Reason Magazine - Topics > Radio

Out of the Cellar on WBAL

matt.welch@reason.com (Matt Welch) — Tue, 06 May 2008 15:33:00 EDT

Attn. Bal'moreans: I'll be on Ron Smith's terrific 1090-AM radio show at ~~12:45~~ 3:45* Inner Harbor time, to talk about Rat City.

* sorry about that.

The Host Whisperer

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:27:00 EDT

This is funny:

You Washingtonians who get your morning news fix from National Public Radio may have noticed something over the years: All those NPR hosts, well, kinda sound the same. There’s a very distinct NPR voice: Quiet, calm and careful.

Well, it’s not an accident. Turns out NPR actually has someone on staff to help radio hosts perfect that soft and lulling voice: David Candow.

“Weekend Edition Saturday” host Scott Simon talked about Candow during a “Q&A Cafe” interview last week at Nathans restaurant.

“There is a man named David, who’s called ‘The Host Whisperer’ and he works with people on their delivery skills,” said Simon.

If You Can't Beat 'Em, Regulate the Hell Out of 'Em

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 13:52:00 EDT

Now that the Justice Department has handed defeat to the National Association of Broadcaster's high-profile (but laughable) campaign against the XM-Sirius satellite radio merger, they're taking a new tack: regulate away satellite's advantages.

Clear Channel is asking the FCC to slap a series of regulations on satellite radio before approving the merger, including requiring XM-Sirius to abide by FCC decency regulations, banning any local broadcasting or advertising (both companies currently offer traffic and weather for large metropolitan areas), minimum public interest programming requirements, and—somewhat surprisingly—licensure for a competing satellite provider.

I actually agree with the last one. I've never understood why the federal government only allowed for two satellite radio providers in the first place.

The other requirements are ridiculous. Whatever you think of FCC decency regulations, satellite radio is a subscription service. Customers pay for what they're getting. You can also easily block objectionable material. As for barring local programming, I'm intrigued to see how Clear Channel plans to argue that limiting competition to terrestrial radio's local coverage would in any way benefit consumers.

FCC Approves XM-Sirius Merger

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:01:00 EDT

That's the good news.

The bad news is that two companies had to grovel before a government panel to get the merger approved in the first place.

My dissection of the National Association of Broadcasters' asinine opposition to the merger here.

CORRECTION: It was the Justice Department that approved the merger, not the FCC. The FCC will issue its own ruling later.

Nonsense of Indecency

jsullum@reason.com (Jacob Sullum) — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:00:00 EDT

In most of the places where this column appears, the four-letter words it contains will not be spelled out. Instead they will be rendered as initial letters followed by dashes.

That custom is an example of self-restraint by newspapers and websites that do not want to offend their readers. It is not the result of government censorship, which would violate the First Amendment.

Yet as a case the Supreme Court recently agreed to hear illustrates, different rules apply to broadcast TV, where the Federal Communications Commission has decreed that anything it deems "indecent" may not be aired between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m. One day soon Americans will marvel at the bureaucratic energy expended on censorship in this one arbitrarily chosen segment of the media universe.

The FCC imposed its first fine for broadcast indecency in 1975, provoked by a mid-afternoon airing of a George Carlin monologue on a New York City radio station. In upholding the fine, the Supreme Court emphasized the distinction between Carlin's "verbal shock treatment," involving the deliberately provocative, repeated use of expletives, and "the isolated use of a potentially offensive word."

For the next three decades, taking its cue from the Court, the FCC let stray expletives slide. Then Bono got a little carried away at the 2003 Golden Globe Awards, where he pronounced his award for best original movie song "really, really fucking brilliant."

In response to complaints orchestrated by the Parents Television Council, the FCC's Enforcement Bureau said Bono's expletive was not indecent because it was not really a sexual reference and in any event was "fleeting and isolated." Five months later, the commission reversed this finding, along with its longstanding policy of overlooking isolated vulgarities. The FCC later ruled that expletive-containing comments by Cher at the 2002 Billboard Music Awards and by Nicole Richie at the 2003 Billboard Music Awards were indecent as well.

Last June, in response to a lawsuit by broadcasters, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled that the FCC had violated the Administrative Procedure Act by failing to "articulate a reasoned basis for its change in policy." That decision, which the Supreme Court now has agreed to review, did not definitively address the broadcasters' constitutional objections, but the court was skeptical that they could be overcome.

The 2nd Circuit suggested that the FCC's indecency rules are unconstitutionally vague, creating "an undue chilling effect on free speech" by drawing seemingly arbitrary distinctions. A single fuck or shit on a live awards show can cost a network millions of dollars, for example, but the same words are OK in a "bona fide news interview," even if the interview is a thinly disguised promotion for one of the network's own entertainment shows.

The accidental airing of Cher's "fuck 'em" is indecent, but the deliberate airing of the very same footage in the context of a news report is not. The "repeated and deliberate use of numerous expletives" is OK in a fictional World War II movie because they are "integral" to the film yet indecent in a documentary about real-life blues musicians.

It's obvious by now that the FCC makes up the rules for acceptable speech as it goes along. In the paradigmatic example of broadcast indecency, Carlin's monologue about "the words you couldn't say on the public airwaves," there's no question that the expletives were "integral" to the routine, which was partly about the very censorship to which it became subject.

The premise underlying the Supreme Court's decision upholding the fine for Carlin's monologue was that TV and radio over the airwaves are "uniquely pervasive" and "uniquely accessible to children." With nine out of 10 U.S. homes receiving cable or satellite TV, with downloads and DVRs making a hash of "time channeling," with ratings and parental controls available across video sources, that premise is no longer tenable. The only question is how much longer the courts will pretend otherwise.

© Copyright 2008 by Creators Syndicate Inc.

Can You Get a Little Bit High?

jsullum@reason.com (Jacob Sullum) — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:21:00 EDT

Hear me answer this and other drug-related questions during my appearance the day before yesterday on Political Animals, "Bowling Green's premier political radio talk show and your personal megaphone for liberty." The show, which is produced by Western Standard Radio and airs on WBGU (run by students at Bowling Green State University in Bowling Green, Ohio) is co-hosted by an American, Jay Lafayette, and two Canadians, Peter Jaworski and Terrence Watson. Previous guests have included our own Matt Welch, Ron Paul, Jonah Goldberg, and Ezra Levant. The archives as well as the live feeds are available on the Western Standard's blog.

Harmful Elements in the Air

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 09:51:00 EST

Happy news from Hong Kong:

The Hong Kong government's attempt to shut down pirate radio broadcaster Citizen's Radio was scuttled in a recent decision of the Hong Kong High Court. In the decision, the Court stated that it did not see how the station's broadcasting could jeopardize public safety.

In a complicated ongoing legal battle, the Hong Kong government had sought to extend an injunction preventing the station from going to air. Citizen's Radio argued that denial of their application for a license violated their freedom of expression.

The unlicensed broadcasts were started in 2005 by a group of pro-democracy activists after their application for a license was denied by the Broadcasting Authority. The station airs phone-ins and discussions about current events and politics, including discussions about Hong Kong's transition to full democracy.

Every One of Those [artificially scarce] Late Night Stations/Playing Songs Bringing Tears to My Eyes

bdoherty@reason.com (Brian Doherty) — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:17:00 EST

Wondering why radio sucks in its Feburary "Why Things Suck" cover package, Wired reporter Brendan Koerner goes to the expert: our own Jesse Walker. An excerpt:

The sad decline of conventional radio is an Econ 101 lesson in the consequences of artificial scarcity — and a B-school case study on the limits of scientific management. The scarcity is the fault of the Federal Communications Commission, which decided in the mid-1940s to confine FM broadcasting to its current frequency range, roughly between 88 and 108 MHz. The FCC's spectrum-allocation rules, designed to prevent station signals from interfering with one another, further limited the number of broadcasting licenses it granted in any one market.
By the '70s, thanks to a fecund period in popular music, a generation of audacious DJs, and cheap radios, FM had become wildly popular. That made stations valuable properties — so valuable, in fact, that only large companies could afford to buy and manage them. "The legal cost alone of getting on the air is enormous," says Jesse Walker, author of the radio history Rebels on the Air. The government could have eased this situation by allocating more spectrum for radio use and increasing the number of licenses, Walker argues.

And read his Rebels in the Air.

Reason Radio: Somewhere Near Salinas

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:38:00 EST

Attention, California readers: If you're in Monterey, Salinas, or the right part of San Jose, you can hear me from 8:10 to 8:30 this morning on KION, 1460 on your AM dial. I'll be a guest on Wake Up Monterey, where Mark Carbonaro will talk with me about the Republican presidential race. Here's his blurb for the interview:

The GOP is up for grabs! Reason editor Jesse Walker joins us to talk about the future of the Republican party. Where's it going? Who are the players? Which one of the candidates for the nomination can win and take hold of the reins of the party? Walker contends the GOP is rudderless right now and its direction is ripe for the taking.

For more on the subject: my article "The GOP Is Up for Grabs."

Ron Paul Radio

bdoherty@reason.com (Brian Doherty) — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:25:00 EST

Tired of Radio Nowhere and Radio GaGa, and sitting near a computer all day? Internet broadcasting and grassroots Ronmania brings us Ron Paul Radio. Creator DJ Lo Ti explains his purpose:

The internet is becoming the mainstream, despite what the television claims, and I want to make Ron Paul Radio THE premiere source for coverage of news and events regarding the advancement of freedom in the 2008 elections. By providing you with great freedom supporting hosts and shows around the clock, we are breaking free from the restrictions imposed by the controlling corporate conglomerates. We CAN make a difference, and the internet has been a wonderful tool for freedom enthusiasts to reach out to other like-minded people. So to that end we’re going to bring you as much live and exclusive coverage as possible, backed up with quality news and analysis from our great line up of hosts, all while having a good time and celebrating this exciting time in history.

For those who find audio just isn't enough to satisfy their Ron Paul yearnings, or whatever other yearnings they might have, there's always the Hotties for Ron Paul calender.

The War on Jerk-Off Radio Personalities Comes Home

gillespie@reason.com (Nick Gillespie) — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 11:59:00 EDT

Earlier today (wasn't that a time!), I blogged about the latest flap over Rush Limbaugh, the one about "phony soldiers," phony politicians, etc.

Now comes word from David Harsanyi, Nanny State author and November reason cover boy (subscribe!) that San Francisco's Board of Supervisors, that august political institution what once appointed the Rev. Jim Jones to a city post, is trying to pass a resolution condemning radio show host Michael Savage for "hate speech." Recaps Harsanyi:

This resolution was the board's second attempt to condemn Savage (curiously enough, his show emanates from San Francisco) specifically for his yammering about illegal aliens. The only thing that stops resolution from passing is a San Franciscan by the name of Ed Jew (an American-Asian) vetoes the vote. Not only that, but Jew had the stones to stand up and defend Savage's First Amendment right to free expression. If only such a person existed in Washington DC - on either side - we'd all be better off.
Jew said, "For the record, I do not agree with comments allegedly made by Mr. Savage, but the First Amendment gives him the right to make those comments."
How refreshing to hear such an obvious point said in public.
So then ...
[Supervisor Gerardo] Sandoval responded with a personal challenge to Jew.
"If this commentary was directed at the Chinese-American or the Asian community, you would not be resorting to this rigid formalism on your part," he said.

Yes, yes, I know: It all gets confusing when you throw an Asian American named Jew into the mix (stir fry?). But here's Harsanyi, cutting through the clatter like a hot knife through butter:

Michael Savage is offensive. A elected government official referring to deference of the First Amendment as "rigid formalism" is far more offensive. I have no idea if Jew would adhere to ideological and political consistency if his own ethnicity were attacked daily on the radio. But I do know Sandoval's comment gives us a peek into the mindset of many officials these days. To them, freedom is no longer a priority. Not if it offends them.

