises the war or the president hates America? Franken has been on countless tours to entertain the soldiers and was over in Iraq and Afghanistan last year performing comedy along with a number of both left-wing and right-wing entertainers. I don't think it's fair to stereotype everyone from the left as haters of America and I also don't think it's fair to stereotype everyone from the right and fanatical fascists. But there again, that's my point. I feel the extreme rhetoric on a lot of talk shows contributes to simplistic (and often false) generalities about "them"-- whoever the other side may be. From raccoonradio@myway.com Sat May 28 13:25:53 2005 From: raccoonradio@myway.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat May 28 13:25:53 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? Message-ID: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> Donna wrote: >>I don't know what you have been listening to, but I listen to Al Franken and Ed Schultz. I have never heard either one insult Christianity. In fact, both have had ministers on their shows, and both try to expose the audience to a variety of views. Well, that's good. There is a faction of the Left that views Christianity as hateful, though (and sometimes certain Christians can be: I remember some of the vitriol after the death of Matthew Sheppard). A messageboard (for the Randi Rhodes show, I think) had posts about an Ohio Air America affiliate (for barely a month) suddenly switching to religious music after being sold and someone said it was taken over by the "Christo-fascists". Oh please; so they're a bunch of religious Nazis? Maybe some religious folks (of any sect) are extreme (think about 9/11), but some aren't. I'm not all that religious but I hope we can respect those who are. We need to find a middle ground here. Tolerate others' religious views, unless they're extreme enough to provoke hatred or violence. (And, getting back to radio...) if Franken does have religious leaders on and doesn't mock those of a religious bent, then, great. It is good if some guests appear on talk shows with a perspective not often heard. For example, liberal black activists have been heard regularly on talk shows, and I have heard some conservative black voices represented on Sean Hannity's show, such as Niger and Roy Innis of the Congress for Racial Equality. Sean has had debates between liberal and conservative blacks about racial issues. Laura Ingraham has had some liberal activists on and debates them, etc., and I'm not sure all conservative hosts would do that. Maybe some liberal activists are contacted by talk hosts to be guests but they refuse, fearing they'll be shouted down. _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com From raccoonradio@gmail.com Sat May 28 13:37:54 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Sat May 28 13:37:47 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> References: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: <1fbbbced05052810377e7f9d6f@mail.gmail.com> And by the way, since "Clinton-bashing" on talk radio was brought up, and it did indeed occur, I must admit I haven't see the kind of vitriol from the Right when Clinton was in power that I do see now from the Left with Bush. Did we ever see protest signs or bumper stickers reading "Clinton is Hitler"? Were there T-shirts saying "Save America, Kill a Democrat"? Also: shows like Sean Hannity have been coming down on liberals who bash the President for this reason: we're at war and the world sees all this anti-Bush rhetoric, and we are pictured as being divided. He feels the troops (most of them, anyway) are dismayed by people who say they support the troops, but not the man leading them, the commander-in-chief. Sure, we can disagree with him on how the war is being fought, but the anti-Bush vitriol makes us look divided to those overseas. That's what people like Hannity are pointing out. Let me finish, by the way, by saying this on our Memorial Day Weekend: many in our military fought for our freedom over the years. Some are still with us like my Dad, 84 years old and living on Cape Cod. And some gave the supreme sacrifice. "All gave some...some gave all..." From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat May 28 13:44:47 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat May 28 13:45:10 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050528133552.02812328@pop.registeredsite.com> Bob said-- >Maybe >some liberal activists are contacted by talk hosts to be guests but they >refuse, fearing they'll be shouted down. Sadly, until recently there were not many established and respected liberal/progressive hosts and not many think tanks with a liberal point of view. That is changing, and I think it's a change for the better-- again, I am saying the hosts and activists who are not extremists, but who represent the liberal point of view, are important for people to hear, just like the hosts and activists from the right who are not extremists deserve to be heard on liberal/progressive shows. That's my hope-- that we can get back to dialogue, rather than endless rants from either side. And based on what I've heard from people I know at liberal think tanks like the Center for American Progress, most right wing hosts DON'T contact them. It's easier to beat up on a myth rather than talk to an actual person. I'm with you, Bob, on this one-- I find the extremes really tedious and offensive. For example, I don't hate America, I don't hate Christians (my closest female friend of over 40 years is a nun, my second closest friend is a southern Baptist), I don't hate anyone-- but boy do I dislike any hosts who make broad generalities about "the left" or about "liberals". Btw, as I have said many times, I consider myself a moderate. There are issues I agree with the right on, and issues I am much closer to the left on. What we all need is more dialogue and less shouting. Jon Stewart was right when he said that the screaming, ranting hosts on both sides are hurting America. These sorts of accusatory and perpetually outraged hosts may be fun to listen to, but it's not useful to give the public the idea that nobody from the liberal side could possibly be a good person with good ideas, just as it's not useful to give the public the idea that every Repubican is an arch right-wing wacko. From dlh@donnahalper.com Sat May 28 13:50:26 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sat May 28 13:50:47 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <1fbbbced05052810377e7f9d6f@mail.gmail.com> References: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050528134634.027070d8@pop.registeredsite.com> At 01:37 PM 5/28/2005 -0400, Bob Nelson wrote: >And by the way, since "Clinton-bashing" on talk radio was brought up, >and it did indeed occur, I must admit I haven't see the kind of >vitriol from the Right when Clinton was in power Excuse me????? Rush was calling for his impeachment every ten minutes. Other talkers were calling him the worst president ever, a disagrace, etc. Extreme right talkers like Chuck Harder implied he had murdered Vince Foster and killed other people with whom he disagreed. Whether you were a Clinton fan or not, he never murdered anyone and his sexual sins were not the worst thing a human being has ever done. Right wing radio was excessive in demonising him, and they still do it even today. And yes, Bob, I do agree many left wing talkers are equally fervent in their hyperbole about Bush, but I don't hear lefties saying he personally murdered anyone... they dispute why we went into Iraq and they dispute his policies. But I absolutely did hear right wing hosts bashing Clinton over and over and over-- and I thought they really mis-led their audience by doing so. From billo@shoreham.net Sat May 28 16:58:40 2005 From: billo@shoreham.net (Bill O'Neill) Date: Sat May 28 16:58:54 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050528022431.02843500@pop.registeredsite.com> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527184422.026b2900@pop.registeredsite.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050528022431.02843500@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <4298DB80.30304@shoreham.net> Donna Halper wrote: > I was just trying to do some analysis of the ratings bump Michael > Savage got this past book. But whenever I ask about a conservative > host, I tend to arouse the conservatives on the list who think I am > being critical. That was not the reason I asked in the first place-- I find it interesting that my post got no feedback, and the post was about as free of politics as any I've read on this string. Bill O'Neill -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.2.0 - Release Date: 5/27/2005 From rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net Sat May 28 23:16:28 2005 From: rogerkirk@mail.ttlc.net (rogerkirk) Date: Sat May 28 23:16:21 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? Message-ID: <200505282316.AA933101600@mail.ttlc.net> Donna Halper wrote: >...boy do I dislike any hosts who make broad generalities >about "the left" or about "liberals". I find generalities can be the "Meat & Potatoes" of quite a few of Savage's rants. From radiotony@comcast.net Sat May 28 23:37:15 2005 From: radiotony@comcast.net (radiotony) Date: Sat May 28 23:37:22 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com><20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050528134634.027070d8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <008001c563ff$b5aaff20$6600a8c0@tony> While I tend to agree with Donna on this list and her opinions, I just want to note one thing here: I never heard Chuck Harder imply that Clinton murdered Vince Foster or killed other people with whom he disagreed. All Harder ever noted was that there were discrepencies with the evidence about Foster's "suicide" - the condition of his body when found in Ft. Marcy Park, the rug and hair fibers on his persons at the time his body was discovered, a suicide note that was ripped up and found at the White House that was not in his hand script, the alleged relationship with Hillary, and the problems at the Rose Law Firm where they both worked. I can't imagine that anyone would kill themselves over a silly editorial in the WSJ but that is the standard assumption. There is a lot of cryptic evidence about the Foster incident. None of it points to the Clintons killing him ... but none of it points to suicide either. On one of my talk shows after the incident, I interviewed a witness who said he saw men in suits around the area hours before Foster's body was "discovered" by the FBI. I've read two books on the subject and it has always seemed pretty weird to me. All Harder ever noted was that there were a number of people around the Clinton's who mysteriously died - and there were a lot - known as "The Clinton Death List." Now, were there as many as Bush? Not if you include the thousands who have died from the foolish invasion of Iraq. For many years, many of them during the Clinton years, I've listened to Harder and I don't recall him every implying that Clinton killed anyone. I do recall him taking great risks to allow some interesting - and yes, wacko - people on the air to express their viewpoints which may not be the same as ours. Which is what a challenging host should do. Of course, this cost him everything too. Best, Anthony Schinella News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region with thoughtful community radio http://www.wkxl1450.com http://politizine.blogspot.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Donna Halper To: Bob Nelson ; boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2005 1:50 PM Subject: Re: could someone explain this to me? At 01:37 PM 5/28/2005 -0400, Bob Nelson wrote: >And by the way, since "Clinton-bashing" on talk radio was brought up, >and it did indeed occur, I must admit I haven't see the kind of >vitriol from the Right when Clinton was in power Excuse me????? Rush was calling for his impeachment every ten minutes. Other talkers were calling him the worst president ever, a disagrace, etc. Extreme right talkers like Chuck Harder implied he had murdered Vince Foster and killed other people with whom he disagreed. Whether you were a Clinton fan or not, he never murdered anyone and his sexual sins were not the worst thing a human being has ever done. Right wing radio was excessive in demonising him, and they still do it even today. And yes, Bob, I do agree many left wing talkers are equally fervent in their hyperbole about Bush, but I don't hear lefties saying he personally murdered anyone... they dispute why we went into Iraq and they dispute his policies. But I absolutely did hear right wing hosts bashing Clinton over and over and over-- and I thought they really mis-led their audience by doing so. From lawyer@attorneyross.com Sun May 29 00:41:54 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun May 29 00:41:30 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050527184422.026b2900@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <42990FD2.13298.64ED52@localhost> On 28 May 2005 at 0:38, Steve West wrote: > I don't see you guys sticking up for Rhodes. I've only listened to her once, for about five minutes. I can't make a judgment on that short a time. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From lawyer@attorneyross.com Sun May 29 00:41:55 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun May 29 00:41:46 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <3102.206.15.138.224.1117280268.squirrel@206.15.138.224> References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> Message-ID: <42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost> On 28 May 2005 at 7:37, hykker@grolen.com wrote: > Maybe "unpatriotic" is a bit strong, but you've got to admit that > Franken and his ilk tend to be of the "blame America first" mindset. No I don't, and they aren't. It seems that any criticism of a Republican administration's foreign policy is "blaming America first." Criticism of a Democratic administration's foreign policy seems to be quite OK. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From dlh@donnahalper.com Sun May 29 00:47:44 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sun May 29 00:48:06 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <008001c563ff$b5aaff20$6600a8c0@tony> References: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050528134634.027070d8@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050529004605.028d0248@pop.registeredsite.com> At 11:37 PM 5/28/2005 -0400, radiotony wrote: >While I tend to agree with Donna on this list and her opinions, I just >want to note one thing here: I never heard Chuck Harder imply that Clinton >murdered Vince Foster or killed other people with whom he disagreed. I heard him say various things that skated perilously close to accusing the Clintons of being involved in Foster's tragic death. And I also heard him say that Hillary wanted to implant citizens with computer chips (!) because her goal was to track citizens like laboratory rats... I've got that one on tape... Mr Harder was the king of conspiracy theorists. From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Sun May 29 01:26:55 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Sun May 29 01:32:59 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost> Message-ID: <002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz> > On 28 May 2005 at 7:37, hykker@grolen.com wrote: > > > Maybe "unpatriotic" is a bit strong, but you've got to admit that > > Franken and his ilk tend to be of the "blame America first" mindset. > > >From: "A. Joseph Ross" > > No I don't, and they aren't. It seems that any criticism of a Republican administration's > foreign policy is "blaming