• 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

Chairman Carr asks networks to air 'pro-America content' to mark nation's 250th birthday

For Adult Standards, I was going to suggest Neil Diamond's "Coming to America"...oh, wait that song is about immigrating to the US. Better play it safe and stick to Kate Smith's "God Bless America".
 
I, for one, don't care what the holier-than-thou Chairman wants.

We're repeating the top 100 songs of 1986 American Top 40 countdown, hosted by that great American, the late Casey Kasem.
 
TheBigA said:
Of course it's in the public interest to do whatever the chairman wants.
Click to expand...
I would think that the 250th anniversary of our independence should be an opportunity to celebrate the perseverance and validity of a democratic republic.

No nation is perfect, but after a quarter of a millennium, it seems that we have done better than any other nation on the planet. While we have things that we want for the future, with national health care as one example, we have done a pretty good job so far, warts and blemishes and all.

As someone who has either lived in or worked in over 20 other countries, I find our shortcomings to be less than those of anyplace else and our desires to continue to improve to be greater than those of other nations.

Why not celebrate what we have achieved even while we accept that society is always a "work in progress".
 
PBS has already announced it will continue it's annual A Capitol Fourth, even though it won't receive government funding.

Every year, PBS has televised this huge celebration from the steps of the capitol, complete with fireworks display.

NBC will also do it's annual Macy's 4th of July Fireworks show from New York Harbor. They don't need to be reminded by the FCC.

As I said in post #20, these things are all eminently fundable. Advertisers want to support these shows. That's why they do them.
 
What did the networks do to honor the Bicentennial in 1976? Other than the all-day celebrations on July 4th? One of the big 3 networks could air an "American History Minute" during primetime. Much like the "Olympic Moment" that CBS would do in the weeks before the Winter Olympics (when they had them), or the Black History Minutes that were aired on TBS during February. CBS also did the Presidential Portraits in the '80s with Walter Cronkite.

I expect July 4th, 2026 will also be an all-day celebration on ABC, NBC, and CBS. Many remotes and live reports from all over the country.

Chairman Carr does seem to be stuck in 1976 when it comes to television operating hours, however...
 
TheBigA said:
That's not the point. The question is why does the FCC feel the need to get involved in programming?
Click to expand...
The Chairman has total freedom to express an opinion or a recommendation.

Remember Newton Minow and his "Vast Wasteland"? He certainly did not hide his views.

"Thereafter, it came as little surprise that after the election of John F. Kennedy Minow eagerly pursued the position of FCC chairman. Some observers nevertheless considered it unusual given his lack of experience with the media industry and with communication law.[8] In 1961 he was appointed by President Kennedy to be one of seven commissioners of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as well as its chairman." (Wikipedia)

He made that "Vast Wasteland" speech just a month or two into his tenure at the FCC, despite essentially no broadcast experience. Sound familiar?
 
davideduardo said:
The Chairman has total freedom to express an opinion or a recommendation.
Click to expand...

Not using my taxpayer dollars, he doesn't. If he's using government letterhead, he's the government, not an individual.

Minow was making a speech, not using the facilities of the FCC. Very different things.

Carr talks all the time. It's all BS. But this time, he included the FCC's Media Bureau and the PR department in his release.
 
TheBigA said:
Not using my taxpayer dollars, he doesn't. If he's using government letterhead, he's the government, not an individual.

Minow was making a speech, not using the facilities of the FCC. Very different things.

Carr talks all the time. It's all BS. But this time, he included the FCC's Media Bureau and the PR department in his release.
Click to expand...

Right. I suspect that Carr's statements were dictated by his boss. However, if he tried any enforcement actions, especially against the big players, his statements would be laughed out of court, even in most conservative jurisdictions. The U.S., unlike most other countries, has a long history of government non-involvement in radio and television programming outside of obscenity.
 
ted chittenden said:
The U.S., unlike most other countries, has a long history of government non-involvement in radio and television programming outside of obscenity.
Click to expand...
Define "most other countries". I have worked in about two dozen other countries, and in most, from Argentina to Mexico, the governments have about the same or less involvement in broadcasting than here.

The European nations are a different case: Eastern Europe was behind the Iron Curtain and as soon as it fell, private radio and TV took over dominant positions. In Wester Europe, governments dominated broadcasting well into the 60s with a couple of exceptions... yet once private radio and TV were offered, it became equally dominant just like Eastern Europe.

The exceptions are in totalitarian nations, like Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela in our Hemisphere.
 
davideduardo said:
Define "most other countries". I have worked in about two dozen other countries, and in most, from Argentina to Mexico, the governments have about the same or less involvement in broadcasting than here.

The European nations are a different case: Eastern Europe was behind the Iron Curtain and as soon as it fell, private radio and TV took over dominant positions. In Wester Europe, governments dominated broadcasting well into the 60s with a couple of exceptions... yet once private radio and TV were offered, it became equally dominant just like Eastern Europe.

The exceptions are in totalitarian nations, like Nicaragua, Cuba and Venezuela in our Hemisphere.
Click to expand...

In Canada, while private broadcasting is allowed, the CRTC (Canada's version of the FCC) still dictates what programming formats those stations are going to have. (I was going to link to the CRTC's website on this but it looks like that website is down.) It was because of the CRTC that the top-40 format took much longer to get onto FM in Canada--the government entity simply refused to allow any top-40 stations on the FM band until the late 1980s.
 
davideduardo said:
The Chairman has total freedom to express an opinion or a recommendation.
Click to expand...
We enjoy making fun of things here, and some just lend themselves to being laughed at. But David is right here, This wasn't a mandate; it was just a suggestion. Sure, it was at the bequest of his boss, and that itself will cause pushback. You can agree or disagree, but nobody said broadcaster's have to do anything.
 


Back
Top Bottom