More here.

Rush Limbaugh vs. Senate Democrats

gillespie@reason.com (Nick Gillespie) — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 07:33:00 EDT

Needless to say, in this sort of battle, the audience is the real loser. Rush Limbaugh, whose popular show is broadcast over Armed Forces Radio (and Clear Channel stations), declaimed "phony soldiers" who come home and oppose the Iraq war. That led Senate Democrats to denounce him. Some snippets (courtesy of a Fox News story).

Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.):

Reid accused Limbaugh of attacking "those fighting and dying for him and for all of us. Rush Limbaugh got himself a deferment from serving when he was a young man. He never served in uniform. He never saw in person the extreme difficulty of maintaining peace in a foreign country engaged in a civil war. He never saw a person in combat. Yet, that he thinks his opinion on the war is worth more than those who have been on the front lines," Reid said.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa):

Harkin followed Reid, saying: "Maybe he was just high on his drugs. I don't know." In 2003, Limbaugh admitted a dependency on pain medication, but three years later reached a plea deal that cleared him of prescription shopping for Oxycontin.

And Limbaugh:

In an attack that began with the first words of the show and continued throughout his daily three-hour broadcast Tuesday, Limbaugh compared Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, claimed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is using a liberal media watchdog to suppress her opposition and said he feels sorry for Sen. Tom Harkin's family for having to be associated with the Iowa Democrat's statements on the Senate floor a day earlier...
"It's about them and they are desperately trying to salvage themselves with their own lunatic fringe base who they are not only disappointing but they are deceiving because the dirty, little secret, as I also predicted, was that if the Democrats win the White House in '08 they are not pulling out of Iraq. All the top tier Democrats have said so," Limbaugh told his audience.
"Time to distract those peasants with pitchforks out there who are fit to be tied over being betrayed by Harry Reid, (House Speaker) Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democrats," he said.

More here.

The Secret Origins of Silicon Valley

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 11:48:00 EDT

From an interesting business history article in the San Francisco Chronicle:

"There is this myth that Silicon Valley was all orchards when the chip companies arrived, but it's not true. It had been building, building for a long time," said Christophe Lécuyer, a Stanford-trained historian who turned his dissertation into a book, "Making Silicon Valley."

Lécuyer, now an economic analyst with the University of California system, said the region's technological awakening began almost a century ago when, not long after the great quake of 1906, the Bay Area -- and particularly the Peninsula -- began innovating with the then-hot technology of radio.

"The San Francisco Bay Area was a natural place for interest in radio because it was a seagoing region," said Timothy Sturgeon, an industrial researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who described this radio period in a paper, "How Silicon Valley Came to Be."

Lécuyer and Sturgeon argue that, roughly 30 years before Hewlett and Packard started work in their garage, and almost 50 years before the Traitorous Eight created Fairchild, the basic culture of Silicon Valley was forming around radio: engineers who hung out in hobby clubs, brainstormed and borrowed equipment, spun new companies out of old ones, and established a meritocracy ruled by those who made electronic products cheaper, faster and better.

Not that all the energy was coming from the grassroots:

[T]he future Silicon Valley would find a powerful customer with deep pockets - the U.S. military.

Sturgeon said U.S. naval officials, impressed by Federal Telegraph's technology, gave the Palo Alto firm huge contracts during World War I - the first but not the last time war would fuel the region's tech firms.

In another hint of the future, Sturgeon writes that around 1910, Peter Jensen and Edwin Pridham quit Federal Telegraph "to start a research and development firm in a garage in Napa" to improve loudspeakers. In 1917, they formed Magnavox, which built public address systems for destroyers and battleships in World War I.

Advertisement: This is as good a time as any to plug my 2001 book Rebels on the Air: An Alternative History of Radio in America, which among other things looks at the complicated relationship between the military and the hobby radio community in the years around World War I. You can also turn there to read more about the early broadcaster Charles "Doc" Herrold, who has a bit role in the Chronicle piece. That's Rebels on the Air: an excellent stocking stuffer, if you have unusually large feet.

[Via Slashdot.]

Dis-Mythed

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 09:06:00 EDT

Eliot Morgan and Casey Lartigue, Jr. (the latter a friend and former colleague of mine) explain in the Washington Post how they were fired from their XM Radio talk show for attempting to debunk some of the conspiracy theories prevalent in the black community, including the notorious "Memorandum 46."

How to Get Ahead in Radio: Marry LBJ

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 10:20:00 EDT

Jack Shafer describes the unbeautified side of the late Lady Bird Johnson, noting that many obituaries for the former first lady "find her scheme to 'beautify' America more interesting than her blatant exercise in political graft."

In 1943, the year Lady Bird Johnson purchased KTBC, the Federal Communications Commission, which reviewed all broadcast-license transfers, was close to being abolished, [Robert A.] Caro writes. Lyndon Johnson used his political influence in both Congress and the White House to prevent that from happening. The FCC was among the most politicized agencies in the government, Caro asserts, and it knew who its friends were.

Johnson socialized with FCC Commissioner Clifford Durr at the time, "sometimes at Durr's home, sometimes at his own," although Durr says Johnson never mentioned Lady Bird's application for KTBC's license. Lady Bird, however, directly approached Durr about the station, and Lyndon phoned James Barr of the FCC's Standard Broadcast Division. "He wanted to get a radio station, and what I remember is, he wouldn't take no for an answer," Caro quotes Barr.

The whole story is here, including how LBJ "shook down powerful companies to advertise on the station."

Reason Visits the World Bank

Tue, 10 Jul 2007 18:59:00 EDT

Last month, Managing Editor Jesse Walker spoke on a panel about podcasting at a conference sponsored by the World Bank. That event is now a podcast itself, at Beyond the Book.

Fair and Balanced: It's the Law

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 19:26:00 EDT

Three days after Diane Feinstein declared she was "looking at" reviving the Fairness Doctrine, Rep. Mike Pence has introduced a bill to prevent such a resurrection.

For more on Pence, go here. For more on the Fairness Doctrine, go here.

Mellow Out or You Will Pay

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:42:00 EDT

The latest hint that the Dems might try to revive the odious Fairness Doctrine:

Feinstein, speaking on "Fox News Sunday" with Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said talk radio in particular has presented a one-sided view of immigration reform legislation being considered by the Senate....

Asked if she would revive the fairness doctrine, which used to require broadcasters to present competing sides of controversial issues, Feinstein said she was "looking at it."

"I remember when there was a fairness doctrine," she said, "and I think there was much more serious correct reporting to people."

In a better world, this woman's political career would have been derailed 28 years ago by a surprise upset victory for the lead singer of the Dead Kennedys. In the world we're stuck in, you can read about the Fairness Doctrine's speech-squashing effects here.

Radio Free Capitol Hill

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 10:55:00 EDT

Good news for fans of neighborhood radio: Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Penn.) and Lee Terry (R-Neb.) introduced a bill yesterday to loosen the government's restrictions on starting independent, low-power stations in urban areas. Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) sponsored the Senate's version of the legislation. (Yes, McCain. Initially a vocal opponent of low-power radio, he did an about-face several years ago; these days he's pretty good on the issue.)

Here's what the bill does:

* It repeals the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000. This misnamed law, pushed by the National Association of Broadcasters, hobbled the FCC's plan to license new low-power stations by effectively limiting the available slots to the countryside. (Fun fact: In the House, every Republican except Ron Paul and Ed Royce backed the bill.)

* Within carefully defined limits, it allows stations to transmit closer to each other on the FM band, thus making room for more broadcasters.

* It asks the FCC, when issuing licenses, to give low-power projects that offer their own programming the same consideration given to "translator" stations that retransmit signals originating elsewhere.

The law is called the Local Community Radio Act of 2007. The folks at the Prometheus Radio Project offer some tips on helping it pass here.

Update: McCain isn't the only presidential candidate backing the bill. I just got an email from Ron Paul's legislative director letting me know his boss is signing onto it as well.

Those Free Airwaves Are Pretty Expensive

jsullum@reason.com (Jacob Sullum) — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 12:54:00 EDT

In a New York Times op-ed piece titled "The Price of Free Airwaves," FCC Commissioner Michael Copps makes the case for compelling broadcasters to carry good-for-you programming their audiences evidently don't have the good sense to demand:

America lets radio and TV broadcasters use public airwaves worth more than half a trillion dollars for free. In return, we require that broadcasters serve the public interest: devoting at least some airtime for worthy programs that inform voters, support local arts and culture and educate our children—in other words, that aspire to something beyond just minimizing costs and maximizing revenue.
Using the public airwaves is a privilege—a lucrative one—not a right, and I fear the F.C.C. has not done enough to stand up for the public interest. Our policies should reward broadcasters that honor their pledge to serve that interest and penalize those that don't.

In case Copps' notion of a "public interest" that is distinct from what actually interests the public was not confusing enough, here's another puzzle: If broadcasters use "the public airwaves" for free, how do we know that privilege is worth half a trillion dollars? It turns out those free airwaves are pretty expensive:

Broadcast licenses continue to be very valuable. Univision's assets—many in small markets—were sold for more than $12 billion. A single station in Sacramento, owned by Sinclair Broadcasting, went for $285 million in 2004. A station in a megamarket like New York or Los Angeles could easily fetch half a billion dollars or more.

Since the price a company pays for a station consists mostly of the broadcast license's market value, that company, pace Copps, has in fact purchased the right to use "the public airwaves." While the initial recipients of broadcast licenses enjoyed a windfall, subsequent owners do not. Why should they be subject to the special requirements that Copps says are justified by their free enjoyment of something for which they paid a lot of money?

Attn, D.C. Reasonoids: Jesse Walker Speaks to the Establishment About Internet Radio

Mon, 04 Jun 2007 10:52:00 EDT

Later this week Managing Editor Jesse Walker will appear at a panel about podcasting at Publishing For Impact 2007, a conference sponsored by the World Bank. Details:

This Publication Has a Volume Control: What to Expect When Print Moves to Podcast

Moderator: Christopher Keannelly, Director, Author & Creator Relations, Copyright Clearance Center; former journalist and host of Beyond the Book, a conference and podcast series produced by the non-profit Copyright Clearance Center

Reid Conrad, Co-founder of Near-Time, an online collaboration software developer

Curtis Franklin, Author of The Absolute Beginner's Guide to Podcasting

Jennifer Harris, Strategic Director for the Washington, DC-based Center for Digital Democracy

Jesse Walker, Managing Editor of Reason, the libertarian monthly, and the author of Rebels on the Air: An Alternative History of Radio in America

Once upon a time, publishing was the business of printing ink on paper. Then, a decade ago, the Internet introduced the world to the power of pixels. In 2007, podcasting allows publishers and authors to speak new volumes to their readers.

A word coined from merging "broadcasting" with "iPods" (the now ubiquitous portable devices for downloading audio files, including music as well as the spoken word), podcasting is poised to move publishing toward a comprehensive strategy that captures print, online and the human voice -- all in a unified, reinforcing message. "This Publication Has A Volume Control" will show you how. When forging community and sharing information are highly valued principles, the publishing professional must turn to new media capabilities that amplify their message; invite audience participation; and enrich the business strategy. Podcasting increases understanding and distribution of published works, and significantly supplements existing content.

To attend the panel, you need to register for the entire conference, a steep $750. Alternately, you could wait until the panel is podcast on the Beyond the Book site for free.

Location: The Westin Grand, 2350 M Street N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037.

Date and Time: Wednesday, June 6, 2007, 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.

Killing Internet Radio

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 23:14:00 EDT

On March 1, 2007, the U.S. Copyright Office announced a potential death sentence for thousands of Internet radio stations. Thanks to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998, webcasters must pay a special performance fee each time they play a recording. Under the newly enacted rate structure, those debts will be calculated based not on how much revenue a station earns but on how many listeners it has. In essence, each transmission to each individual listener will be treated as a separate licensed performance.

“It’s roughly a tenfold increase,” says Bill Goldsmith, co-proprietor of the eclectic rock outlet radioparadise.com, comparing this year’s expected fees to the amount he was previously paying. “The rates are too much for any class of stations to pay.” Goldsmith’s station, for example, attracts around 250,000 listeners a month. Under the new system, it expects to owe about $500,000 this year, well in excess of its income.

These fees should not be confused with the royalties that Internet stations, like AM and FM stations, pay to songwriters. Those have been in place for a long time, and they are calculated on a much more reasonable basis. (Goldsmith’s station pays songwriters about $2,000 to $3,000 a year.) The new payments go to the owners of the performance rights, which usually means the record company. And only Internet stations have to pay them. AM and FM stations are exempt—unless, of course, they want to stream online.

Bounties, Sí; Hunting, No

jwalker@reason.com (Jesse Walker) — Wed, 23 May 2007 13:28:00 EDT

When the Copyright Office decided to jack up the fees paid by Internet radio stations, one of the groups pushing for the hike was an organization called SoundExchange. The Houston Press explains its interest in the issue:

This is the U.S. Copyright Office-approved quasi-official body that collects money for performances of recordings on digital cable and satellite TV, Webcasts, and satellite radio and then disburses a portion to artists. Originally a wing of the widely reviled Recording Industry Association of America, it became independent in 2003, although there are still members of the RIAA on the SoundExchange board.

Over the past seven years, SoundExchange has found and paid thousands of artists, but they have admitted they can't find about 25 percent of the people they have been looking for. Today, that number stands at more than 8,300 artists.

What happens to that money if SoundExchange can't find them? SoundExchange keeps it.

How hard is it trying to find them? After perusing the list of lost musicians, the Press's John Nova Lomax reports that "in less than five minutes of Googling, I found the official Web sites and/or MySpace pages of Fito Olivares, Goudie, Mark May, the Hollisters and Los Skarnales. What's more, highly visible people like Cam'ron (fresh off a highly-publicized appearance on 60 Minutes), Fat Joe and Danzig are on the 'lost' list too." Some of these artists have simply failed to send in the necessary paperwork, but it's hard to believe that's true of all of them.

Lomax's conclusion: "When an agency gets to keep the money it is supposed to be doling out to people it is responsible for finding, it is easy to detect at least a possible conflict of interest." And when it's lobbying to increase the amount being paid...

It Isn't Torture, It's "Tough Love"

rbalko@reason.com (Radley Balko) — Tue, 22 May 2007 07:47:00 EDT

Your schadenfreude of the day:

Dr. Laura’s psychotic 21-year-old son — one of the U.S. Army’s fresh new faces — claimed on the MySpace page that his “job” was “running around this horrid place doing nasty things to people that deserve it … and some that don’t.”
The illustrations include one of a man forcing a child to suck his dick, at knifepoint and in front of the child’s terrified mother. In another, “a top-hatted man laughs as he rapes a bound and bleeding woman in front of her family.”
Dr. Laura has been curiously silent about her son’s bravery.

Insert judgmental psycho-crap about how strong parents don't raise bad kids here.

Radio Free Reason

Sun, 20 May 2007 20:32:00 EDT

Attention, listeners in Monterey, Salinas, and San Jose: This Monday, Jesse Walker will be talking about the late Jerry Falwell with host Mark Carbonaro on KION 1460 AM. The interview will last from 7:10 to 7:30 in the morning, pacific time.

Read Jesse's article about Falwell here.

Check out the KION website here.