Starter of this subject: Steve Jones
Last post in this subject: 1/22/2003
Messages in this subject: 2
| Steve Jones | 1/22/2003 2 replies |
|
I have a couple of questions about the Red and Blue networks. Firstly, I am aware that in much of the country NBC only had one affiliate, which could be fed either a Red or Blue Network programme. I was wondering why NBC only had one station in these areas. Was it because there weren't enough radio stations, or did NBC think that they wouldn't get enough sponsors who would want to have their programmes heard in those areas and so be unable to support two stations? Or was it too costly to have two sets of telephone lines to connect NBC to the stations?
Secondly, during the two years or so when the Blue Network was a separate company from NBC but still owned by RCA, what happened to these supplemental stations? Did they all become full-time Red Network stations, which would have left the Blue Network much smaller by comparison, or did the previous system continue until RCA sold the Blue Network? Or were they divided between the two networks so that the Blue Network consisted of more than just the basic stations? I can think of reasons for all three scenarios so I would like to hear what was really the case. Many thanks. |
| jim isham | 2/20/2003 1 replies |
|
Regarding your first question, one possible reason is that the areas in question simply could not financially support more than one or two radio stations.
In an area that could support two stations one would possibly be affiliated with CBS and the other with NBC. If the city could support three stations then the third one had the option to be affiliated with the other NBC network or Mutual. |
| Steve Jones | 3/1/2003 0 replies |