Globe prints 3 excellent letters on DePetro fiasco

[Varulven]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ed...2006/11/08/power_of_words_and_radio_stations/

Here are some excerpts. Go to the above link for the entire letters:

DePetro revealed homophobia on his WRKO show by linking his disdain for Ross to her sexuality, and for that he was rightfully fired. But let's not follow his lead. If lesbian -- or Muslim, Jew, black, or Latino -- become slurs, he wins and bigotry rules. These are beautiful words; let's use them well.

GINA FRIED
Lexington



That question led to an illuminating discussion of the concepts of corporate ownership of multiple radio stations, the power of high ratings, hypocrisy, and what the phrase "money talks" means in the real world.

DAVE CLINE
Brookline

OF HUGELY greater significance than the remarks of one ignorant egomaniac is the power of a corporation -- a body whose individual operatives are unknown to and unreachable by the public -- to silence him and deny him access to the publicly owned airwaves. Ongoing in our present national life is the further concentration of such power into the grasp of fewer and fewer corporations.

DON QUINN
Newton


By the way, DePetro's attorney told him not to sue. "Sir, Please disregard me responding to your email."

John also wrote a more uptempo - nicer e mail, and for that I thank him.

JV

 

[bostonrose]

why not tell us what that email said?

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

OF HUGELY greater significance than the remarks of one ignorant egomaniac is the power of a corporation -- a body whose individual operatives are unknown to and unreachable by the public -- to silence him and deny him access to the publicly owned airwaves. Ongoing in our present national life is the further concentration of such power into the grasp of fewer and fewer corporations.

Of hugely greater significance than the remarks of one ignorant letter-writer is the startling ignorance on the part of some members of the public about the First Amendment and "access to the publicly owned airwaves."

If anyone thinks they own the "airwaves" (an artificial construct that doesn't exist until a transmitter is powered up), let them march into a radio station and demand to be put on the air. The laughter will echo through the hallways, because no such "ownership" or right of access exists at law.

No radio station owner is compelled by law or regulation to hire any particular person or grant them access to their microphones. However, by law, what a radio station programs is solely under the control of its owner, who cannot delegate such authority to any other party. A little education on these facts might begin to erase some of the appalling ignorance on the part of the public as to what constitutes First Amendment "rights."

So many have said that John DePetro should not have been fired for what he said, and that's certainly debatable. But too many have said that DePetro was denied some sort of right to speak on the radio, and that's quite simply a crock.

Oh yes, one more piece of ignorance by the letter-writer: The names of the owner(s) of all licensed radio stations are in the public record. Their identities are hardly "unknown to and unreachable by the public." Willful ignorance, when used to try to make a point, is of course another matter...

 

[Varulven]

RE: Don Quinn's letter

We've had this discussion before about the "public" airwaves, which are hardly public.

I tend to agree with Mr. Quinn regarding corporations "body whose individual operatives are unknown to and unreachable by the public.

Certainly the names of the license owner(s) are in the public record. Methinks Mr. Quinn is talking about the
people on the Board of Directors, and the "silent partners". Yeah, you can buy 1 share of stock and show up at a CBS board meeting - or go online and hear Rupert Murdoch board meetings, but these individuals - even with their names revealed - generally are a shadowy group who work in the best interests of the corporation, not the listener. One of the reasons I fight so hard for Public Access is that it is one of the last bastion's of Free Speech.

I particularly like the word "bastion" in regards to some of the cronies in Public Access. It reminds me of one of Howie Carr's favorite words. We all need a bastion from the ...tards


bastion

n 1: a group that defends a principle; "a bastion against corruption"; "the last bastion of communism" 2: a stronghold into which people could go for shelter during a battle [syn: citadel] 3: projecting part of a rampart or other fortification

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

Methinks Mr. Quinn is talking about the people on the Board of Directors, and the "silent partners".

Then he...and you...are still wrong. I suggest you...and he...read the following, relating to the public reporting of station ownership:

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/...cess.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/octqtr/47cfr73.3615.htm

The "I own one share" gadflys who buy their share just to harass other stockholders don't have to be listed because they exert no influence on the company other than making the occasional loud noise.

 

[raccoonradio]

A newspaper article said (big 'RKO advertiser) Harvard Pilgrim Health Care
complained about JD's anti-gay comments back in March and
asked that their spots be taken off during DePetro's slot.
WRKO complied. If you go to 'RKO's site you'll see they
(HPHC) advertise there, too. Right in between the "Podzinger"
and "Celtics schedule" bits on the site.

DePetro is asking they give him his show back, send him to
sensitivity training, and he promises he'll put Ross on
once per week so she can address her audience. Factors in
DePetro's dismissal, according to articles I've read:

--complaints from advertisers and poss. listeners
--low ratings--went to half of what they were...
--After the Fat Matt incident he was kind of put on
probation and WRKO feels he broke that probation
--Jason Wolfe (WRKO PD) feels it wasn't so much what he
said but how he said it ("tone")

Personally I thought DePetro was good on occasion. Not exactly the most "pro radio" voice but hey that didn't
stop Al Franken. But consider WRKO doesn't want to
p--- off sponsors or listeners, and certainly not the
Red Sox--as they're now the flagship of Red Sox radio.

The Sox almost wound up on Greater Media's WBOS (GM
backed away from their proposal plus I think Entercom
topped it) and some felt the Sox didn't want their
flagship (WEEI up till now) to be a station that
constantly criticized Sox ownership.

Now consider this: Henry, Werner, Lucchino, Epstein
are all liberals as far as I know. See pics of them posing
with Kerry on bostondirtdogs.com...Permission was given
for Queer Eye for the Straight Guy to film at Fenway
("Hi Theo!!!"--sound clip often played by JD).

Does Entercom/WRKO want to spoil its relationship with
the Sox? They spent big money to get the rights but if
a "controversial" talk host makes fun of gays, maybe they'd
withdraw from the contract...Notice also that since the
DePetro controversy, the "Scondras sound" seems to be
absent from Howie's show.

Would WRKO fire Howie for a similar offense? Maybe, but consider a) they'd give him a couple chances, and b)
Howie got higher ratings than DePetro. That actually could
be a factor in his firing. "Waiting for a good excuse..."

WRKO has to worry about complaints from listeners and
advertisers. Remember Stern and the FCC fines Infinity (now
CBS Radio) got? How about the fact that some stations
worry that too many negative things in their "public
file" could squash a license renewal?

There's a need for radio to be edge and controversial
but also for station owners to play it safe. WRKO
may feel it's time for the latter. Just my opinion...

Also re: the comparison to Dennis and Callahan:
that may have been first offense (got suspension). DePetro
had been suspended in July (IIRC) for the Amorello comment
and was warned he could get more serious action if it
happens again.

if JD can convince 'RKO to let him back on (maybe only
a weekday show) at the conditions he specifies, then
who knows...He may have some good points; as do they...

 

[Casablanca]

The problem dear Brutus is not in John DePetro but in the entitity known as Entercom, a bought and paid for mouthpiece of the Republicrat Party.

 

[tony r]

Boston needs a good radio talk show like WHJJ in Rhode Island from where DePetro came from. Thank Goodness he left, boring, nasty, self centered, spiteful, I think due to the lack of being able to discuss issues, except for his warped view of politics.

Now, HJJ has Helen, on a.m. then Howie, and Arlene, good guests, conservative, liberal, not only politics, but, many other areas of interest.

Boston needs a good talk show, like the ones I remember many,many years ago, but, a host who despite leanings, can discuss many issues.

Also, get rid of Doughboy.

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

The problem dear Brutus is not in John DePetro but in the entitity known as Entercom, a bought and paid for mouthpiece of the Republicrat Party.

Really? I assume you have proof of your latest baseless charge?

 

[TowerBuzz]

I agree that it can appear that way at times. I think it is not so much the republican party having paid for Entercom, while their chief officers many of whom are republican supporters ( as are many top execs at radio companies including cbs and clear channel), I dont think it trickles down to the local stations. It's simply about $$$, the simple path to listener involvement is to pander to the vocal segment of the audience. The conservatives tend to be more attentive to the media regurgitations of the right, it's a fact. Why do you think it had taken an operation like air America so long to appear? conservative talk radio has been around for a good decade plus, and liberals have been around even longer, so why has only the conservative side been largely represented at radio, and flourished? Air America was a decent idea but would never garner the type of borderline fanatical audience that conservative talk radio has because those on the left are a different animal. Yes they can be as filled with vitriole for the right as their counterparts have for them, and they may have more of a tendency to log onto moveon.org etc somewhat regularly but they dont crave the constant affirmation that they are right and everyone else is wrong. This is the secret to right wing tak radio, the audience (conservatives) need to be told that they are right (correct) costantly whereas those on the left do not seem to have the same need so no one had ever thought that left leaning talk outlets would gather as much and as loyal an audience, becuase that audience does not have the same need for such programming. The largest disservice that talk radio has done to this country is that it has made people think that all democrats are left wing, "liberals" and that all republians are right wing, bible thumpers. Neither is right, most intelligent people are squarely in the middle.