• 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

WPVI To Call Itself "ABC6" Starting April 1?

DToTheJ

DToTheJ

Here's the situation: In Providence, ABC is threatening to deny affiliation of its network to WLNE/Channel 6, whose agreement with the network expires at the end of this month (more info on the New England TV board.) As a result, WLNE may no longer refer to itself as "ABC6," nor be able to use the domain name "abc6.com" if ABC has its way.

Meanwhile, back in Philly, you have WPVI, which currently dubs itself "6ABC." What are the odds that, come April 1, WPVI will be branding itself "ABC6" instead of the awkward-sounding "6ABC"? As well as using the aforementioned "abc6.com" domain?
 
I can't imagine any change at WPVI, particularly a reversal of 6ABC to ABC6. WPVI remains the crown jewel in the ABC network crown, routinely drawing in more percentages of people than othe ABC affiliates.

This is a case of not rocking the boat. They aren't going to change anything.
 
::) Nothing has ever precluded WPVI from referring to itself as "ABC6" on-air, they simply chose the latter. As for the domain, they could pick it up - but if they wanted it in the first place, they could have easily gotten it years ago.
 
Why would one have anything to do with the other?

Odds are roughly nil.
 
All this is is a concocted correlation of "loss of domain name" with "what other ABC affiliates are on 6?".

Of all stations, WPVI, where change is begrudging, would never do this.
 
I think it was hard for channel 6 to even start refering to itself as 6 ABC. As it is, they kind of still call it Channel 6 Action News, not 6 ABC Action News.
 
Can't we just get away from this "network + channel number" branding finally???

It's just plain ol' CHANNEL 6. Everyone in Philly knows they're ABC. It was understandable during the affiliate switches, but that was over 15 years ago. Time for this crap to go.
 
No, it's not going anywhere. Logical business decision in today's world.
 
Thank FOX for the branding. When they came on nobody referred to themselves as network name & channel, but fox made its affiliates re brand themselves as FOX __. The other networks took notice & now everywhere its like this.

I don't think we needed it here in Philly. NBC10 made sense, cause of the affiliate switch. Ch3 had the KYW calls so it was smart to leave that as. However that meant it made even less sense when years later they adopted the CBS3 name.

If any station in this country didn't need to brand itself with what network it is, it would be ch6. People who don't live in this market know about 6. I think the abc logo on the 6 was good enough, but slow they have transitioned to being 6abc. I think only during action news is the station still called ch6, but even then it depends. For example if they're promoting the nights lineup they will say 6abc. "Tonight on an all new dancing with the stars, someone dies. You can catch that at 8:00PM right here in 6abc"

However if its a special report on action news being promoted they will say ch6. "You can catch my report on why TV sucks tonight at 11 here on ch6".
 
Irishfl said:
Ch3 had the KYW calls so it was smart to leave that as. However that meant it made even less sense when years later they adopted the CBS3 name.
Click to expand...

Up in Boston, Channel 4, WBZ-TV is KYW-TV's sister station, both original Westinghouse stations who both flipped from NBC to CBS on the same day. "WBZ" changed to "CBS4" probably around the same time "KYW" became "CBS3". In 2007, they got rid of "CBS4" and the TV station was rebranded back to WBZ. Their all news station is WBZ-AM and CBS put an all sports station on With the WBZ-FM call letters.
 
I love that people get worked up over "channel" vs a network identifier, as if that somehow diminishes anything.

We're in a world of hundreds of choices now. Using the network brand (through good and lean times) is a logical way of establishing an identity that may not have been as needed when you could count channels on your fingers...and maybe toes in the early days of cable.

No one stops watching because a channel goes from primarily using "channel X" to "X-NETWORK."
 
Irishfl said:
However if its a special report on action news being promoted they will say ch6. "You can catch my report on why TV sucks tonight at 11 here on ch6".
Click to expand...

ROTFLMAO

Slightly OT: Remember in 1996(?) when WPVI first branded as "6ABC", didn't it use a promo with Village People soundalikes singing "6ABC" to the tune of "YMCA"?

And closer to the topic, two stations that have resisted all temptation (though you can correct me) to go the [channel]-[network] (or vice versa) branding route are WBAL-11 (NBC to CBS and back again) and WJZ-13 Baltimore (ABC, then CBS). Not at all like WMAR becoming "ABC2" and WBFF becoming "Fox45".

ixnay
 
imhomerjay said:
We're in a world of hundreds of choices now. Using the network brand (through good and lean times) is a logical way of establishing an identity that may not have been as needed when you could count channels on your fingers...and maybe toes in the early days of cable.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the folks at WGN-TV and KTLA. They have never sacrificed their bankable individualism for the sake of a network branding. There are others just like those two, and I wish more stations could have followed their lead.

There is nothing logical about losing one's own self, following the crowd and becoming a virtual clone.
 
Yeah, that channel 6 really lost its identity and radically changed because they added "ABC" to their primary identity. That's a good one.

Yippee, some stations find success one way, some another. But nothing is diminished by using a network name except in the minds of people who focus on trivial, non-issues.
 
imhomerjay said:
Yeah, that channel 6 really lost its identity and radically changed because they added "ABC" to their primary identity. That's a good one.

Yippee, some stations find success one way, some another. But nothing is diminished by using a network name except in the minds of people who focus on trivial, non-issues.
Click to expand...

If you've got some Kool-Aid left in your fridge, please save me some. Then perhaps I'll come to your way of thinking.
 
Wouldn't touch Kool Aid. Not my beverage of choice. But feel free to drink anything you want.

If you can come up with some actual evidence that the bulk of stations have suffered from a business standpoint specifically because they choose to adapt to the reality of the modern world and make some adjustments to a brand name, have at it. (And a few disgruntled people who want to pretend it's still 1976 don't count as actual harm. :D )

None of us should be holding our breath waiting for that to happen.
 
"No, it's not going anywhere. Logical business decision in today's world."

That statement could not be be further from the truth. Yeesh....
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom