Re: Legal IDs and the FCC

[Dan Strassberg <dan.strassberg@worldnet.att.net>]

At 12:52 PM 4/30/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Hello:
>
>WXKS-AM, when I was there in 84-85 had a different ID, which just became
>legal to do at the time.   Since we had the changed COL to Everett, my idea
>was to say "WXKS, Everett, with studios in Medford."    We had just changed
>COL with an ID as "Everett" only and many Medfordites rose a stink over it.
> So, we placated them by doing the 'studios' addition.    So, why not BOSTON,
>too?    With that format, it wasn't necessary to try to be a big Boston
>blaster, imagewise.  People kind of accepted that this was
>Medford-old-peoples' music.
>
>----jibguy
>
Heck, you could have placated the aggrieved citizens of Medford even more by
saying "with studios and transmitter in Medford." It was 100% true and I
doubt that, under any FCC rules, that true statement could have been a cause
for FCC action against the station. I remember in the 40s, the AM 1480 in
Jersey City IDed as WHOM Jersey City with studios also in New York. Yet
later, when the AM 1280 wanted to identify itself as WOV New York and
Carlstadt the FCC gave them a hard time and forced them to stop. I think, in
this case, the purpose of the dual ID was to make it legal to program from
the TX site in Carlstadt. I believe that, at the time, programming actually
had to originate from the COL (for at least some number of hours each day)
and WOV wanted to get around that requirement by specifying both New York
and Carlstadt as COLs.

- -------------------------------
Dan Strassberg (Note: Address is CASE SENSITIVE!)
ALL _LOWER_ CASE!!!--> dan.strassberg@worldnet.att.net
(617) 558-4205; Fax (617) 928-4205

------------------------------