Brocton piratre causes havok at Logan

[WLYNWAZNgm]

Responsibility

Well said, Mr. Hair. You most certainly are not dumb...

Real broadcast stations pay taxes. They pay payroll taxes. They employ people who pay income taxes.
They donate thousands of hours of airtime for announcements, programming, and emergeny preparedness that serve the community. They play by the rules set down by the government of this country. If you have a problem with a legitimate broadcast station -- go and see their public file. It is your right as a citizen. If you think you could do a better job - challenge their license at renewal time. Nothing is wrong with legal, fair competition on a level playing field.

Bring it on! Be ready to put your money (LOTS of it...) where your mouth is, however. Be ready to prove, in no uncertain terms, that you are, indeed, a more fit licensee. Good luck with that.

Those who openly support pirates -- what do YOU do for a living, eh? I would bet that if it is any type of legitimate, legal work, there are rules that YOU must follow as well... Denying somebody their livelihood, who plays by the rules, is unconstitutional -- a violation of due process. That is not politically-correct "civil disobediance".

Pirates are self-absorbed children who think only of themselves. They are poor role models for the "community" they claim to serve. They deserve no consideration of ANY kind. If you are breaking the law, you deserve no protections from that same law. If you want anarchy - there are plenty of places in the world where you can migrate. Good luck with that...

 

[Signpost]

I googled Ed Perry, an NFL player came up..

Points about licensed stations wholly in compliance with the law, pirate radio operators "outlaws": noted.
That most pirate radio operators are egotistical morons: agreed.

My defense of pirates is only philosophical. But were pirates to be granted legal status, this too would be vehemently opposed - as LPFM now is by the NAB. Bottom line: legitimate broadcasters don't want any more competition than they already have. Understandable. The reality is that any intelligent content provider who wishes to reach an audience is much more likely to use the internet as a means of "broadcasting". Pirates around Boston seem to be entirely minorities attempting to service a segment of the population ignored by licensed broadcasters. Whether or not the purpose of these broadcasts is altruistic - i couldn't tell you, I don't speak the language. Yes, the world would be a better place if they would secure the ability to broadcast legally.

I don't condone any pirate that interferes with a licensed frequency, but I do think the airwaves are the domain of the public, and have been monopolized by corporate interests who, like the pirates, have very little purpose for "serving the public", unless it will increase listenership. A disproportionate chunk of radio's advertising dollars are going to San Antonio, when they used to be funneled back into local markets to pay real live jocks. The heart and soul of radio has been sold to Wall Street, and pirates, in principle, remain a harsh challenge to that status quo.

Public sympathy for the broadcasting industry's cries of "foul" will be negligible compared to the music industry's cries of "foul" over the rampant piracy they face - at least radio pirates aren't taking money directly out of broadcaster's pockets, they're just trespassing.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

I googled Ed Perry, an NFL player came up..

Not surprising, given the way search engines work. The Ed Perry others have referred to is the licensee of WATD in Marshfield...a long-time broadcaster who serves, and gets intimately involved with, his community in a way that few other licensees have ever done. He puts his money where his mouth is, unlike the pirates.

But were pirates to be granted legal status, this too would be vehemently opposed - as LPFM now is by the NAB.

Of course it would be opposed...for the same reason that the recent immigration bill was so vehemently opposed. You don't reward those who break the law by saying "it's OK" afterwards. The lesson that imparts is that even if you're breaking the law now, just wait, soon you won't be. That's the first step toward anarchy...a government without the cajones to enforce its own laws because it's too inconvenient.

I do think the airwaves are the domain of the public, and have been monopolized by corporate interests who, like the pirates, have very little purpose for "serving the public", unless it will increase listenership.

This is the mindset you need to get rid of. Broadcasting is a business, and since 1920, when WEAF ran what is generally regarded as the first radio commercial, it always has been. When you're running a business, in 1920 or in 2007, money is what matters. Increasing listenership increases revenues. It's not brain surgery or rocket science. Stations that don't keep the money coming in don't last very long.

A disproportionate chunk of radio's advertising dollars are going to San Antonio, when they used to be funneled back into local markets to pay real live jocks.

Clear Channel Communications owns less than 9% of US radio stations...a figure that is steadily dropping as they sell off many of their small- and medium-market stations...and yet they are continually and unjustifiably cast as the bogeyman of radio...the symbol of everything that's "wrong" with radio according to the "radio is a monopoly" crowd. Please excuse them for running a business according to the law and making a profit. They didn't mean it, and they'll never do it again. Promise.

