Tuesday, September 8, 2009

GUEST COLUMN: Cleveland Digital TV

OMW NOTE: We are basically no longer updating the Ohio Digital TV blog, which was designed to "carry the heavy load" during the period around the digital TV transition on June 12.

From now on, we will continue to post digital TV-related items on the regular Ohio Media Watch blog, like the item below...which we've copied over here for convenience.


Long-time OMW reader Trip Ericson (RabbitEars) gives us his take on the local digital TV situation, including potential channel availability should one of the Cleveland market stations wish to make a channel move...particularly the alleged CBS affiliate currently stuck on RF digital channel 10...


Hello, all!

I'm Trip Ericson, the lunatic behind the website RabbitEars.Info, and I've penned this special guest feature on Ohio Media Watch to try to address some of the questions about WOIO and where they could move assuming they wanted to jump ship from channel 10.

This entire article will be written with the assumption that channel 31 is reserved for WJW, even though in reality, it's not. If WOIO was to take channel 31, then this article would apply to WJW just as well. Channel 31 is an open channel by all standards, and would solve the problem for one, but not both, of the VHF broadcasters in the market.

The big problem with all of this is that the FCC's interference rules are rather vicious. In the analog world, there were hard distance limits. If you were x miles away, your station fit. If you were x-1 miles away, your station did not fit. Very simple to understand and very logical.

In digital, the FCC requires a Longley-Rice interference study. The FCC rule is that your allotment cannot create more than 0.5% new interference to any one station. That is to say, you can cause 0.49% interference to station A, and 0.49% interference to station B, and still be within the rules.

The software to run these studies is made available on the FCC website but only runs on a specific computer system. Any other software to perform these studies costs many thousands of dollars, putting it out of the reach of many. I have a friend with access to some software to run these analyses, and had hoped to have him run some studies on WOIO for me, but as press time approaches, he has not been online since I decided to write this article.

Cleveland being where it is, so close to the Canadians, also makes this complicated. To start with, let's look at the Cleveland-area vacant allotments according to Canada:

03 1024' 9 kW ND
05 1027' 9 kW ND
25 994' 67 kW ND
31 (Ignored)


39 958' 200 kW ND

Shaker Heights:
19 1151' 151 kW ND

43 1105' 170 kW ND

A few of these can be tossed out right away. 3 and 5, obviously, would be worse than 10 is now, and thus are removed from the list. 43 is useless due to proximity to WGGN-42, which would almost certainly be way, WAY above 0.5% interference. A signal on 25 would be crippled by KDKA in Pittsburgh and thus unable to adequately cover the area. So this leaves us with channels 19 and 39.

Now, these are just channels that the Canadians have already negotiated with the United States; there's nothing preventing more channels from being negotiated. Let's pull in some other channels to run through that might look good at first glance:

14, 18, 21, 27, 44, 51

Most of these can be tossed out right away:

14 and 18: These two look very clean, until you read through FCC regulations and learn they are reserved for "land mobile." That is, they're used for two-way communication in Pittsburgh among public safety and other licensees. There's a hard spacing rule of 155 miles that Cleveland simply does not meet.

21 and 44: Adjacent channel issues to WFMJ and WNEO aside, which would probably toss these two out right away, spacing to WMYD and WWJ in Detroit probably would do it too. I would not expect either of these allotments to work out.

19 and 51: These frequencies, though promising, have adjacent channel problems. 19 would likely fail with regard to WFMJ-20, and 51 would certainly fail with respect to WEAO-50. Thus, these channels are not under consideration.

At this point, we now see that what started out as a pretty interesting list of channels under consideration, is now narrowed down to two possibilities: Channels 27 or 39. Let's analyze them.

Channel 27: On the adjacent channels, we find WVIZ-26 and WUAB-28, both of which are co-located and thus would not cause any issues. This leaves us with co-channel concerns. WBGU on 27 is probably far enough away that a minor directional null would safely protect it, though this should be checked with an interference study. The big problem is CKCO-DT-3 in Sarnia, which is allotted 994' 810 kW. Even with a WKYC-style directional pattern, I'm not sure that the Canadians would be willing to accept a channel 27 in Cleveland.

Channel 39: This one is more promising than channel 27. The adjacent channels are more than 100 miles away, which means that interference to them should be minimal. There's a Class A at 92 miles that could be an issue, but an interference study would be needed to determine how much of a problem it would be. WADL is both directional away from Cleveland, and on a short tower, and I suspect would not be a problem. Plus, channel 39 already existed as an allotment for WDLI, so the chances of it working are good. My question would be just how much power they could run on 39. It's possible that it wouldn't be enough to satisfy them.

Now, I was staring at it for a while, and I came up with another possibility that might actually be superior to either channel 27 or 39, but I'm not sure how much of a problem it will cause.

Channel 33 caught my eye because it was clean except for a single Canadian station at 76 miles. CICO-TV-59 (analog 59/digital 33) is only allotted 492' 4 kW ND (that's not a typo) on channel 33. I don't know a lot about Canadian allotments, but unless I missed something, it looks like the currently unbuilt CICO-TV-59 digital signal could be moved from channel 33 to channel 20. This would actually reduce interference that it would receive from adjacent channels.

Relocating CICO-TV-59 would then open up channel 33 for use in Cleveland. The only concern would be to CICO-TV-32 in Windsor, allotted 703' 350 kW ND. A slight directional pattern might protect it if it's even an issue. I wonder what the Canadians would say to this proposal, given that the vacant but agreed upon channel 31 allotment is also adjacent to it. Perhaps WOIO could trade the current channel 19 analog antenna to CICO-TV-59 to use on channel 20 digital, assuming it's usable for that.

It seems perfectly logical. I suppose that's why it would never happen.

Ultimately, after all that study and analysis, the most certain answer I can give is "I don't know."

Without the ability to run an interference study, channel 39 looks the best, but that's no guarantee that it works in a satisfactory manner. I would suspect that if WOIO wanted to get off of channel 10 bad enough and they were not in the Canadian border zone, they could make it work regardless, but the Canadians are an unknown.

Finally, I'd like to direct readers to a project I've been working on. I have been teaching myself PHP through coding a project for RabbitEars. I put it in public beta last week and it's currently called the "DX Tool." I plan to change that name, as it's misleading in that it's not just for DXers.

I would like to ask readers of Ohio Media Watch who use over the air to consider trying out the DX Tool. By doing this, the DX Tool allows for the inversion of the reception reports to form a coverage map based on real world reports.

Sign up and submit reception reports for your local stations and maybe we can fill in this map with data showing just how bad reception is for WOIO, plus reception issues for WJW or maybe other stations as well can be shown on their own respective maps.

Thank you to Ohio Media Watch for giving me the opportunity to write this essay. Continue the great work!

Friday, August 7, 2009

WOIO Gets Clearance For Power Boost

(The following is a reprint of an item posted on the main OMW blog.)

Trip Ericson, creator of the RabbitEars.info website, passes along word that the alleged Cleveland market CBS affiliate has been a construction permit by the FCC for a power increase.

It's the 10.3 kW facility Raycom Media's WOIO/19 Shaker Heights (RF channel 10) applied for in mid-2008, which would be a slight bump up from the current 3.5 kW facility being used by the station. It'd also be slightly higher up on the station's tower - 361 meters height above average terrain, vs. 304 for the current DT 10 facility.

Trip and others have told us in the past that you "shouldn't expect much" whenever that new facility makes it to the air.

It's still rather low in power level, and does virtually nothing to solve reception problems north of the Parma antenna farm...for very good reason, as Canadian-cross-Lake-Erie powerhouse CFPL/10 London ON is still on the air, and needs signal protection.

And it'll need that protection from Cleveland even after Canadian TV goes all digital in a couple of years, as CFPL has filed to remain on channel 10 in the digital age.

But...it's at least slight movement, and maybe some people will have a better shot at the signal.

Thursday, July 2, 2009

A Letter To Dave Folsom

Oh, sometimes poking a little fun is too easy.

In an earlier item, ODTV cited an article by TVNewsday's Harry Jessell about the problems experienced by VHF digital TV operators. Jessell cited such things as VHF's vulnerability to impulse noise, and the more widespread use of indoor antennas in 2009.

Dave Folsom took keyboard to E-mail client, and has written a response to Jessell's earlier article in a "Letter to the Editor" published today on the trade website. (Don't go to the link yet! You'll spoil the surprise!)

