News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Regional television markets

Started by Desert Man, November 18, 2017, 10:37:53 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

hbelkins

#400
I was wrong. It was XERB and XERF. I'd heard years ago that it was XERA.

https://www.songfacts.com/facts/zz-top/heard-it-on-the-x

https://billygibbons.com/2016/11/heard-it-on-the-x/


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.


ErmineNotyours

#401
Quote from: hbelkins on August 24, 2019, 04:35:55 PM
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on August 01, 2019, 06:31:59 PM
A month late, but I used to be forced to listen to country station KMPS at work, and they would play the anthem at noon every day.

When I was on vacation in San Diego, I woke up at midnight on Sunday night to hear boarder blaster (English language alternative rock) XETRA play the Mexican national anthem.

XETRA? Never heard of it.

However, XERA (without the T) and XERF were the Mexican stations that inspired ZZ Top's "Heard It On The X."

I'm just going by the information I found on Radio Locator.

Seattle's The End (KNDD) was started by the owners of XETRA at the time.  They brought over Brian Jones as the morning host, and he said that XETRA was the inspiration for Wall of Voodoo's "Mexican Radio."  Brian also said that the studio was right next to the transmitter, "Shooting X-rays into your head," due to relaxed work safety rules.

Scott5114

Quote from: SP Cook on June 11, 2019, 04:14:43 PM
Odd.  For those of you too young to remember, stations used to go off the air about 1:30 or so until 5 or even 6 AM.  They would end the day with a recitation of some legalese, including where the tower was located, and then play the song.  Most had a similar deal in the morning.  This ended as advancements in technology made automation possible and it thus profitable to broadcast even when 99% of potential viewers were either asleep or working the graveyard shift.  I have seen youtubes of similar practices in Canada, Australia and Mexico, so I guess it was a universal thing.

As late as the mid 2000s, the PBS affiliate in Oklahoma City would sign off at night. In lieu of the national anthem, though, they had a reading of "High Flight" over video of fighter jets. Right after the final line "Put out my hand, and touched the face of God", it faded into the station logo, then cut to black.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 01, 2019, 03:39:33 AM
There is a radio station that usually plays the National Anthem most mornings at 5:30.  WTIC 1080 plays it between the 30 minute Sunrise Special newscast and the morning show.  Oftentimes, it's a recording of former Hartford Whaler anthem singer Tony Harrington.  Not sure if it's part of the station's tradition or the morning show's.

KOMA has a station tradition of playing the OU marching band's rendition of "Oklahoma!" at 5:00 pm every day. I think this dates back to when they were an AM clear channel station, so it kind of served as a state pride sort of display for listeners in faraway states.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

IM42A

Quote from: bandit957 on January 08, 2018, 10:53:48 AM
Quote from: bing101 on January 07, 2018, 11:44:44 AM
http://www.adweek.com/tvspy/nbc-boston-reveals-new-logo-on-anniversary/198466

WBTS-TV in Boston has been renamed NBC 10 Boston.

I was wondering why I never heard of this station before, and it turns out it's a low-power station. This has to be the only major market in America where a major network is on such a weak signal.

I'm surprised NBC allows this, quite frankly.

As a practical matter, WBTX is a full-power station, in that it shares WGBX-44's full-power spectrum.  It was also rebroadcast on full-power WNEU-60 at one time.  Be that as it may, the Boston situation is a mess.  It was basically a situation of creating a network affiliate pretty much from scratch, as with WWJ-62 in Detroit and WCGL-46 in Atlanta (pre-existing stations in both cities, but minor ones suddenly elevated to major-network-affiliate status).

IM42A

#404
Quote from: Desert Man on November 23, 2017, 01:55:18 PM



The Coachella Valley CA has channel 50 - subchannels .2 is WPMY (My Net) Pittsburgh (serves West Virginia), .3 WPMI (NBC) Mobile, AL (Gulf coast including Miss. & Fla.), .4 KDMD (CBS) Alaska (not sure it's from Anchorage or Juneau) and .5 KEZI (ABC) Eugene OR (Pacific time schedule). The seasonal resident population forms a large portion of the TV market demographic, as well these areas are known for large low-income migrant worker populations come to the resort economy in the winter season. Appalachia, the "Delta" or "cotton belt", Alaska and "Pooregon" - that makes sense. However, the majority of resort work is from Mexico and Central America like Guatemala and El Salvador, as well Puerto Rico (an US territory) and even the Philippines - they immigrate to Guam, Saipan and esp Hawaii. KVMD channels 23 and 31 (based in 29 Palms and Victorville) have 2 Tagalog or Filipino languages subchannels - the Philippines also have Cebuano, Ilocano, Mindanao and Visayano. Channel 50 itself (29 in 29 Palms) is our local My Net. station, KPSE owned by KMIR (NBC), and KMIR is now on cable in 29 Palms, because they used to not be over-air there.

