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

[Paul B. Walker, Jr.]

No Dan, they are not the most local of local service.. they are unprotected
fill in services, supposedly
Paul


On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Dan.Strassberg <dan.strassberg@att.net>wrote:

> 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.
>>
>
>