WBZ should hang it's head in shame

[Paul Anderson]

On May 31, 2012, at 3:40 PM, Chris Hall wrote:

> Most of us have very fond feelings for WBZ but it is 2012 not 1985. KISS-108 sounded great in 1985 and it would be great nostalgia but it would not be viable CHR in 2012. While almost all the other CBS Radio owned and programmed news outlets have moved along with the times WBZ is stagnant in the past to its detriment and that is sad. They get away with it because there is no competition, Do you think CBS would sit back and allow WBZ-TV to look and sound like they did in 1987.......never. Someone in the organization would be wise to bring in the programmers from WINS and WCBS before it is too late.

What, exactly, would you do to improve WBZ?  Although a lot of the news is repetitious, and most of the traffic reports don't pertain to me, and Boston weather is different than in the center of the state, I find the pace and level of information just right.  I listen for 20-30 minutes on my commute in the morning.  This pattern is exactly what all-news stations expect.

I'm familiar with both WCBS and WINS in New York.  Would you want WBZ to sound like either of those?  I don't think we need a teletype bed like WINS (ask your friends if they know what that sound is and you'll probably get blank stares), although I've always liked their top-of-hour sounder.  What does WCBS do that WBZ does not?

I'm afraid you'd suggest more glitz and a faster pace, both of which would not add anything to the station.

Sounding like 1985 is not bad if it works.  I think WBZ's pacing is good for an all-news station.

Your young friends who don't know about WBZ are quite out of touch.  If the station was on FM, they'd know about it.  Their ignorance of WBZ is more due to the band the station is on, and the general lack of interest in news by younger listeners, instead of the sound of the station, I suspect.

Paul

P.S.  And you misspelled "its" in your subject line.