America first." No, not just that. When people imply that 9-11 was America's fault, that then THAT puts them in the "blame America first" category. And, IMHO, the liberals hosts on AA, have all, at one time or another, impied that. From dlh@donnahalper.com Sun May 29 02:08:39 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sun May 29 02:09:01 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz> References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050529015112.02a89ef8@pop.registeredsite.com> >Joe P said-- > >And, IMHO, the liberals hosts on AA, have all, at one time or another, >impied that. Wow. This reminds me of that old theory about how each of us hears what we want to hear, or how our listening reflects what we already believe. I think some of my friends who are conservative expect to hear "blame America" stuff on AA because they are told so often on right-wing radio that all liberals and progressives are disloyal and hate America (Anne Coulter and Michael Savage have both said liberals are traitors). But I've *never* heard Al Franken or Randi Rhodes say 9/11 was America's fault. They were however, very critical of the war and of the policies of the Bush administration, such as the lies about WMD, the plan to invade Iraq (rather than Saudi Arabia), not having a plan to secure the peace after Saddam was overthrown, etc. How is it an example of blaming America if a talk show host criticizes those in power? Rush and Michael and Sean and Bill criticized every single thing Bill Clinton did. Do they hate America? My point is not that AA is perfect-- it's not. It has its moments of excellence, and on many days, it still has growing pains. I don't agree with everything I hear on AA, just as I hope sincerely that the conservatives on this list don't agree with every word that Rush Limbaugh utters. Again, all I was hoping for was an analysis of how we've all gotten so polarized and how our choices in talk radio reflect that polarization. But please, JP, give a listen to Ed Schultz (3-6 pm weekdays) or listen to a couple of days of Franken and you will hear plenty of guests, from both the right and the left. Yes, you will hear Bush criticized, but you won't usually hear him insulted with the kind of vehemence and anger I hear from some right wing hosts when they mention the Clinton years. And you absolutely won't hear Schultz or Franken (or even Rhodes or Stephanie Miller) say 9/11 was our own fault. There are some far left critics I can think of who undoubtedly were guests on various shows, and *they* may have said that, although I can't even recall a guest making that assertion. But hey, sometimes talk hosts or guests say stoooopid things. Again, I have no problem with right wing hosts who disliked Clinton's *policies*-- my problem is when either side throws words like traitor and nazi and fascist around and totally demonizes the person. Clinton was not the worst president ever, and Bush is not a candidate for sainthood (or vice versa, depending on which side you are listening to). From dlh@donnahalper.com Sun May 29 11:39:10 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sun May 29 11:39:32 2005 Subject: members getting in print Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050529113736.028c38d0@pop.registeredsite.com> Nice letter in support of PBS printed in today's Boston Globe by our own Laurence from Methuen. And this past week, I was quoted in both the Lowell Sun and the Boston Herald. Any other list-members in print this week? We've got such a famous bunch of people! From radiotony@comcast.net Sun May 29 11:46:43 2005 From: radiotony@comcast.net (radiotony) Date: Sun May 29 11:46:50 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050528134634.027070d8@pop.registeredsite.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050529004605.028d0248@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <00db01c56465$9dd91010$6600a8c0@tony> You say he was the "king of conspiracy theorists" like that is a bad thing. One man's conspiracy is another man's awareness. And without conspiracy theories or questioning investigation, there would be no true journalism. While I don't know the exact comment that Harder made which you are referring to, I will only say that it was Clinton's anti-terrorism bill that started all of this - a precursor to Bush's PATRIOT Act. The difference was that Clinton's was a domestic terror bill which tracked people he didn't particularly like and now the PATRIOT Act tracks both foreign and domestic people that Bush doesn't like. It was Clinton's bill - written and introduced before the Oklahoma City bombing - which started our nation on the road that it has been on - curbing our freedoms, tracking people, encouraging transponders in everything from clothing, to cars, to IDs, hence what may be the reasoning for 'Hilary wants to implant citizens ...' It may have been a conspiracy in 1996 but it is FACT now. You can't buy a GM car without a black box tracking device in it which reportedly records your GPS location, speed at any given time, use of brakes, potentially causes of accidents, etc. Why has GM installed these boxes? Now, this isn't OnStar; these boxes are installed whether you want OnStar or not. You can't buy a shirt in some WalMarts without an RFID transmitter in the tag. Now we have the REAL ID Act, which sailed through both houses under the guise of protecting us from illegal aliens. Do a Google on biometric chips and see that, wow, there are people injecting themselves with chips and there is even legislation which proposes injecting Alzheimer's patients with transponder chips. A Bible reader and smart person like yourself Donna should be able to see the significance of all of this without placing partisan blame. It's both sides who have brought us to where we are. Have you noticed that there seem to be cameras everywhere? After reconstruction of Route 3, I noticed all these new utility poles being built along the road with half black globes atop them. I called the Highway Dept. to find out what they were and they wouldn't tell me. After a bunch of phone calls, I finally got someone in PR who said that the poles were new cameras from a Homeland Security grant. As part of the 2004 Democratic convention, thousands of cameras were built to "protect" the conventioneers yet the police are using them to watch over the city. In a story in the Boston Herald after the convention, a reporter asked, When are the cameras coming down? Never, said Commissioner O'Toole. Lastly, I would add that it was Clinton [with help from the Republicans] who rammed through the Telecom Bill which has brought us to the point where we are as far as radio markets: A vast wasteland of audio alcohol doing nothing to inform or educate the public about anything. So bad is it that some folks are allowed to brainwash people three hours a day with complete lies with no balance at all. Don't forget Donna: It was Clinton [and other Democrats like Rep. Ed Markey] who brought our industry to this. I would add that it was Clinton [again, with help from the Republicans] who sent the low-skilled decent wage jobs overseas with those bad trade deals which has hurt the bottom rung of our society and therefore our economy, beyond repair. Much of this has hurt small market radio stations which relied on mom and pop stores for ads to survive. Without those ads, they can't hire folks to tell the small market stories or discuss the local issues because they can't afford the local talent. What do they do? They turn to the bird which blast in the unanswered propoganda again because they can't afford the local talent. Best, Anthony Schinella News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region with thoughtful community radio http://www.wkxl1450.com http://politizine.blogspot.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Donna Halper To: radiotony ; boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 12:47 AM Subject: Re: could someone explain this to me? At 11:37 PM 5/28/2005 -0400, radiotony wrote: >While I tend to agree with Donna on this list and her opinions, I just want >to note one thing here: I never heard Chuck Harder imply that Clinton >murdered Vince Foster or killed other people with whom he disagreed. I heard him say various things that skated perilously close to accusing the Clintons of being involved in Foster's tragic death. And I also heard him say that Hillary wanted to implant citizens with computer chips (!) because her goal was to track citizens like laboratory rats... I've got that one on tape... Mr Harder was the king of conspiracy theorists. From lglavin@lycos.com Sun May 29 13:29:34 2005 From: lglavin@lycos.com (Laurence Glavin) Date: Sun May 29 13:29:33 2005 Subject: members getting in print Message-ID: <20050529172934.CBF07CA078@ws7-4.us4.outblaze.com> >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Donna Halper" >To: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org >Subject: members getting in print >Date: Sun, 29 May 2005 11:39:10 -0400 > > Nice letter in support of PBS printed in today's Boston Globe by > our own Laurence from Methuen. And this past week, I was quoted in > both the Lowell Sun and the Boston Herald. Any other list-members > in print this week? We've got such a famous bunch of people! For people who live far away or are travelling and can't get a hahd copy of the Globe, here's the URL: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/letters/articles/2005/05/29/a_network_that_belongs_to_all_of_us/ Some of you who read this may say "hey is this an impostor?"; Glavin usually isn't this concise, but rattles endlessly repeating himself and going over the same ground repetitiously and even redundantly. You guessed it...the Globe chopped it down somewhat. Something to do with the price of newsprint. not r -- _______________________________________________ NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once. http://datingsearch.lycos.com From scott@fybush.com Sun May 29 13:40:37 2005 From: scott@fybush.com (Scott Fybush) Date: Sun May 29 13:40:03 2005 Subject: members getting in print In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050529113736.028c38d0@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050529133956.035b1c90@gwind.pair.com> At 11:39 AM 5/29/2005 -0400, Donna Halper wrote: >Nice letter in support of PBS printed in today's Boston Globe by our own >Laurence from Methuen. And this past week, I was quoted in both the >Lowell Sun and the Boston Herald. Any other list-members in print this >week? We've got such a famous bunch of people! I had a nice chat with Mark Jurkowitz the other day about a certain public radio show that launches this week. I'll be interested to see what he writes about it in the next day or two... s From dan.strassberg@att.net Sun May 29 13:59:24 2005 From: dan.strassberg@att.net (Dan Strassberg) Date: Sun May 29 13:59:39 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost> <002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <001901c56478$2bcc7580$19eefea9@dstrassberg> I listen to AAR A LOT--and I do not recall EVER--even once--hearing any of the hosts even suggest such a thing! On the other hand, there was a very well publicized statement by a prominent spokesman for the Christian Right (can't recall which one, but he is very well known, Falwell maybe) that absolutely DID blame America for 9/11. He specifically blamed abortion and homosexual unions. The first is legal in all 50 states, thanks to the Supreme Court's interpretation of the US Constitution in several decisions, of which Rowe v Wade was only the first. The second is (I believe), legal in three states--Hawaii, Vermont, and Massachusetts. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Pappalardo" To: "A. Joseph Ross" ; Cc: Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 1:26 AM Subject: Re: could someone explain this to me? > > > > On 28 May 2005 at 7:37, hykker@grolen.com wrote: > > > > > Maybe "unpatriotic" is a bit strong, but you've got to admit that > > > Franken and his ilk tend to be of the "blame America first" mindset. > > > > > >From: "A. Joseph Ross" > > > > No I don't, and they aren't. It seems that any criticism of a Republican > administration's > > foreign policy is "blaming America first." > > No, not just that. > > When people imply that 9-11 was America's fault, that then THAT puts them in > the "blame America first" category. > > And, IMHO, the liberals hosts on AA, have all, at one time or another, > impied that. > > From radiotony@comcast.net Sun May 29 14:59:55 2005 From: radiotony@comcast.net (radiotony) Date: Sun May 29 15:00:02 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost><002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz> <001901c56478$2bcc7580$19eefea9@dstrassberg> Message-ID: <013e01c56480$9ae94ee0$6600a8c0@tony> Partial transcript of comments from the September 13, 2001 telecast of the 700 Club JERRY FALWELL: And I agree totally with you that the Lord has protected us so wonderfully these 225 years. And since 1812, this is the first time that we've been attacked on our soil and by far the worst results. And I fear, as Donald Rumsfeld, the Secretary of Defense, said yesterday, that this is only the beginning. And with biological warfare available to these monsters -- the Husseins, the Bin Ladens, the Arafats -- what we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact -- if, in fact -- God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve. PAT ROBERTSON: Jerry, that's my feeling. I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror. We haven't even begun to see what they can do to the major population. JERRY FALWELL: The ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this. PAT ROBERTSON: Well yes. JERRY FALWELL: And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way -- all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen." PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur, and the problem is we have adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government. And so we're responsible as a free society for what the top people do. And, the top people, of course, is the court system.. JERRY FALWELL: Pat, did you notice yesterday the ACLU and all the Christ-haters, People For the American Way, NOW, etc. were totally disregarded by the Democrats and the Republicans in both houses of Congress as they went out on the steps and called out on to God in prayer and sang "God Bless America" and said "let the ACLU be hanged". In other words, when the nation is on its knees, the only normal and natural and spiritual thing to do is what we ought to be doing all the time - calling upon God. ~~~ PAT ROBERTSON: > Amen Best, Anthony Schinella News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region with thoughtful community radio http://www.wkxl1450.com http://politizine.blogspot.