The heart and soul of radio has been sold to Wall Street

Who do you think owned all the radio stations when broadcasting was coming of age? Large corporations, that's who. They were the only outfits with the necessary money to buy the stations and/or build them and make them work. Everyone seems to think that "corporate radio" is a recent development. It wasn't. I'll reiterate: Broadcasting is a business. It's no more or less complicated than that, and it has always been that way. A business that doesn't make money is soon out of business.

 

[johnster]

Where does it stop?? Would you morons condone Television pirates, Business radio pirates, Marine radio pirates, public safety radio pirates? There reasons why rules and regulations where established to regulate the radio spectrum. Your and my legislators have drafted the current radio regulations. Once they allowed the limited numbers of commercial stations to sell advertising a value was attached to these licenses. These broadcasters have the right to defend turf. And pirates are always interfering. There is not a frequency available in this area that wouldn't interfere with someone. Just because some of you are not happy with the direction or programming that some of these corporations have taken over the years in their efforts to make money doesnt give you the right to just fire up on a frequency and start your own little juke box. Hell your probably the same folks that still think Napster wasn't stealing plain and simple. As WLYN has pointed out time and time again. There are means to get your music on the radio. Yes you have to pay. It's commercial get it. You also can't print money, Drive a car without a license, or a plane and there are good reasons for all these things. The FCC's hands should be untied in this area and much stiffer penalties should be allowed. I would have no problem with a refusal to shut down bringing felony charges and jail time. I don't own a major corporation nor do I agree with many of their programing choices. But I do think when they pay millions of dollars for broadcast licenses and play by the rules that they should be able to defend their turf. If you want a portion of the band for morons with programing ideas of their own then you should work on legislating for that. If you decided to choose civil disobedience than you should go to jail for your beliefs. If there is no penalty your not really committed. Anyone today can start an internet radio station. You don't have to jam everyone else to force it on others.

 

[Signpost]

You're all absolutely right. Radio is a business, and has a right to earn money. They have the right to lay you off to curtail expenses. Pirates are trespassers who should be shot on sight. However, the FCC shutting down the ONE pirate who interfered with airline communications is an indication that all the other pirates have been "allowed" to broadcast for months and years despite the flagrant violation of the law. Perhaps it's not a very big deal to anyone except broadcasters.

Again, i'd point to the UK example: many of the pirate broadcasters there became legal - probably because the government was powerless and it looked better if the wildly popular pirates were at least broadcasting legally. When the boat "Laser Radio" was broadcasting from sank, they were greeted with a hero's welcome when rescuers brought them ashore. In the UK, pirates broadcasting illegally invoked a romantic "outlaw" appeal among the general population - so much so that Scott Shannon adopted "Pirate Radio" as a positioner for a perfectly legal operation in Los Angles, just to create the image that they were a bunch of rebels doing whatever they wanted. Then there's the movie "Pump Up the Volume"..

The Ed Perry others have referred to is the licensee of WATD in Marshfield...

I actually listen to WATD quite often, and am a cheerleader for small, community based broadcasting outlets.

This is the mindset you need to get rid of. (snip) Stations that don't keep the money coming in don't last very long.

Why do i need to get rid of that mindset? A few individuals get rich off the backs of laborers who, in the case of radio, might pour their heart and soul into an operation, only to be let go when voicetracking becomes available? Why in the world would you support that unless you're a shareholder? Before 1992, corporations couldn't own more than one AM and one FM in a given market, and competition between the myriad broadcasting companies was fierce. Deregulation has allowed the medium to be concentrated into the hands of small group of corporations (and I agree, Clear Channel is not the worst of them. It would be different if Randy Michaels hadn't been forced out early, though.) While this has strengthened the radio industry as a whole, enabling it to secure a bigger slice of overall advertising, the benefits to listeners have been negative: news and information is way down on music stations. Voice tracking and syndicated programming has increased, decreasing the localism of the medium. Spot loads skyrocketed, driving listeners away. Salaries appear to be heading down. My friends are earning less today in positions that commanded much higher salaries a decade ago - when billing was lower - with the difference now going to corporate owners. Of course this business model is no different than the fast food industry, telecommunications, or oil companies. But if you struck oil in your back yard, figured out how to refine it in your basement, and started selling gas to your friends for 40 cents a gallon - only to have Exxon Mobil go after you for not having the right permits, whose side would the public be on? Same with pirate radio.

