NOT....Re: [BC] Clear Channel Wants More?

[Rich Wood]

------ At 06:39 PM 10/5/2005, Mike Gideon wrote: -------

>You don't think the other group owners are behind raising the cap? 
>Did Mark say to better serve the community?

Why would they. No one else is anywhere near the current one. I never 
expect someone driven by the stock market claim to want to better 
serve the community, even though that's been radio's tradition until 
consolidation. At least in lip service.

>NO OURS didn't. Like Barry said, people just make stuff up as fast 
>as they can type. Our studios, and most of the transmitter sites 
>remained online. That's all I'm saying about that

Hmm. I recall you admitting that your people got things running a few 
stations at a time. I'll have to check the archives. As I recall, 7 
stations. You seem to have forgotten I know a lot of people within 
Clear Channel. You're telling me none of your New Orleans stations 
were off the air?

>>You could have stayed off the air and the result would have been the same.
>
>No it wouldn't. People needed life saving information. They didn't 
>need "professional commentary" full of spin.

Was that what WWL was doing?

>I don't do multiple ownership studies, but a Market is comprised of 
>stations that are home to the market. I think it's an Arbitron thing.

Yes it is. However, it can include out of market signals if they 
appear in the diaries. WOR often appeared in the Philadelphia book 
but was, by no means, a metro station.

>They are only talking about a small number of markets. Instead of 
>making stuff up as you go, read the transcript.

I guess all the trades got it wrong. Misquoted. Yeah. That's the ticket.

Rich