Anyone still paying for a POTS line should have their head investigated.📞☎️🤣
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
FCC Opens Investigation into NPR and PBS
- Thread starter xmtrland
- Start date
raises hand
They work..... most of the time... kinda
Though, we dont use them for STL related things
There are still places in the US where a POTS line is the only choice for somewhat reliable two-way communications unless you're a ham radio operator. In my area, AT&T is trying to shed that duty and being met with resistance:
Supervisors Ask State Leadership to Protect Landline Telephone Service
Though the California Public Utilities Commission denied AT&T’s request to drop its responsibility to be a carrier of last resort last year, Supervisor Sue Hoek said Nevada County residents are still losing critical landline service.
Dave B.
Lots of stations will use dial up POTS line as a second connection to a Burk or other IP based remote control. Its an inexpensive backup to control the transmitter. I have a site that has Comcast fiber as the main and Starlink as the backup. Fail over is handled by the firewall/router. Its still nice to have the dial up backup.
Customers for Lumen just get the run around, even if the have a legitimate use for that old POTS. And yes there are other options that I'm considering.
Customers for Lumen just get the run around, even if the have a legitimate use for that old POTS. And yes there are other options that I'm considering.
KSKO uses Starlink as our main STL but an engineer in Australia is using us as an example as to why Starlink would be a good idea for a back up for their network of stations.
For what it is, Starlink is fantastic.
Brendan Carr's FCC will now be investigating commercial radio as well, looking for payola:
www.insideradio.com
Brendan Carr Orders FCC To Investigate Radio Concert Complaint.
The Federal Communications Commission will investigate allegations raised by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) about the relationship between radio and music acts when it comes to station concerts. FCC Chair Brendan
Is this complaint tethered to reality at all?Brendan Carr's FCC will now be investigating commercial radio as well, looking for payola:
Brendan Carr Orders FCC To Investigate Radio Concert Complaint.
The Federal Communications Commission will investigate allegations raised by Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) about the relationship between radio and music acts when it comes to station concerts. FCC Chair Brendan
The new investigation comes at the request of Sen. Blackburn (R-TN), who is a co-sponsor of the FAIR act. Proponents of the FAIR act dispute any promotional value to radio airplay. Yet in her complaint, Sen. Blackburn now says there is a promotional value. Which is it? It can't be both.
We should also point out that Sen. Blackburn's legislation specifically seeks "equitable treatment for terrestrial and internet services." But payola laws ONLY apply to broadcasting, not digital. Perhaps she should consider legislation to require internet services also abide by payola laws.
They don't. That's what I said in post #2. The goal is to create another pretext into defunding. He says so in the letter.
The implication is that the NPR and PBS funding announcements air on local radio and TV stations.
Perhaps she should crawl back into whatever hole full of ignorant people she crawled out of. Payola by definition occurs when someone who does not represent the owner of a station accepts compensation or rewards for causing a song to be played only because of those rewards; this is not payola as it is a "deal" between the station itself and an artist or label.
If a station makes an agreement to sponsor a show, then it is in their best interest to make sure the artist's songs get played along with the typical "and see them at the Z-109 show this weekend".
There might be some regulation in order for "added plays" to be identified, but that seems absurd. A station promoting a concert is going to want to promote the artist in every way possible.
My first station sponsored concert event was in the 60's when a huge pop star, Enrique Guzmán, came in from Mexico. We got the exclusive for radio interviews and appearances (he even sang our jingles a capella) and we played a lot more of his songs. We had all our staff at the concerts and tied our name to everything. We gave things to him and the promoter, but we got back a lot more prestige and image enhancement. Nobody was bribing anybody... it was a fair trade and all parties were very happy with the results.
Aa we've said throughout this thread, the goal is to create the government investigation. The existence of an investigation revives the articles in the music press such as Rolling Stone about radio and payola. It's part of the pressure campaign to get congress to pass her FAIR act, requiring broadcast radio to pay a record label royalty. If the FCC fines a few stations, that's just a side benefit for them. The music industry wants more regulation of radio, and this helps their cause.
The contradiction is the Act claims there's no promotional value in airplay. In her request to the FCC, she says there is.
Last edited:
I really don't get what all the fuss is about. NPR, PBS and the member radio and TV stations really don't need the money. They get money from the audience. They get money from various non-profits and NGOs with an agenda to promote. And they have so called "enhanced underwriting," which hardly differ in any noticeable way from commercial spot announcements. They have fancy buildings, the latest equipment, pay good salaries (especially to management) and have enough money left over to run for profit businesses. Maybe public broadcasters needed CPB money in the 70s and 80s to get started but not any more.
Rich people don't need social security or medicare either. But they get it. The Public Broadcasting Act says they get federal funding. If congress wants to repeal, they need 60 votes in the senate.
Apparently the new FCC chairman interprets that differently than you. He says the law only allows the name of the sponsor. That's what this thread is about. Read his letter.
It seems like you assume/misunderstand alot about NPR member stations
I do NOT have an exhorbinant salary or the latest equipment. I'm the only full time employee, with one part time announcer, 1 part time office manager and one contract accountant. WE do not have fancy buildings, in fact.. ours is one of the oldest in town and its oozing issues everywhere.
This is the only "business" we run, no one involved in KSKO in any fashion (as far as ive been able to tell in 5 years) is rich or has something going on over on the side.
We have no agenda, except getting information out there. Unfortunately, alot of the non profit and NGOs you talk about .. if that happens, it goes to NPR, i dont know a ton of stations who get a ton of money from those angles.
Listener memberships are good for our population numbers, but that and business underwriting, fundraising from bingo, auctions and our music festival would still not be enough to support us. Electricity is about $1500 a month, salaries among the people I describe above is around $5000 a month... internet access among our main station and our rebroadcast stations (stations, not translators) are about $1000 a month.
You have a serious misconception about what many NPR member stations are
I posted this on my FAcebook page last night:
I rarely post something controversial/devisive or hard hitting on my page but I must speak up on something I believe in..... otherwise, I wouldn't be doing my job and I wouldn't be in McGrath, Alaska.
CPB funding getting eliminated would decimate and ruin many stations. Let me be clear, in regards to this post... I don't speak in an official capacity for KSKO nor should my personal opinion be construed as the opinion of KSKO or the Kuskokwim Public Broadcasting Corporation. This post was made on my own time after work on my own computer and internet connection.
The amount of funding each tax payer ends up giving on a yearly basis which goes to CPB is about a cup or two of gas station coffee a year. Want that money back? I'll mail you $3 from my own wallet
Elimination of CPB funding would cause many stations to go completely off air completely, others would be forced to have minimal staff and be just a pass through for national programming and others would have severely reduced local content.
Is it possible one station here or there has violated the underwriting announcements once or twice? I guess its possible, but incredibly unlikely. We public broadcasters take our roles and responsibilities seriously and I know me like others are very careful about what we said and I know many of us often second guess ourselves and err on the side of caution.
Elimination of CPB funding would mean many people are left with ZERO source of local information.. like life saving weather during winter, wildfire season or river break up season. I know in 40 plus years that it'd be safe to say KSKO has saved lives by being on the air.
I think FCC Chairman's opinion would be very different if the network in question and its member stations were Pro Trump/Pro Republican. I see very few complaints from republicans about FOX, OANN, NewsMax and RSBN.
Does a news organization have a bend/slant in their long form news discussion and commentary? I think so, every last single one. But when it comes to facts for straight up news reporting, NPR is one of the most accurate sources you'll find.
Remember, just because you disagree, doesn't make it wrong. I have a rule, I verify with two sources, minimum.. including one from the other side of the aisle from me. I've staked my career on being fair, impartial and accurate when it comes to news.... regardless of where the truth comes from.
My background is in commercial radio, not public radio but I see the great value in what public radio provides. Eliminating CPB funding would me alot of people, including people like me.. would likely be out of a job.
If you were to guess my stances on subjects/politics based on where I work and what you think.. you'd be maybe 2/3rd right. How do I know this? Because of what I've heard, been called or accused of in the past.
Ask anyone whos been a long time listener of mine, Ask anyone whos been a professional friend of mine for years, Ask people I've worked with in the past.. they will tell you I'm one of the most impartial people when it comes to news content I generate locally.. my personal opinion, stance or beliefs play zero part in my decisions.
I think you'll find most all of us in public radio would be the same way. We're doing our job as best we can and in some markets with public radio being some of the highest rated stations, there is a clear need and desire for what we do.
I also think this, along with removing NPR and mainstream media from the Pentagon while replacing it with decidedly right leaning news outlets is a potential threat to press freedom: Trying to shut down dissenting voices.
I believe 150 percent in what KSKO and NPR does otherwise I wouldn't still be here after nearly 5 years. Stations like mine are not swimming in money, quite the opposite.
I'm probably going to regret posting this but think about what you say before you say it. What you say, champion or are calling for could be part of the FCC Chariman Carrs argument that could be a threat to mine and others jobs.
IF you want to discuss things, thats fine.. but 1.) Remain civil. 2.) Use FACTS not talking points with verifiable info/sources/links.,
I rarely post something controversial/devisive or hard hitting on my page but I must speak up on something I believe in..... otherwise, I wouldn't be doing my job and I wouldn't be in McGrath, Alaska.
CPB funding getting eliminated would decimate and ruin many stations. Let me be clear, in regards to this post... I don't speak in an official capacity for KSKO nor should my personal opinion be construed as the opinion of KSKO or the Kuskokwim Public Broadcasting Corporation. This post was made on my own time after work on my own computer and internet connection.
The amount of funding each tax payer ends up giving on a yearly basis which goes to CPB is about a cup or two of gas station coffee a year. Want that money back? I'll mail you $3 from my own wallet
Elimination of CPB funding would cause many stations to go completely off air completely, others would be forced to have minimal staff and be just a pass through for national programming and others would have severely reduced local content.
Is it possible one station here or there has violated the underwriting announcements once or twice? I guess its possible, but incredibly unlikely. We public broadcasters take our roles and responsibilities seriously and I know me like others are very careful about what we said and I know many of us often second guess ourselves and err on the side of caution.
Elimination of CPB funding would mean many people are left with ZERO source of local information.. like life saving weather during winter, wildfire season or river break up season. I know in 40 plus years that it'd be safe to say KSKO has saved lives by being on the air.
I think FCC Chairman's opinion would be very different if the network in question and its member stations were Pro Trump/Pro Republican. I see very few complaints from republicans about FOX, OANN, NewsMax and RSBN.
Does a news organization have a bend/slant in their long form news discussion and commentary? I think so, every last single one. But when it comes to facts for straight up news reporting, NPR is one of the most accurate sources you'll find.
Remember, just because you disagree, doesn't make it wrong. I have a rule, I verify with two sources, minimum.. including one from the other side of the aisle from me. I've staked my career on being fair, impartial and accurate when it comes to news.... regardless of where the truth comes from.
My background is in commercial radio, not public radio but I see the great value in what public radio provides. Eliminating CPB funding would me alot of people, including people like me.. would likely be out of a job.
If you were to guess my stances on subjects/politics based on where I work and what you think.. you'd be maybe 2/3rd right. How do I know this? Because of what I've heard, been called or accused of in the past.
Ask anyone whos been a long time listener of mine, Ask anyone whos been a professional friend of mine for years, Ask people I've worked with in the past.. they will tell you I'm one of the most impartial people when it comes to news content I generate locally.. my personal opinion, stance or beliefs play zero part in my decisions.
I think you'll find most all of us in public radio would be the same way. We're doing our job as best we can and in some markets with public radio being some of the highest rated stations, there is a clear need and desire for what we do.
I also think this, along with removing NPR and mainstream media from the Pentagon while replacing it with decidedly right leaning news outlets is a potential threat to press freedom: Trying to shut down dissenting voices.
I believe 150 percent in what KSKO and NPR does otherwise I wouldn't still be here after nearly 5 years. Stations like mine are not swimming in money, quite the opposite.
I'm probably going to regret posting this but think about what you say before you say it. What you say, champion or are calling for could be part of the FCC Chariman Carrs argument that could be a threat to mine and others jobs.
IF you want to discuss things, thats fine.. but 1.) Remain civil. 2.) Use FACTS not talking points with verifiable info/sources/links.,
Cold Coffee
Banned
There are community radio stations who are to the left of NPR. Manny of them rely on CPB grants. How can we avoid talking politics here when this whole thing is just political?
It depends. Pacifica stations don't accept federal or corporate money. That's pretty common among the community stations.
And that is probably who Brendan Carr listens to when he forms his opinions about public radio. He wants to defund Pacifica out of existence. (He would, as Paul says, have no problem funding organizations whose slant he agrees with.) If he were a smarter man, he'd know that no CPB funds go to Pacifica, but he's apparently not, and is willing to burn down the entire house because he doesn't like the wallpaper in one room.
If Mr. Carr were truly a conservative, or even just a competent lawyer, he'd know the government has no role in dictating speech. But this entire crew seems willfully ignorant and/or dismissive of our Constitution, especially 1A.
Fish rot from the head down.
I'll concede that the Alaskan Bush is a different world than the one in which other NPR operate and maybe an exception should be made for remote stations.
- Status