If you only regard radio as a business, and can't acknowledge the intrinsic and artistic appeal of the medium, or its power to reach out and draw listeners in emotionally, then you're part of the problem. Furthermore, that mindset "i need to get rid of" doesn't apply to college radio, small volunteer stations like WOMR in Provincetown, religious radio, or even public radio. They have very different operating models compared to your corporate model, but at least they broadcast legally.

Sorry to ramble on, and I know WLYNGM will weigh in with his mechanical "Pirates Illegal Bad Period" rhetoric - the main point I'm trying to impart is that the plight of the legal broadcaster generates no sympathy from the general public. Joe Normal living in Quincy is concerned about the price of gas, drive by shootings, quality of schools, vandalism and break-ins - but a pirate radio station sliding in between WBMX and WPLM isn't on his radar - only yours. In fact, it's another choice on Mr. Normal's dial, so he actually benefits.

 

[TSBench]

Again, i'd point to the UK example: many of the pirate broadcasters there became legal - probably because the government was powerless and it looked better if the wildly popular pirates were at least broadcasting legally.

You may want to consider what gave rise to the UK pirates. It was the UK government monopoly on broadcasting. Which is the exact opposite of in the USA, where it is illegal for the government to own radio stations broadcasting to an in-country audience.

The way the US handled the licensing of broadcasters, allocation of fregs, and regulated the spectrum to assure orderly usage, is why the USA had more radio stations, and listeners more choices, in 1960 than the rest of the world combined. You may have a legitimate philosophical problem with government regulation, but this is one example where it appears to have worked, and for the benefit of almost everyone. If there is one aspect of interstate commerce that nobody seems to have a problem with, it's this one.

There may be situations somewhere in the world analogous to the US, but the UK certainly isn't one of them.

Regards,
TSB

 

[Signpost]

You may want to consider what gave rise to the UK pirates. It was the UK government monopoly on broadcasting. Which is the exact opposite of in the USA, where it is illegal for the government to own radio stations broadcasting to an in-country audience.

All of Europe was like that, wasn't it ? I'd forgotten, radio there was really boring, and explains why the pirates were cheered on. But Capital radio goes way back in London, curious how they were allowed to broadcast. For awhile I believe they were the world's highest billing station - I heard they were raking in 200 million Pounds a year back in the early to mid 80's, though i find that hard to believe.

Thanks for reading my earlier rant, though. I really don't support pirates' illegal activities - just trying to cast a different perspective on the issue.

 

[Neggy]

I shouldn't have to do this but..

When I said "google Ed Perry" I assumed that everyone knew who he is and what he has done. I guess this is how we can tell the radio people from the spectators. It was tongue in cheek.

besides keeping radio local, the story of how he got WATD on the air is what I should have referenced. You too can do what Ed did. And for those of you that don't know how it came to be, here is a link to WATD's website, where it is all laid out in various colors and white.

http://www.959watd.com/AboutWATD.asp

Do I need to explain General Tire, the F.C.C., the concept of unfit license holder due to cooking the books, and how WRKO got new ownership?

 

[Signpost]

Do I need to explain General Tire, the F.C.C., the concept of unfit license holder due to cooking the books, and how WRKO got new ownership?

I'm afraid you do - i don't know this story, and would love to learn about it. Never read the history of Ed Perry/WATD - it's a nice story. Reminds of John Garabedian - he was putting stations on left and right, just found the available frequencies and got 'em on the air.

 

[Signpost]

Re: Brocton pirate causes havoc at Logan

Looks like Ed Perry was a pirate himself at one point. From his bio posted at http://www.959watd.com/edperry.asp

"Edward and some friends built a larger and more powerful transmitter and began entertaining the entire town of Natick (and parts of Framingham) with rock and roll music. The FCC was, however, not entertained, and promptly shut down the station."

Oh, those mischievous teenagers! Always getting in trouble. Kind of amazing he was granted a license after getting in trouble with the FCC.

 

[Neggy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RKO_General

 

[Signpost]

got it. Looks like the process took decades. Thanks for posting!

 

[TSBench]

All of Europe was like that, wasn't it ? I'd forgotten, radio there was really boring, and explains why the pirates were cheered on.

I first got to Europe in the late 60's, and everything I heard on the radio sucked, except for AFRTS, which everyone listened to, including the locals. I didn't speak the languages, so I really don't remember, and wouldn't have known, if the local stations were government owned or commercial. I do remember, though, sitting in Pedro's, a gin mill in Tormalinas, listening to a Moroccan music station for an hour and thinking that maybe deafness wouldn't be such a bad thing afterall.

But Capital radio goes way back in London, curious how they were allowed to broadcast.

I was in London on reserve duty in the fall of 1973, and Capital radio was front page news, because it was going to be either the first or second (I forget which) legal commercial station in the UK, plus it had a celebrity factor since the actor Richard Attenborough was involved as the owner or one of the owners, I believe.

Interestingly for this discussion, Capital Radio went on the air on both FM and Medium Wave (for some reason the UK gov allowed a simulcast on different bands) and the MW signal was on the same frequency used by one of the Dutch offshore pirates (either Radio Caroline or Radio Veronique) which lead to government crackdowns on the pirates. I had an old MW radio in my seabag from my earlier tours and remember being mystified as to why the Brits could let the airwaves be so screwed up when this kind of crap almost never happened in the US.

, For awhile I believe they were the world's highest billing station - I heard they were raking in 200 million Pounds a year back in the early to mid 80's, though i find that hard to believe.

Yikes. IIRC, the pound in the early 80s was worth about a buck forty or fifty, so that would have them billing close to $300 mil in USDs, at a time when a top performing station in a major US market might have trouble billing $20 mil.
They were just about the only game in town for a number of years, but that figure seems pretty high.

I was back in the UK in the late nineties when one of my kids was going to college over there, and I think Capital Radio had fallen to the middle of the pack, but didn't seem to be hurtin' for advertisers, and was probably still pretty profitable. I think they are just FM now, 98.5 if memory serves.

Regards,
TSB

 

[Signpost]

I have no way of confirming Capital's income back then, but it made sense that being the ONLY commercial station in a city of 13 million, it could be the world's highest billing. Given that circumstance, Capital could conceivably have billed the revenue of 20 stations. It would be like Z100 being the only music/personality station on the air in NYC, with the other sticks all noncommercial NPR type programming. Around 1990 I inquired about jobs at Capital, and found out a position there paid the equivalent of $35,000 a year. Not much for such an expensive city and such a wealthy operation.

Today the London FM dial is filled with commercial operators, much like here. Off the top of my head, there's Heart, XFM, Kiss, plus the plethora of BBC channels which now have to compete for listeners, but don't play commercials, and don't need to raise money by begging (like NPR here does) - so I think BBC has the advantage thanks to British taxpayers. I listen to the readily available streams of Radio 1 and Radio 4 once in awhile.

While the US radio spectrum allocation in the 1960's was the model for the world to follow, the world has since followed. Now we have pirates in most US cities. There are still pirates in the UK, but I personally find what I hear on the radio over there to be more adventurous and compelling than the content available here. That's probably not so much a function of government regulation as much as the disposition of the listening population.

 

[WLYNWAZNgm]

British media

Do not forget that in Britain - believe this is still true - the people pay a media tax -
much like we pay motor vehicle excise taxes - which finances the government-owned media...

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

You're all absolutely right. Radio is a business, and has a right to earn money. They have the right to lay you off to curtail expenses. Pirates are trespassers who should be shot on sight. However, the FCC shutting down the ONE pirate who interfered with airline communications is an indication that all the other pirates have been "allowed" to broadcast for months and years despite the flagrant violation of the law. Perhaps it's not a very big deal to anyone except broadcasters.

That ONE pirate was quickly taken down because he was endangering lives. No one is "allowing" other pirates to have their way. There are such things are priorities.

If you only regard radio as a business, and can't acknowledge the intrinsic and artistic appeal of the medium, or its power to reach out and draw listeners in emotionally, then you're part of the problem. Furthermore, that mindset "i need to get rid of" doesn't apply to college radio, small volunteer stations like WOMR in Provincetown, religious radio, or even public radio. They have very different operating models compared to your corporate model, but at least they broadcast legally.

The intrinsic and artistic appeals of radiodon't mean a hill of beans if the stations don't make money. Once again: This is a business. Oh, and BTW: College stations, volunteer stations, religious stations and public stations still need money to operate. They are still businesses, whether you like it or not. They don't get their money from commercials, but they still need money to operate.

the main point I'm trying to impart is that the plight of the legal broadcaster generates no sympathy from the general public....In fact, it's another choice on Mr. Normal's dial, so he actually benefits.

Only until that other choice starts interfering with Mr. Normal's preferred programming from a LICENSED broadcaster. And, I'd like to see some proof of your assertion that the "plight" of a legal broadcaster (a curious term at best) generates no sympathy from the general public. Those people who built businesses from the ground up and had to struggle to make that business successful certainly will sympathize. Those people who appreciate a degree of professionalism and polish on radio programming will sympathize. Those people who can hear their programming clearly because the station they like is not being interfered with by other licensed stations certainly will sympathize.

 

[Neggy]

I was thinking on my way home today, that the agency that would be best at shutting down pirates would be the IRS.

Then maybe I.C.E.

 

[Signpost]

Those people who built businesses from the ground up and had to struggle to make that business successful certainly will sympathize. Those people who appreciate a degree of professionalism and polish on radio programming will sympathize. Those people who can hear their programming clearly because the station they like is not being interfered with by other licensed stations certainly will sympathize.

If that's true, then why are people abandoning radio in droves? Ten years ago at a stop light, when i heard music coming out of someone's car, I'd race to figure out which station they had on, and always found it. It's been at least 3 years since the last time that happened: they're not listening to the radio, instead it's their own music on now. Every car has a CD player, and it's much easier to make a CD than it was to make a cassette tape. Take the "T" sometime, or walk around the Esplanade - everyone's listening to iPods, not the radio. Apple's latest iPods did NOT include an expected FM tuner. And almost everyone I know is subscribing to XM, and won't shut up about how great it is. Statistics have shown radio's audience dwindling (by 5% a year?) for at least the past 10 years, but my own, personal, unscientific observations have me believing the audience is declining faster than statistics show. And just wait until WIFI gets universally deployed so you can get internet radio in your car - the latest Bridge report shows that'll kill satellite radio.

No, I have no proof, I'm just using common sense. Go ask the checkout girl at the supermarket. Ask the clerk magistrate at city hall. Ask anyone NOT in the radio biz: "Do you care if pirate radio stations are on the air without a license?" Hell, just ask if they listen to radio! 10 years ago "what station do you listen to?" usually got a response of "108" or "104". Now, when i ask that, it's usually: "I don't listen to radio." The kid next door who just graduated from High School told me that, literally, and furthermore: neither do his many friends. To these people: what's the difference whether or not the stations are licensed? In fact, distrust of large corporations is pretty widespread, these rebellious kids would probably think the pirate station was "cool" . And if it takes pirate to come on and do something that'll resonate with these non-radio listening kids - it would have to be something a licensed operater with too much to lose would never dare try - well, then the pirates might be doing the industry a service. That's not what I see happening, just being hypothetical.

It's not the fault of the radio industry (other than drastically increasing spot loads upon consolidation - that cannibalized radio in my opinion) - but it's more a function of changing times and technology. The kids I know NOT listening to radio have blogs, spend a lot of time on myspace and youtube, and actually seem to embrace a staggering variety of music compared to when I was a kid - when my only source of music was the radio.

Radio has been decreasing in relevance, has slightly declined overall in billing, and faces a very uncertain future. Hard pill to swallow, but maybe the pirates are just the injection that radio needs to keep an apathetic public interested.

BTW.. pirates need money to operate too. Electricity ain't cheap!

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

If that's true, then why are people abandoning radio in droves?...No, I have no proof, I'm just using common sense.

Damn right, you have no proof. Last figures from several sources state that 94% of the American population uses over-the-air radio at least once a week...not a statistically different figure than 10, 20, 30 or 40 years ago. Abandoning radio in droves? I don't think so. Maybe in your little corner of the world, but not in overall reality.

 

[Signpost]

h

Abandoning radio in droves? I don't think so. Maybe in your little corner of the world, but not in overall reality.

I'm not about to commission a study to prove I'm right and you're wrong. But if you can't accept the fact that radio listenership is in decline, you're doing the industry a disservice, because that sort of denial only continues the trend. Even in your corner of the world, which i presume from your attitude is the older side of the Boomer generation, time spent listening is down 2.3% from July 2004 to Aug 2007. My corner, the younger side of the Boomer world, it's down 14%. The attrition increases the younger you skew. I'm getting all this information from http://www.bridgeratings.com/

Sure, 94% of Americans hear some radio at least once a week, I read that too, but time spent listening is not what it used to be. Elsewhere I read that radio listenership right now is at a 27 year low, but I'm sure that statistic is open to selective interpretation.

The sky isn't falling - yet - but personally i love radio and would like to see it thrive for decades to come. But by not facing reality, you might instead be facing a premature retirement. (like the entire news staff at WRKO, y'know?) I find the fact that teens are not embracing radio quite alarming. You may not care, because by the time those teens are in their 30's, you'll be living off your pension, but I have to earn a living for a few more decades.