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Dan Strassberg To: Joseph Pappalardo ; A. Joseph Ross ; SteveOrdinetz Cc: boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 1:59 PM Subject: Re: could someone explain this to me? I listen to AAR A LOT--and I do not recall EVER--even once--hearing any of the hosts even suggest such a thing! On the other hand, there was a very well publicized statement by a prominent spokesman for the Christian Right (can't recall which one, but he is very well known, Falwell maybe) that absolutely DID blame America for 9/11. He specifically blamed abortion and homosexual unions. The first is legal in all 50 states, thanks to the Supreme Court's interpretation of the US Constitution in several decisions, of which Rowe v Wade was only the first. The second is (I believe), legal in three states--Hawaii, Vermont, and Massachusetts. -- Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@att.net eFax 707-215-6367 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joseph Pappalardo" To: "A. Joseph Ross" ; Cc: Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 1:26 AM Subject: Re: could someone explain this to me? > > > > On 28 May 2005 at 7:37, hykker@grolen.com wrote: > > > > > Maybe "unpatriotic" is a bit strong, but you've got to admit that > > > Franken and his ilk tend to be of the "blame America first" mindset. > > > > > >From: "A. Joseph Ross" > > > > No I don't, and they aren't. It seems that any criticism of a Republican > administration's > > foreign policy is "blaming America first." > > No, not just that. > > When people imply that 9-11 was America's fault, that then THAT puts them in > the "blame America first" category. > > And, IMHO, the liberals hosts on AA, have all, at one time or another, > impied that. > > From rickkelly@gmail.com Sat May 28 23:44:56 2005 From: rickkelly@gmail.com (Rick Kelly) Date: Sun May 29 15:44:56 2005 Subject: 70th anniversary of the first public demonstration of FM Message-ID: <521b7fd1050528204430b2e8c4@mail.gmail.com> The clock will be turned back on Saturday, June 11, 2005, when a transmitter broadcasting on an original FM frequency will be switched on at the Alpine Tower in Alpine, NJ, to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the first public demonstration of FM radio by its inventor Major Edwin Howard Armstrong. You can read all about it at: http://www.cscmgt.com/news/2005-05-25-wfdu-armstrong-broadcast.html -Rick Kelly www.northeastairchecks.com From lawyer@attorneyross.com Sun May 29 16:27:28 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Sun May 29 16:27:11 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <4299ED70.17107.353632@localhost> On 29 May 2005 at 1:26, Joseph Pappalardo wrote: > When people imply that 9-11 was America's fault, that then THAT puts > them in the "blame America first" category. I haven't heard any of them say or imply that. > And, IMHO, the liberals hosts on AA, have all, at one time or another, > impied that. Since you say you haven't listened for more than five minutes, your opinion must be based on third-hand accounts, some of which are deliberate lies. -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From dlh@donnahalper.com Sun May 29 19:19:32 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sun May 29 19:19:57 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <00db01c56465$9dd91010$6600a8c0@tony> References: <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> <20050528172553.29494397B@mprdmxin.myway.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050528134634.027070d8@pop.registeredsite.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20050529004605.028d0248@pop.registeredsite.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050529191440.02a52588@pop.registeredsite.com> Tony wrote-- >A Bible reader and smart person like yourself Donna should be able to see >the significance of all of this without placing partisan blame. It's both >sides who have brought us to where we are. Umm, I think, as often happens in a prolonged discussion, that I've been misconstrued. I don't think I said or implied that only one side is right and one side is wrong. We had a specific discussion about Michael Savage and about Chuck Harder and about Al Franken and Randi Rhodes. But I was not in any way saying that one side has it all right and the other side has it all wrong. I believe I've said repeatedly that I deplore the extremes on both sides and find the accusations, shouting, and over the top rhetoric very difficult to take. But some of what has been happening recently definitely IS partisan because one party controls both the executive branch and the congress. On the other hand, there were plenty of things Clinton did that I wasn't happy about-- especially the Telecom Act. He said later that he felt congress, which by that time was in the hands of Republicans and pro-business Democrats, was gonna over-ride him if he vetoed it, but he should have taken more of a stand when he had a chance. That having been said, I still can't buy some of Chuck Harder's theories, and when hosts make accusations without any proof whatsoever, even though I understand it's a rhetorical device, it still bugs me. From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Sun May 29 20:44:29 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Sun May 29 20:46:05 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost><42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost><002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz><001901c56478$2bcc7580$19eefea9@dstrassberg> <013e01c56480$9ae94ee0$6600a8c0@tony> Message-ID: <00f101c564b0$c4297480$1404fea9@xyz> And your point here is what? That Falwell and Robertson are talk show hosts? They are ministers...and they can believe and speak of anything they want. I thought this was a discussion about AA, Rush, harder and radio talk hosts.... ----- Original Message ----- From: "radiotony" > Partial transcript of comments from the September 13, 2001 telecast of the > 700 Club From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Sun May 29 20:44:35 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Sun May 29 20:46:08 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost><002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz> <001901c56478$2bcc7580$19eefea9@dstrassberg> Message-ID: <00f201c564b0$c4d14d40$1404fea9@xyz> From: "Dan Strassberg" > I listen to AAR A LOT--and I do not recall EVER--even once--hearing any of > the hosts even suggest such a thing! And I have listened to Chuck Harder a LOT and never heard him "imply Clinton had murdered Vince Foster and killed other people with whom he disagreed." The above instances may indeed be a case of, what Donna called, "that old theory about how each of us hears what we want to hear, or how our listening reflects what we already believe." > On the other hand, there was a very > well publicized statement by a prominent spokesman for the Christian Right > (can't recall which one, but he is very well known, Falwell maybe) that > absolutely DID blame America for 9/11. He specifically blamed abortion and > homosexual unions. I believe it was Pat Robertson and Falwell. But that's how religious freedom works in this country. You are entitled to believe in any crazy thing that you want. (And, people will disavow most of the nutty things you say, as was the case with this. Robertson has very little standing in the Republican Party and eslewhere.) And, as we should all know, ministers do not speak for the entire republican party. > The first is legal in all 50 states, thanks to the > Supreme Court's interpretation of the US Constitution in several decisions, > of which Rowe v Wade was only the first. The second is (I believe), legal in > three states--Hawaii, Vermont, and Massachusetts. Legality doesn't equal morality...and that's what Robertson was addressing. From: A. Joseph Ross, J.D. >>Since you say you haven't listened for more than five minutes, your opinion must be based on third-hand accounts, some of which are deliberate lies.<< No, they are based on first hand listening. ((See Donna's theory above) ;-) From radiotony@comcast.net Sun May 29 20:47:47 2005 From: radiotony@comcast.net (radiotony) Date: Sun May 29 20:47:53 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost><42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost><002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz><001901c56478$2bcc7580$19eefea9@dstrassberg> <013e01c56480$9ae94ee0$6600a8c0@tony> <00f101c564b0$c4297480$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <018401c564b1$3386fa00$6600a8c0@tony> Just passing on the exact quote someone else was referring to, that's all. Best, Anthony Schinella News Director/A&E Host at WKXL 1450 Celebrating Concord, N.H. & the Capital Region with thoughtful community radio http://www.wkxl1450.com http://politizine.blogspot.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Joseph Pappalardo To: radiotony ; boston-radio-interest@rolinin.BostonRadio.org Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 8:44 PM Subject: Re: could someone explain this to me? And your point here is what? That Falwell and Robertson are talk show hosts? They are ministers...and they can believe and speak of anything they want. I thought this was a discussion about AA, Rush, harder and radio talk hosts.... ----- Original Message ----- From: "radiotony" > Partial transcript of comments from the September 13, 2001 telecast of the > 700 Club From dlh@donnahalper.com Sun May 29 20:57:25 2005 From: dlh@donnahalper.com (Donna Halper) Date: Sun May 29 20:57:45 2005 Subject: another one bites the dust... Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050529205604.02ae50d0@pop.registeredsite.com> I just heard about the untimely death (cancer) of Domenic Troiano-- wow, he was only 59. I don't know if any of you were familiar with him-- great rock guitarist who played with a number of bands during the 60s, 70s, and 80s. One of the nicest people I ever worked with. From wollman@csail.mit.edu Sun May 29 22:20:04 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sun May 29 22:19:59 2005 Subject: could someone explain this to me? In-Reply-To: <013e01c56480$9ae94ee0$6600a8c0@tony> References: <4297AF83.12895.394357@localhost> <42990FD3.6291.64EF00@localhost> <002901c5640f$a8e9aa60$1404fea9@xyz> <001901c56478$2bcc7580$19eefea9@dstrassberg> <013e01c56480$9ae94ee0$6600a8c0@tony> Message-ID: <17050.30804.160807.512452@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Ok, folks, enough! -GAWollman From wollman@csail.mit.edu Sun May 29 22:33:44 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sun May 29 22:33:38 2005 Subject: REMINDER: BRI/NERW dinner, June 8, RSVP soon! Message-ID: <17050.31624.455310.783957@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> While you all settle down to a nice relaxing Memorial Day (watching a parade or trying to pull off a family cookout between the rain showers), or even for those of you in the 'biz who have to work on "shopping holidays" like this one, please consider attending our dinner, on June 8th in Framingham. If you haven't already responded, please do so on or before June 1; I can't guarantee seating for procrastinators! The email address once again is , and you can see the full details and the original announcement at . -GAWollman From wollman@csail.mit.edu Sun May 29 22:49:12 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Sun May 29 22:49:07 2005 Subject: 70th anniversary of the first public demonstration of FM In-Reply-To: <521b7fd1050528204430b2e8c4@mail.gmail.com> References: <521b7fd1050528204430b2e8c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <17050.32552.692428.553578@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > The clock will be turned back on Saturday, June 11, 2005, when a > transmitter broadcasting on an original FM frequency will be switched > on at the Alpine Tower in Alpine, NJ Some of us hope to be there. (The station has been operating sporadically all this year; Scott and I saw it at the SBE chapter meeting in January, when it was still operating as WB3XXE -- it's now WA2XMN.) -GAWollman From wollman@csail.mit.edu Mon May 30 00:25:49 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Mon May 30 00:25:48 2005 Subject: 70th anniversary of the first public demonstration of FM In-Reply-To: <429A5AFB.22989.1E12D11@localhost> References: <521b7fd1050528204430b2e8c4@mail.gmail.com> <429A5AFB.22989.1E12D11@localhost> Message-ID: <17050.38349.702411.50804@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > And just where do we get equipment that can receive these broadcasts? Universal Radio or Grove Enterprises would probably be a good start. Otherwise, hang around antique sales looking for radios from the '40s. -GAWollman From lawyer@attorneyross.com Mon May 30 00:14:51 2005 From: lawyer@attorneyross.com (A. Joseph Ross) Date: Mon May 30 01:01:59 2005 Subject: 70th anniversary of the first public demonstration of FM In-Reply-To: <17050.32552.692428.553578@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> References: <521b7fd1050528204430b2e8c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <429A5AFB.22989.1E12D11@localhost> On 29 May 2005 at 22:49, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < > said: > > > The clock will be turned back on Saturday, June 11, 2005, when a > > transmitter broadcasting on an original FM frequency will be > > switched on at the Alpine Tower in Alpine, NJ > > Some of us hope to be there. (The station has been operating > sporadically all this year; Scott and I saw it at the SBE chapter > meeting in January, when it was still operating as WB3XXE -- it's now > WA2XMN.) And just where do we get equipment that can receive these broadcasts? -- A. Joseph Ross, J.D. 617.367.0468 15 Court Square, Suite 210 lawyer@attorneyross.com Boston, MA 02108-2503 http://www.attorneyross.com From kwillcox@wnsh.com Mon May 30 08:51:13 2005 From: kwillcox@wnsh.com (Keating Willcox) Date: Mon May 30 09:35:31 2005 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 9, Issue 154 In-Reply-To: <200505300502.j4U527Io061686@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> References: <200505300502.j4U527Io061686@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.2.20050530083753.061216f0@mail.comcast.net> At 01:02 AM 5/30/2005, you wrote: I believe it was Pat Robertson and Falwell. But that's how religious freedom works in this country. You are entitled to believe in any crazy thing that you want. (And, people will disavow most of the nutty things you say, as was the case with this. Robertson has very little standing in the Republican Party and eslewhere.) These guys are caricatures, and say a lot of stuff that is quite embarrassing. The roots of all Islamic terrorism are the long standing enmity between Islam and the rest of the world, starting with the crusades, and amplified by their new enormous wealth and technology. But Europeans have been at war with Islam since well before 1960 when most of Africa was freed, and the war continues with any country that offends or antagonizes them. The horrendous Islamic censorship of its own people with fatwa rulings and terror homicides of courageous writers and journalists has nothing to do with Western immorality, and everything to do with the harshness of Islam against any of its critics. (off-topic) The left here is not guilty of being negative to the right, their radio shows are guilty of being boring, of giving Islamic terrorists a pass due to mistaken notions of political correctness, and of a bizarre condemnation of Israel that totally baffles me. How is it that all the main liberal church denominations of the US are now trying to divest from Israel??? back to radio - we had Hightower on for a while and some other liberal hosts, and their shows were great, but the production values were very thin. Poor audio, poor production, and a somber political attitude that minimized humor. Can the left be funny? Sure. Look at the collected works of Hunter S. Thompson. He was always hysterical, and a strong voice against war and Republicans. If I had to run a left-wing talk show network, I would have a series of light hearted, Imus like, muckrakers, with lots of Limbaugh style parody and Stern style pranks. And I would get the enormous untapped audience of progressives that have only NPR and AA to listen to. Sincerely, Keating Willcox ~/~ WNSH AM 1570 Beverly 'playing the best music ever recorded' kwillcox@wnsh.com www.wnsh.com 978-921-1570 FAX 978-468-1954 376 Hale Street, Beverly, MA 01915 From kc1ih@mac.com Mon May 30 09:55:19 2005 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon May 30 09:56:00 2005 