WGBH Greater Boston covers the meeting, "classical changes"

Dan.Strassberg dan.strassberg@att.net
Thu Jan 7 07:37:32 EST 2010

One of those stations would be WPLM-FM. For any proposal to be
acceptable to Ms Campbell, WPLM's coverage of Boston, Providence, and
Cape Cod would have to be maintained. Although WPLM is a full B (that
is, not a B1), it does not have full B facilities because its HAAT is
only 430' (equivalent to ~38 kW @ 492' AAT) and it is severely
short-spaced to at least one co-channel station (WPLR New Haven). As
you know, Ms Campbell has repeatedly rejected very large offers to buy
WPLM-FM. Unless her finnancial situation has radically deteriorated,
you can expect that she would reject out-of-hand any proposal that
would not at least maintain WPLM's existing coverage. Of course, if
the FCC were to waive its rules to permit a move of WCRB that would
protect WPLM's actual facilities (as opposed to protecting a station
sited at WPLM's location but having an HAAT 62' higher than WPLM's),
WCRB could improve its signal in Boston proper and parts of the South
Shore without even having to change in its CoL. In this scenario,
which would fully protect WPLM's existing contours, WCRB would move to
the WMKK site (where is it, Saugus?), where it could probably diplex
right from WMKK's antenna. However, everyone I've asked about the
possibility of such a rule change or waiver has told me to

So. what would become of WPLM under your proposal?

Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
To: <raccoonradio@mail.com>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 10:10 PM
Subject: WGBH Greater Boston covers the meeting, "classical changes"

> <<On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:25:21 -0500, raccoonradio@mail.com said:
>>  http://www.wgbh.org/greater_boston/index.cfm
>> Look for "classical changes"
>> "Boos and hisses; problems, complaints, and some support"
> One misstatement in the report was the claim (also made by Mr. Voci
> at
> the forum last night) that it is not possible to improve WCRB's
> signal.  This is of course not true; it would simply involve
> spending
> a lot of money (I guesstimated $20 million).  That would get them a
> full class-B from the Pru, but would require moving or changing five
> allotments.  (Two of the stations involved are owned by companies
> that
> are currently bankrupt.)  Having said that, if I were WGBH
> management,
> I would not consider it a prudent investment -- it would be cheaper
> to
> simply give an HD tuner to every complainer in the hall.
> I asked Voci after the event about changing the programming source
> on
> W242AA.  He gave some smokescreen about FCC rules -- which is
> hogwash;
> from an FCC perspective it does not matter whether 96.3 relays 89.7
> or
> 89.7-HD2 -- but admitted that they were considering it.  That would
> solve the problem with the rich people on Beacon Hill -- like the
> "leader of a major cultural institution" -- who are unable to get
> 99.5.  (Unlike some of the complainers, I actually find it
> believable
> that there would be people on the south side of Beacon Hill who
> couldn't get 99.5, given the unfavorable topography and the
> front-end
> overload from the seven stations on the Pru.)
> -GAWollman

More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest mailing list