FCC June 2nd

Chris Forbes · Post by **Chris Forbes** » 3 Jun 2003 3:54 am

I miss the days when you heard a record and could say, "that's definately a west coast singer," or, "that guy has to be from Memphis." Lately everything is sounding the same and you can't even tell some of the singers from each other much less who their influences are.

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 3 Jun 2003 3:59 am

Chas good quote. It is fascism in a nutshell.
And good observation CB too.

I will note one thing the Nazis really did create a tribal attitude, albeit a very big tribe. And used the media to do it; All media, records, live performance, radio, and print.

And at the same time supressed all disenting voices with destruction of that competing idelogical media,
and public humiliation of those creating it,
and censoring it if it couldn't be destroyed or co-opted...
Sounds like the Dixie Chicks situation a bit to me..

One of the hallmarks is an "us against them attitude... ALL of them,
but these little guys here especially".
And the media is suborned to spread that message. Al la Goeblels.

La Pen and his FN bunch are doing the same thing demonizing a segment of the population and spreading fear of that segment to gain power.

The french Right was very weak in countering that message, and the Left was living in this utopian mindset and lost out big time.

There were some interesting parralels between the last US election and the french one too.

As to the FFC ruling...
the slippery slope has been getting steeper for decades and the republicans in control have just tilted the world several degrees farther off level...
and will continue too.

Americans can be observed voting for narrow demographic issues coupled to moralisms,
rather than voting in relation to the big picture of their best interests OVER ALL.

France just got it's wake up call for that mindset, and gave Chirac 80% vs La Pen in the run off,
even though no one really wanted Chirac all that much.
They just regretted the effect of their protest votes

I wonder how we americans will be seeing OUR next election after the last few years of total republican control.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

This FCC vote is endemic of the behind the scenes problems most people are not acknowleging.
And that were foreseeable even from over here.
Will we vote for a pie in the sky utopian vision of what we would like,
or what is based on facts as they really are. One wonders.[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 03 June 2003 at 05:04 AM.]

Michael Haselman · Post by **Michael Haselman** » 3 Jun 2003 8:14 am

This is a great and interesting thread, and a pretty scary one. I've been doing some extrapolating: Where did most of us on this forum get our musical education and influences? Listening to tunes on the radio first, then buying the music. Therefore if a kid growing up now is getting his influences from the radio...I shudder.

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 3 Jun 2003 11:16 am

Michael.. a very good point.
But our grand parents used to think the same about...
depending on age; boogie woogie.. or rock n roll.
I'll still take all of the above vs a steady diet of Emmenem
[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 03 June 2003 at 02:47 PM.]

Michael Haselman · Post by **Michael Haselman** » 3 Jun 2003 11:49 am

David: I meant more in the context of how radio content is controlled by corporate suits and dollar figures much more now than in the days when dj's could play what they wanted, and that's how good music got through to the masses.

Tony LaCroix · Post by **Tony LaCroix** » 3 Jun 2003 12:31 pm

Most of the people I know between the ages of 18 and 30 don't listen to the radio at all. I'm still in that category and grew up with tapes and CDs that my buddies turned me on to. Young musicians, especially, rarely listen to the radio. We figured out that it was all crap long ago.

It's the huge number of 13-17 year old girls that are influencing the direction of radio and CD sales. And then there's the above-40 radio audience- a very distant second.

To be honest, I'm not sure where all the concern on this post comes from (at least as it pertains to the demise of music). Musicians and arstists have alway been low men and women on the totem pole, and they've alway made art, often great art. Besides, I've been getting advice on how to play the pedal steel guitar from folks in Australia, Spain, France, and all over the U.S. for free!. How bad-off could we be?

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 3 Jun 2003 1:52 pm

Michael I got your point exactly.

My addendum to it was that the, achmm, older generation is often what the politicos listen too for their social cues,
and then the media conglomerates then listen to the politicos desires,
and try to please them, to help them ease their ways into out pocketbooks with new legislation.

So the parents attitudes and fears are affecting what the stations play both directly and indirectly.
So a continual dumming down of music and a closeing off of alternate outlets.

Michael Haselman · Post by **Michael Haselman** » 4 Jun 2003 4:50 am

David: Amen, Brother. I fear that it's a lumbering bull elephant of a juggernaut that can only be stopped by some towering musical genius. (Parker, Coltrane, Beatles, Hendrix...someone of that impact) I hope one comes along in my lifetime, but I'm not holding my breath.

------------------
Marrs D-10, Webb 6-14E

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 4 Jun 2003 4:59 am

The last music person I can think of to do that was Frank Zappa.
A towering musical genious, but no small coincidence.
Vs. Tipper Gore, he advocated common sense vs fear.

Then went off and discussed Hedgel and Kant with Vaclav Havel. playwrite, freedom fighter vs communism and President of Chekoslovakia.. for fun.
My kinda guy !

chas smith · Post by **chas smith** » 4 Jun 2003 10:59 am

I hope one comes along in my lifetime, but I'm not holding my breath

I'm sure he will be here, whether or not you will get to hear him will be another story....

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 4 Jun 2003 11:26 am

But lets not forget that some music only got (gets) thru to the minions because someone was handing over some cash ..or some other
short term gratification. Does Alan Freid come to mind ?

The best thing about todays radio's is that the on/off knob works both directions.

The new unknown artists today still have a totally unreasonable uphill battle to get airplay , and that hasn't changed whatsoever in the past 45 years.

It's either Toby 4 times an hour or the off button.

TP

Gene Jones · Post by **Gene Jones** » 4 Jun 2003 11:55 am

...(quote from above)...Most of the people I know between the ages of 18 and 30 don't listen to the radio at all....

My conventional wisdom is that there are very few people over the age of 30 who listens to the radio either.

That leaves radio to the "under 18" age group.....which explains the music being played on the radio today.

Most of those "old fogeys" over 40 listen to "talk radio" these days!

Gene
www.genejones.com [This message was edited by Gene Jones on 04 June 2003 at 12:58 PM.]

Bob Hoffnar · Post by **Bob Hoffnar** » 4 Jun 2003 12:50 pm

Congress is going to try to do something about this. Here is a web site that makes it easy to contact your reps:
http://capwiz.com/afr/afr_alert.html

Tony,
Things are much, much worse now than the old payola days.This is a true story I know first hand: In the 80's you paid a guy named Rocco in Phila $6,000 to $10,000 and he would get your tune played on 5 good sized east coast stations for a week. If people liked the tune it stuck. If they didn't it went away. No politics, or market studies. You could get on the radio without Rocco if you wanted to. He just made it easy.
Now to get airplay you need to pay about $250,000 to Clearchannel and Clearchannel makes sure that the tune has been gone over by there marketing depts. Its really bad now.

So now the only music available on mainstream radio has been approved by marketing execs and then paid for. With the FCC ruling the actual news we get can be based on its ability to generate more profits for the conglomerate.[This message was edited by Bob Hoffnar on 06 June 2003 at 10:24 AM.]

Earnest Bovine · Post by **Earnest Bovine** » 4 Jun 2003 1:31 pm

When logic brings you to a false conclusion (wishing that the FCC would impose more government regulation), you must check your premises.

Del Rangel · Post by **Del Rangel** » 4 Jun 2003 2:00 pm

So does that mean that free market is equatable to more freedom for musicians in turn? Or maybe I miss your premise Ernesto de la Vaca.

Mark Durante · Post by **Mark Durante** » 6 Jun 2003 3:33 am

It's not a Free market anymore, it's an Expensive market and only the big boys can afford it

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 6 Jun 2003 3:44 am

Ernest the FCC isn't being asked to create new regulation,
just not kill working regulation, that is protecting us from big money forces in the market.

It has become even more: he who has the most cash and or clout gets to control what we listen to.
And those cats cowtow to the politicos to get their way greased smoother for again more profit.
And trust me I am very much NOT a french socialist fan either.
But there are limits needed to a freewheeling market controled by only the SEC from time to time.
The airwaves were ruled a public entity, and are essentially leased for commercial purposes, with some restarints based on the concept of the public good.
These restraints have been under attack by commercial forces for decades..and they are winning the battle, to our detriment.

Bob Hoffnar · Post by **Bob Hoffnar** » 6 Jun 2003 9:38 am

Earnest,
The government currently owns all the free airways. The purpose of the FCC was originally to make sure that the general public had access to them. Much like the public park system.

If the government sold the airways at a real market price and got completely out of the way it would be one thing. But as it is we don't have a free market situation. We live in a plutocracy at this point.

Bob

Jeff A. Smith · Post by **Jeff A. Smith** » 6 Jun 2003 9:06 pm

If the government sold the airways at a real market price and got completely out of the way it would be one thing. But as it is we don't have a free market situation. We live in a plutocracy at this point.

Once a monopoly of force is legitimized in a given area, all efforts at keeping that force limited are pretty much doomed to failure. You can have a constitution which clearly outlines everything that government is allowed to do, and eventually the public can be convinced that it is correct to routinely violate the literal sense of the document; especially if the body charged with interpreting the document is itself part of the government.

I don't believe that more laws will remedy an oligarchic situation. One way or another, the same people would end up getting what they want from the system.
[This message was edited by Jeff A. Smith on 06 June 2003 at 10:08 PM.]

Tony LaCroix · Post by **Tony LaCroix** » 10 Jun 2003 6:02 am

I'm with Jeff. Regulations rob us of the right, and eventually, the ability to deal with our neighbors, whether they be thieves or media giants. Where will we be when the last knowledgeable person has given his power to Mr. Government? If you hire a dragon-slayer to take care of all your dragons, you shouldn't be suprised when the slayers have all been eaten, and the rest of the town has no idea how to kill a dragon.

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 10 Jun 2003 6:21 am

So basically your saying goverment is the dragon, it has already lost so why say anything since we can do nothing about it?

It isn't a question of more regulation... it's a question of our having a say in how things are regulated for our benifit.

I am at present effectively disenfranchised. What senator will listen to me, who is my representative.
So maybe I see the gradual erosion of the FCC control of the PUBLIC airwaves as a bigger thing from here, than you do from there.

The only way to have a say is to have an orginazation that is as big as the one you are opposing. Hense the popularity of grassroots politicqal organizations to fight against big money lobbyists.
But there is no large enough grassroots group to fight the media consolidation and the concuurent control of information to us.

Butso that leaves only the goverment that we, in theory, have continued to put in place to look out for our "little guy" interests.
Still if we don't tell them what we want, they only go for the loudest voice they hear.

Which in this case seems to be big media money. And you seem to say we have already lost the battle, why fight it.

Once a monopoly of force is legitimized in a given area, all efforts at keeping that force limited are pretty much doomed to failure.

Tell that to Standard Oil and ATT&T.
It's legitimate only if a majority of voters / citizens agree it's legitimate, within the confines of the constitution. And it's possible amndments.[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 10 June 2003 at 07:36 AM.]

Tony LaCroix · Post by **Tony LaCroix** » 10 Jun 2003 8:20 am

Sorry.. I was reaching with that analogy.

The dragon isn't government, it's big business. The dragon slayer is the FCC, and we all are in the town. The FCC has been eaten by big media and we don't know how to deal with that particular dragon because we were convinced that the FCC would do it for us.

"...it's a question of our having a say in how things are regulated for our benifit."

This is where we seem to differ in perspective. I belive that we have a say until we hand over our voice to others, supposedly to speak for us. The canned response to this idea is, "...but we have representatives to speak for us..." The problem is that representatives do not speak for us, they speak for themselves. I consider this to be the logical and natural outcome of representative goverment, which I oppose. Interestingly enough, many of the founding fathers were borderline anarchists like myself, who saw the danger of giving personal choice over to this new constitutional government. What I oppose is those who say, "There's nothing good on my TV. What can the government DO about this?" We stand staring at the dragon, our swords made of rubber, our town drunk and apathetic, and our dragon slayers in the belly of the beast.

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 10 Jun 2003 2:42 pm

Yes they are swallowed in the belly of the beast...
until they see their bread an butter thrown in the sand.
i.e. Their actual voters raising such a stink..
and threatening to vote them out..
then they think... which is more powerfull ;

Fighting this losing battle and losing the cash cow that comes with it
or losing the war and lots of cash cows.
So then they are selective in their battles.

So basically cash talks either way,
but the little guys with their plural voices and votes CAN override the big boys...should they choose too.
It just takes numbers AND volume level.
That's why so many pols seem poll driving between elections.

That's why we are hearing more than a few senators saying... what's going on here let's have a look see. They been getting calls and e-mails and letters.

Apathy is the best friend of big money getting it's way.

Even with it's glaring faults, inevitable if you consider the human condition, this system does have more balance than the alternatives..

How much country music and accurate news do they get in China these days?
[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 10 June 2003 at 03:49 PM.]

CrowBear Schmitt · Post by **CrowBear Schmitt** » 10 Jun 2003 3:43 pm

Considering most of the Jive and Poofter on the Tube and Radio, might as well just cut"em loose and look and listen elsewhere
Frank Zappa wrote that great tune about the slime oozin out

------------------
Steel what?

Earnest Bovine · Post by **Earnest Bovine** » 10 Jun 2003 6:55 pm

A common argument says "regulation is necessary, but the regulators are serving the wrong people."
Let's see if we can find the moral flaw here:

1. There are only a few broadcast TV channels, and radio frequency slots.
2. Each one is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
3. I want one but I don't want to pay for it.
4. Therefore the government should steal it and give it to me.

(hint: look near the top)