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

Re: Fun with rimshotters

To: Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com>, mwaters@wesleyan.edu
Subject: Re: Fun with rimshotters
From: Aaron Read <aread@speakeasy.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 14:12:04 -0500
Cc: boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20030219133750.03498938@mail.rochester.rr.com>
References: <20030219183120.7736.qmail@web12102.mail.yahoo.com><5.1.0.14.0.20030218234156.034e7fa8@mail.rochester.rr.com>
Sender: owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org

At 01:43 PM 2/19/2003 -0500, Scott Fybush wrote:
>Yes and no. TV's don't automatically have "-TV" as part of the calls, as 
>witness my own WOKR(TV) here in Rochester. I think - but
>don't know for sure - that it would be acceptable to have a base call on 
>WGBH(TV) and a suffixed call on WGBH-FM, though
>that is not the case here. (It's WGBH-TV; the non-suffixed ones are 
>WFXT(TV), WUNI(TV), WWDP(TV), WYDN(TV), WMFP(TV),
>WUTF(TV) and WBPX(TV)...)

What about with DTV?  Is it required to say WHDH-DT for example?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aaron "Bishop" Read             aread@speakeasy.net
FriedBagels Consulting          AOL-IM: readaaron
http://www.friedbagels.com      Boston, MA

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fun with rimshotters
  - From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>
- Re: Fun with rimshotters
  - From: Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com>

References:
- Re: Fun with rimshotters
  - From: Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com>
- Re: Fun with rimshotters
  - From: Scott Fybush <scott@fybush.com>

Prev by Date: Re: WCYI/WHOM
Next by Date: Re: Fun with rimshotters...
Previous by thread: Re: Fun with rimshotters
Next by thread: Re: Fun with rimshotters
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread