-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
WCSB Flips to Jazz
- Thread starter Delete My Account
- Start date
The fact there exists zero critical thinking or anything resembling investigative journalism in this market is absolutely damning. Where's Roldo Bartimole when we need him most?
Heck, I miss when Roger Brown wrote on radio for the Plain Dealer. At least he was aware of the industry and market realities.
This is going over the line very quickly.
This is off-topic but I'm going to say it anyway. For twelve years (November 2010-December 2022), I was a member of the Governor's Council on Blindness and Visual Impairment (GCBVI) in the state of Arizona. There were (and still are) open meeting law requirements that we had to follow, including the publishing of the meeting agendas at least 72 hours beforehand. Members of the public were welcome to attend our meetings (the dates of the meetings were scheduled and well known far in advance). We did, though not all state comissions did this, give time to members if they wanted to speak their minds about any issues we weren't scheduled to discuss at the end of the meetings and sometimes we followed up. At any rate, we were well aware that there could be some real legal consequences if we didn't follow the state's open meeting laws.
I have no idea what the state of Ohio's open meeting laws are or even if the state legislature and governor always follow them. But I do know that, at least in the state of Arizona, if you are a government board or commission and you don't follow those laws and a controversy comes up because of decisions your group made without fully following those open meeting laws, the state board or commission you were on could find itself in real legal trouble.
As I said before, there is nothing in the state open meeting laws that require CSU to operate a radio station or return it to the students.
The only possible outcome from a lawsuit on this would be that the university would have to open the operation of the station to other bidders.
Any invalidating of the deal would be at best temporary. The university has been very clear that it no longer wants to operate a radio station.
The only possible outcome from a lawsuit on this would be that the university would have to open the operation of the station to other bidders.
Any invalidating of the deal would be at best temporary. The university has been very clear that it no longer wants to operate a radio station.
If for some reason the deal is invalidated, CSU will just turn off the transmitter to WCSB and file an STA. The old format isn't coming back and would 100% pose a legal liability if it did.
Exactly how would it pose a "legal liability"? I could see if they get it back and drop a slew of "F" bombs on air or slag people/persons/institutions but I'm pretty sure saner heads would prevail. And if worse comes to worse, have a seven second delay with an administrator or senior station management with a finger hovering over the delay button.
One would have wished saner heads prevailed on October 3. Ideastream and CSU have tried repeatedly to be that. But there's not a sane head to be found at all among the majority of WCSB staffers who WEREN'T students that have been leading this social media rage-bating parade against CSU and Ideastream and whose participation is now a complete legal liability for the university.
Oh come on. That sounds absolutely impractical right out of the gate. If former WCSB staff reacted badly to campus security whisking them out of the studios, how do you think they're really going to feel with an administrator present and looking over them 24/7? Seriously???
CSU doesn't want to do radio, they aren't going to waste time or resources doing something they don't want to do when the risks are endless. It'd be far more safe to turn off the transmitter, finish dismantling the studios (assuming that hasn't already begun) and file a 180-day STA.
And this is assuming we'd even get to that point in the first place.
Last edited:
Yet again, it's why if the XCSB crowd were to blow all their money suing and somehow invalidating the transaction, CSU will simply turn off the transmitter and dismantle everything. They simply don’t want to operate a campus format. Wouldn't even be surprised if CSU filed to cancelled the license and wash their hands entirely.
I'll ask this for the upteenth time. How can the XCSB crowd actually "win" by their definition of winning when they are never getting 89.3 back? Are they actually more interested in burning everything before them because of the allure of social media rage-bating?
This may be my last post on here. The XCSB crowd, along with the endless circular arguments about this topic with the same exact talking points ad naseum, have all but destroyed my interest in radio as a hobby.
Good lord Nathan I posted an inside joke for CSB listeners.
if you're that uptight maybe you should quit the hobby. Go smoke a joint or something
This isn’t a joke. When I’m arguing the same exact stuff over and over and over and over and over again and only see the same people who ran WCSB refusing to concede to reality and keep making things incredibly toxic online and being self-destructive in the process, I have every right to be livid.
I don’t do drugs.
I don't understand how the WCSB situation could drive anyone to "destroy my interest in radio as a hobby."
I get that you don't like the GM or the XCSB folks, which is of course your right. I also think you're so committed to the authoritarian stance that "it's the college's license, and those whiny students and volunteers have no say in anything," that you're blinding yourself to another perspective you should consider.
As I and others have been saying all along, even if the WCSB programmers had no legal right to the station, that isn't the entire story. The university (and Ideastream, for that matter) should and could have anticipated that the abrupt lockout of the station without any attempt at a more cooperative transition would have drawn a backlash. Why shouldn't it? You might dismiss all the years and effort that went into the old WCSB as having no value - but clearly it DID, to an lot of people.
And if you're really passionate about radio "as a
hobby," you might consider that all of those community and student programmers putting effort into WCSB were also pretty damn passionate about radio as a hobby, in a city that's justly renowned as one of the better places in the country for community radio. A lot of cities (looking at you, Buffalo) don't have even one community station like what WCSB was. The fact that Cleveland has several, including WRUW and WJCU, says a lot of good things about Cleveland to me.
You seem pretty determined to let this whole thing make you viscerally angry, and you have some smart people here trying to talk you down from that. I wish you'd listen to them. Your anger isn't going to change anything about a situation that none of us can control. (Though I wish I had been involved as a broker, because I continue to believe it could have been handled so much better.)
And if you let this drive you away from the radio hobby, who wins? We don't, because I enjoy your input here most of the time. XCSB doesn't win. CSU doesn't win. Ideastream doesn't win. You just lose, and why?
I get that you don't like the GM or the XCSB folks, which is of course your right. I also think you're so committed to the authoritarian stance that "it's the college's license, and those whiny students and volunteers have no say in anything," that you're blinding yourself to another perspective you should consider.
As I and others have been saying all along, even if the WCSB programmers had no legal right to the station, that isn't the entire story. The university (and Ideastream, for that matter) should and could have anticipated that the abrupt lockout of the station without any attempt at a more cooperative transition would have drawn a backlash. Why shouldn't it? You might dismiss all the years and effort that went into the old WCSB as having no value - but clearly it DID, to an lot of people.
And if you're really passionate about radio "as a
hobby," you might consider that all of those community and student programmers putting effort into WCSB were also pretty damn passionate about radio as a hobby, in a city that's justly renowned as one of the better places in the country for community radio. A lot of cities (looking at you, Buffalo) don't have even one community station like what WCSB was. The fact that Cleveland has several, including WRUW and WJCU, says a lot of good things about Cleveland to me.
You seem pretty determined to let this whole thing make you viscerally angry, and you have some smart people here trying to talk you down from that. I wish you'd listen to them. Your anger isn't going to change anything about a situation that none of us can control. (Though I wish I had been involved as a broker, because I continue to believe it could have been handled so much better.)
And if you let this drive you away from the radio hobby, who wins? We don't, because I enjoy your input here most of the time. XCSB doesn't win. CSU doesn't win. Ideastream doesn't win. You just lose, and why?
And, anyone with experience with radio and format changes would know that leaving the kind of staff WCSB had on the air after an announcement was, to say the least, dangerous.
But it had little audience, just as the ultra-block programmed Pacifica stations do (or, perhaps, "don't")
Yet WCSB has had very limited audience, like due to its extreme block programming in an era where consistent formats are the only winners.
A very laminated audience, sure, but a limited audience that cared.
For once, try to l look at this through the eyes of the people who are passionate about the station, and not through the eyes of Nielsen. Just once, let alone call THEM toxic simply for caring so much about a radio station that wasn't bring in WMJI numbers.
Today, there are easy and less expensive ways to broadcast niche programming, and those are found on the web. Unfortunately, most of those WMJI numbers are music based and not economically apt for podcasts but it is a lot easier to do a "longer" version of a streamed music show if multiple streams are created, each with a more focused and (not said negatively) narrower set of content elements.
The "eyes of Nielsen" are simply a measurement of the usefulness of a station or show. This is where we get into "if a tree falls in the forest..."
Again, as a former owner, manger, PD and group PD who heard lots of stories of what happens when the current staff is told in advance of a format change, I do not blame the university for avoiding potential license and reputation threatening incidents. Heck, they got one anyway even if the logical solution is to petition for some sort of aid by the university and new program source for the establishment of a streamed version of "the old" WMJI.
The closest I ever came personally was when I was OM at Liberman Broadcasting and we bought a progressive rock station and let it keep operating for about 90 days while the sale went through the FCC. In the meantime, I spent all my waking hours policing a format that had a format that, to me, was aural waterboarding. Still, the jocks made sarcastic, often anti-Hispanic, remarks. That was a principal reason why I "left early" and went to KLVE & KTNQ.
The same could be said for many religious outlets such as Family Radio, especially when Harold Camping was alive.
Again, you are viewing this from a successful commercial station angle. Keep in mind the differences between non-profits and commercial outlets, specifically regarding money. The goal for commercial radio stations, with few exceptions, is to maximize profits for their owners. That is why, IHeart, for example, is laying off a lot of people now. On the other hand, the only real goal for a non-profit operation is to raise enough money to keep the station running. All other goals relate to the ideals that the non-profit outlet is supporting.
The difference is the religious group paid for the station. In this case, the university and the student activity fund paid for the station.
The issue is who pays? Yes, the station did an annual fundraiser. But it only covered a fraction of the costs. They couldn't operate on that money alone.
Not enough to actually pay all the expenses. Somebody has to pay for this. It was unfair that the student body had to pay for something they didn't use.
Would the city be willing to pick up the rest of the cost? Use taxpayer money to replace the university expense?
Unless I've missed it somewhere on this thread, what is the difference between WCSB and XCSB?
Again, I'm not (wasn't) one of their listeners, and never even heard of WCSB until the Ideastream takeover. Tuning in where I'm at results in a blend of 3 different stations, and I just dismissed it as an out-of-market station.
Again, I'm not (wasn't) one of their listeners, and never even heard of WCSB until the Ideastream takeover. Tuning in where I'm at results in a blend of 3 different stations, and I just dismissed it as an out-of-market station.
Ideastream retained the WCSB call letters for 89.3, so the old WCSB rebranded as XCSB.
If XCSB starts an internet station they won't be able to call it WCSB.