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 9, Issue 154 In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20050530083753.061216f0@mail.comcast.net> References: <200505300502.j4U527Io061686@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> <6.2.0.14.2.20050530083753.061216f0@mail.comcast.net> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050530094946.02276b40@mail.mac.com> At 08:51 AM 5/30/2005, Keating Willcox wrote: >back to radio - we had Hightower on for a while and some other liberal >hosts, and their shows were great, but the production values were very >thin. Poor audio, poor production, and a somber political attitude that >minimized humor. Can the left be funny? Sure. Look at the collected works >of Hunter S. Thompson. He was always hysterical, and a strong voice >against war and Republicans. If I had to run a left-wing talk show >network, I would have a series of light hearted, Imus like, muckrakers, >with lots of Limbaugh style parody and Stern style pranks. And I would get >the enormous untapped audience of progressives that have only NPR and AA >to listen to. So, you are saying that to be successful, left wing political talk has to be funny? Is right wing political talk only successful when it's funny? I think as long as it's interesting, political talk of any stripe can be successful, it doesn't need to be a laugh-a-minute, or constantly ridiculing those with other viewpoints. Larry Weil Temporarily in Lake Wobegone, ME Wobegone is a state of mind! From miscon@miscon.net Mon May 30 13:29:38 2005 From: miscon@miscon.net (Mission Control) Date: Mon May 30 14:20:36 2005 Subject: "Open Source" starts today Message-ID: <200505301329.AA141033760@miscon.net> WGBH | 89.7 | 7pm just a reminder. Mike From Kaimbridge@gmail.com Mon May 30 15:13:57 2005 From: Kaimbridge@gmail.com (Kaimbridge M. GoldChild) Date: Mon May 30 15:23:12 2005 Subject: WWZN Off-Air Message-ID: <429B65F5.30607@Gmail.com> Not taht anyone--other than maybe over in Europe! P=)--listens to them anyways, but 1.510-WWZN has been off-air since at least 8:30pm last night. ~Kaimbridge~ (Note: Along with getting a brand new 'puter this weekend--2.8 GHz speed, 80 GB hard drive--I've officially switched my main addy to G-Mail, though my programmer.net addy is still open and accepting!) ----- Wanted?Kaimbridge (w/mugshot!): http://www.angelfire.com/ma2/digitology/Wanted_KMGC.html ---------- Digitology?The Grand Theory Of The Universe: http://www.angelfire.com/ma2/digitology/index.html ***** Void Where Permitted; Limit 0 Per Customer. ***** From wgsr1570@nrcdxas.org Mon May 30 15:43:07 2005 From: wgsr1570@nrcdxas.org (Ronald C. Gitschier) Date: Mon May 30 16:59:12 2005 Subject: WABC is Cookin' In-Reply-To: <429B65F5.30607@Gmail.com> References: <429B65F5.30607@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <20050530194307.26935.qmail@mail.vobbe.com> Hey 'all; WABC is still in the WABC Rewound mode. Neat stuff. I've been dumping it to my hard drive since around 1PM... and will try to get most of what's left. Chuck Leonard is on right now. Osmond's "Yoyo"... http://www.wabcradio.com/listenlive.asp Ron Gitschier Formerly Lowell, MA; WLLH 1400/WSSH 99.5 1978, Palm Coast, FL WQAI-WYHI-WGSR-WNNR-WVOJ 1570 Fernandina Beach, FL WVOJ-WNNR 970 Jacksonville, FL WFBO-LP 93.3 Flagler Beach, FL From raccoonradio@myway.com Mon May 30 17:16:21 2005 From: raccoonradio@myway.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon May 30 17:16:20 2005 Subject: WWZN Off-Air Message-ID: <20050530211621.905205C459@mprdmxin.myway.com> WWZN in back on now. I noticed it off air last night about 7:30 pm while I was driving back from NH, etc. It was still off earlier today, but back on when I just checked. Transmitter problem of some sort...? _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com From markwats@comcast.net Mon May 30 17:19:09 2005 From: markwats@comcast.net (Mark Watson) Date: Mon May 30 17:19:13 2005 Subject: Red Sox Spanish Network Announcer J.P. Villaman Has Died Message-ID: <007d01c5655d$39b87140$6f918318@Mark> Just saw on WCVB's news that Boston Red Sox Spanish Radio Network announcer J. P.Villaman was killed in a car accident early this morning in Wilmington MA. He was 46. Villaman was on his way home from Logan Airport after returning from New York where he called last night's Sox-Yankees game. Villaman was one major league baseball's first Spanish language radio broadcasters, announcing Sox games starting in 1995, when the Red Sox formed the "Spanish Beisbol Network". WROL (950 Boston) is the current flagship station, WCCM (1490 Haverhill) is one of the affiliates. Mark Watson From raccoonradio@gmail.com Mon May 30 17:25:04 2005 From: raccoonradio@gmail.com (Bob Nelson) Date: Mon May 30 17:24:57 2005 Subject: Red Sox Spanish Network Announcer J.P. Villaman Has Died In-Reply-To: <007d01c5655d$39b87140$6f918318@Mark> References: <007d01c5655d$39b87140$6f918318@Mark> Message-ID: <1fbbbced05053014257e7066dc@mail.gmail.com> I was just about to mention it (they were talking about it on WEEI).Story link: http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/4547032/detail.html On 5/30/05, Mark Watson wrote: > Just saw on WCVB's news that Boston Red Sox Spanish Radio Network > announcer J. P.Villaman was killed in a car accident early this morning in > Wilmington MA. From miscon@miscon.net Mon May 30 18:21:06 2005 From: miscon@miscon.net (Mission Control) Date: Mon May 30 18:21:02 2005 Subject: Red Sox Spanish Network Announcer J.P. Villaman Has Died Message-ID: <200505301821.AA35586362@miscon.net> This type of thing is always such a shock - I work as a part-time engineer for SBN here in Boston (they're also now in Tampa and Philly). Only because of illness was I not down there with them this w/e. We are all stunned. For the record, the Red Sox have had Spanish broadcasts since 1989 when Hector Martinez and Bobby Serano called the games for the Red Sox Hispanic Radio Network broadcast across the Carter Radio Network stations. Ken Carberry, who hired Villaman (when Martinez left) said this evening, "J.P. always had a smile on his face. He loved baseball and he loved people. My heartfelt condolences go out to his family and friends." The Spanish Beisbol Network is currently owned by William Kulik. Still carried on WROL, and is also the SAP for the telecasts. Not meaning to be ghoulish, just thought you'd want the straight scoop. damn. Mike Mike Wilkins ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "Mark Watson" Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 17:19:09 -0400 > Just saw on WCVB's news that Boston Red Sox Spanish Radio Network >announcer J. P.Villaman was killed in a car accident early this morning in >Wilmington MA. He was 46. Villaman was on his way home from Logan Airport >after returning from New York where he called last night's Sox-Yankees game. >Villaman was one major league baseball's first Spanish language radio >broadcasters, announcing Sox games starting in 1995, when the Red Sox formed >the "Spanish Beisbol Network". WROL (950 Boston) is the current flagship >station, WCCM (1490 Haverhill) is one of the affiliates. > >Mark Watson > > > From hykker@grolen.com Mon May 30 20:06:08 2005 From: hykker@grolen.com (hykker@grolen.com) Date: Mon May 30 20:04:35 2005 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 9, Issue 154 In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20050530094946.02276b40@mail.mac.com> References: <200505300502.j4U527Io061686@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> <6.2.0.14.2.20050530083753.061216f0@mail.comcast.net> <6.2.1.2.2.20050530094946.02276b40@mail.mac.com> Message-ID: <3073.206.15.139.56.1117497968.squirrel@206.15.139.56> Larry Weil wrote: > > > So, you are saying that to be successful, left wing political talk has to > be funny? Is right wing political talk only successful when it's funny? > I > think as long as it's interesting, political