I know this is going back awhile, but where does this information come from?  I have never heard of such an arrangement before.  It would be highly unusual for network affiliates from across the country to be retransmitted OTA on a low-power TV station, in the fashion of a translator.  The closest thing to this I have heard of, is from the earlier days of TV when Denver and Salt Lake City stations were seen either via OTA translators or cable, both fed by microwave, throughout the Intermountain West.  Those areas have TV stations of their own now and do not need Denver or SLC, moreover, the local stations do not particularly want people in their markets watching TV from other markets --- "local eyes on local ads".

Again, if a source for this information is available, I'd like to see it.

kevinb1994


ftballfan

Quote from: IM42A on April 23, 2021, 12:21:38 AM
Quote from: bandit957 on January 08, 2018, 10:53:48 AM
Quote from: bing101 on January 07, 2018, 11:44:44 AM
http://www.adweek.com/tvspy/nbc-boston-reveals-new-logo-on-anniversary/198466

WBTS-TV in Boston has been renamed NBC 10 Boston.

I was wondering why I never heard of this station before, and it turns out it's a low-power station. This has to be the only major market in America where a major network is on such a weak signal.

I'm surprised NBC allows this, quite frankly.

As a practical matter, WBTX is a full-power station, in that it shares WGBX-44's full-power spectrum.  It was also rebroadcast on full-power WNEU-60 at one time.  Be that as it may, the Boston situation is a mess.  It was basically a situation of creating a network affiliate pretty much from scratch, as with WWJ-62 in Detroit and WCGL-46 in Atlanta (pre-existing stations in both cities, but minor ones suddenly elevated to major-network-affiliate status).
WBTS and WWJ are both O&Os. CBS ended up buying then-WGPR (a very low budget independent) after being turned down for an affiliation by WDIV, WXYZ, WKBD (the then-current FOX affiliate), WXON, and even WADL (which was and still is another low-budget independent)

IM42A

Quote from: kevinb1994 on April 24, 2021, 11:43:24 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/24/local-tv-stations-plot-to-remain-relevant-in-shift-to-streaming.html

Here's a CNBC article on the future of broadcast TV

I am honestly surprised.  I never thought Americans would go back to broadcast TV.  Cable and satellite seemed to have pretty much of a lock on things, such that some people weren't even really aware they could use an antenna to get TV.  The early "free TV" antenna commercials were very insulting to the intelligence --- "by federal law, TV stations have to provide these signals to you for free" (well, duh!) --- but there is a generation that grew up not knowing anything but pay-TV services.

IM42A

Quote from: ftballfan on April 24, 2021, 06:03:35 PM
Quote from: IM42A on April 23, 2021, 12:21:38 AM
Quote from: bandit957 on January 08, 2018, 10:53:48 AM
Quote from: bing101 on January 07, 2018, 11:44:44 AM
http://www.adweek.com/tvspy/nbc-boston-reveals-new-logo-on-anniversary/198466

WBTS-TV in Boston has been renamed NBC 10 Boston.

I was wondering why I never heard of this station before, and it turns out it's a low-power station. This has to be the only major market in America where a major network is on such a weak signal.

I'm surprised NBC allows this, quite frankly.

As a practical matter, WBTX is a full-power station, in that it shares WGBX-44's full-power spectrum.  It was also rebroadcast on full-power WNEU-60 at one time.  Be that as it may, the Boston situation is a mess.  It was basically a situation of creating a network affiliate pretty much from scratch, as with WWJ-62 in Detroit and WCGL-46 in Atlanta (pre-existing stations in both cities, but minor ones suddenly elevated to major-network-affiliate status).
WBTS and WWJ are both O&Os. CBS ended up buying then-WGPR (a very low budget independent) after being turned down for an affiliation by WDIV, WXYZ, WKBD (the then-current FOX affiliate), WXON, and even WADL (which was and still is another low-budget independent)

Right.  I know CBS actually bought WVEU-69 in Atlanta, but sold it and instead affiliated with WGNX-46.

The big drawback here was that CBS was being forced to affiliate with fairly low-power, high-dial-position UHF stations, but with the advent of DTV, probably 75% of all TV stations are UHF anyway, so it really doesn't matter anymore.  Most legacy VHF stations are now on UHF, with the low-number VHF channel being retained for PSIP only.

zachary_amaryllis

this all makes me wonder..

back in the day, tv stations wanted low channel numbers because of the way older tv's tuned uhf channels (turn top knob to 'u', turn bottom knob to channel whatever, become human pretzel to make it come in)

but now, does that really matter? its just as easy to tune channel 62 as it is to tune channel 2, save one extra keypress on the remote..

of course, where i live the only ota channel is the damnable cheyenne station, and since they went digital, its mostly unreceivable in the canyon. back in the day, it came in with varying degrees of fuzziness, but was watchable.
clinched:
I-64, I-80, I-76 (west), *64s in hampton roads, 225,270,180 (co, wy)

bandit957

I miss the days when there were 3 commercial networks that fit neatly into the 3 VHF channels we had here. If I discovered some city had 2 or 3 networks on UHF, I'd think, "Man, this must be a tiny city!"
Might as well face it, pooing is cool

SectorZ

Quote from: bandit957 on April 25, 2021, 10:08:52 AM
I miss the days when there were 3 commercial networks that fit neatly into the 3 VHF channels we had here. If I discovered some city had 2 or 3 networks on UHF, I'd think, "Man, this must be a tiny city!"

I think the Weird Al Yankovic movie "UHF" ruined UHF signals for our generation.

kevinb1994

Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 10:16:14 AM
Quote from: bandit957 on April 25, 2021, 10:08:52 AM
I miss the days when there were 3 commercial networks that fit neatly into the 3 VHF channels we had here. If I discovered some city had 2 or 3 networks on UHF, I'd think, "Man, this must be a tiny city!"

I think the Weird Al Yankovic movie "UHF" ruined UHF signals for our generation.
Heh, I didn't get to watch that one until I was out of high school. Not bad, just not for everyone.

SP Cook

Big Media is in something of a quandy, relative to OTA TV.  On the one hand, it wants to continue to screw over people with this ridiculous "retransmission fee" nonsense.  On the other hand, statistics show that most people are really not interested in "local TV".  They are interested in NETWORK TV, but the truly local material, generally just the local news, is really not that popular.  People would be just as happy with a feed of primetime and sports. 

I'm old.  I know a lot of self-proclaimed "cord cutters" (a better term would be cord switchers, since they pay for internet, then pay for all these streaming services, to me a true cord cutter would just live off OTA TV and free things like Pluto, Stirr, VUit, and YouTube.    All of them are a generation younger than me.  And, despite the fact that you can get 34 channels, including all the networks, free with an antenna, they all have the same blank look on their face they have when  presented with a paper map or a manual transmission.


The Nature Boy

Quote from: SP Cook on April 25, 2021, 11:44:00 AM
Big Media is in something of a quandy, relative to OTA TV.  On the one hand, it wants to continue to screw over people with this ridiculous "retransmission fee" nonsense.  On the other hand, statistics show that most people are really not interested in "local TV".  They are interested in NETWORK TV, but the truly local material, generally just the local news, is really not that popular.  People would be just as happy with a feed of primetime and sports. 

I'm old.  I know a lot of self-proclaimed "cord cutters" (a better term would be cord switchers, since they pay for internet, then pay for all these streaming services, to me a true cord cutter would just live off OTA TV and free things like Pluto, Stirr, VUit, and YouTube.    All of them are a generation younger than me.  And, despite the fact that you can get 34 channels, including all the networks, free with an antenna, they all have the same blank look on their face they have when  presented with a paper map or a manual transmission.

This reminds me of a post I saw a few years back of someone looking for a stream of the Super Bowl when all they really had to do was buy a cheap antenna, connect it to their TV, and they'd get it for free and in high quality.

brad2971

Quote from: IM42A on April 25, 2021, 05:58:11 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on April 24, 2021, 11:43:24 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/24/local-tv-stations-plot-to-remain-relevant-in-shift-to-streaming.html

Here's a CNBC article on the future of broadcast TV

I am honestly surprised.  I never thought Americans would go back to broadcast TV.  Cable and satellite seemed to have pretty much of a lock on things, such that some people weren't even really aware they could use an antenna to get TV.  The early "free TV" antenna commercials were very insulting to the intelligence --- "by federal law, TV stations have to provide these signals to you for free" (well, duh!) --- but there is a generation that grew up not knowing anything but pay-TV services.

