scottsan said:
When Binsack got nailed, a reporter asked me (I bought time on WILK for a few years to do The Pet Guy Show) what, if anything, can radio stations do to "screen" paid programs like this to ensure nothing shady happens. The answer I gave was "nothing." How could you? In the case of Binsack, he had a contest where he was giving away a home. A listener won it, he made a big promotion out of it, and the listener got nothing. Sure it reflects bad on the radio station, but there really isn't anything the station can do to insulate themselves other than run the "paid announcement" disclaimer every 15 minutes to let listeners know this is not a XYZ station program. What are your thoughts? Do you think that these two instances will have stations thinking twice about putting these kinds of programs on the air?
Block programs like "colon blow" shows are a plague on the business. ("You can lose 25 pounds by cleaning the debris out of your intestines!") Money is tight these days and as a result, RVPs, GMs and SMs will take money from just about any vendor, especially one that puts cash on the line, up front. In this sense, GMs should be treated as if they are complicit with the hucksters, charlatans and
"Madoff Lite" shysters that pitch these schemes.
When I programmed a news-talk station years ago in a large medium market, I tried to hold the line on vendor shows. It wasn't easy. Considering how hard-pressed radio companies are these days, it's likely worse. The vendors played fast and loose with their claims, but usually didn't go over the line. However, there was a program that promoted a "cure for cancer," a supplement that would restore cancer patient's health. The program was hosted by a guy who claimed to be a doctor (I determined he was a PhD in animal biology, not an MD.) This guy bought a half hour block and had the balls to tell cancer patients they "could be cancer free" if they stopped taking the medications and cancer treatments that
their physicians had prescribed and instead bought the elixer that he hawked on the show.
I first heard this program the week that it began airing and was furious. It happened that one of my relatives was being treated for breast cancer at the time. Apparantly the Chief of Oncology at Roswell Park Cancer Institute, one of the nation's foremost cancer treatment and research hospitals, heard the program too and was more upset than I was. It was Monday morning. He called the station, got through to me and read me the riot act, medically, legally and ethically. He calmed down a bit when I told him I felt exactly as he did, especially because a relative was being treated for cancer.
I approached the GM and told him I thought the show was unethical and should be taken off the air. I gave him my reasons and some of the reasons the Chief of Oncology gave me. My GM said, "As long as the client pays for the time, the show is alright with me, I don't see a problem." I then asked, "If your daughter had cancer and she was on medication prescribed by a physician to treat the cancer, what would you think about this guy's claims? Would you take her off the medication prescribed by her doctor?" The GM says, "How do you know the stuff
doesn't work." What an imbecile!
The Chief of Oncoclogy was media savvy and knew about our company, the people who ran it and that it was publicly held corporation. It also helped that Roswell Park Cancer Center is well connected to all parts of the community: Banks and their clients, political movers and shakers, clergy and most of all, to its grateful patients.
When I talked to the doctor and told him there was resistance within our sales department to take the program off, but that he could "continue the dialogue with our GM" the doctor followed up. As a result, the GM did called me on the carpet. "You just
cost us $500 a week in billing." I expected it and was well prepared, "I think I just saved the station's license, spared you a lot of grief and saved your job. The next person the Chief of Oncology will call is our CEO." A member of the CEO's family recovered from cancer about three years earlier, so it was likely the Chief of Oncology would have received a sympathetic ear.
My GM just couldn't accept giving up the $500 a week in billing. The next question out of his mouth was, "What if we run the program at 4 a.m. instead of 6 a.m?" I actually laughed out loud and told him he was rolling the dice on his job, my job and the license. After about five minutes of deliberation, he begrudgingly agreed to take the program off the air.
Turns of the Chief of Oncology
did call the CEO, had a pleasant conversation and the CEO called my GM later that day. Through the grapevine, I was told the GM told the CEO, "I took that program off the air as soon as I became aware of it. It'll never run again. Damn the billing!" What a ******nozzle!
To his credit, the Chief of Oncology recounted his conversation with me when he first talked to our CEO and few months later, the CEO visited the station and pulled me aside to compliment the way I handled the situation. Clearly, he knew the GM was blowing smoke.
Unfortunately, there are GMs who think nothing of putting a vendor on the air, no matter what's being sold or the service that's being offered. PDs and OMs have to deal with a lot of crap these days more than ever, especially in smaller markets.
Allowing vendors to pitch shemes that steal people's money or their helth is wrong. Some people will argue "Caveat emptor" (buyer beware) and that "stupid listeners" should be held accountable too. But keep in mind that these hucksters often prey on the sick, elderly and uneducated, who will try just about anything to regain their health or their financial security. BTW some pretty smart people fell for Bernard Madoff's scam too.
