Entertainment desk
< February 2	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 4 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 3

WJZ-TV

In WJZ-TV#Early_history, it says: "Until 1956, it carried an additional primary affiliation with the DuMont Television Network." Now, what exactly was this affiliation, and was it in fact an affiliation primarily of Channel 13 or of DuMont? This sentences confuses me somewhat. Thanks in advance for your help!--Boczi (talk) 08:38, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Please do kindly ping me when you answer. Thank you.--Boczi (talk) 08:43, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Boczi: The channel would not be an affiliate of Channel 13 - it was Channel 13. Per the section linked, it was an affiliate of both ABC and DuMont Television Network. For more on what this relationship entails, see the "dual affiliation" section of our article on network affiliation. Matt Deres (talk) 14:36, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Matt Deres: Sorry, couldn't answer more early! You say WAAM itself was an affiliate of ABC and DuMont, but as already stated it says "it [i. e. WAAM] carried (!) an additional primary affiliation with the DuMont Television Network" in the article. In my view, this doesn't really go together with your statement…--Boczi (talk) 15:23, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This just seems like semantic confusion. To carry an affiliation is to be an affiliate. That's the idiom at use here. They mean the same thing. --Jayron 32 15:27, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]