Larry You bring up some good points. What light can you bring to the statement that the FCC inspected the site pretending to be a cable guy as was reported by Maureen? This could make one believe that there is a conspiracy to keep the station quiet.
----- Original Message ---- From: pistonen57 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 5, 2007 10:14:30 AM Subject: [AsburyPark] Re: WYGG - Ask them for The Truth You mean the station did not document the inspection and violations found? As I said, the record shows the station went silent on its own, so it must have had major problems it felt like it should not continue with after coming to the attention of the FCC, and I believe their authorized site was not available, so what should they have done? Continue on at wrong height and coordinates and subject themselves to further fines? Would you pay for them? Are you usually privy to the FCCs records? Please tell me who you know. When did you inspect the station? You did't have to go there to know that Bangs Avenue is a high building and they were at an absurdly wrong height and wrong coordinates for several years, and to see that the antenna was real close to the rooftop, which is a hazard. So, you still say you did not find any violations? They were obviously allowed to return to the air with an STA because the station went silent voluntarily and applied for an STA for new site, which they wre granted. So, since revoking a license is not something the FCC usually does, even with serious violations, they are allowed back on the air, which I guess is happening according to Maureen, and since I've heard them back on. If there were no violations, why did they apply for STA to go silent, then another one to move? Notice to the public for what action? Aside from the list of violation notices that get posted, where are these public notices you speak of that are issued within 2 weeks? They are in fact a "real" licensed class A station with all the requirements of "real" full broadcast stations, you know what that entails. Should they be allowed to operate like a pirate, at any height, and anywhere they like, without required EAS equipment... without being called on it? If they were allowed to do that, the FCC would surely be playing favorites and something would be wrong with that. Not to mention, since their coverage area is tremendoulsy increased at the unauthorized height, its contour was well within the listenable range of 88.1 WNJT public radio to the west, and it must have been causing some interference to listeners trying to get them, as well as adjacent channel interference to 88.3 listener-sponsered WBGO Jazz 88 in northern Monmouth. A lot of people listen to these good stations, they do not belong to one of the two radio groups you mentioned, and they are not canned crap. Also, the lack of EAS could cause listeners of WYGG to miss important alerts. --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com, Mike Hemeon <tvnetdude2000@ ...> wrote: > > I have been through the stations documents and there is no indication as to why the station was taken off the air. There is no record of the inspection at the FCC, there is no record of any warnings, citations, or fines. The FCC has to have a reason to shut a station down there has to have been a violation and I cannot find one. > > The FCC today has no problem fining stations for anything to them it is a source of income. > > The FCC has had no jurisdiction of content since the Communications Act of 1996 and is one of the reasons that there aren't any challenges to broadcast licenses during renewal anymore. > > The station asked for an STA to remain silent in November because they were forced to move after the plug was pulled. I have read the stations STA and the conditions of it and if there were any violations why did they allow them to return to the air? > > What you say is true about the FCC and their timelines on fines but notification to the public that something happened appears within two weeks. > > The last time they were fined was for moving without telling the FCC and I believe not having an EAS receiver. They are a glorified LPFM station and if you know anything about LPFMs they are a little more than licensed pirate stations. > > They serve a specific part of the community unlike the canned crap on terrestrial radio out there today. > > I know exactly how the FCC works, the FCC of today, I have two FM applications in front of them right now along with an FCC attorney. They have a backlog of close to two years now and LPFMs, NCE-FMs, and pirates are on the very bottom of their list. I have also appeared before the FCC and testified on the matter of HDTV terrestrial transmission systems 8VSB vs. COFDM. > > I can't agree that there would be a big stink made about it. It is a small religious station owned by a minority group and if it went away who would notice? People from another country that live on the fringes of society with no power. > > Do they feel stupid about being fined? I would imagine that the sting of a fine of over ten grand would upset them. They are not a commercial station that belongs to one of the two radio groups in the area that has an FCC attorney to wipe their noses. > > The commercial stations in the area had visits from teh FCC in the past year and were fined also how stupid do they feel. These people are allegedly professionals they must really feel stupid. > > The GM of the station told me exactly what happened on that day and it made no sense. > > Okay you went through your rant now why did they shut them down? You ask many questions but still no answers. The question remains why is there absolutely no documentation on this inspection or shutdown. Why is that? > > Someone indeed should find out what the story on this is and I don't see any results coming from you. So far all I have heard from you is > > > > pistonen57 <pistonen57@ ...