[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[1]RE>boston-radio-interest-digest V4 #73
Happy 4th of July Weekend!
Our offices are CLOSED. We will re-open on Wednesday July 5th. If this is
urgent, you may page me at 617-408-1935. Otherwise, I'll be sure to get back to
you Wednesday.
Have a safe and fun 4th!!!
On 07/01/2000, boston-radio-interest wrote:
>
>boston-radio-interest-digest Saturday, July 1 2000
>Volume 04 : Number 073
>
>
>
>Subjects in this issue:
>
> Re: WCRB (programming)
> Re: WCRB (programming)
> Re: WCRB (programming)
> Re: WCRB (programming)
> WFAD
> Re: WFAD
> WBOT
> Re: WBOT
> Re: WDME
> Re: WCRB (programming)
> NERW 6/30: Holiday Hiatus
> Saturday Hop?
> Re: WBOT
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>-------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 02:15:13 -0400
>From: "Dan Strassberg"
><Dan.Strassberg@worldnet.att.net>
>Subject: Re: WCRB (programming)
>
>I feel rather uncomfortable with the concept of
>government deciding how
>programming should broaden the horizons or elevate
>the tastes of the
>listening public. On the other hand, I don't think
>such attempts _have_ to
>wind up as cures that are worse than the disease.
>The CRTC controls formats
>and imposes requirements on Canadian content. In so
>doing, they exclude some
>formats that might succeed. In Toronto, for
>example, didn't the CRTC just
>decide against granting a CP to a group named
>"Aboriginal Voices?" I think
>the CRTC's judgment was that the applicant didn't
>provide enough details
>about the proposed programming and that the
>minorities the programming would
>have served do not represent a suffcient slice of
>the large population of
>metro Toronto. Of course, there's certainly a
>strong argument that the
>marketplace, and not the CRTC, should have been
>allowed to make that
>decision.
>
>But in the US, the FCC used to require licenseees
>to provide a minimal
>amount of news and public affairs programming. To
>my knowledge, the FCC
>never specified what kind of public affairs
>programming. And "lifestyle
>news", which is arguably not news at all, could
>have satisfied the news
>requirement. In my opinion, both radio and the
>listening public are much the
>poorer for the elimination of that requirement. I
>know the opposing
>argument--that in most markets there are enough
>signals to fulfill the
>public's need for news and public affairs. Still,
>requiring all stations to
>broadcast news, even to an uninterested public, in
>my mind, was a good
>thing, and was consistent with granting private
>broadcasters licenses to use
>the the public airwaves.
>
>- --
>
>Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg@worldnet.att.net
>Phone: 1-617-558-4205, eFax: 1-707-215-6367
>
>- -----Original Message-----
>From: Dib9@aol.com <Dib9@aol.com>
>To: Jibguy@aol.com <Jibguy@aol.com>;
>umar@nerodia.wcrb.com
><umar@nerodia.wcrb.com>; lglavin@lycosmail.com
><lglavin@lycosmail.com>
>Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
><boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
>Date: Thursday, June 29, 2000 11:19 PM
>Subject: Re: WCRB (programming)
>
>
>>My serious answer to your first two questions is
>who judges what is a
>>"positive influence" and how do you set standards
>that licensees can be
>held
>>to? What stations would you say provide nothing
>positive? If people
>listen
>>to a station, doesn't that mean that a portion of
>the public finds the
>>station to be providing something positive?
>>
>>As for public affairs programming: I do not think
>such a requirement is
>>necessary, though the FCC clearly has the
>authority to make such
>requirements
>>under the law.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 07:31:04 EDT
>From: Dib9@aol.com
>Subject: Re: WCRB (programming)
>
>If stations had met the FCC requirements by putting
>significant resources
>into producing quality public affairs programming,
>which they broadcast
>during times when people actually listen, I would
>not disagree that this
>might have some public benefit. The problem is
>that many stations met this
>requirement by broadcasting "lifestyle" news as you
>mentioned or running
>public affairs shows at 6 AM on Sunday morning. I
>do not believe that
>anything has been lost by ending the requirement to
>run such shows.
