[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FW: Oops 7/4...and WRKO!

What a riot!

...and who the hell is this Sarah Wight (@wrko.com)????  (Obviously
someone who has no value for WRKO's heritage...)

Gee, why do they have a mailbox "feedback@wrko.com" if they really have
NO respect for the thoughts, opinion and 'feedback' of the listeners....

I guess she takes a lot of pride in job....and her station.....

If you have the original post....you should send them along to "The
Inside Track", Susan Bickelhaupt and Dean Johnson.....alontg with a
letter saying that you sent this to the 'feedback' address at WRKO....
and this is what you got for a response.  

I would love to see the Globe or Herald do a story on how badly WRKO is
trying to bring down their demo's..and that this is a trend of many
older-leaning stations...i.e... Michael Jackson at KABC, Jerry Williams,
IGNORING their Anniversary!

BTW...with all the changes at WRKO from Jeff Katz, to the Two Chicks, to
the inclusion of foul language...to 'modernized' liners...and Howie
Carr's Stern wannabe approach...They haven't done anything to raise
their 25-54 numbers to any significant extent.  

Donna siad she spoke to John Gehron and said he was a 'pretty nice guy'.
 I hear good things about him as well.....and he was brought to American
Radio to run their Boston operation.  You may remember him bringing in
Phyllis Levy as the host of 'Sex Talk' in the evenings.  I had high
hopes for his influence on their stations.  

But apparentyly he is keeping a 'low-profile'...becuase I haven't seen
him make his mark on the Boston operation....and I haven't seen anyone
attribute anything happenning there to him.  


- -------- REPLY, Original message follows --------

> Date: Wednesday, 09-Jul-97 01:51 PM
> From: Roger Kirk               \ Internet:    (rkirk@mail1.videoserver
> As you can see, WRKO really doesn't even care?
>  ----------
> From:  Sarah Wight[SMTP:sarah@wrko.com]
> Sent:  Wednesday, July 09, 1997 9:35 AM
> To:  RKirk
> Subject:  Re: Oops 7/4
> I think you have too much time on your hands
>  ----------