Re: Re:Re:Wired.com on Reversing Consolidation

[Dave Faneuf <tklaundry@juno.com>]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 00:22:47 -0500 (EST) Garrett Wollman
<wollman@lcs.mit.edu> writes:
> <<On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 04:57:46 GMT, Dave Faneuf <tklaundry@juno.com> 
> said:
> 
> > Am I remembering the GOP Congressman story incorrectly?  
> Apparently
> > IIRC the dominant media forces in his district were all owned by a
> > person who disagreed with him politically and slanted news etc to
> > his own end.
> 
> He was in a weird situation: his district is north of Dallas/Fort
> Worth, in an area which was raped for DFW rimshot move-ins, so none 
> of
> the local stations which ostensibly ought to have served the area 
> had
> any interest in him -- and the one he ran into trouble with was
> essentially the only *local* station left.  There are few places in
> the country that got screwed by the FCC and Docket 80-90 nearly as
> badly as the small cities within a hundred miles of every big city 
> in
> Texas.
>GAWollman

Why would you think that unusual?   Look at the Boston market, how many
outlying stations here are pretending to be Boston stations and ignoring
their COL?  Without doing any research there's  WKLB (Lowell) Star93
(Lawrence) WXRV (Haverhill) 
WROR (Framingham) even KISS 108 (Medford).  All of these stations are
"supposed" to serve the community but just try to get a local political
spot or issue on one of them.  This situation existed even before the
monopoly......uhhh.....lifting of the restrictions on station ownership
were in place, 
df

(ps, was the above formatted correctly?  If so then the problem lies when
I access my account through the web)