[B R-I] Re: W279BQ-103.7 On-Air (Where?); New Pirate On 94.9?

[Dan.Strassberg]

I guess nothing is too absurd for the FCC. Aren't translators supposed
to be the most local of local services? If so, in the FCC's Alice in
Wonderland world, what could make more sense than to require no local
content, no local ID, and no coverage of the CoL? And with so much now
invested in translators--mainly by the Religious Right, who have
enormous political clout in DC--the likelihood of this absurd
situation ever being corrected appears (only a bit optimistically) to
be zero.

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

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Fybush" <scott@fybush.com>
To: <boston-radio-interest@lists.BostonRadio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: [B R-I] Re: W279BQ-103.7 On-Air (Where?); New Pirate On
94.9?
>
> COL is pretty nearly irrelevant where translators are concerned.
> There's no requirement that a translator cover all (or any) of its
> COL, nor that it have a public file or provide any public-interest
> programming to that community. It doesn't even need to have an aural
> ID with the COL mentioned, so long as it does an FSK ID.