iHeart Settles With FCC

[TheBigA]

iHeart has signed a consent decree over charges made by TN Sen Marsha Blackburn having to do with payola

iHeartMedia Enters Consent Decree With FCC Over Payola Investigation

iHeartMedia has entered into a Consent Decree with the FCC over alleged payola practices. The Commission states that Senator Marsha

radioinsight.com

INSTANT INSIGHT:The FCC was unable to come up with any proof of payola at iHeart’s events, but iHeart needed to avoid a long-drawn out investigation. So the consent decree allows the FCC to claim some semblance of victory in the matter.

It was a totally baseless charge that had no proof. But that doesn't matter in this government. If any republican makes a charge, it's assumed to be true. Blackburn is currently running for TN governor. The state recently gerrymandered itself so there are no democrat representatives. Even though 35% of the state register as democrat.

We discussed this last year, but the thread has been closed due to inactivity:

Payola & Coercing Bands to do Events in Exchange for Airplay

Attorney David Oxenford's blog today is headlined: FCC Enforcement Advisory Warns of Payola Concerns in Coercing Bands to Play at Broadcast Station Events with Threats of Decreased Airplay – and Reminds All Broadcasters, Radio and TV, of Sponsorship Identification Requirements He goes on to...

radiodiscussions.com

 

[TheBigA]

Look how carefully this story was written in Inside Radio

iHeartMedia To Boost Artist Disclosures Under FCC Settlement.

The FCC has closed a payola investigation into iHeartMedia without a fine or any finding of wrongdoing, however the broadcaster has agreed to sweeping new compliance rules tied to live

www.insideradio.com

 

[Theater of My Mind]

It was a totally baseless charge that had no proof.

There were no hearings, so there is no proof to the contrary either.

Look how carefully this story was written in Inside Radio

Most people here are aware of how this company operates and can draw their own conclusions, regardless of the corporate spin being reported in the friendly trade media.

 

[TheBigA]

Most people here are aware of how this company operates

I think most people are also aware how this government is operating, and can also draw their own conclusions.

It doesn't matter how hard iHeart's conservative talk stations work to promote the president. It earned them no credit in this battle.

 

[ted chittenden]

I think most people are also aware how this government is operating, and can also draw their own conclusions.

It doesn't matter how hard iHeart's conservative talk stations work to promote the president. It earned them no credit in this battle.

Right. When anybody (or corporation) capitulates to this administration's initial demands, he demands more of them down the road, not less.

 

[PTBoardOp93]

There were no hearings, so there is no proof to the contrary either.

There can never be proof to the contrary. That's why criminal proceedings have "innocent until proven guilty" as a core tenet.

 

[TheBigA]

The interesting thing about this consent decree is it only applies to iHeart. But iHeart isn't the only radio company that does these kinds of concerts. Cumulus, Townsquare, and Audacy all do these things all the time. But the senator only targeted iHeart, and consequently they're the only company that was required to sign.

 

[ted chittenden]

The interesting thing about this consent decree is it only applies to iHeart. But iHeart isn't the only radio company that does these kinds of concerts. Cumulus, Townsquare, and Audacy all do these things all the time. But the senator only targeted iHeart, and consequently they're the only company that was required to sign.

That's because of IHeart's size in the field, compared to the other entities you named. If IHeart wasn't the largest player in the field, then it would not likely draw all the attention it has for its practices.

 

[TheBigA]

That's because of IHeart's size in the field, compared to the other entities you named. If IHeart wasn't the largest player in the field, then it would not likely draw all the attention it has for its practices.

The law is supposed to be applied equally. In this case, it's not.

 

[PTBoardOp93]

Audacy and Cumulus also don't run large scale music festivals, so the Senator's complaint is pretty easily batted away by those companies.

 

[TheBigA]

Audacy and Cumulus also don't run large scale music festivals, so the Senator's complaint is pretty easily batted away by those companies.

The senator's complaint also included local radio artist appearances and "free shows." Audacy & Cumulus do lots of them.

iHeart easily could have "batted away" this complaint as well. Their festivals are all above board and not "free" in any way.

The senator also targets iHeart in her promotion of the American Music Fairness act, even though iHeart pays artist & label royalties.

 

[MarkW]

Senator Blackburn is a gigantic piece of work; I'll leave it at that.

Even if performance of concerts led to non-cash compensation in the form of increased radio air play, who really cares? I suspect this is not an area where the American public wants elected officials and bureaucrats to devote any meaningful energy.

 

[TheBigA]

I suspect this is not an area where the American public wants elected officials and bureaucrats to devote any meaningful energy.

If you read the consent decree, all it says is that iHeart will follow the law. If there are increased spins, they will be announced as such.

• Compliance plan: iHeart must develop and implement a new compliance plan within 60 days, including:
  • Annual reports to the FCC (for 3 years)
  • Disclosure of an anti-payola policy to artists
  • Public disclosures about artists performing at iHeart events

Non cash compensation isn't illegal. It just has to be disclosed in advance. The main thing is Blackburn & Carr can claim a win.

The funny part about this is when Blackburn talks about her new royalty, she says artists get no benefit from radio airplay. But in this case, she claims they do.

 

[CTListener]

If you read the consent decree, all it says is that iHeart will follow the law. If there are increased spins, they will be announced as such.

Will this eliminate the coordinated chart-fixing known as "push weeks," in which stations across the county kneel and kiss the ring of the major labels and increase spins of a few songs each week to insure their maximum ranking on the airplay charts? As a listener with several country listening options locally, I'd appreciate not hearing the same three or four songs at the top of the hour on all four stations every week. Do the stations get any kickback from the labels for this farcical manipulation of "popularity"?

 

[TheBigA]

Will this eliminate the coordinated chart-fixing known as "push weeks,"

No. This is just about concerts.

Do the stations get any kickback from the labels for this farcical manipulation of "popularity"?

No. These are all established hit songs. It's not like stations don't want to play these songs.

The rotation of songs changes every week. Heavies are played once every hour or two. That's how formats work.

There's nothing "farcical" about it. When the station adds the song, it is taking a risk that the song will be a hit.

The station tracks the songs each week, and determines growth based on response. Peak week is the culmination of the process.