Sat Jan 7 07:07:02 EST 2017
I think at one point things like the Globe's TV magazine had a page with a
chart showing cable TV channel positions in various locations.
I haven't bought TVGuide in years but at one point they had a whole bunch
of channels to list and in some cases they had to use different symbols;if
they somehow listed both the channel 6s in Portland and New Bedford, one
would be a white 6 in a black TV shaped background while the other was a
black 6 in a white background. Or was that a local newspaper doing that.
It's a bunch of confusion with the likes of channel numbers, virtual ones,
or cable ones.Ch 50 in NH is probably on another channel number really and
I think they actually use the number 18 because that's where they are on
many cable systems. I think Ch 22 in Burlington VT area would say, "Channel
22, Cable 4". NBCBoston is saying "Ch 10 on most providers" but there are
various channel locations between Ch 8 WBTS, Ch 60 in NH for those over the
air, and a subchannel of WMFP 62..and yet we hear they're on 60.5 not
On Friday, January 6, 2017, Bob DeMattia <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Charter Worcester, WJAR is only available SD. Same thing for WGGB.
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 10:15 PM, Paul Anderson <firstname.lastname@example.org
> > > No 25.3 (Laff TV)?
> > I guess I forgot to put that on the list. Yes, I get 25.3.
> > > No Providence (10 or 12 anyway)?
> > Nothing from Providence. My antenna is a Mohu 50-mile job but it’s
> > mounted inside on an exterior wall facing east-northeast.
> > Concerning newspaper TV listings, what a mess! The Worcester Telegram &
> > Gazette daily paper shows WJAR as “17” and out-of-order, listing it in
> > old spot before WPRI channel 12. Granted that’s their cable position for
> > their SD signal, but… And who really watches the SD channel of any
> > these days? Don’t most people have HD TVs?
> > I saw no NBC Boston listings in either the MetroWest Daily News, the
> > Boston Globe or the Boston Herald on Tuesday, but as reported here, the
> > Herald seems to have caught up.
> > The papers would be better off using call letters with a guide showing
> > cable positions. But I suppose there’s not room in the daily paper for
> > that.
> > Paul
More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest