Reader comments: 'Localism' may tune out Utah stations
8 comments | Read story
brunopuppy | 12:01 p.m. July 4, 2008
Mr Hansen ins disingenious. He does not serve the community of Oakley. Like many broadcasters, Simmons Radio has taken a frequency allocated to Oakley and "moved" it to Salt Lake. A signal is more valuable in Salt Lake than in Oakley. They have no intention of serving Oakley or any other small community. They are about buying the frequency or in this case developing the frequency, and then selling it. (See also Mill Creek Broadcasting). This may be a good thing for smaller communities.
Ted | 12:04 p.m. July 4, 2008
The good folks in Minot, North Dakota, no doubt wish there had been someone minding the store at the local radio station when a train derailed and sent poison gas into the city -- something no radio station reported for hours because they had all been bought, consolidated into one studio, and mostly emptied of on-air people.
We had the article the other day showcasing the owner who didn't think he had a radio monopoly despite owning all but one of the radio stations in his valley. Why is the Deseret News suddenly trumpeting the joys of big radio -- which listeners are abandoning in droves?
We had the article the other day showcasing the owner who didn't think he had a radio monopoly despite owning all but one of the radio stations in his valley. Why is the Deseret News suddenly trumpeting the joys of big radio -- which listeners are abandoning in droves?
Comments continue below
Curious listener | 2:04 p.m. July 4, 2008
One has to wonder how just 15 years ago, stand alone radio stations were able to get by with full staffs 24/7 and no consolodation. I would guess MORE stations are going out of business during this era of consolidation than back then.
Oidar Listener | 10:58 a.m. July 5, 2008
I am in total agreement...consolidation has caused the downfall of many, many local services to small communities. Serving larger cities means a huge difference between a county by county survey and a metro ratings survey. The owners know that! Yet they moan over having to be told what to do by anyone, much less, the FCC.
This move is years overdue! Hope it passes!
This move is years overdue! Hope it passes!
Local Radio Station Owner | 2:41 p.m. July 5, 2008
Who are these greedy mega broadcasters trying to kid? God forbid they may have to serve in the community interest, as their license should require, and once did. Tehachapi, California is one such community who lost their only local radio station, now it's nothing more than a repeater for a Los Angeles radio station a 100 miles away. I know many broadcasters who would be pleased to restore local radio if the big boys can't afford it. The radio stations won't shut down; they will just have to move back to their community of license. Just think of all the local jobs that will be created, and taxes that will be paid and stay local, Our local station has 15 full time staffers, we buy everything we can locally. Local radio stations can and should contribute to the local economy. Our radio station enjoys giving back, to bad the "Mega Broadcasters" don't! Broadcasting is a cash cow, always has been, having a local studio is a drop in the bucket compared to the millions they take in.
Proud to serve and invest in our local community!
Steve Thomas
KNJO Radio
Proud to serve and invest in our local community!
Steve Thomas
KNJO Radio
radio nut | 4:49 a.m. July 6, 2008
What I miss is "clear channel" am broadcasting at night. Your local station ksl could be heard here in Illinois after WJJD now WYYL sighned off at Salt Lake City sunset. Better to have 12 good quality am stations,rather than 1000 poor "slop-buckets" I think the FCC is a "bad case" of the "tail wagging the dog" MY thoughts about the quality of FM broadcasting are not fit to print on your website.
Mrs. Tracy | 9:05 a.m. Aug. 5, 2008
Thanks for the article about my Uncle David B. Smith, he will be missed terribly.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining



For years owners fought for the present monopoly system and ownership of multiple radio stations.
Owners now have studios all in one city, like Salt Lake, and claim "service" of Ogden and Salt Lake, when in reality they probably only want the residents considered for figuring their numbers of listeners for ratings purposes.
It is a real shame for cities the size of Ogden and Provo to no longer have true local coverage of news and community events by a local radio station.
In some communities across the country, there may be a studio in a city, but the station is connected to a satellite music or talk service and the only staff is often a receptionist and maybe a salesman, while the owner is somewhere else in the state or country.
If owners are going to reap the benefits of multiple station ownership (like taking in increased revenue), then they should also have to shoulder the responsibilities of serving the communities they siphon the revenue out of.