WNSH/WPEP

[Joseph Pappalardo]

>
> But the question still remains - on what grounds would it have been
challenged?
>
> "People in Taunton" don't hold the WPEP license. Anastos Broadcasting
does.

Taunton community leaders and oficials (Mayor, etc), could make a case for
consideration, due to the fact that two "out of town" operators negotiated
to take away their radio service.

> (Look at what happened - can it
> already be more than a decade ago? - with WLIB and WOWO.)

But this was the same owner of both stations, wasn't it?

Secondly, WOWO didn't dissappear, it simply altered it's pattern.

> "People in Taunton" had several opportunities to buy WPEP over the years.

Did they?  My guess is the majority of Taunton didn't even know it was for
sale.  (Never mind that it was part of a Beverly application to shut it
down.)

> >"Special Circumstances" might be a premise that for consideration of an
> >application.  (Since it is not for a 'new' station, but to continue
service
> >to the community....a community that is losing it's station.)
>
> But in the eyes of the FCC, Taunton is not losing radio service. The
> situation would be somewhat different if WSNE were not licensed there -
but
> it is, and since the FCC doesn't consider programming issues and WSNE
meets
> whatever minimal standards currently exist for service to its community of
> license, there are no "special circumstances" that would hold water here.

WSNE is an higher powered FM station which serves a much larger
audience/area.

No amount of WSNE programming originates from Taunton.

> The FCC takes the window process very seriously. Every applicant could
come
> up with some sort of "special circumstances"; the use of windows keeps
> everything on a reasonably even keel nationwide.

Good lawyers can make the case for just about anything.

You can indict a ham sandwich.

You can sue *anybody* for just about *anything*.

A good comm lawyer can petition the FCC for just about anything.

Again, it would not need a 'window' for a new license.

Just a petition to deny the facilities upgrade.

(Which, no doubt, should've been done long ago, had inetested parties been
aware of the deal.)