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


<<On Sun, 13 Jul 1997 13:00:49 -0400, Donna Halper <dlh@donnahalper.com> said:

> station, to get WBZ's signal into Boston.  When in March of 1931 the call
> letter swap occurred, the purpose never changed-- Westinghouse had a
> commitment to cover all of Massachusetts with the WBZ signal, and if that
> meant having two stations simulcasting, so be it.      

But the real question which remains unanswered was: did the Commission
consider the ``booster'' somehow ``special'', such that, in order to
effect this swap, WBZ was /moved/ from Springfield to Boston and WBZA
from Boston to Springfield, or was it rather the case that the
callsigns themselves were simply transposed.  It makes a difference if
we're defining longevity in the sense of license continuity, since
WBZA did not sign on until some time after WBZ.

- -GAWollman

- --
Garrett A. Wollman   | O Siem / We are all family / O Siem / We're all the same
wollman@lcs.mit.edu  | O Siem / The fires of freedom 
Opinions not those of| Dance in the burning flame
MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA|                     - Susan Aglukark and Chad Irschick