Re: WXKS-AM

[Dan.Strassberg@att.net]

Sure. When WXKS (AM) added night service, the interference-free night signal 
could not meet city-of-license requirements for the old COL--Medford. A lot of 
Medford is west of the 99 Revere Beach Parkaway transmitter site and hence lies 
in the nulls of the night pattern. Fortunately, Everett, lies to the east--in 
the area of maximum signal strength and the signal arrives in much of Everett 
over highly conductive salt water. With the very high level of interference on 
1430 at night, I suspect that Everett is the ONLY community that could qualify 
as WXKS's COL. I suspect that even Malden wouldn't cut it. In any event, 
Everett was not the COL of any other broadcast station, so it was an ideal 
choice.

Kind of too bad, though, that whoever designed WXKS's night facilities was more 
interested in adding billable air time than in providing realistic coverage of 
the market. At the time WXKS filed its application for night service, there was 
no such thing as a nighttime authorization for a Class D AM. By the time the 
station got the nighttime facilities on the air, however, the FCC had started 
to grant nighttime operation to daytimers.

Bob Bittner is no friend of Clear Channel, which owns WXKS, but CCU would be 
well advised to try to strike a deal with Bob to use WJIB's tower for a night-
only synchronous transmitter. With a few watts from 443 Concord Ave, WXKS could 
add quite a bit of population to its nighttime coverage. Another synchronous Tx 
at WNTN's site on Rumford Ave on the Newton-Waltham line would also help. From 
a technical standpoint, I think both sites are feasible. And since WNTN doesn't 
operate at night, the relatively small frequency difference (7.74% of the 
higher frequency) would not be a problem.
--
dan.strassberg@att.net
617-558-4205
eFax 707-215-6367

> Hi Dan:
> 
> DO you know why 'XKS-AM changed it's license from Medford to Everett?
> 
> 
> John
> 
>