Classical Battle

WNCN is a radio station in the New York City area that has been broadcasting a passable mix of classical music and assorted junk. A year and a half ago it was traded to Starr Broadcasting. Starr, on acquiring control of the station, pledged itself to maintain a mix of something like 70 per cent classical music. Starr has been. losing money on the station. Starr desires to change the mix from 70 per cent classical to 100 per cent (deleted). The aficionados of the former have brought suit in court against Starr for threatening their ears with (deleted). Starr has fought back in the courts. Attorneys are earning fees. Tempers are snapping. Citizens are writing letters to the New York Times, and the Times is, of all things, publishing them. Day after day the great controversy rages in the press, and, no doubt, in the pulpit, in the subway, in Flatbush, up in the Bronx, on Fire Island tee-hee . . .

Now it is remarkable that Starr made certain gestures that can be interpreted as offering payment, that payment has in effect been made, and that property has changed hands. In short: Starr bought something. Now suppose you bought an amusement park that had paddleboats and pony rides, and after a while you figure you’ll make a few more bucks by altering the ratio between the two attractions? If it’s your property, why shouldn’t you do exactly what you want with it? One would think that Starr has a right to do whatever it wishes with its own property.

WR

About the Author

William F. Rickenbacker

Featured Tags

WNCN is a radio station in the New York City area that has been broadcasting a passable mix of classical music and assorted junk. A year and a half ago it was traded to Starr Broadcasting. Starr, on acquiring control of the station, pledged itself to maintain a mix of something like 70 per cent classical music. Starr has been. losing money on the station. Starr desires to change the mix from 70 per cent classical to 100 per cent (deleted). The aficionados of the former have brought suit in court against Starr for threatening their ears with (deleted). Starr has fought back in the courts. Attorneys are earning fees. Tempers are snapping. Citizens are writing letters to the New York Times, and the Times is, of all things, publishing them. Day after day the great controversy rages in the press, and, no doubt, in the pulpit, in the subway, in Flatbush, up in the Bronx, on Fire Island tee-hee . . .

Now it is remarkable that Starr made certain gestures that can be interpreted as offering payment, that payment has in effect been made, and that property has changed hands. In short: Starr bought something. Now suppose you bought an amusement park that had paddleboats and pony rides, and after a while you figure you’ll make a few more bucks by altering the ratio between the two attractions? If it’s your property, why shouldn’t you do exactly what you want with it? One would think that Starr has a right to do whatever it wishes with its own property.