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

[mwaters@wesleyan.edu (Martin J. Waters)]

Paul R. Hopfgarten wrote:

>To All:
>
>#1) ARS has trashed WRKO, no question about....
>
>However, I think that having 1260/WNAC=680/WRKO is not going to compute
>with the vast majority of listeners ('BZ had no frequency or call letter
>changes {WBZA not withstanding} since NARBA, and many more people will
>remember.
>
<snip>
>
>Question, how (in general) would you time-line a station?
>
>Since 680's ownership has changed many times, would not the start date of
>WLAW be the more accurate place to start
>
<snip>

        Others also have questioned tracing the lineage of WRKO back to
1922, which surprises me. Garrett and Donna have answered that. By the
usually accepted basis of tracing a station, continuity of a chain of
ownership and operation, there is no question in this case. Last year,
nobody questioned WBZ's anniversary. That station now has been sold, but
that didn't matter. It shouldn't. Call letters come and go. Some other
heritage stations don't have their original call letters. WABC and WCBS are
well-known cases. No station has the same format it did in 1922. There was
basically one radio format then -- variety. Sign on for a couple hours,
pray that the transmitter stayed on the air, broadcast something. It seems
to me that there is an underlying animosity toward WRKO as it exists now,
and toward ARS, that is behind some of the comments. On the other hand,
it's OK for WBZ, as all-news, and as still--by the prevailing "standards"
of the business--a well-run station that most people on the group respect.
Criticizing WRKO's current operation should be one thing, and the
anniversary question another, IMO.

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