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

Re: WHDH drops playoffs

It makes no sense. Why do we need three or four stations to watch a debate on?
They have pool feeds why not pool stations. These news dept. egos need to be
trimmed. More people are probably interested in the playoff game than are
interested in the debate in the first place and the debate is available elsewhere.
In this day and age we need an FCC rule against simulcasting. Then the news
departments would just have to take turns. It just no longer makes any sense to
have the same program on 3 or 4 channels its a waste of TV bandwidth. I'd even
argue that the modern day political debates aren't news anywise but more like like
long political commercials but I'll save that discussion for another day. I think
the WWF could get bigger ratings if they where up against them... I know lest
combine the two.

Hmmm now wait if UMass blows up right in the middle of it I have no problem with
the other two stations going live..... In fact I'd want to know!... so I guess I
don't want a simulcast rule against breaking news just boring news or political

Sptseditor@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 9/26/2000 10:10:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> tklaundry@juno.com writes:
> << The Boston Herald reports WHDH will pre-empt the first round of the AL
>  playoffs in favor of carrying the presidential debate Oct 3.  No word on
>  whether NBC will put the playoffs on channel 68 in Boston or not. >>
> Makes sense seeing the debate's in Boston and the Sox are eliminated from the
> playoffs. I would imagine NBC would probably put the game on Channel 68;
> especially with its satellite stations, it would equal and/or surpass Channel
> 7's signal.
> A few years ago, Channel 5 had to pre-empt a regular-season Sox game for one
> reason or another (when "The Baseball Network" was airing regional Saturday
> night contests through ABC) and Channel 68 picked it up. If anyone remembers,
> there was a controversy of sorts, since Channel 38 was squaking about how it
> should have aired the game, since it was still holding Sox rights at the time.