Cliff Winston & "That Other Board"

[mostb1]

It's interesting how KMR posts on that other board how everyone "missed" Cliff Winston moving to 100.3. Missed? I think it was posted here 5 days ago http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=51263.0

So who really missed it KMR? Maybe you should call your buddy Jhani Kaye. But please stop leaving messages for him at KBIG. They hate that at the front deak at Clear Channel since he's been gone for nearly a year. But I guess you didn't know...

Maybe in another week he'll post 100.3 is going to become "Mojo"...I expect he will.

 

[Radiogeek500]

So you found us I see ;D

Let me just state for the record that "over there" no one likes to post falsified rumors, everyone likes facts. Falsified rumors get people nowhere except a lawsuit and I hate lawsuits and especially the justice system because there never is justice and anyone who says so needs to pull their head out of their........

The reason why no one posted about Winston is that we wern't sure. Now, it is more clear.

And Mojo is still a rumor until otherwise accredited.

 

[mostb1]

So you found us I see ;D

Let me just state for the record that "over there" no one likes to post falsified rumors, everyone likes facts. Falsified rumors get people nowhere except a lawsuit and I hate lawsuits and especially the justice system because there never is justice and anyone who says so needs to pull their head out of their........

The reason why no one posted about Winston is that we wern't sure. Now, it is more clear.

And Mojo is still a rumor until otherwise accredited.

"Found us"? I've known about it since day one.

"Everyone"...you mean all 3 of you? There are less people posting on that board than Rick Dees jokingly claims he has listeners!

It's wonderful to see KMR still has to refer to me over there, too, but jealousy will get you no where...just like where that board is. But all I can say is give KMR my best and tell them to keep up the great work over there (I tell that to everyone who is a loser).

And Mojo is just a rumor like Cliff Winston going to 100.3...blah, blah, blah...good to see KMR and "that board" is late on everything!

And look who (you) is talking about posting rumors. Hot isn't going to become "The Beat" again. Who told you that? It's changing back to something in January but not to that.

BTW, good to see you can cut and paste what KMR asks you to.

 

[Radiogeek500]

You my friend are just obsessed with KM.

KM doesn't control me or anything I do, I am my own person for one.

And yes, 100.3 did become Mojo, the 100.3 in Cincy. As for LA, still a rumor unless I hear otherwise. And it is owned by Radio One and RO has proven what they can do to a station before and if you don't think a 2nd coming of the nails in the coffin aren't true, then I have some advice for you sir, better make up a good resume and stop kissing Majors and the Liggin's Butts. As for Cliff, he failed at KJLH and WILL fail at the Beat, meanwhile KDAY is sure riding up on that butt, ain't they? Steve Harvey is making a mockery of a scene at KKBT.

No rumors about 92.3 becoming the Beat out of my mouth, just simple wondering. And MR Insider, if you're gonna slam me for Beat rumors, want to tell us what is in store for 92.3? Are you saying Mega is coming back? They'd better do it right this time, no Bee Gees disco like the last damn time.

Oh yes, I give my best regards to you. Not having you post over there is quite a relief for all of us. And there are more then 3 people just to let you know.

Like I said, have fun with your RO friends because YOU WILL someday find yourself the butt of the jokes.

 

[zumahans]

Please, please, please, [EDIT] - the tears of laughter are shorting out my computer and might void the warranty.

Gotta say one thing about KM: she knows at least as much about San Fernando Valley bus scheduled as he does about radio.

[EDIT-vulgar]

 

[mostb1]

You my friend are just obsessed with KM.

KM doesn't control me or anything I do, I am my own person for one.

And yes, 100.3 did become Mojo, the 100.3 in Cincy. As for LA, still a rumor unless I hear otherwise. And it is owned by Radio One and RO has proven what they can do to a station before and if you don't think a 2nd coming of the nails in the coffin aren't true, then I have some advice for you sir, better make up a good resume and stop kissing Majors and the Liggin's Butts. As for Cliff, he failed at KJLH and WILL fail at the Beat, meanwhile KDAY is sure riding up on that butt, ain't they? Steve Harvey is making a mockery of a scene at KKBT.

No rumors about 92.3 becoming the Beat out of my mouth, just simple wondering. And MR Insider, if you're gonna slam me for Beat rumors, want to tell us what is in store for 92.3? Are you saying Mega is coming back? They'd better do it right this time, no Bee Gees disco like the last damn time.

Oh yes, I give my best regards to you. Not having you post over there is quite a relief for all of us. And there are more then 3 people just to let you know.

Like I said, have fun with your RO friends because YOU WILL someday find yourself the butt of the jokes.

Thanks for cracking me up, KMR.

Cliff Winston already worked at 'The Beat'. 100.3 is NOT 'The Beat' anymore. Read the press release for Cliff and there is no mention of it currently being 'The Beat' from Cliff, Kevin Fleming or Radio One. And Cliff was no failure at 'The Beat' as he was once #1 25-54 doing the exact same shift he will be doing.

Who the hell cares about Cincinnati? We're talking about L.A.

What a silly rant you go off on about Radio One. You better go and catch up on what I've previously written here about Radio One.

You post about a rumor of Hot becoming 'The Beat' is the only mention of it anywhere in the world of radio. Besides, it could never happen since Radio One not Clear Channel owns the intellectual property of 'The Beat'. And while we are it it, you're digging way too deep with Mega. So lets just say you are so cold on this it's pathetic. Remember this thread when we have to reference back to it come January.

It is quite a relief to ALL of us over here that we don't have to put up with a moron know-it-all nobody like KMR anymore. You can ask "it" why it started posting about me "over there" if you are looking for who is obsessed with whom. Take your nonsense "over there" and the three of you can continue having a great time posting about nothing. We're all just glad we don't have to endure the b-s of the former moderators of this board...

 

[Radiogeek500]

You just don't get it do you?

Your statement said "92.3 is going back to something but not the Beat." Excuse me MR Know it All, but there have only been 4 formats in 92.3's history and two of them were absolute failures. Rock with a Beat and Mega.

Yes, Clear Channel owns the intellectual property of the Beat Name, check your facts. It is one of tons of trademarks ie Kiss, Wild, The Bull, etc etc.

And since when has KM posted about you? He/she don't give a rats BLEEP about you or Zuma Hamas for that matter.

Wanna explain why Radio One is still running 100.3 the Beat promos on air? If they were gonna drop the name entirely, they wouldn't even mention the name at all. Or direct their listeners to www.thebeatla.com. So Mojo is still a rumor. I suppose you'll change your story in a week and tell us they decided not to go through with the name change because something was decided yada yada yada.

Keep the publicity coming, everybody loves controversy!

 

[mostb1]

You just don't get it do you?

Your statement said "92.3 is going back to something but not the Beat." Excuse me MR Know it All, but there have only been 4 formats in 92.3's history and two of them were absolute failures. Rock with a Beat and Mega.

Yes, Clear Channel owns the intellectual property of the Beat Name, check your facts. It is one of tons of trademarks ie Kiss, Wild, The Bull, etc etc.

And since when has KM posted about you? He/she don't give a rats BLEEP about you or Zuma Hamas for that matter.

Wanna explain why Radio One is still running 100.3 the Beat promos on air? If they were gonna drop the name entirely, they wouldn't even mention the name at all. Or direct their listeners to www.thebeatla.com. So Mojo is still a rumor. I suppose you'll change your story in a week and tell us they decided not to go through with the name change because something was decided yada yada yada.

Keep the publicity coming, everybody loves controversy!

[*EDIT]

You use quotes for a statement that you've only made, not me. Now you've got them changing format. What are you smoking?

Mega was not a failure. It's part of the format today on 92.3.