In some major metro/rural TV markets, you don't even need the antenna. There is app called Locast, which was started by a bunch of football fans irate at the networks' NFL blackout rules. It's a free app, though they do ask for donations. Being a nonprofit, Locast thus gets around the Supreme Court's Aereo decision.

bing101

Quote from: brad2971 on April 25, 2021, 12:17:50 PM
Quote from: IM42A on April 25, 2021, 05:58:11 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on April 24, 2021, 11:43:24 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/24/local-tv-stations-plot-to-remain-relevant-in-shift-to-streaming.html

Here's a CNBC article on the future of broadcast TV


I am honestly surprised.  I never thought Americans would go back to broadcast TV.  Cable and satellite seemed to have pretty much of a lock on things, such that some people weren't even really aware they could use an antenna to get TV.  The early "free TV" antenna commercials were very insulting to the intelligence --- "by federal law, TV stations have to provide these signals to you for free" (well, duh!) --- but there is a generation that grew up not knowing anything but pay-TV services.


In some major metro/rural TV markets, you don't even need the antenna. There is app called Locast, which was started by a bunch of football fans irate at the networks' NFL blackout rules. It's a free app, though they do ask for donations. Being a nonprofit, Locast thus gets around the Supreme Court's Aereo decision.

Newer TV's made in the past 5 years are more dependent on Wi fi signals and go straight to streaming feeds. I know some of the newer Samsung TV's does that.


https://www.walmart.com/ip/TCL-55-Class-4-Series-4K-UHD-HDR-Roku-Smart-TV-55S431/276964903?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=0&wl13=3708&adid=22222222420449455996&wmlspartner=wmtlabs&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=501107745824&wl4=pla-293946777986&wl5=9032052&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=8175035&wl11=local&wl12=276964903&wl13=3708&veh=sem_LIA&gclid=Cj0KCQjwppSEBhCGARIsANIs4p6X_OazYKKD0DWer2RLQJR6IZVDRIlGzOVPb-lzjKetX2YQhuM9ku4aAsSzEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds



Some of the newer TV's labeled RokuTV does that. Antenna OTA TV's might become a rare feature in this decade.  You can attach an antenna on the TV but its an optional feature on this model though.

3467

But OTA isn't completely dead . Gray just bought Quincy TV Midwest stations for 900 million making the Oakleys the second richest downstaters after the Tracys down US 24.
This relates to roads since it was Tom  Oakley that led the crusade to get the Illinois 110.

kevinb1994

Quote from: 3467 on April 25, 2021, 10:17:45 PM
But OTA isn't completely dead . Gray just bought Quincy TV Midwest stations for 900 million making the Oakleys the second richest downstaters after the Tracys down US 24.
This relates to roads since it was Tom  Oakley that led the crusade to get the Illinois 110.
That's a surprise, because the COVID made other deals with Gray TV not worth pursuing. I recall that a proposed deal with TEGNA was canceled as a result.

kevinb1994

Quote from: bing101 on April 25, 2021, 09:07:30 PM
Quote from: brad2971 on April 25, 2021, 12:17:50 PM
Quote from: IM42A on April 25, 2021, 05:58:11 AM
Quote from: kevinb1994 on April 24, 2021, 11:43:24 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/24/local-tv-stations-plot-to-remain-relevant-in-shift-to-streaming.html

Here's a CNBC article on the future of broadcast TV


I am honestly surprised.  I never thought Americans would go back to broadcast TV.  Cable and satellite seemed to have pretty much of a lock on things, such that some people weren't even really aware they could use an antenna to get TV.  The early "free TV" antenna commercials were very insulting to the intelligence --- "by federal law, TV stations have to provide these signals to you for free" (well, duh!) --- but there is a generation that grew up not knowing anything but pay-TV services.


In some major metro/rural TV markets, you don't even need the antenna. There is app called Locast, which was started by a bunch of football fans irate at the networks' NFL blackout rules. It's a free app, though they do ask for donations. Being a nonprofit, Locast thus gets around the Supreme Court's Aereo decision.

