|
|
Post by admin on Mar 24, 2003 6:48:10 GMT -5
Well I've always thought KIQ was pretty much a dead station until the war broke out, but it seems like everywhere I go people are tuning in the CNN feed on KIQ it's pretty much 24/7 news coverage on the Iraq war.
|
|
|
|
Post by SamSpade on Mar 24, 2003 10:55:21 GMT -5
I heard a hosted radio program the other evening on KIQ. Is that some new development?
I can't believe people are finding it! I've always had night reception issues with it. That's true, Headline News was airing almost straight coverage of sister station CNN, but now its toned down a little.
I'm assuming that KSL will get the listeners back now that its a weekday- I didn't get to hear what they did weekends.
Citadel's continued CNN coverage is an admirable job! They even did the updates over the weekend.
|
|
|
|
Post by x on Mar 25, 2003 1:35:29 GMT -5
They've had some leased time programs for quite a while. Might even be a leftover from the pre-HN format.
For the first few days, the Headline News cable channel was simulcasting the main CNN-US channel. The radio affiliates just came along for the ride. They're back to a normal format now, from what I can see, er, hear.
They do have night reception issues because they're only authorized at 13 watts at night. Up in Weber I can often hear CBR Calgary with its 50,000 watts under KIQN at night.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amanuensis on Mar 27, 2003 9:57:39 GMT -5
I suspect the reception problems that KIQN has at night is the reason why ABC didn't buy that station.
BTW, I remeber that KIQN used to air the AP Radio News service. That was a better feed for radio listening, since there were no references to visual images. So why did they switch to the CNN feed? The only answer that makes sense to me is that the CNN feed is less expensive than the AP feed. Those of you who know, am I right?
One last question, can anyone guesstimate just how much money KIQN has to spend each month to pay CNN, keep the transmitter powered and the computers running? Since all of the staff quit, who is keeping the ship afloat? Is the bankruptcy trustee paying for this under the assumption that an on-air station can be sold for more money than one that is off-air?
|
|
|
|
Post by x on Mar 29, 2003 6:06:03 GMT -5
If KIQN had gone off the air whenthe staff left, the station's license would have been deleted by now.
I figure the station is probably making some kind of money, though how much I have no idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by David on Mar 30, 2003 15:30:33 GMT -5
If KIQN had gone off the air whenthe staff left, the station's license would have been deleted by now. I figure the station is probably making some kind of money, though how much I have no idea. KIQ does have at least one live announcer, or at least they did three months ago. During afternoon drive time in December, someone was playing Christmas music and giving time checks & weather forecasts. I suspect the announcer who was live in the studio a few months ago is also responsible for maintaing the station and keeping it on the air. There has to be an engineer or someone to power the station down at night and make sure the CNN feed doesn't go offline. |
|
|
|
Post by x on Mar 30, 2003 21:39:08 GMT -5
The powering down is virtually always done by timer. The ads are probably inserted by computer too. The only human intervention necessary would be doing 'traffic' (not the roadway thing, but settling up commercial schedules) and call the engineer if something goes wrong. My guess would be that there isn't a fulltime engineer who actually works there. It would be cheaper to have someone on call. If I were Intelliquest I'd ask about subcontracting to one of the station groups in the market like Citadel or Clear Channel.
|
|