[**EDIT] Clear Channel does NOT own the intellectual property of 'The Beat' in Los Angeles nor have it service or trade marked.

[EDIT]

We don't give a rats behind about KMR over here either. We're just glad he's off destroying another board. Notice how posting on this board has zoomed up since the idiot former moderators were kicked off this board. And at that "other board' you're lucky to have 1/2 dozen posts in a week on the L.A. board. And half of them will be removed for no reason.

As for 100.3, why explain something you'd never understand? Look up the word 'strategy'. 'The Beat' name is being put out to pasture and will soon be buried completely. AGAIN YOU FAILED TO READ WHAT I WROTE. I suppose you'll change your tune by the beginning of the year when it disappears into radio history.

[*EDIT].

[*EDIT-inflammatory]
[**EDIT-namecalling]

 

[zumahans]

Is Messex shorthand for Middlesex? I knew a guy named Middlesex once.

 

[OldGringo]

You are a complete idiot. Clear Channel does NOT own the intellectual property of 'The Beat' in Los Angeles nor have it service or trade marked.

Clear Channel owns the service mark, "The Beat" and any station with the name not owned by CCU has made some form of licensing agreement with CCU to permit such usage.

So much for your extensive knowledge of the situation.

 

[mostb1]

You are a complete idiot. Clear Channel does NOT own the intellectual property of 'The Beat' in Los Angeles nor have it service or trade marked.

Clear Channel owns the service mark, "The Beat" and any station with the name not owned by CCU has made some form of licensing agreement with CCU to permit such usage.

So much for your extensive knowledge of the situation.

Some of us, and not you, have FIRST hand knowledge of the intellectual property of "The Beat" Los Angeles. You do not and you are wrong so I would stay out of this.

 

[OldGringo]

You are a complete idiot. Clear Channel does NOT own the intellectual property of 'The Beat' in Los Angeles nor have it service or trade marked.

Clear Channel owns the service mark, "The Beat" and any station with the name not owned by CCU has made some form of licensing agreement with CCU to permit such usage.

So much for your extensive knowledge of the situation.

Some of us, and not you, have FIRST hand knowledge of the intellectual property of "The Beat" Los Angeles. You do not and you are wrong so I would stay out of this.

Clear Channel owns the service mark. They can permit its use for free, for a fee or for a cash settlement... but nobody can use it without their consent. Just check the registry of service marks. Please ask how The Beat in San Antonio uses the name, OK? That is "first hand knoledge" in any book.

 

[mostb1]

You are a complete idiot. Clear Channel does NOT own the intellectual property of 'The Beat' in Los Angeles nor have it service or trade marked.

Clear Channel owns the service mark, "The Beat" and any station with the name not owned by CCU has made some form of licensing agreement with CCU to permit such usage.

So much for your extensive knowledge of the situation.

Some of us, and not you, have FIRST hand knowledge of the intellectual property of "The Beat" Los Angeles. You do not and you are wrong so I would stay out of this.

Clear Channel owns the service mark. They can permit its use for free, for a fee or for a cash settlement... but nobody can use it without their consent. Just check the registry of service marks. Please ask how The Beat in San Antonio uses the name, OK? That is "first hand knoledge" in any book.

I am not interested in your San Antonio Univision deal. We are discussing Los Angeles not some obscure medium market. You obviously have no clue how the deal was structured or what restrictions were imposed on the deal by the federal government for the sale of the intellectual property and transmitter for (100.3) 'The Beat' Los Angeles to Radio One. I told you to not get into this as you have proven that you pocess ZERO knowledge of this transaction. Radio One retains full control over the use of the intellectual property of 'The Beat" in Los Angeles. There are no restrictions (including 'consent') or payments of any kind being made to Clear Channel. Got it? And soon it will not matter anyway as 100.3 will not be "The Beat" or KKBT.

 

[OldGringo]

Clear Channel owns the service mark. They can permit its use for free, for a fee or for a cash settlement... but nobody can use it without their consent. Just check the registry of service marks. Please ask how The Beat in San Antonio uses the name, OK? That is "first hand knoledge" in any book.

I am not interested in your San Antonio Univision deal. We are discussing Los Angeles not some obscure medium market. You obviously have no clue how the deal was structured or what restrictions were imposed on the deal by the federal government for the sale of the intellectual property and transmitter for (100.3) 'The Beat' Los Angeles to Radio One. I told you to not get into this as you have proven that you pocess ZERO knowledge of this transaction. Radio One retains full control over the use of the intellectual property of 'The Beat" in Los Angeles. There are no restrictions (including 'consent') or payments of any kind being made to Clear Channel. Got it? And soon it will not matter anyway as 100.3 will not be "The Beat" or KKBT.

I am stating that Clear Channel has a national service mark for "The Beat" as a name for a broadcast related (internet, radio, satellite, TV and similar) operation and that any usage of the term anywhere in the US and its territories must be with the consent of Clear Channel. LA is no different. CCU can grant any form of license to Radio One or any other company for the use of the name it considers 1) to protect its mark and, 2) to further the interests of the company. If giving usage in the LA metro was expeditious to the greater gain on the sale of 100.3, they still included usage language in the deal because not doing so would weaken the hold on the national service mark.

By the way, the feds did not approve the sale of "intellectual property" (which is different from a service market) as such transactions require no federal approval. The feds approve transfers of licences (FCC), and aprove concentration of control (DOJ) but there is no approval for sellling the intellectual property of a format than there is in selling a house or a used car.

Top 50 markets are not obscure. And we are #1 in San Antonio just as we are in LA... not CCU.

 

[mostb1]

Clear Channel owns the service mark. They can permit its use for free, for a fee or for a cash settlement... but nobody can use it without their consent. Just check the registry of service marks. Please ask how The Beat in San Antonio uses the name, OK? That is "first hand knoledge" in any book.

I am not interested in your San Antonio Univision deal. We are discussing Los Angeles not some obscure medium market. You obviously have no clue how the deal was structured or what restrictions were imposed on the deal by the federal government for the sale of the intellectual property and transmitter for (100.3) 'The Beat' Los Angeles to Radio One. I told you to not get into this as you have proven that you pocess ZERO knowledge of this transaction. Radio One retains full control over the use of the intellectual property of 'The Beat" in Los Angeles. There are no restrictions (including 'consent') or payments of any kind being made to Clear Channel. Got it? And soon it will not matter anyway as 100.3 will not be "The Beat" or KKBT.

I am stating that Clear Channel has a national service mark for "The Beat" as a name for a broadcast related (internet, radio, satellite, TV and similar) operation and that any usage of the term anywhere in the US and its territories must be with the consent of Clear Channel. LA is no different. CCU can grant any form of license to Radio One or any other company for the use of the name it considers 1) to protect its mark and, 2) to further the interests of the company. If giving usage in the LA metro was expeditious to the greater gain on the sale of 100.3, they still included usage language in the deal because not doing so would weaken the hold on the national service mark.

By the way, the feds did not approve the sale of "intellectual property" (which is different from a service market) as such transactions require no federal approval. The feds approve transfers of licences (FCC), and aprove concentration of control (DOJ) but there is no approval for sellling the intellectual property of a format than there is in selling a house or a used car.

Top 50 markets are not obscure. And we are #1 in San Antonio just as we are in LA... not CCU.

Clear Channel thinks it has a national service mark for "KISS" also. Have they been able to enforce it? Not always. Only when a company other than say Entercom or Emmis hasn't challenged them which is due to the legal fees. So what is your point since we are talking about Los Angeles and have been since I started this thread?

You really don't know what you are talking about, David. There were stipulations in the sale that the feds asked for (and that includes the intellectual property). Remember, this was under the Clinton administration not the approve every business deal Bush administration. Clear Channel has no rights in Los Angeles to the Beat name or its usage nor did Radio One have to ask for them. I'm sorry that you don't know about that but maybe you should have before you butt into this thread.