>
>- -- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine
>
>In a message dated 6/30/00 2:17:52 AM Eastern
>Daylight Time,
>Dan.Strassberg@worldnet.att.net writes:
>
><< But in the US, the FCC used to require licensees
>to provide a minimal
> amount of news and public affairs programming. To
>my knowledge, the FCC
> never specified what kind of public affairs
>programming. And "lifestyle
> news", which is arguably not news at all, could
>have satisfied the news
> requirement. In my opinion, both radio and the
>listening public are much the
> poorer for the elimination of that requirement.
>>>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 08:28:16 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Sven Franklyn Weil <sven@gordsven.com>
>Subject: Re: WCRB (programming)
>
>On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 Jibguy@aol.com wrote:
>> I feel an LTAR debate at WJTO coming
>> on.......
>> ----jibguy
>
>No LTAR on WJIB anymore?
>
>- --
>Sven F. Weil
>email: sven@chookus.com
>WWW homepage:
>http://home.gordsven.com/gordsven/sven
>RadioLand Site:
>http://home.gordsven.com/gordsven/sven/radiomuseum.
>html
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 10:08:11 -0500
>From: "Ronald Steele" <ekul2891@ifriendly.com>
>Subject: Re: WCRB (programming)
>
>- ----------
>>From: "Dan Strassberg"
><Dan.Strassberg@worldnet.att.net>
>>To: <Dib9@aol.com>, <Jibguy@aol.com>,
><umar@nerodia.wcrb.com>,
><lglavin@lycosmail.com>
>>Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
>>Subject: Re: WCRB (programming)
>>Date: Fri, Jun 30, 2000, 1:15 AM
>>
>
>> I feel rather uncomfortable with the concept of
>government deciding how
>> programming should broaden the horizons or
>elevate the tastes of the
>> listening public. On the other hand, I don't
>think such attempts _have_ to
>> wind up as cures that are worse than the disease.
>
>Well, I think the CBC and BBC are two stellar
>examples. Some great programs,
>both cultural, and the more "cutting edge new
>stuff" have been provided by
>those organizations.
>
>Luke Steele
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 13:24:22 -0400
>From: "Bill O'Neill" <billo@erols.com>
>Subject: WFAD
>
>Curious if anyone knows anything about WFAD (1490
>Middlebury, VT) It
>looks like we'll be calling that area "home" in
>about a month. I've
>heard a lot of local talk "Talk of Vermont" and
>they do a lot with their
>CBS affil. in terms of features, etc. Talent
>sounds solid. Not sure
>about the local NX commitment. For a 1 kW D/N (I
>think), they footprint
>pretty well even to Burlington about 30 mi. N.
>Their ADI seems to be
>Addison Cty. pop. around 60K?
>
> Bill O'Neill
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 17:14:35 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Sven Franklyn Weil <sven@gordsven.com>
>Subject: Re: WFAD
>
>http://www.wfad.com
>
>That's their website - they have a programming grid
>(albeit somewhat
>awkward).
>
>They have none of the requisite Rush Limbaugh and
>Dr. Laura bird-droppings
>that every talk station now seems compelled to
>have.
>
>
> KEWWLLLL
>
>On Fri, 30 Jun 2000, Bill O'Neill wrote:
>
>> Curious if anyone knows anything about WFAD (1490
>Middlebury, VT)
>
>- --
>Sven F. Weil
>email: sven@chookus.com
>WWW homepage:
>http://home.gordsven.com/gordsven/sven
>RadioLand Site:
>http://home.gordsven.com/gordsven/sven/radiomuseum.
>html
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:55:03 -0400
>From: "Paul Hopfgarten" <hopfgapr@sprynet.com>
>Subject: WBOT
>
>WBOT (COL Brockton MA) AKA Hot 97.7 has begun using
>live DJ's on the air,
>though not yet in Morning Drive. Some female with a
>'faddish' hip-hop name
>does middays and one "Chuck-Dog" does afternoons.
>They had a "live" outdoors
>show last Friday (6/23) at thier 90 Warren St
>Roxbury (Yes, WILD's studios).
>
>I'm kind of surprised there's been no mention of
>this on this BB.
>
>Interesting follow-up.....although I realize they
>(WBOT) got a decent winter
>book (1.2) in Boston for a brand new under 50kw
>suburban outlet, if appears
>they may not be getting quite the traction in
>Boston Proper they'd hoped.
>
>The afternoon DJ was encouraging people to
>call...and lamented that all the
>callers were from Brockton...he was wondering aloud
>where all the 'boys from
>the Rox(bury) were?'
>
>Where, indeed...
>
>- -Paul Hopfgarten
>- -'in the 'hood of Derry NH
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
>> [mailto:owner-boston-radio-
>interest@bostonradio.org]On Behalf Of Bill
>> O'Neill
>> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:24 PM
>> To: Boston Radio Interest
>> Subject: WFAD
>>
>>
>> Curious if anyone knows anything about WFAD (1490
>Middlebury, VT) It
>> looks like we'll be calling that area "home" in
>about a month. I've
>> heard a lot of local talk "Talk of Vermont" and
>they do a lot with their
>> CBS affil. in terms of features, etc. Talent
>sounds solid. Not sure
>> about the local NX commitment. For a 1 kW D/N (I
>think), they footprint
>> pretty well even to Burlington about 30 mi. N.
>Their ADI seems to be
>> Addison Cty. pop. around 60K?
>>
>> Bill O'Neill
>>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 19:16:30 EDT
>From: Dib9@aol.com
>Subject: Re: WBOT
>
>In a message dated 6/30/00 6:49:20 PM Eastern
>Daylight Time,
>hopfgapr@sprynet.com writes:
>
><< one "Chuck-Dog" does afternoons. >>
>
>Chuck Dog? That's very close to Chuck Igo. I'd
>like to hear Chuck on an
>urban station.
>
>- -- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 21:29:37 -0400
>From: rickganley@juno.com
>Subject: Re: WDME
>
>WDME is now in the restored Bank Building in
>dowtown Dover-Foxcroft.
>
>The train car was sold in 1997.
>
>- -Rick G.
>
>
>
>On Thu, 29 Jun 2000 23:22:10 EDT Dib9@aol.com
>writes:
>> I was driving through Sebec, Maine yesterday and
>beside the road in
>> Sebec was
>> the old train car that used to house WDME.
>Apparently, the station
>> no longer
>> broadcasts from the train car. Does anyone know
>when the move
>> occurred and
>> why?
>>
>> -- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine
>
>___________________________________________________
>_____________
>YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
>Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
>Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE
>software, visit:
>http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 22:42:46 -0400
>From: "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@world.std.com>
>Subject: Re: WCRB (programming)
>
>On 30 Jun 2000, Dan Strassberg wrote:
>
>> But in the US, the FCC used to require licenseees
>to provide a minimal
>> amount of news and public affairs programming. To
>my knowledge, the FCC
>> never specified what kind of public affairs
>programming. And "lifestyle
>> news", which is arguably not news at all, could
>have satisfied the news
>> requirement. In my opinion, both radio and the
>listening public are much
>> the poorer for the elimination of that
>requirement. I know the opposing
>> argument--that in most markets there are enough
>signals to fulfill the
>> public's need for news and public affairs. Still,
>requiring all stations to
>> broadcast news, even to an uninterested public,
>in my mind, was a good
>> thing, and was consistent with granting private
>broadcasters licenses to
>> use the the public airwaves.
>
>Amen! I, for one, learned quite a lot about the
>world by listening to the
>regular news broadcasts on WCOP, our teenage Top-40
>station. Especially
>since the news was better done then, on a station
>aimed at teenagers, than
>it is today on WBZ.
>
>
>===================================================
> A. Joseph Ross, J.D.
>617.367.0468
> 15 Court Square
>lawyer@world.std.com
> Boston, MA 02108-2503
>http://world.std.com/~lawyer/
>===================================================
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 00:57:55 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Scott D Fybush <fybush@world.std.com>
>Subject: NERW 6/30: Holiday Hiatus
>
>NERW will not be published this week (Friday 6/30)
>while we catch our
>breath from our recent travels and enjoy a long
>holiday weekend. (Wait,
>we work in the news business -- there's no such
>thing as a long holiday
>weekend!)
>
>In any event, given the dearth of news this week,
>we're taking a
>breather and will return with two weeks' worth of
>news, informed
>speculation, and opinion on Friday, July 7. See
>you all then!
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2000 01:12:16 -0400
>From: Donna Halper <dlh@donnahalper.com>
>Subject: Saturday Hop?
>
>Just found some more old TV Guides. I was looking
>at one from August of
>1956 and it advertised a new show with Norm
>Prescott and Alan Dary-- "a
>show for young moderns"-- that's what it said. It
>was called the Saturday
>Hop, and featured guests, plus dancing to the hits
>(of course). Does
>anybody remember this program? It aired at 6pm on
>Saturday, and I wonder
>if it was different from Stan Richards' "Totem Pole
>Matinee." (For the
>folks wondering why the TV Talk... all the
>aforementioned dee jays were
>also on radio at the time...)
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 05:51:39 EDT
>From: Chuckigo@aol.com
>Subject: Re: WBOT
>
><<Dan Billings wrote:
>Chuck Dog? That's very close to Chuck Igo. I'd
>like to hear Chuck on an
>urban station.>>
>
>Dan,
>
> i am on an urban station. WROR in Boston.
>Boston is more Urban that
>Bowdoinham, no? <g>
> coincidentally, our toll free number here (800
>468 1057 or 800 HOT 1057)
>rings in from all over the country, including the
>misdialers from Alabama who
>seem to think we play "Back That B---- Up" and the
>like. the toll-free for
>HOT 105 down there is an "877" area, and we get
>their requests all the time.
>JJ was ready to whoop me one upside my head the
>other night for trying to
>shine on one of the callers by affecting an "urban
>'tude & slang".
>
>- - -Chuck Igo (no relations to Chuck Roast, Chuck
>Wagon, or Chuck Dog...)
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of boston-radio-interest-digest V4 #73
>******************************************
>
>
>RFC822 header
>-----------------------------------
> Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu
>([18.24.4.193]) by exchange.wfnx.com with SMTP
>(Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version
>5.5.2650.21)
> id NHJFYPBD; Sat, 1 Jul 2000 05:53:35 -0400
> Received: (from majordom@localhost)
> by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id
>FAA06479
> for boston-radio-interest-digest-outgoing;
>Sat, 1 Jul 2000 05:52:51 -0400 (EDT)
> (envelope-from owner-boston-radio-interest-
>digest@bostonradio.org)
> Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 05:52:51 -0400 (EDT)
> Message-Id:
><200007010952.FAA06479@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
> From: owner-boston-radio-interest-
>digest@bostonradio.org (boston-radio-interest-
>digest)
> To: boston-radio-interest-digest@bostonradio.org
> Subject: boston-radio-interest-digest V4 #73
> Reply-To: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
> Sender: owner-boston-radio-interest-
>digest@bostonradio.org
> Errors-To: owner-boston-radio-interest-
>digest@bostonradio.org
> Precedence: bulk
>
>
Krissy Galster
FNX Radio Network
phone: 781-595-6200 x 208
e-mail: kgalster@fnxradio.com