• 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

A Reasonable Suggestion

D

DeSoto

Guest
As a new comer to this board and reading all the fighting that has gone on because of the Jay Severin expose between various posters it might be helpful to the general reader if the moderators required in the account information to list whether some of these posters hold management positions at these station.

To an outsider it reads as if genral managers and program directors are directing some of the responses. You can tell because they are all too defensive to any criticism of a station or talent. Sometimes it reads like they are ganging up on those who have a different opinion.

Probably impossible to do but would help but all of these posts in balance.

Just a suggestion from an outsider.
 
Most people want to remain anonymous. Those who are able, do post who they are (sometimes with consequence). There are a few...neanderpol is one that comes to mind. I haven't seen him around lately. He often has good insite to the industry. Some moderators need to keep their identity as well. It's unfortunate that there are people like parklane who feel they have to rveal privaledged information. This is the reason people don't like saying who they are.

FYI..caution to those of you who communicate with other posters. You never know what might be used against you. Some have had to learn the hard way.





> As a new comer to this board and reading all the fighting
> that has gone on because of the Jay Severin expose between
> various posters it might be helpful to the general reader if
> the moderators required in the account information to list
> whether some of these posters hold management positions at
> these station.
>
> To an outsider it reads as if genral managers and program
> directors are directing some of the responses. You can tell
> because they are all too defensive to any criticism of a
> station or talent. Sometimes it reads like they are ganging
> up on those who have a different opinion.
>
> Probably impossible to do but would help but all of these
> posts in balance.
>
> Just a suggestion from an outsider.
>
<P ID="signature">______________



</P>
 
Charlie, you are very reasonable - however Desoto makes some very good points.

Management DOES come on this board and interfere with what posters write.
Jocks and producers have been known to attack and put personal information (often erroneous and quite illegal) about people in order to slap them down.

Radio-Info has often been duped by the Corporations who run what are, for all intents and purposes, these monopolies.

That's what monopolies do. I have a specific example of a major corporation going after one of my properties on the internet. It is amazing. They stole from me, and they are trying to - not only re-write - "overwrite" history by publishing their information under the guise of my name. To try to steal my work by "eminent domain", if you will.

So the problem of Corporations getting defensive when we say negative things, justifiably so, about their "talent", if you want to call it that in some cases, is expected. It just should be prohibited. I said something about "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" before.

Of course some of the higher ups at Radio-Info may work for Infinity or other stations down in Tennessee - which only proves my point. Corporations get the benefit of the doubt. Critics get banned.

That's not a level playing field.


> Most people want to remain anonymous. Those who are able, do
> post who they are (sometimes with consequence). There are a
> few...neanderpol is one that comes to mind. I haven't seen
> him around lately. He often has good insite to the industry.
> Some moderators need to keep their identity as well. It's
> unfortunate that there are people like parklane who feel
> they have to rveal privaledged information. This is the
> reason people don't like saying who they are.
>
> FYI..caution to those of you who communicate with other
> posters. You never know what might be used against you. Some
> have had to learn the hard way.
>
>
>
>
>
> > As a new comer to this board and reading all the fighting
> > that has gone on because of the Jay Severin expose between
>
> > various posters it might be helpful to the general reader
> if
> > the moderators required in the account information to list
>
> > whether some of these posters hold management positions at
>
> > these station.
> >
> > To an outsider it reads as if genral managers and program
> > directors are directing some of the responses. You can
> tell
> > because they are all too defensive to any criticism of a
> > station or talent. Sometimes it reads like they are
> ganging
> > up on those who have a different opinion.
> >
> > Probably impossible to do but would help but all of these
> > posts in balance.
> >
> > Just a suggestion from an outsider.
> >
>
 
>
> Of course some of the higher ups at Radio-Info may work for
> Infinity or other stations down in Tennessee - which only
> proves my point. Corporations get the benefit of the doubt.
> Critics get banned.
>

The is a falacy. Period.<P ID="signature">______________



</P>
 
> As a new comer to this board and reading all the fighting
> that has gone on because of the Jay Severin expose between
> various posters it might be helpful to the general reader if
> the moderators required in the account information to list
> whether some of these posters hold management positions at
> these station.
>
> To an outsider it reads as if genral managers and program
> directors are directing some of the responses. You can tell
> because they are all too defensive to any criticism of a
> station or talent. Sometimes it reads like they are ganging
> up on those who have a different opinion.
>
> Probably impossible to do but would help but all of these
> posts in balance.
>
> Just a suggestion from an outsider.
>


I'd be willing to bet (although of COURSE he'll deny it) that this DeSoto person is actually Parklane, one in the same. He points out the same exact things and has the same accusations as Parklane.. and also goes out of his way to (twice) call himself an "outsider".... I'd bet tomorrow's lunch it's him. Cabradio, maybe you better check it out? Just a comment.
 