> wrote: > Let's just end this nonsense. I've never seen someone more laughably > off-base than Mike with his be-all end-all doom and gloom conspiracy > theories. Whatever he thinks he knows about AP politics is all well > and good, but it has nothing to do with what happened to WYGG. There > really is no mystery to this, if you people would stop typing and go > look for the truth in front of your faces. The sad thing is, I don't > think anyone here really has the station's interests in mind. You're > just either bashing the FCC, politicians, or arguing amongst each other > in some kind of childish word-play, I-know-more- than-you game. Why > doesn't someone go do some real investigating and find some hard > facts? Think about it. > > If anyone wants to know what happened with WYGG and the FCC, why > doesn't someone ask the station exactly what they were doing wrong. I > am an area resident in the broadcast business, and some of you are > asking the wrong questions. The FCC does not need a reason to inspect > a broadcast station; they do random, unannounced, unsolicited > inspections all the time. There's usually no complaint. They are > looking for technical violations, public file, main studio rule > violations, stuff like that. An FCC inspector has never, ever shut down > licensed broadcast stations based on content or some political > reasons. If they did, that would be some pretty bad press, and the > station would likely make a big stink about that. I don't know much > about the political situation in AP, and don't think the FCC really > cares about that at all. Also, I don't see any official notice that > the FCC shut down the station. About the station not receiving any > official notice, if you haven't noticed, the FCC these days seems to > take a really long time to issue their fines, sometimes more than a > year. From what I can see, for minor violations, FCC issues violation > notices routinely within a month or two. The more serious stuff with a > monetary fine takes much longer to issue. Maybe it's lack of manpower, > or they just can't decide what they want to do. > > Ask WYGG if they themselves requested special temporary authority to go > silent in November. Ask them why a broadcast station would ever want > to go silent if everything was OK. > > Ask them if they feel stupid, after notices and fines in 2002, (they > are public documents posted on the web) to continue operating with an > antenna at 601 Bangs Avenue, at a height of approx. 44 meters instead > of the authorized 14 meters. Ask them if it could be to illegally > increase their coverage area from a couple of mile radius to at least > 20 miles?) Ask them if they thought that illegally covering so much > area could cause interference to another station on 88.1. > > Ask them if they feel stupid to also continue operating at the wrong > coordinates (wrong place) for all these years after a fine. > > Ask them if they lowered their power like someone said they did to > account for that height. Ask them also if they ever received > authorization to raise height and lower power. > > Ask them if they had previously operated without required, potentially > life-saving EAS equipment for several years. Ask how they expected > their listeners to get important emergency alerts or weather alerts > with no EAS. > > Ask them if they ran a station for years without any public inspection > file. Ask them what they told members of the public who asked to, and > have the right to check their public records. > > Ask them if their antenna was a radio frequency radiation (RFR) hazard, > by being mounted so close to the roof surface, and if so, why they > certified on their 2006 renewal application that their was no RFR > hazard? Ask them if they thought about workers on the roof that might > be exposed to high levels of RFR. > > Ask them if the real station owner had a history of pirate operation in > the New York area. > > Ask them if they consider themselves really lucky to have continued to > operate for years at much too high a height, wrong coordinates, and > with other serious violations, with FCC fines thrown in, or did they > have some political pull of their own that allowed them to get away > with operating like that for so long. > > Ask them why, as a non-commercial station, they had groups on the air > that ran commercials. Ask them if they charged a fee to run these > spots. > > Ask them if they now want to abide by the terms of their license like > most other broadcasters do, or embarrasingly continue to look like > a "pirate" station with a license. > > Ask them why they moved to a new location and if they are already back > on the air with a Special temporary authority, and how they managed > this if all the AP politicians and the FCC and even George "W" are > involved in a conspiracy to shut this station down because of something > political. > > Ask them if they have a station engineer. > > Ask them to do the right thing so that they can serve the community > properly like I believe they want to. > > Larry M. > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --- > Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know. Ask your question on Yahoo! Answers. > ____________________________________________________________________________________ The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php
