However, they are not "required to do so".
There is an affiliation contract that specifies the details. When there's a contract, there's a requirement. It's not voluntary.
When you work for a big company, you don't always get to do whatever you want..
Have you seen or know the details of the contract?
And as pointed out....WBZ has never run a ton of network stuff.
I have seen network news affiliation contracts before. There is an expectation that some content will air.
NBC News did this deal with iHeart in part to promote their name.
When you have one of their reporters creating a custom report, there is an expectation that it will air.
What WBZ did under previous ownership and management doesn't matter.
The expectation is that the programming is available to the affiliate.....not that they are required to run it.
No, they did this deal to get spots on the air.
]
(BTW...wasn't it you that said they are doing the same things, contract, blah, blah, blah....as they old owner....but that doesn't matter.) ;-)
I was not aware of any connection 'tween iHeart and ABC News Radio.
WBZ didn't carry NBC News before. iHeart told them to carry it. How many times do I have to say this?
NBC News doesn't sell the spots. They create the content.
They want to have their brand name heard in Boston.
This was a brand marketing deal from NBC News.
I have never said that they will be "running a lot of network content."
They have a new PD too, right?
because iHeart told them to.
You can say it as long as you want. What you need is to back up your point that they were told/required to carry it.
Content created to sell spots. The spots ruinning are more important than the content.
You said stations need the content. And that stations eat content.
No they don't. You are making a lot of assumptions about a station you don't know much about.
That's the deal they made with NBC.
It's in the story I linked earlier.
I did, and I said that in response to a general comment asking why do networks create content. This wasn't specifically about WBZ. It was about networks and radio stations.
Actually that's correct. The previous PD of WBZ resigned a few weeks ago and he hasn't been replaced yet.
No, the deal they made is to "provide access" to NBC Radio News.
And I pointed out that WBZ doesn't "eat" network content. And somehow you had an issue with that. Do you refute that?
You're parsing words again.
ou're talking about WBZ under old ownership and management.
I don't understand what your problem is here
I have no problem...except you insisting over and over that your limited perspective is the only valid one, and shouldn't be challenged.
It appears you've never been told you are wrong before.....and keep trying to change the argument so that you can somehow be right and won't have to see that there's another way of looking at things.
There is none. ABC News Radio now markets itself internally, as they do with ESPN Radio.
My point: perhaps iHeart does not require its stations to carry reports from NBC News Radio.
What "limited perspective" are you talking about?
I also noticed that some WBZ-TV people have been on air on WBZ radio again - in particular Barry Burbank last weekend with extra winter storm/snow coverage. They were still using Accuweather for the weather on the 3's he was just an extra weather story during the news. Heard Steve Burton doing some sports story as well.
And "Jon Keller, political analyst for WBZ NewsRadio and WBZ-TV" is still heard on 1030 - at least for now and I hope going forward, as well.
For now, they're still in the same building. It may be a bit tougher once the radio station moves.