> >
> >
Corporations get the benefit of the
> doubt.
> > Critics get banned.
> >
>
> That is a fallacy. Period.

I don't post often but I read the contents of Radio-Info quite often.
It seems to me that reasonable and occasionally constructive criticism
is allowed without prejudice.
As mentioned in earlier posts, it's the sarcastic, personal
attacks that bring the conversation down to unacceptable lows. I'm not a
lawyer but I don't think anything said by our Moderator was illegal. It
may have been unpopular with certain individuals, but assuming we're all
grownups here, take your medicine and move on.
By the way, I also don't think the posts by DeSoto pass the "sniff" test
regarding whether or not he is a lawyer. Just my humble opinion...
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
 
I don't know what's funnier, the former "parklane" - a.k.a. "DeSoto" (who registered for the site a mere six minutes after parklane's last login) - trying to pretend he's a "newcomer" or the former "millennium" - a.k.a. "fccfight" - chiming in in favor of the ex-parklane with his typical conspiracy theory about how everyone who disagrees with him must have been planted by some big radio company.


Say, someone ask the two of them what they think of Howie Carr.
 
<font color="red">[EDITTED FOR LACK OF REAL CONTENT]</font><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by cabradio on 09/23/05 09:26 PM.</FONT></P>
 
> > >
> > >
> Corporations get the benefit of the
> > doubt.
> > > Critics get banned.
> > >
> >
> > That is a fallacy. Period.
>
> I don't post often but I read the contents of Radio-Info
> quite often.
> It seems to me that reasonable and occasionally constructive
> criticism
> is allowed without prejudice.
> As mentioned in earlier posts, it's the sarcastic, personal
> attacks that bring the conversation down to unacceptable
> lows. I'm not a
> lawyer but I don't think anything said by our Moderator was
> illegal. It
> may have been unpopular with certain individuals, but
> assuming we're all
> grownups here, take your medicine and move on.
> By the way, I also don't think the posts by DeSoto pass the
> "sniff" test
> regarding whether or not he is a lawyer. Just my humble
> opinion...
> Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
>
The truth is that "companies" arent paying attention to this site as some are dying to believe. Individuals at companies are certainly both participants and or spectators but the persistent belief that corporations are somehow so concered about the ramblings of people on this baord that they order employees to post here in whatever capacity is just silly. Sometimes people just disagree with one another without any corporate agenda getting in the way, and it always appears to be people on the outside of EVERYTHING trying to post factually about what people on the inside of corporations are being told to do where this board is concerned. That doesnt even make any SENSE this board is a hobby it's not CNN.
 
CLARIFICATION

> Management DOES come on this board and interfere with what
> posters write.

The only way any radio station management would interfere is to post something themselves. Radio-Info.com does not take direction from anyone.

> Jocks and producers have been known to attack and put
> personal information (often erroneous and quite illegal)
> about people in order to slap them down.
>

And there are listeners who think this is their rebuttle forum for what is said on the air. It isn't.


> Radio-Info has often been duped by the Corporations who run
> what are, for all intents and purposes, these monopolies.
>

Really? How so?

> That's what monopolies do. I have a specific example of a
> major corporation going after one of my properties on the
> internet. It is amazing. They stole from me, and they are
> trying to - not only re-write - "overwrite" history by
> publishing their information under the guise of my name. To
> try to steal my work by "eminent domain", if you will.

That's YOU, not Radio-Info. That's like saying because a fast food employee spit in your food, they spit in everyone's food. It's simply not true.

>
> So the problem of Corporations getting defensive when we say
> negative things, justifiably so, about their "talent", if
> you want to call it that in some cases, is expected. It
> just should be prohibited. I said something about "throwing
> the baby out with the bathwater" before.

I have yet to see ANY communication from ANY corporation. If you have, please produce it.

>
> Of course some of the higher ups at Radio-Info may work for
> Infinity or other stations down in Tennessee - which only
> proves my point.

Doug was the highest up. He didn't work in radio. He passed away recently, and yet you continue to be disrespectful. Lance would be the next "higher up". I'm not sure what his day job is. Next is Sam, he's the tech guru. Not sure where he works either. That's it for "higher-ups".

I haven't seen one bit of evidence that suggests they cater to corporations. Most of what you are talking about is heresay and quite libelous as you are attempting to damage their reputation.


> Corporations get the benefit of the doubt. Critics get banned.

The statement above is a fallacy. There are plenty of critical people who play by the rules. Troublemakers are banned.

<P ID="signature">______________



</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom