Talk:WERQ-FM

Fair use rationale for Image:WERQ logo 1999-2005.jpg

Image:WERQ logo 1999-2005.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Former WERQ logo.jpg

Image:Former WERQ logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:19, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Conception Of Radio Or Television Station "Ownership"

SUBJECT: The Wikipedia Conception Of Radio Or Television Station "Ownership"

 Dear member of the Wikipedia Governing Board:

 This contributor objects to the term, "owner" to describe the operator of an American television or radio station. According to the Federal Communications Act of 1934, as amended, American broadcasters are not "owners, but "licensed operators". The stations/frequencies are owned by the American people, because the radio spectrum is a finite resource, in the public domain.

 The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issues licenses to broadcasters to serve their communities, and I quote from the 1934 Act, "in the public interest, necessity and convenience". Whether a station makes a profit from these activities is of little concern, in the spirit of the Act.

 The only things that given station might "own" is the broadcast facility itself: studios and transmitters, antenna towers and, possibly the land on which the towers reside. They do not "own" the frequencies. They do not "own" the licenses. They do not "own" the Call Letters. They do not "own" the airwaves. We do, by proxy of the federal governemnt.

 The FCC operates under the U.S. Department of Commerce, which, among other things, regulates interstate trade. Because radio and television signals may transcend the boundaries of a given state, territory or federal district, the FCC must be concerned with these matters as well.

 Additionally, because of the word and spirit of the Act of 1934, as amended, the FCC must occasionally regulate the programming content of its licensed operators, in the public interest. Terrestrial broadcasters are not free to broadcast anything they wish; the must abide by standards set forth in the FCC Rules and Regulations, federal legislation and the judgements of the Judicial branch of our federal government.

 American broadcasting is a public service. It simply happens to be suported by commercial advertising. For many years, this American model was completely unique on planet Earth. We have a system which attempts to serve both advertisers and listeners well and the best broadcasters do both.

 Unfortunately, today, especially after the market forces unleashed by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, most broadcasters, especially radio broadcasters, are not serving either of their constituencies well, at all.

 So, I ask the Wikipedia governing authorities to re-consider using the term, "owner" to describe the nature of a given radio or television company's sovereignty over the stations they are entrusted by the people of the United State to operate.

 "Currently-licensed Operator" would be a better term than, "Owner", in my opinion.

Sincerely,

David Tate —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.177.201.101 (talk) 08:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

nickname : source ?

Could anyone explain where the nickname 92Q comes from? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.65.157.122 (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2011 (UTC)