Technically, The Beat in L.A. was never owned by Clear Channel, btw.

You mean you were #1 in San Antonio. Cox is about to clean your clock. Hip-hop isn't your game. [EDIT].

[EDIT-inflammatory]

 

[OldGringo]

Clear Channel thinks it has a national service mark for "KISS" also. Have they been able to enforce it? Not always. Only when a company other than say Entercom or Emmis hasn't challenged them which is due to the legal fees. So what is your point since we are talking about Los Angeles and have been since I started this thread?

They do not think they have a service marke, they own the service mark on Kiss. To get it, they granted use to stations that had lengthy historic usage that came close to the continuous usage of KIIS-FM, LA. This was to, apparently, avoid the mark being contested. However, in markets like Bakersfield, they enforced the mark because the usage was more recent. In cases like Albuquerque, they allowed lengthy prior usage to be grandfathered.

You really don't know what you are talking about, David. There were stipulations in the sale that the feds asked for (and that includes the intellectual property).

We are not talking about intellectual property, but a service mark. "Intellectual property" is vastly more ample... but is dealt with like a mivie script, not like a service mark.

Remember, this was under the Clinton administration not the approve every business deal Bush administration. Clear Channel has no rights in Los Angeles to the Beat name or its usage nor did Radio One have to ask for them. I'm sorry that you don't know about that but maybe you should have before you butt into this thread.

Clear granted usage of The Beat to Radio One as part of the spin-off upon the merger of AMFM with Clear.

Technically, The Beat in L.A. was never owned by Clear Channel, btw.

No, it was spun to allow the merger WITH Clear Channel and that transaction was set up by Clear Channel, not Radio One. Per the FCC, Clear owned the staiton temporarily in early 2000 while the sale of the overlapped AMFM stations went through.

You mean you were #1 in San Antonio. Cox is about to clean your clock. Hip-hop isn't your game. Aiding and abetting illegal aliens is.

The Beat is an Hispanic station, and Hispanic is not Cox' game. We have Hispanic staitons in English all over the US.

The other remark is despicable, untrue and racist. You should be ashamed.

 

[mostb1]

Clear Channel thinks it has a national service mark for "KISS" also. Have they been able to enforce it? Not always. Only when a company other than say Entercom or Emmis hasn't challenged them which is due to the legal fees. So what is your point since we are talking about Los Angeles and have been since I started this thread?

They do not think they have a service marke, they own the service mark on Kiss. To get it, they granted use to stations that had lengthy historic usage that came close to the continuous usage of KIIS-FM, LA. This was to, apparently, avoid the mark being contested. However, in markets like Bakersfield, they enforced the mark because the usage was more recent. In cases like Albuquerque, they allowed lengthy prior usage to be grandfathered.

You really don't know what you are talking about, David. There were stipulations in the sale that the feds asked for (and that includes the intellectual property).

We are not talking about intellectual property, but a service mark. "Intellectual property" is vastly more ample... but is dealt with like a mivie script, not like a service mark.

Remember, this was under the Clinton administration not the approve every business deal Bush administration. Clear Channel has no rights in Los Angeles to the Beat name or its usage nor did Radio One have to ask for them. I'm sorry that you don't know about that but maybe you should have before you butt into this thread.

Clear granted usage of The Beat to Radio One as part of the spin-off upon the merger of AMFM with Clear.

Technically, The Beat in L.A. was never owned by Clear Channel, btw.

No, it was spun to allow the merger WITH Clear Channel and that transaction was set up by Clear Channel, not Radio One. Per the FCC, Clear owned the staiton temporarily in early 2000 while the sale of the overlapped AMFM stations went through.

You mean you were #1 in San Antonio. Cox is about to clean your clock. Hip-hop isn't your game. [EDIT]
[EDIT-inflammatory]

The Beat is an Hispanic station, and Hispanic is not Cox' game. We have Hispanic staitons in English all over the US.

The other remark is despicable, untrue and racist. You should be ashamed.

Lets start at the end. I would be ashamed to be working for a company such as Univision that promotes how to break the laws of the United States of America. Univision should lose ALL of their licenses for aiding and abetting illegal aliens (which in some cases is a felony). The day is coming when much of the audience you serve (illegal aliens) will be asked to leave the United States. Those that don't will be physically removed. [EDIT]
Cox has well served Hispanics and will in San Antonio with a better sounding hip-hop station than the poorly programmed Beat in San Antonio. One example of Cox's serving Hispanics with a hip-hop format is already in Orlando.

KKBT was never owned by Clear Channel. Your dates are way off. Clear Channel NEVER operated AMFM stations in Early 2000. Per the FCC what? Your imagination FCC? The merger of AMFM and Clear Channel did not close until August 30, 2000 and Clear Channel had NO control until that date as there was no LMA or JSA of the AMFM stations such as KKBT. But Clear Channel never assumed control of KKBT. Radio One started their purchase of KKBT and 11 other stations from Clear Channel and AMFM on March 13, 2000. It took over KKBT just hours before the closing of the AMFM and Clear Channel merger on August 29, 2000. http://www.radioink.com/HeadlineEntry.asp?hid=28394&pt=archive
I should know, I worked there. Did you? Here's more proof, moron http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2000/August/504at.htm
http://www.kagan.com/archive/kagan/2000/09/05/clear.shtml
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B02EEDA103BF937A25750C0A9669C8B63

The switch from 92.3 to 100.3 (KCMG going from 100.3 to 92.3 and KKBT going from 92.3 to 100.3) under AMFM was made on June 30, 2000. Clear Channel did not own or control either station at that time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KKBT

Also, Steve Harvey started in September 2000 - within weeks of Radio One's takeover from AMFM of KKBT. I'd post a link to that too to prove Radio One was in control and had closed on KKBT but unfortunately, www.radio-one.com only has press releases dating back to 2001..

And Clear Channel NEVER has given Radio One any kind of permission to use 'The Beat' in Los Angeles. Period. [EDIT]

[EDIT--personal attacks.]

 

[OldGringo]

Lets start at the end. I would be ashamed to be working for a company such as Univision that promotes how to break the laws of the United States of America. Univision should lose ALL of their licenses for aiding and abetting illegal aliens (which in some cases is a felony). The day is coming when much of the audience you serve (illegal aliens) will be asked to leave the United States. Those that don't will be physically removed. Hopefully you'll lose your job along with the loss of much of your audience. You are the one who should be ashamed of yourself.

OK, prove that Univision promotes breaking of any laws. You can not, because that statement is untrue, defamatory and an outright lie.

You should be aware that anyone... citizen, resident, tourist, etc., within the borders of the US enjoys certain protections granted by the Constitution and by the legal system based on our constitution.

In any case, since illegal immigrants are not generally diarykeepers, the audience served by ALL LA and US Spanish language or Hispanic targeted stations is the legal resident and citizen community.

You're an idiot, David. Cox has well served Hispanics and will in San Antonio with a better sounding hip-hop station than the poorly programmed Beat in San Antonio. One example of Cox's serving Hispanics with a hip-hop format is already in Orlando.

Cox' Orlando station is serving a community that is predominathly Puerto Rican, which is nothing like the Mexican American population of San Antonio. And the SA station is all of two weeks old, so whether it is serving anyone is still quite subject to the passage of time. It is a little hard to judge a station that is still running "10 thousand in a row" with one that has been the established #1 for five years... neither you nor I know how this is going to play out, so you are just guessing with absolutely no knowledge of the market, either (the market you dismissed as an insignificant small market, by the way).

