• 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

KDAF/33 gets its channel number back...

T

Tom_Desmond

Guest
Has anyone else noticed this? It looks like they've gone from identifying as "Dallas/Fort Worth's WB" back to "WB33" sometime in the past week. So much for Tribune's efforts to move away from identifying by channel number.

I wonder if this is only occurring in Dallas, or if Tribune is going back to channel numbers in some of their other markets as well?
 
> Has anyone else noticed this? It looks like they've gone
> from identifying as "Dallas/Fort Worth's WB" back to "WB33"
> sometime in the past week. So much for Tribune's efforts to
> move away from identifying by channel number.
>
> I wonder if this is only occurring in Dallas, or if Tribune
> is going back to channel numbers in some of their other
> markets as well?
>
From what ive seen....it appears WB2 in Denver and KTLA 5 are "rolling back" as well.
 
> > Has anyone else noticed this? It looks like they've gone
> > from identifying as "Dallas/Fort Worth's WB" back to
> "WB33"
> > sometime in the past week. So much for Tribune's efforts
> to
> > move away from identifying by channel number.
> >
> > I wonder if this is only occurring in Dallas, or if
> Tribune
> > is going back to channel numbers in some of their other
> > markets as well?
> >
> From what ive seen....it appears WB2 in Denver and KTLA 5
> are "rolling back" as well.
>

I noticed this about two weeks ago.
It should also be noted that WB33's ratings have collapsed in the past year. I'm not saying the loss of the channel number had anything to do with the collapse, but I'm sure the ratings have a lot to do with why the number is coming back.
 
> It should also be noted that WB33's ratings have collapsed
> in the past year. I'm not saying the loss of the channel
> number had anything to do with the collapse, but I'm sure
> the ratings have a lot to do with why the number is coming
> back.

Which raises the question of why 33's ratings did sink in the past year? Part of it was presumably due to weakness in the WB's national ratings, but that can't account for all of the drop. What I've been wondering is if their sitcom blocks from 5 to 7 PM and 10 PM to midnight were getting a bit stale -- until this fall's launch of "Sex & the City", it had been a while since they added anything new.
 
> > It should also be noted that WB33's ratings have collapsed
>
> > in the past year. I'm not saying the loss of the channel
> > number had anything to do with the collapse, but I'm sure
> > the ratings have a lot to do with why the number is coming
>
> > back.
>
> Which raises the question of why 33's ratings did sink in
> the past year? Part of it was presumably due to weakness in
> the WB's national ratings, but that can't account for all of
> the drop. What I've been wondering is if their sitcom
> blocks from 5 to 7 PM and 10 PM to midnight were getting a
> bit stale -- until this fall's launch of "Sex & the City",
> it had been a while since they added anything new.
>
Its not only the entertainment programming, its the non-existant news department and idiot managment who is unwilling clean house and bring in a compatent news staff. Save Weather Bob, everyone there suffers from "Deer In Headlights"
 
> Which raises the question of why 33's ratings did sink in
> the past year? Part of it was presumably due to weakness in
> the WB's national ratings, but that can't account for all of
> the drop. What I've been wondering is if their sitcom
> blocks from 5 to 7 PM and 10 PM to midnight were getting a
> bit stale -- until this fall's launch of "Sex & the City",
> it had been a while since they added anything new.

you hit the nail on the head. Just a few years ago, Raymond and Friends repeats hit 8-10 ratings on some nights. Now they are lucky if they hit a 5 on any night.

I'm not sure "Sex" will work for them at 10. I think it would work better at 10:30
 
> > Which raises the question of why 33's ratings did sink in
> > the past year? Part of it was presumably due to weakness
> in
> > the WB's national ratings, but that can't account for all
> of
> > the drop. What I've been wondering is if their sitcom
> > blocks from 5 to 7 PM and 10 PM to midnight were getting a
>
> > bit stale -- until this fall's launch of "Sex & the City",
>
> > it had been a while since they added anything new.
>
> you hit the nail on the head. Just a few years ago, Raymond
> and Friends repeats hit 8-10 ratings on some nights. Now
> they are lucky if they hit a 5 on any night.
>
> I'm not sure "Sex" will work for them at 10. I think it
> would work better at 10:30
>
Speaking of, I wonder how South Park is doing weeknights at 11 on UPN21? From what ive seen, its mostly the same show with slight editing for language. Also strikes me as odd as WB33 didnt go after it (as Tribune is handling distribution)and went for Sex & The City instead.
 
> Speaking of, I wonder how South Park is doing weeknights at
> 11 on UPN21? From what ive seen, its mostly the same show
> with slight editing for language. Also strikes me as odd as
> WB33 didnt go after it (as Tribune is handling
> distribution)and went for Sex & The City instead.

Oddly enough, WB39 in Houston picked up SP....but then in DFW you have UPN21 owned by Viacom...in Houston, UPN20 is owned by FOX...and guess who owns Comedy Central where SP plays first? Viacom! figures.....
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom