The Boston Celtics and Air America

[hellohello]

Didn't get to hear The Celtics on 1510 AM, but can only imagine the signal made it tough.

Now that the Celtics are on WRKO, will they get bigger ratings?

If they do get bigger ratings on RKO, it gives great weight to the Progressives
here who claim give Air America a bigger forum, watch the numbers come in.
WTKK would be a nice start.

There seems to be squabbling on this board about the ratings of Air America,
but as much as I like Randi Rhodes, have you tried listening to her at night in Norwood? Burlington, Mass? Weymouth? Brockton?

Of course Mike Savage is going to get decent numbers by default.

The whole situation with Ed Schultz being taken off of radio for our troops where the majority of force-fed information is Right Wing/Conservative talk speaks volumes.

Across the board there are problems for the Republicans with the Congress getting a low approval rating, and the President getting a worse approval
rating. Thus, Rush Limbaugh's #s in Boston cannot be that good.

The Celtics will be a good meter as they are non-political. If a sports team does better on a clearer and brighter signal, it is clear that good progressive talk would do better as well.

just a thought.

 

[blabhead]

>
> The Celtics will be a good meter as they are non-political.
> If a sports team does better on a clearer and brighter
> signal, it is clear that good progressive talk would do
> better as well.
>
> just a thought.
>
There is the issue of them becoming a more exciting team as their young players develop that must be taken into account also.

 

[Eli Polonsky]

> There seems to be squabbling on this board about the ratings
> of Air America, but as much as I like Randi Rhodes, have you tried listening
> to her at night in Norwood? Burlington, Mass? Weymouth? Brockton?

Norwood and Burlington may be able to get some fringe of WKOX.

Weymouth may be able to get a fringe of the directional WXKS signal beaming out over the water.

Brockton I guess is out of luck since 920 WHJJ in Providence changed format and dropped AA (or so I hear, I haven't checked).

Actually, all those areas may be able to get skip from WLIB 1190 in NYC better than the nighttime signals of either of our AA locals.

 

[raccoonradio]

have you tried listening
> to her at night in Norwood? Burlington, Mass? Weymouth?
> Brockton?

The daytime signals of WXKS and WKOX are pretty good. Yes, it's tougher at night but when it comes to daytime programming, and I know we're heading into "much
shorter daylight hours", there's still more than a few hours where AAR can make its mark with the likes of William Miller's Daughter, Stuart Smalley,
and Sgt. Schulz.

OK, WTKK; just junk the whole lineup and put AAR there. See how fast they go from a 3.5 to a 1.0...it's not the signal it's the programming.

I'm sure glad there are lots of conservative voices out there like ABC, CBS, CNN,
NBC, The Boston Globe, NPR, PBS, Time, Newsweek, AAR, Democracy Now!, etc.
Right wing wackos all of 'em! (/sarcasm)

 

[DanStrassberg]

>
> Norwood and Burlington may be able to get some fringe of
> WKOX.

Actually, WXKS may be better than WKOX at night in Burlington--especially since CFGO has been misbehaving for the last month--supposedly the result of a failed vacuum capacitor either in the night phasor or in an ATU. The part is not a stock device and has to be specially manufactured for the Ottawa station. I guess it never occurred to the Canadians that when a station's DA goes on the fritz, the station should operate at reduced power. In the US, when a station notifies the FCC of such a problem (stations are supposed to do so unless the problem is really short-lived), the FCC grants STA, which generally does not protect co-channel stations as well as the normal operation would, but doesn't completely blow them out of the water either. Although I live well outside of WKOX's NIF contour, the station had always been listenable here at night since it started running progressive talk. This month it has been virtually unlistenable at night and is now sometimes also unlistenable after sunrise and before sunset. I've been in contact with WKOXKS's CE. He spoke with the CE of CFGO, which is how I know about the failed capacitor. WXKS is always completely hopeless here at night and is now problematic during the day because of nearby WAZN 1470 and WWZN 1510. 1510-1470 = 40. 1470-40 = 1430. Voila: the cross modulation often makes 1430 unlistenable. At night, if WXKS had a stronger signal here, the problem might be less severe because WWZN's night signal in this direction is considerably smaller than its day signal, but WXKS's night pattern, lower night power, and the hellacious QRM on 1430 kill any hope of listening to WXKS here at night ;>(
>
> Weymouth may be able to get a fringe of the directional WXKS
> signal beaming out over the water.
>
> Brockton I guess is out of luck since 920 WHJJ in Providence
> changed format and dropped AA (or so I hear, I haven't
> checked).
>
> Actually, all those areas may be able to get skip from WLIB
> 1190 in NYC better than the nighttime signals of either of
> our AA locals.
>
Boston is in a pretty deep minimum of WLIB's night pattern, which was designed to protect the long-dark operation of CHTN on 1190. Like almost all such dark Canadian allocations, this one is still notified to the US and so WLIB's pattern had to be designed to protect it. I imagine that WLIB must come in like gangbusters at night in Brockton and maybe in Nashua, but around here no so good.

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

1200 And 1430 Night Reception (Was: Re: The Boston Celtics and Air America)

Eli Polonski wondered:

> Norwood and Burlington may be able to get some fringe of
> WKOX.

Living in Norwood, I can answer half of that question.

I do get WKOX-1200 at night. It's not the best signal, but it is listenable at my home.

On the other hand, I don't get WXKS-1430 at night unless there's some sort of freak conditions that prevent Newark (New Jersey)'s WSNW (also on 1430) from being received at my location.

According to Radio Locator.com's map of WXKS-AM's nighttime signal, the northern part of Weymouth (as well as Hull, portions of Quincy near the shoreline, downtown Boston, parts of the North Shore and some suburbs just north of Boston) should get the station at night.

In contrast, the WKOX nighttime signal is actually beamed towards Burlington. It probably isn't the best signal there either, but I suspect those in Burlington would have better luck with WKOX after dark than with WXKS-AM.

 

[ajhenderson]

> There seems to be squabbling on this board about the ratings
> of Air America,
> but as much as I like Randi Rhodes, have you tried listening
> to her at night in Norwood? Burlington, Mass? Weymouth?
> Brockton?
>
> Of course Mike Savage is going to get decent numbers by
> default.

Actually, not really. He may get lead-in from Carr, but if so was absolutely unlistenable, everyone would disappear.

There are plenty of 50kW blowtorches in FL and AZ running nothing but brokered programming, and surprisingly, they get no ratings. Hmm.

 

[epsilon]

> Brockton I guess is out of luck since 920 WHJJ in Providence
> changed format and dropped AA (or so I hear, I haven't
> checked).


WHJJ dropped all the daytime shows, but is still airing Randi Rhodes and Mike Malloy at night.

 

[HHH]

Cartoon could easily be Bush

You could very easily replace the individuals in your cartoon with Bush screaming the same thing, while a congessman holds the tablet reading "Bush confirms WMDs in Iraq" or "Bush confirms Hussein trying to buy yellow cake" or any other set of--ahem--false information later proven as fake.

Neo-Cons wanted Dan Rather's head for not checking the accuracy of his information. Yet Bush gets a pass from them for the same thing.

Plus, you seem to be looking for right-biased news to replace "left-biased news"
(didn't Bob Novak work for CNN? George Will for ABC? These are lefties?

Whatever happend to the pursuit of a balanced report? Seems now everyone WANTS a biased report (biased for THEIR view).

 

[raccoonradio]

Re: Cartoon could easily be Bush

We found a WMD in Iraq. He's on trial now (you know, the guy who got interviewed by Rather: "Are we ever going to see you again, Uncle Saddam?") Yes, I consider
Mr. Hussein to be a WMD. His regime not only murdered thousands but they
encouraged suicide bombers (paid off the families) and trained terrorists
on how to hijack planes.

>> George Will for ABC?

A commentator, not a news anchor who used "fake but accurate" forged documents to try and bring down a sitting President. Courage.

If we didn't have a liberal bias, you could be seeing THIS on your TV:<br>

ANNCR: "The CBS Evening News...With...Rush Limbaugh"

 

[fccfight]

Boston is not your typical market. If you put a show on 680AM, 850 AM or
1030 AM it has numbers almost automatically. It takes really bad programming - Jeff Katz on RKO comes to mind - to completely drive the listeners away.

Mr. Depetro doesn't add to RKO, he just fits into their narrow format so the
Pat Whitley crowd stays put. Quite sad when they could put something intriguing on the air and actually get ratings

How did Depetro do in the last book? When there's trouble in the morning
(Peter Blute gone, Scotto in transition), it is not helpful to the mid-day.

> > There seems to be squabbling on this board about the
> ratings
> > of Air America,
> > but as much as I like Randi Rhodes, have you tried
> listening
> > to her at night in Norwood? Burlington, Mass? Weymouth?
>
> > Brockton?
> >
> > Of course Mike Savage is going to get decent numbers by
> > default.
>
> Actually, not really. He may get lead-in from Carr, but if
> so was absolutely unlistenable, everyone would disappear.
>
> There are plenty of 50kW blowtorches in FL and AZ running
> nothing but brokered programming, and surprisingly, they get
> no ratings. Hmm.
>

 

[HHH]

Re: Cartoon could easily be Bush

> We found a WMD in Iraq. He's on trial now (you know, the guy
> who got interviewed by Rather: "Are we ever going to see you
> again, Uncle Saddam?")

Did he call him "Uncle Saddam"?


Yes, I consider
> Mr. Hussein to be a WMD. His regime not only murdered
> thousands

He was murdering thousands when we considered him a "friend" back in the 80s against Iran. We looked the other way back then. We looked the other way with Stalin, too.

I just feel that this business of Bush saying "we need to wipe out evil people" is dumbed-down crap for the naive. The US has a history of alligning itself with many brutal dictators if it is in our national interest.


but they
> encouraged suicide bombers (paid off the families) and
> trained terrorists
> on how to hijack planes.


But so did / are about twenty other regimes in the world.

Don't sidestep the point I am making. Hussein was presented to the American public (by the Bush admin.) as someone who was a DIRECT and IMMINENT threat the security of the USA (wrong), had a nuclear bomb program (wrong) and who was directly associated with 9/11 (wrong). Certainly if you read the Downing Street memos you will find that Bush and his old guard associates wanted to invade Iraq long before 9/11.

Look, Hussein was an evil, brutal dictator, but so was Qaddafi, Idi Amin, and a host of others.

Listen, imagine this: It is December 7, 1941 and the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt decares war on.....ARGENTINA. Why? Argentina is a brutal dictatorship and is generally sympathetic with the Japanese in their anti-American views. Now, we hear the spin: "Are we not better off without this brutal dictatorship? Were they not evil? Were they not all for the destruction of the United States?" Yeah, but.....they were not the prime objective.

>
> >> George Will for ABC?
>
> A commentator, not a news anchor who used "fake but
> accurate" forged documents to try and bring down a sitting
> President. Courage.

You are giving Dan Rather a hell of a lot of power! "Bring down a sitting president" simply with docs about his National Guard service? My God, if all the fake information about WMDs, yellow cake, the Downing Street memos, the CIA strongly questioning the accuracy of Bush's "imminent danger" statements, and
practically all of Colin Powell's presentation to the UN being revealed as inaccurate does not bring down Bush, being possibly AWOL for a few weeks 30 years ago ain't gonna do it!
>
> If we didn't have a liberal bias, you could be seeing THIS
> on your TV:

So you want to replace "Liberal Bias" with "Conservative Bias"? Why?

You keep confirming my argument that too many people these days want "news" that supports their opinions (both on the left and the right), instead of an attempt to reveal facts.

BACK TO RADIO (as in what this forum is all about): This is why I HATE commercial talk radio. It is 99% Kool Aid drinkers on both the left and the right who demonize (like you did with Rather) their "enemy".

By the way, what do you think of Ed Klein's recent book about Hillary Clinton?
It was so full of lies, misinformation, and laughable inaccuracies that the publishers are reportedly quietly ready to pull it. Any outrage about shoddy reporting from the right? Nope. Its fun to drink Kool Aid, isn't it. Life is so simple that way. Before you counter with "Michael Moore!!!", I have to tell you that I am not a fan of him, either.

Let's learn something from Edward R. Murrow, who once said "the evil is not in the stars, but in ourselves".


>
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by HHH on 10/31/05 12:40 AM.</FONT></P>

 

[coolidge]

Re: Cartoon could easily be Bush

> Listen, imagine this: It is December 7, 1941 and the
> Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt decares war
> on.....ARGENTINA. Why? Argentina is a brutal dictatorship
> and is generally sympathetic with the Japanese in their
> anti-American views.

In case you weren't aware of it already, your post was riddled with factual inaccuracies and sorely lacking in historical perspective of any kind.

By the way, how about imagining this one:

It is December 7, 1941 and the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. 11 months later, Roosevelt responds by invading ... MOROCCO. A country without any Japanese or Germans!

Wacky, eh? But that's what actually happened.

 

[HHH]

Re: Cartoon could easily be Bush

>
> In case you weren't aware of it already, your post was
> riddled with factual inaccuracies and sorely lacking in
> historical perspective of any kind.

Like what?