Re: WBZ-AM protects purity of airwaves again

["Bill O'Neill" <billo@erols.com>]

Donna writes:  <snip>  You and I may think the whole thing is silly,
but for
>stations like WBZ, they feel they have a certain image to maintain,
and
>part of that image involves being "family friendly".

I applaud any signal that has the (dare I say it) courage to avoid the
lowest common denominator.  It seems that many local stations' local
shows (if there are any) have to play it safe more for economic
reasons (read: advertisers).  If I started hearing the "new,
acceptable slang" on serious news stations, I'd begin to think short
wave, propane powered generators, MREs and a lookout tower for black
helicopters.  (Okay, maybe I just got a little carried away....)

Ratings might be a novel way to discern where people really are today.
Even if you discount the fall ARB book's results with the newly
expanded market boundaries, look at the true winners:  WBZ and WCRB.
Look at the dive that WRKO dook in PM drive, according to today's
Herald article.  I won't accept the "Bill & Monica burnout factor" as
the sole factor.  The last time I checked, WBMX, WODS and others were
more music and _less_ talk, for the most part.

Bill O'Neill

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