Newer TV's made in the past 5 years are more dependent on Wi fi signals and go straight to streaming feeds. I know some of the newer Samsung TV's does that.


https://www.walmart.com/ip/TCL-55-Class-4-Series-4K-UHD-HDR-Roku-Smart-TV-55S431/276964903?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=0&wl13=3708&adid=22222222420449455996&wmlspartner=wmtlabs&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=501107745824&wl4=pla-293946777986&wl5=9032052&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=8175035&wl11=local&wl12=276964903&wl13=3708&veh=sem_LIA&gclid=Cj0KCQjwppSEBhCGARIsANIs4p6X_OazYKKD0DWer2RLQJR6IZVDRIlGzOVPb-lzjKetX2YQhuM9ku4aAsSzEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds



Some of the newer TV's labeled RokuTV does that. Antenna OTA TV's might become a rare feature in this decade.  You can attach an antenna on the TV but its an optional feature on this model though.
We have a giant 65-inch Sony Bravia that's pretty much like those other smart TVs, and it even has Android/Google TV built-in.

SP Cook

Quote from: 3467 on April 25, 2021, 10:17:45 PM
But OTA isn't completely dead . Gray just bought Quincy TV Midwest stations for 900 million making the Oakleys the second richest downstaters after the Tracys down US 24.
This relates to roads since it was Tom  Oakley that led the crusade to get the Illinois 110.

We are in the middle of a major consolidation in that industry.  Both parties ignore or change ownership limits and, after the O&O stations in big cities, there are about a dozen companies that own 90% of the stations. 

The average viewer doesn't notice, but I will give you an example of the "synergy" Gray uses around here.  In my market it owns WSAZ.  It also owns WAVE in Louisville, which will produce Kentucky statewide politics WSAZ uses, and WKYT, which will produce UK and Kentucky state high school stories.  In turn WSAZ will produce reports if the governor or somebody like that shows up in eastern Kentucky, or will do the background story for those stations for teams that go to the state tournaments.  It also owns WXIX in Cincinnati, same deal.  Kind of chains along all over the country.

While it doesn't own any station in DC, it has a studio there and will interview the local politicians for whoever requests it.


3467

Nexstar does that here in Illinois and Iowa. It has helped expand state government coverage . Gray owns stations in adjacent markets now combat least Quincy up to Wisconsin. Nexstar  Des Moines to.  Champaign.

3467

Let me rant about some Midwestern markets. The quad cities should move Henry Iowa to Ottumwa and Jo Davies to Rockford. Kirksville runs more stories from South Iowa than the Quads. Chicago should cede Porter to South Bend and and DeKalb and Western McHenry to Rockford.
Not that this will happen and of course these are counties where the stations can be seen OTA. This is what got me interested as a kid. I asked what are these channels with all the static....

NWI_Irish96

Quote from: 3467 on April 26, 2021, 08:38:44 PM
Chicago should cede Porter to South Bend

Since I'm familiar with this area, I'll comment about it but there are dozens of counties like it out there. Porter county residents have much more connection to Chicago than South Bend. Even Michigan City, which is in LaPorte County, is more connected to Chicago than SB.

However, Porter County is such a tiny percentage of the Chicago metro area that they are rarely going to have stories on Chicago local news.

Thus the quandary--should you move to a TV market that you have no real connection to because it's smaller and as such you'll get more coverage?

To complicate things more, if Porter County moves to the SB TV market, then there is a risk that the Colts and Bears will be on the same network at the same time and you might get the Colts game. That would get people upset pretty quick.
Indiana: counties 100%, highways 100%
Illinois: counties 100%, highways 61%
Michigan: counties 100%, highways 56%
Wisconsin: counties 86%, highways 23%

Roadgeekteen

Quote from: cabiness42 on April 26, 2021, 08:48:19 PM
Quote from: 3467 on April 26, 2021, 08:38:44 PM
Chicago should cede Porter to South Bend

Since I'm familiar with this area, I'll comment about it but there are dozens of counties like it out there. Porter county residents have much more connection to Chicago than South Bend. Even Michigan City, which is in LaPorte County, is more connected to Chicago than SB.

However, Porter County is such a tiny percentage of the Chicago metro area that they are rarely going to have stories on Chicago local news.

Thus the quandary--should you move to a TV market that you have no real connection to because it's smaller and as such you'll get more coverage?

To complicate things more, if Porter County moves to the SB TV market, then there is a risk that the Colts and Bears will be on the same network at the same time and you might get the Colts game. That would get people upset pretty quick.
Does South Bend get Colts or Bears games?
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.