KKBT was never owned by Clear Channel. Your dates are way off. Clear Channel NEVER operated AMFM stations in Early 2000. Per the FCC what? Your imagination FCC? The merger of AMFM and Clear Channel did not close until August 30, 2000 and Clear Channel had NO control until that date as there was no LMA or JSA of the AMFM stations such as KKBT. But Clear Channel never assumed control of KKBT. Radio One started their purchase of KKBT and 11 other stations from Clear Channel and AMFM on March 13, 2000. It took over KKBT just hours before the closing of the AMFM and Clear Channel merger on August 29, 2000.

This is more complex than you think.

02/97 Chancellor sells to AMFM
10/99 AMFM sells to Clear Channel via merger pending approval
In the interim, in 03/2000 AMFM sells KKDB to Radio One to comply with concentration of control.

So the deal was part of and approved by Clear, as part of the decision on wht to divest to comply with FCC rules and DOJ scrutiny. In other words, Clear made a decision on which of the LA assets it wanted to retain, and what it would dispose of and, as part of the "deal in porogress" the properties it did not wish to retain were spun off. So Clear was very much involved even if the licences were never in the name of Clear Channel.

In fact, most Clear Channel licences are not in the name of Clear Channel today... they are in the name of licensee corporations which, in turn, are owned by CCU. The name on the licence is not the critical issue... it is who owns the licensee.

The switch from 92.3 to 100.3 (KCMG going from 100.3 to 92.3 and KKBT going from 92.3 to 100.3) under AMFM was made on June 30, 2000. Clear Channel did not own or control either station at that time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KKBT

But Clear was calling the shots as to disposition of assets to make the deal pass regulatory scrutiny.

And Clear Channel NEVER has given Radio One any kind of permission to use 'The Beat' in Los Angeles. Period. So stop your nonsense when you have absolutely no idea what you are posting.

Yes they have. If they did not have an agreement, there would be abandonment of the mark, and CCU could not defend its use. The principles of marks involve usage, registration and defense of the mark. If you fail on any, you can lose your brand.

 

[klifhanger]

I see the MASTER OF GRAND ILLUSION DAVID EDWARD FRAKLETON GLEASON KNOWN AS THE OLD GRINGO BY HIS FELLOW ENLOIGHTEN DESPOTS IS AT IT AGAIN WITH SPINNING FABRICATION.
'KISS" is used by Clear Channel BUT "KISS" is not owned by them. ask the owner operators and people who have managed,worked and were on the air at the original KISS-FM in San Antonio. KISS -FM STILL EXISTS,NOT OWNED BY CC. Those calls have been there for decades and CC tried to eliminate them when they registered a KISS TRADEMARK, and then tried to buy them. The result? Ruling was KISS WAS NOT AND REMAINS NOT BEING OWNED BY CC.
The master of grand Illusion will be back shortly so he can create a cut and paste link disputing the fact you have just been given.

 

[SuperRadioFan]

Glenn and David, you two are providing a great deal of entertainment, and I'll wager anything that dialogues that take place here on Radio-Info boards are a WHOLE lot more entertaining than that other board in KMR's fiefdom.

Now as to Old Gringo remarks below:

[OK, prove that Univision promotes breaking of any laws. You can not, because that statement is untrue, defamatory and an outright lie.

You should be aware that anyone... citizen, resident, tourist, etc., within the borders of the US enjoys certain protections granted by the Constitution and by the legal system based on our constitution.

In any case, since illegal immigrants are not generally diarykeepers, the audience served by ALL LA and US Spanish language or Hispanic targeted stations is the legal resident and citizen community.

Your statement taken literally is illogical.

I am not a "diarykeeper", as millions upon millions all over the U.S. have never been "diarykeepers" , so does that mean if you are not a "diarykeeper" are you part of the audience "served" or are you not "served"? Cut the carp, David, we all know where your sympathies lie in this debate. If there were never any illegal aliens entering this country illegally FROM south of the border, and that means never, then it's logical to think that Spanish language radio would NOT have as big an audience as it has today, NO???
Spin that.