talk of any stripe can be > successful, it doesn't need to be a laugh-a-minute, or constantly > ridiculing those with other viewpoints. > I think his point was that in order to be successful, left wing political talk has to be ENTERTAINING...approach topics with a sense of humor. For a network made up of so many "comedians", AA is anything but...what skits they introduce seem to be more mean spirited than anything. Jerry Williams was pretty liberal for his day yet managed to be entertaining at the same time. Today's crop of political talk radio (right as well as left) takes itself way too seriously. In order to reach anyone but the hard-core true believers AA is going to have to be less stident...to their credit they seem to be moving in that direction axing some of the more dreadful hosts. From kc1ih@mac.com Mon May 30 21:13:20 2005 From: kc1ih@mac.com (Larry Weil) Date: Mon May 30 21:13:16 2005 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 9, Issue 154 In-Reply-To: <3073.206.15.139.56.1117497968.squirrel@206.15.139.56> References: <200505300502.j4U527Io061686@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> <6.2.0.14.2.20050530083753.061216f0@mail.comcast.net> <6.2.1.2.2.20050530094946.02276b40@mail.mac.com> <3073.206.15.139.56.1117497968.squirrel@206.15.139.56> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050530210640.020c4cb0@mail.mac.com> At 08:06 PM 5/30/2005, hykker@grolen.com wrote: >I think his point was that in order to be successful, left wing political >talk has to be ENTERTAINING...approach topics with a sense of humor. For >a network made up of so many "comedians", AA is anything but...what skits >they introduce seem to be more mean spirited than anything. Jerry >Williams was pretty liberal for his day yet managed to be entertaining at >the same time. Today's crop of political talk radio (right as well as >left) takes itself way too seriously. In order to reach anyone but the >hard-core true believers AA is going to have to be less stident...to their >credit they seem to be moving in that direction axing some of the more >dreadful hosts. I think sometimes funny or entertaining is in the eye of the beholder. If a right wing talk host does a bit that is a slam on liberals, the right wingers who are listening might find it to be a riot and real entertaining, while a liberal who happens to tune in might not find it entertaining at all, and feel his or her blood boiling. Likewise, a liberal host may do a bit that liberals find very entertaining but conservatives find not entertaining at all. This may be behind some of the people who say that AA should be more entertaining. Larry Weil Lake Wobegone, NH From billo@shoreham.net Tue May 31 04:44:21 2005 From: billo@shoreham.net (Bill O'Neill) Date: Tue May 31 04:44:29 2005 Subject: Boston-Radio-Interest Digest, Vol 9, Issue 154 In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20050530210640.020c4cb0@mail.mac.com> References: <200505300502.j4U527Io061686@rolinin.lcs.mit.edu> <6.2.0.14.2.20050530083753.061216f0@mail.comcast.net> <6.2.1.2.2.20050530094946.02276b40@mail.mac.com> <3073.206.15.139.56.1117497968.squirrel@206.15.139.56> <6.2.1.2.2.20050530210640.020c4cb0@mail.mac.com> Message-ID: <429C23E5.5050700@shoreham.net> > At 08:06 PM 5/30/2005, hykker@grolen.com wrote: > >> Jerry >> Williams was pretty liberal for his day yet managed to be >> entertaining at >> the same time. Today's crop of political talk radio (right as well as >> left) takes itself way too seriously. > Perhaps that's the problem - today's talkers aren't broadcasters first, opinion-staters second. Everyone thinks they can do radio. Bill O'Neill -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.3.0 - Release Date: 5/30/2005 From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Tue May 31 13:17:39 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Tue May 31 13:19:39 2005 Subject: Lydon Message-ID: <023d01c56604$b3085fe0$1404fea9@xyz> Anyone catch Lydon's first show either last night on GBH or this morning on WUML? Thoughts? Opinions? JP From wollman@csail.mit.edu Tue May 31 13:33:11 2005 From: wollman@csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) Date: Tue May 31 13:33:05 2005 Subject: Lydon In-Reply-To: <023d01c56604$b3085fe0$1404fea9@xyz> References: <023d01c56604$b3085fe0$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <17052.40919.337009.520061@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> < said: > Anyone catch Lydon's first show either last night on GBH or this morning on > WUML? > Thoughts? Opinions? I listened to the intro, decided it sounded like a lot of fatuous nonsense, and switched it off. -GAWollman From billo@shoreham.net Tue May 31 14:16:44 2005 From: billo@shoreham.net (Bill O'Neill) Date: Tue May 31 15:00:08 2005 Subject: Lydon Message-ID: <429CAA0C.5020205@shoreham.net> Garrett Wollman wrote: > I listened to the intro, decided it sounded like a lot of fatuous > >nonsense, and switched it off. > >-GAWollman > Isn't that how one would describe a talk show with Richard Simmons? Fatuous? Seriously, it doesn't matter how the show goes. Lydon still gets his $150,000 kiss from the taxpayers of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in his role of talk host for one hour a day (a day late on MP3 from WGBH radio. Really.) Oh, and he's also an, er, umm, consultant, yea, that's the ticket, at UMass Lowell. Nice work if you can get it. Especially at the government's ample lactating trough. Otherwise, I have no opinion, whatsoever. Bill O'Neill -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.3.0 - Release Date: 5/30/2005 From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Tue May 31 14:58:19 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Tue May 31 15:01:58 2005 Subject: Lydon References: <023d01c56604$b3085fe0$1404fea9@xyz> <17052.40919.337009.520061@khavrinen.csail.mit.edu> Message-ID: <0c5501c56612$ff2841c0$1404fea9@xyz> > > Anyone catch Lydon's first show either last night on GBH or this morning on > > WUML? > > I listened to the intro, decided it sounded like a lot of fatuous > nonsense, and switched it off. for more see: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fatuous ;-) From joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com Tue May 31 16:48:40 2005 From: joepappalardo2001@yahoo.com (Joseph Pappalardo) Date: Tue May 31 16:50:28 2005 Subject: jocks Message-ID: <000a01c56622$23286be0$1404fea9@xyz> What Boston jocks have their own web sites? Anyone know of any? Joe From abruzzese@biochem.bumc.bu.edu Tue May 31 17:11:30 2005 From: abruzzese@biochem.bumc.bu.edu (Tony Abruzzese) Date: Tue May 31 17:11:21 2005 Subject: jocks In-Reply-To: <000a01c56622$23286be0$1404fea9@xyz> References: <000a01c56622$23286be0$1404fea9@xyz> Message-ID: <429CD302.50904@biochem.bumc.bu.edu> Joseph Pappalardo wrote: >What Boston jocks have their own web sites? > >Anyone know of any? > >Joe > > > > J.J. Wright used to have his own, as well as being a web design consultant. I don't know if he has kept up that sideline from pre-'ROR 105.7 days. Brian Bell (Loren&Wally producer, host of L&W Primetime on WROR) has maintained lungboy.com separately from the official WROR pages. Tony Tony From RBello@BelloAssoc.com Tue May 31 21:28:43 2005 From: RBello@BelloAssoc.com (Ron Bello) Date: Tue May 31 21:28:38 2005 Subject: jocks In-Reply-To: <429CD302.50904@biochem.bumc.bu.edu> References: <000a01c56622$23286be0$1404fea9@xyz> <429CD302.50904@biochem.bumc.bu.edu> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20050531212744.02ceaa90@pop.gis.net> At 05:11 PM 5/31/2005, Tony Abruzzese wrote: >Joseph Pappalardo wrote: > >>What Boston jocks have their own web sites? >> >>Anyone know of any? >> >>Joe >> >> >> >J.J. Wright used to have his own, as well as being a web design >consultant. I don't know if he has kept up that sideline from pre-'ROR >105.7 days. Yes, he has @ JJWright.com