Mr. Folsom takes everyone to task, from the FCC for ignoring higher power recommendations for VHF DTV operations...to antenna manufacturers for poor performance and misleading labeling regarding VHF reception. He also talks about the need for better performance out of tuners and converter boxes.

Quoting Mr. Folsom:

VHF DTV transmission can work as well as UHF transmission if it is allowed enough transmission power, receiver performance improves and indoor and outdoor antennas are designed to receive both spectrum bands properly.

It also could work "as well" if a TV station owner did not insist upon grabbing a VHF allocation that will be forever hampered by a powerful analog (and later, digital) signal in another nearby country, which carries across a Great Lake back into the United States.

Which TV station owner would do that, perhaps?

Why, Raycom Media...which owns Cleveland market CBS affiliate WOIO/19, refusing to budge from RF channel 10 for its digital operation, which is across Lake Erie from powerful London, Ontario-based CFPL/10...which, like Windsor/Detroit area powerhouse CKLW/800, actually had historic over-air coverage in parts of the Cleveland market back in the day.

And that's where we spring the surprise.

Dave Folsom isn't just any reader of the TVNewsday site.

He's VP/Chief Technology Officer for...you guessed it!...Raycom Media, the owner of WOIO and sister MyNetwork TV affiliate WUAB/43. He and his bosses are the people responsible for WOIO's current digital over-air TV mess.

Now, we don't disagree with most of Dave's basic points.

It's clear to us, for example, that VHF power levels are not nearly what they should be.

WOIO, for example, has been putting out a below-anemic 3.5 kW while it struggles on RF channel 10. It's trying to get an increase to a whopping 10.3 kW (oooh, ahh), but is having trouble coordinating that with the signal of...umm...CFPL in Canada. (Hey! How'd that station get there!)

VHF life would be easier for WOIO if it hadn't squeezed in next to CFPL. Digital over-air life for the station would probably be better if it hadn't abandoned UHF 19 for digital operation, but that horse is well out of the barn now.

And even if you needed a rooftop antenna to get CFPL back in the day here, WOIO still has to design its facility to protect the station's viewership on the Canadian site of Lake Erie, meaning power limits and directional antenna patterns.

The same protection needs hampered pre-transition digital applications by Winston Broadcasting CW affiliate WBNX/55 Akron (which eventually managed to light up RF 30), and ION O&O WVPX/23 Akron (which never got approval for pre-transition RF 59, and had to flash cut to 23 at the DTV transition last month).

A power level increase is not The End Answer for VHF DTV. Mr. Folsom makes some very valid points about receiver and antenna performance for VHF, and poor labeling.

But when your DTV transmitter is pushing out less than 4 kW (!) co-channel with a Canadian signal that can ride the waves of Lake Erie right towards your market...that is not any answer, and even 10 kW won't help that situation.

Mr. Folsom's company also owns CBS affiliate WTOL/11 Toledo, and a commenter to the TVNewsday item talks about VHF DTV problems there...

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Some Hope For WJW Signal?

We're not sure we're releasing the balloons and celebrating just yet, but an OMW/ODTV reader is sharing what could be good news for those over-air digital viewers struggling to receive Local TV Fox affiliate WJW/8.

The reader dropped WJW a note via an online contact form, noting the station's VHF related troubles...and joining the rather large chorus hoping to get the station to move back to its pre-transition UHF digital assignment of RF channel 31.

A reply came back...our reader noting the name atop it, of WJW's Todd Meany. He's been the newsroom's "point man" on the digital TV transition, and is listed on the above linked contact form.

Assuming our reader isn't just making this up out of thin air, here's Meany's response:

"We would love to go back to channel 31, and in fact the FCC is talking about letting stations around the country, who are in the same situation as we are, go back to their former channels. We hope this happens sooner rather than later."

Assuming that is Todd, he's actually a bit behind the times in information.

Local TV Fox affiliate sister station WGHP/8 in the Greensboro/High Point NC market has already lit up, under FCC special temporary authority, its former digital signal on UHF 35.

A list by RabbitEars' Trip Ericson details moves by VHF stations across the country to fix or supplement their signal - somehow, either temporarily or permanently. It lists WGHP as currently operating both VHF 8 and UHF 35.

Another sister station of WJW in the Local TV group, KSTU/Salt Lake City, is listed as opting to hang onto pre-transition UHF 28 instead of staying on VHF 13.

And also significant to ODTV, it shows Sinclair ABC affiliate WSYX in Columbus petitioning to move its RF channel from VHF 13 to UHF 48. (It was, of course, on analog 6.) There are no listings (yet?) for ABC O&O WTVG/13 and Raycom CBS affiliate WTOL/11 in Toledo.

Is this brief note scribbled to a frustrated viewer by a Fox 8 staffer a sign that WJW could well land back on UHF RF channel 31 soon - a move that most local digital OTA viewers would likely welcome?

Well, the North Carolina and Utah moves may be an indication that Local TV does see this as a solution for the VHF DTV problem. We don't know if other moves are possible here.

We also don't know if there would be any technical problems if WJW wished to return to UHF 31.

It would seem to be a pretty uncrowded channel, judging from what we've been reading on Mr. Ericson's own site.

But we don't know if CityTV in Toronto would put up new objections to a permanent or even temporary WJW return to 31...CityTV operates analog channel 31 in southern Ontario, not terribly far from London, as a repeater for the Toronto signal.

Though the station can be seen in Erie PA, we're told, we don't believe analog 31 ever made it - even before WJW-DT lit up pre-transition 31 - into the Cleveland market. We don't think this is a similar situation to the CFPL/10 interference to WOIO's anemic VHF RF 10 digital signal...

Monday, June 29, 2009

We Give Up On WJW, WOIO Signals

OK, we've ranted enough.

And just like with our earlier ranting about the afternoon drive talk programming on a certain major Cleveland market AM radio station, we've realized that ranting and raving about it here isn't going to change the situation.

Apparently, the hobbled VHF digital over-air signals of Cleveland market Local TV Fox affiliate WJW/8 and Raycom Media CBS affiliate WOIO/19 are not getting any better in the near term.

We have what we have.

WOIO never showed up on literally thousands of local digital TV over-air watchers' tuners the very moment the station decided to set down upon - and eventually, stay on - RF channel 10.

Yes, the very same channel occupied to this day and beyond by Canadian powerhouse CFPL/10...which appeared directly on many TV sets in the Cleveland TV market before WOIO-DT lit up. The open waters of Lake Erie are a powerful signal conveyor.

Though WOIO is pushing for a power hike to 10.3 kW, it appears to be hobbled even out of the gate, and will still have to consider CFPL's Not Going Anywhere Presence on the other side of that certain lake.

And we mean "Not Going Anywhere", because CFPL filed to stay on channel 10 in digital form, whenever Canada has its own analog shutoff (currently scheduled for 2011).

Any WOIO facility upgrade would be severely limited to the north of Parma because of this. And you know, places like Cleveland, Westlake, Mentor and the like are all north of Parma. And the power upgrade application in the hopper for WOIO is actually 1.3 kW less powerful than WJW's current setup (11.6 kW, as we reported earlier).

WJW, if you believe the FCC records, has a CP modification that would allow it 30 kW of power.

Not only do we have no indication that it's in the works, we have heard the same rumblings other people have heard - that WJW has no intent on actually building it out...that the CP is sitting there unbuilt to protect the station's signal options in the future.

That doesn't make a lot of sense to us, for reasons we've stated here before. We don't put much stock in the rumblings.

And even if the 30 kW permit is built out, OMW reader Trip Ericson in Virginia, who runs the popular RabbitEars TV information site, has mentioned in comments posted here that the proposed facility is highly directional north into Lake Erie...and doesn't believe it'll help a lot of the complaints we've seen south of Parma.

The bottom line - no amount of us complaining about it here, will make any signal upgrade come faster...so, unless news comes forth that either station has decided on - or implemented - a solution, we'll declare the case closed, and go to our cable-connected sets if we wish to watch programming on "Fox 8" or "Cleveland's CBS 19".

The damage these two stations receive from losing a portion of OTA viewers may or may not be a large concern to them, due to the 90% cable and satellite penetration in the Cleveland/Akron (Canton) TV market we reported earlier.

But before we close our books on WJW and WOIO's signal problems, here's a link to an excellent article on Why VHF Isn't What It Used To Be, from the TV trade site TVNewsday. It's from the site's founder, Harry Jessell, and it's called "VHF: Now Everything You Know Is Wrong".

These two snippets sum up the case against digital VHF signals in today's world. In the article, Jessell noted that when he was a kid, his mother vacuuming disrupted VHF analog signals:

It turns out the vacuuming problem has a technical name: impulse noise. It does terrible things to VHF signals and the TV pictures they produce and comes not just from vacuums, but from other electrical appliances with motors, florescent lights, power lines, radios — the whole shebang of man-made interference.

The impulse noise is all around us and probably much worse today than it was 40 or 45 years ago when I was dead serious about my TV viewing.


VHF stations have other problems that attenuate what power they do have. Because of the long wavelengths of VHF signals, they have trouble penetrating homes and apartment buildings. What's more, many committed over-the-air viewers were sold UHF-only TV antennas or all-band antennas with small, lousy VHF elements.

It all explains why viewers are calling hotlines wondering what happened to their favorite stations and why broadcasters are looking for solutions.

Things going as they do for your Primary Editorial Voice(tm), we'll probably learn later today or tomorrow that progress has been made on either station's signal situation. If that happens, we'll post it here.

And if so, you can thank us in advance, even if our role in the timing is only by accident...

Monday, June 22, 2009

The VHF DTV Struggle

Here we are, now over a week out from the June 12th digital TV transition, and stations which "transitioned" to a VHF frequency for their permanent digital channels are still getting a lot of flack.

Broadcasting & Cable has a pretty decent summary of the problems in an article on the trade website today:

Some of the problems with VHF reception are simply due to consumers not having the correct antenna; many antennas marketed as “HDTV-ready” are UHF-only. And the double-rescan procedure recommended last week by the FCC has solved the issue for some viewers in New York and Chicago.

But in many cases, the reception problems are more severe in close proximity to the transmitter than farther away. That suggests the problem is less one of signal coverage than of signal penetration into urban dwellings such as apartment buildings, where many viewers rely on simple indoor antennas.

That would mirror what we've heard here in Northeast Ohio.

Some of the loudest complaints about reception on WJW's new digital channel 8 facility are coming from inner ring Cleveland and Akron suburbs, like Shaker Heights and University Heights, or like our own location somewhere in northern or western Summit County.

In all three locations, WJW's UHF 31 pre-transition facility pegged the signal meter on digital tuners or converter boxes.

Here at OMW World Headquarters, a tiny wire hooked to our Zenith converter box could pick up WJW before the transition...now, we've had to assume the "Fox Viewing Position" made famous on the network's early iconic sitcom "Married...with Children". (And at that time, WJW wasn't a Fox affiliate!)

Again, like most viewers within 15-20 miles of the Parma antenna farm, we do not have a rooftop or attic antenna.

For the record, we THINK we've found an indoor antenna placement here that has brought us the strongest possible WJW signal, with few or no dropouts. But we're not altogether sure that'll hold up under different atmospheric conditions.

On the other hand, this article by Cleveland Plain Dealer business writer Shaheen Samavati last week - which talks about the difficulties receiving WJW and Raycom Media CBS affiliate WOIO/19 digitally - had an interesting note:

Ben Rzepka of University Heights uses a high-powered rooftop antenna that pulls in all Cleveland market stations perfectly - except WOIO. He says he watches programs on the Toledo CBS affiliate, WTOL Channel 11, instead.

"It can't be my system or my antenna," he said. "If I'm getting Toledo stations, it's got to be WOIO that has some kind of problem."

Two oddities in that section of the article.

First, WTOL itself is a VHF digital allocation on its former analog channel, 11. Different band and atmospheric conditions have been bringing in stations as far away as Detroit for Northeast Ohio digital TV viewers.

We know one OMW reader in northern Summit County who says his digital tuner gets at least a brief scan of Detroit CBS O&O WWJ/62 (if not a watchable picture), but that the same tuner can't get WOIO's signal - even though he can actually see tower lights from the Parma antenna farm across the Cuyahoga Valley.

But the University Heights man (with a rooftop antenna!) quoted above stumbles on the other side of the VHF DTV phenomenon...while people relatively close to the transmitter in urban areas are struggling with those stations, the "carrying power" of VHF can the stations' signals far beyond the market, in the right conditions.

It reminds us of the problem Akron market Clear Channel hot AC WKDD/98.1 had when it first camped out on that frequency in the "Great Frequency Swap of 2001"...98.1 was touted as a powerful signal, but it couldn't penetrate buildings in the core of downtown Akron.

Our friends in the TV engineering community will rail against indoor antennas.

But in core urban areas, putting up a rooftop antenna is just not a viable option...for viewers who don't have such problems with higher-powered UHF installations like, oh, say, the new RF 17 allocation for WKYC/3. Or WJW's own pre-transition RF 31.

Why should someone in a core suburb have to put up an outdoor antenna (and pay for it, to boot) when only two stations are a problem without one? If you're going to pay for something to watch TV, why not a cable or satellite subscription?

And as such, we are cautious about over-stating this.

If these figures from the Television Bureau of Advertising (TVB) are correct, the Cleveland/Akron (Canton) TV market enjoys 90% cable and satellite penetration as of this past February. ("ADS" in the chart would basically be satellite, or other non-cable distribution methods.)

That means all but 10% of this TV market's viewers are blissfully unaware of the difficulty picking up the market's two VHF DTV outlets, WJW and WOIO. And of that 10%, there are thousands who do NOT have problems with the local Fox and CBS affiliates' new digital signals.

For those with problems with the VHF side of digital TV, what's next?

Let's bring in our long-time friend, colleague and World Champion Tower Hunter Scott Fybush, from this week's edition of NorthEast Radio Watch:

In the long run, though, it appears the FCC may be right back where it was in, say, 1950: coming to terms with the reality that the state of the art in receiver and antenna design probably requires significantly more power than was originally thought necessary.

That, too, may be an expensive solution for some stations that had already built what were to be their "permanent" VHF digital facilities - though the good news is that most of the stations moving back to their VHF analog allocations have plenty of headroom in their antennas and transmission systems for more power, and often have extra transmitter power to spare, too, if they've converted recent analog transmitters to digital use.

That would certainly appear to apply to WJW, locally.

In fact, if the FCC filings the local Fox affiliate have made are to be believed (or are being read properly), the station is in the process of doing just that: converting its former analog transmitter to digital.

WJW's analog allocation had the station putting out an ERP of 236 kW. We haven't heard any progress on the supposed conversion, if it's taking place, but we'll guess that WJW will build it out at 30 kW and see what happens from there.

WOIO? We've given up on them. The 10.3 kW that the local CBS affiliate is trying to rangle out of its FCC application - reportedly tied up with Canadian coordination with London ON co-channel analog CFPL/10 - is probably not going to help the station very much. And as WOIO's Jim Stunek has told the Plain Dealer's Shaheen Samavati, it's a "time-consuming process".

If you want to watch "19 Action News", and can't see it on your digital OTA tuner, call Time Warner Cable, WOW Cable, Cox Cable or your local cable company, or DirecTV or Dish Network.

Meanwhile, in Toledo, we hear that ABC O&O WTVG/13 is openly talking about the station's own problems with its 11.2 kW allocation on RF 13.

An OMW reader tells us that "13abc" discussed the problem, with the help of several engineers, on the Sunday public affairs program "Conklin and Company". That's no surprise, since ABC itself has been the loudest voice reacting to this whole mess.

We're told that it was learned that WTVG is waiting for an FCC engineer to study the new signal, before trying to get a power increase.

And we hear that WTVG's chief engineer said what Scott Fybush also said in his NorthEast Radio Watch, which we quoted above: that "they took us back to the 1950's power levels where people HAD to have an outdoor antenna"...

A View From The Inside

(This is a reprint of part of an item which appears on our main site, Ohio Media Watch, this morning:)

OMW, and our sister site in the OMW Blog Network, Ohio Digital TV, chronicled the building of the new WKYC/WVIZ tower and digital TV facility on Broadview Road in Parma quite frequently.

Since we were basically taking pictures from the outside, we were left to a lot of speculation about what was going on inside, and when the facility would be completed.

We have all the answers...after the fact, of course.

Dave Kushman, one of WKYC's engineers on the project, brings us the pictures we all imagined before the June 12th transition...with his site hosting an in-depth look at the work inside and outside the site that now houses WKYC's digital channel 17 and WVIZ's digital channel 26.

We'll have to go back and see if some of our speculation was on target, or, well, off target.

The hat tip here is to our blogging colleague over at WKYC, senior director Frank Macek and his "Director's Cut" blog.

And we're wondering if Dave put up the site, in part, because of all the interest in the new WKYC/WVIZ site among our readers...