Re: networks/newscasts-vs-spots run

["Shel Swartz" <shel@lotsofun.com>]

- -----Original Message-----
From: Tim Davisson <timdav@bright.net>
To: FMradio1@aol.com <FMradio1@aol.com>; Sptseditor@aol.com
<Sptseditor@aol.com>; lawyer@world.std.com <lawyer@world.std.com>;
boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
<boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Date: Monday, July 20, 1998 7:17 AM
Subject: Re: networks/newscasts-vs-spots run


>Mike & group......
>
>>
>> I was under the impression that as long as a station cleared the spots
>from
>> the newscasts in an equal or greater daypart from which they were
>scheduled,
>> that it could, concievably,  run NONE of the newscasts.  Even before WBZ
>was
>> owned by CBS, they were a CBS affiliate, but yet it runs none of their
>> newscasts, and ditto for ABC news, except for late nights.  Can anyone
>> clarify??
>
>Mike & all: I believe above is correct....that's what happened when
>WKNR/Cleveland dropped
>CBS news, but kept running the spots.  And I
>think your newscasts-to-spots ratio is correct.
>
>Tim D./Akron, Ohio



You are quite correct, Tim.  Smaller stations often run national network
spots pulled from the network,  more than they have to, free.  That way,
they could tell a local advertiser, "Hey Delta Airlines ruins ads with
us.....". That was my idea many years ago, and as simple aas it is, it's
oten effective, and I'm sorta proud of it.  It enabled one broadcaster here
in south Florida to make some money with his low-rated AM station!

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