John Cereghin wrote: > On 11/5/07, Craig Healy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If the FCC and the courts refuse to intervene, and Congress >> likewise sidesteps it, I think we'll see a number of stations >> simply fold. I was speaking to a fellow who does a lot of IBOC >> work. One comment he made was that there are a lot of stations >> "that shouldn't be on the air". Maybe so, but it's not iBiquity's >> job to silence them.<<< > > Man, if that isn't an arrogant attitude on the part of the IBOC boys, > then I don't know what is. The Industry could get into a huge, > drawn out discussion about who "deserves" to be on the air and who > doesn't and who really is "serving" their community and who isn't.
There's another way to look at this - it's the free market taking its course. If 24-hour IBOC service is valuable enough to the owners of WBZ, let's say, to justify paying WYSL's price for silence, then why shouldn't those two parties be able to freely set a price and make their transaction? This is nothing really new - look at the AM signals that were bought out and taken off the air so WWRL 1600 New York could upgrade a decade or so ago, for instance. Or look at WOWO/WLIB. For every WSNJ, which is indeed a great local station, there are probably a dozen AMs just barely limping along with minimal listenership, whose owners might welcome a chance to cash out and to clean up some of the interference on the dial in the process. Of course, this would only "solve" one piece of the AM IBOC issue, and not even the most critical one. It does nothing to fix the bashing that the big clears inflict on one another - Citadel's not going to pay itself to take WJR silent at night to allow WABC to run digital, or vice versa. And it can't fix the international treaty issues - WBZ might be able to buy off WYSL, but it can't do that for CJMS. s _______________________________________________ IRCA mailing list [email protected] http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: [email protected]
