KLOS Sold - Now it's a Fact!

[ChannelFlipper]

Yes, everyone I know and everyone in my family knows what “tokenism” and “white priviledge” are. You described them well.

When you have a child who was chastised in school for speaking Spanish or told she needed “papers” or a green card to register in an LA school because she was Puerto Rican, get back to me.

As I have been saying throughout this thread, different perspectives, cultures an ethnicities see identical things differently. This is an increasingly important issue for all media as we are at the point where one perspective may even be seen as hostile by members of another, different group

What I described were multiple affirmative action programs that are designed to hire in large quantities people of color who were held to lower academic standards than their non-minority competitors. People like me had to work even harder to get there for just those reasons - spots were specifically held open that were not available to us. That is the complete opposite of "White privilege". And the next time I see the media not take the "minority viewpoint" will be pretty close to the first.

It is absolutely amazing to me that you put down America, the country that has provided you so many opportunities and benefits in your own life. Instead of using your own example to lift people up and be an example to them of the greatness of America, you use culturally offensive terms such as "White Privilege" that I am sure you are aware only serves to alienate and divide people from each other (and frankly, has no business being on a website such as this).

PS - before you go on saying there is another world that I know nothing about, I will tell you I spent several of my formative years growing up in an almost exclusively Hispanic neighborhood and school in Highland Park after attending kindergarten across the street from the Coliseum. I can guarantee you there was no "white privilege" going on in either place.

 

[davideduardo]

NYC, a perfect example. All you see are yellows on those major avenues.

LA is not NYC. It's always been pretty hard to hail a "free" cab on the streets of LA.

There is, as usual, a radio angle to this. NYC has about the only truly effective public transit in the entire country, and because of this the morning and afternoon drive audiences are much lower as a percentage of the universe than anywhere else in the US.

In the last survey where we had real data on "home" "work" and "car" listening, the average major metro had about 33% of listening in the car; in NYC it was below 25%.

You don't need a car in much of the NYC market. You can barely survive without one in LA.

 

[davideduardo]

Here is some truth: If the judge had a $1,000,000 check waiting for you at the top of the hill instead of jury duty service, you would have found a way to get there. As it is, you decided it wasn't worth your bother and it was a justifiable reason to shuck you citizen's duty.

Actually, what I did was sit on the sidewalk leaning against a building, using my cell phone to ask one of the promo teams to come from Hollywood as a favor to pick me up and take me home while the other retrieved my car and drove it there, too. I had gone a bit too far trying to "take the hill" and could not move any further.

One of the favorite subjects on talk radio KTNQ a few years later was "second class" treatment in LA city and county public offices. Like "Driving While Hispanic", getting government services was similarly seen as an area were services were not equally distributed. Over the course of years, the number of severe cases we documented and reported to authorities ranging from the country sheriff to the LA City Council was astounding; in the vast majority of cases it was seen by the higher-ups that fair treatment had not been in effect. I'd like to think that our efforts improved life for millions in the LA area.

By the way, I know of very few cases where on-air or programming executives of Hispanic targeted stations were ever, every seated on a jury. The "media affiliation" issue made one or both of the attorneys reject us. In about 16 or 17 times I have been called in the US and perhaps 20 times in Puerto Rico, I never heard a case for that reason. I've never asked anyone from non-Hispanic media if the same occurred to them. Michael?

 

[davideduardo]

What I described were multiple affirmative action programs that are designed to hire in large quantities people of color who were held to lower academic standards than their non-minority competitors. People like me had to work even harder to get there for just those reasons - spots were specifically held open that were not available to us. That is the complete opposite of "White privilege". And the next time I see the media not take the "minority viewpoint" will be pretty close to the first.

It is absolutely amazing to me that you put down America, the country that has provided you so many opportunities and benefits in your own life. Instead of using your own example to lift people up and be an example to them of the greatness of America, you use culturally offensive terms such as "White Privilege" that I am sure you are aware only serves to alienate and divide people from each other (and frankly, has no business being on a website such as this).

PS - before you go on saying there is another world that I know nothing about, I will tell you I spent several of my formative years growing up in an almost exclusively Hispanic neighborhood and school in Highland Park after attending kindergarten across the street from the Coliseum. I can guarantee you there was no "white privilege" going on in either place.

Trying to make America better is not to "put down America".

In my first radio job at WJMO in Cleveland, I joined much of the program and news staff in a trip to Newton, MS, to register voters. This was a gem of the Old South where Klansmen would go "poling" at night in Black neighborhood and near where other civil rights workers were killed a few years later at Philadelphia.

We went to Newton because we wanted to make things better. It was our "dream" too. But we had to recognize and get others to recognize that there was a better, fairer way. The status quo was not enough.

Radio did things like that in that era. WVON, WCHB, WJMO, WDAS, WOL, WDIA and many others called for change. It was the most patriotic thing they could do because they were asking for equal rights to truly be for all.

And I spent several decades involved with news/talk stations in Puerto Rico, where the alpha and the omega of any discussion was whether Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans would achieve something closer to equality as Americans under statehood or as an enhanced Commonwealth (which in itself is a horrible translation of "Free Associated State", the legal term for PR).

 

[davideduardo]

With all due respect, David, I believe you wanted to say Vietnamese immigrant from Westminster rather than Westchester.

Yep. Thanks for the correction.

 

[michael hagerty]

I

Actually, what I did was sit on the sidewalk leaning against a building, using my cell phone to ask one of the promo teams to come from Hollywood as a favor to pick me up and take me home while the other retrieved my car and drove it there, too. I had gone a bit too far trying to "take the hill" and could not move any further.

One of the favorite subjects on talk radio KTNQ a few years later was "second class" treatment in LA city and county public offices. Like "Driving While Hispanic", getting government services was similarly seen as an area were services were not equally distributed. Over the course of years, the number of severe cases we documented and reported to authorities ranging from the country sheriff to the LA City Council was astounding; in the vast majority of cases it was seen by the higher-ups that fair treatment had not been in effect. I'd like to think that our efforts improved life for millions in the LA area.

By the way, I know of very few cases where on-air or programming executives of Hispanic targeted stations were ever, every seated on a jury. The "media affiliation" issue made one or both of the attorneys reject us. In about 16 or 17 times I have been called in the US and perhaps 20 times in Puerto Rico, I never heard a case for that reason. I've never asked anyone from non-Hispanic media if the same occurred to them. Michael?

Been called three times. Released once because of my career, twice because they impaneled a jury before they got to me.

I have worked with two people who worked in media and wound up on a jury. In 48 years.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

I

Been called three times. Released once because of my career, twice because they impaneled a jury before they got to me.

I have worked with two people who worked in media and wound up on a jury. In 48 years.

Weather or not David would have been selected is completely irrelevant. Neither David, you, nor anyone else can know what their selection criteria will be. I once served on an attempted murder trial where the attempted murder took place just down the street from a childhood home. I told the attorneys that. They asked if I still had a good recollection/understanding of the corner in question and I said absolutely. I thought for sure one attorney or the other would kick me off - but they didn't.

Point is, nobody likes jury duty and the fact of the matter is that normally we are not judged by a jury of our peers, but rather by a jury of people who were not savvy enough to weasel out of it through the many lawful loopholes they have, or even worse, those that want to be there for lack of any other meaningful employment. In any case, it was a civic duty he chose not to perform that day. Assuming he is an intelligent and fair juror, which I fully believe he would be, he indirectly deprived someone of their rights. It may seem like trivial point, but it isn't to me.

 

[davideduardo]

Weather or not David would have been selected is completely irrelevant. Neither David, you, nor anyone else can know what their selection criteria will be. I once served on an attempted murder trial where the attempted murder took place just down the street from a childhood home. I told the attorneys that. They asked if I still had a good recollection/understanding of the corner in question and I said absolutely. I thought for sure one attorney or the other would kick me off - but they didn't.

Point is, nobody likes jury duty and the fact of the matter is that normally we are not judged by a jury of our peers, but rather by a jury of people who were not savvy enough to weasel out of it through the many lawful loopholes they have, or even worse, those that want to be there for lack of any other meaningful employment. In any case, it was a civic duty he chose not to perform that day. Assuming he is an intelligent and fair juror, which I fully believe he would be, he indirectly deprived someone of their rights. It may seem like trivial point, but it isn't to me.

You still are not noting that I was no longer in a condition that would have allowed me to serve anyway...

But the point does seem to be conclusive based on both Michael's experience and mine that in the overwhelming majority of cases "foreground" members of the media (on-camera, on-air, opinion makers like programmers) will be rejected summarily or by the attorneys. I know from long experience that members of the Hispanic media tend to be excused most / much of the time. I asked Michael to contribute his considerable experience about "the rest of the story" in general market electronic media.

I know my step brother, who was editor of a newspaper, was called many times and never impaneled. Same reason.

Speaking of rights, it's the accused right to not be judged by those their counsel feel would be biased on the case.

 

[semoochie]

I was grown before I realized that there was any prejudice against Hispanics, primarily because there were no Hispanics before that. They were "white"!

 

[davideduardo]

I was grown before I realized that there was any prejudice against Hispanics, primarily because there were no Hispanics before that. They were "white"!

Good point. The Census included Hispanics who did not define themselves as Black, Native American or Asian (yes, there are Hispanics in all those groups) were put in the "white" column.

The civil rights and EEO acts of the 60's and 70's created a need for statistics on Latinos so the laws could be applied. The Census Bureau dug up an archaic term, "Hispanic", which had meant "people from the former Roman province of Hispania" (Present day Iberia). They applied it, in the first definition, to people "now of or of the heritage of the culture that spoke Spanish".

Since the definition was not a racial one, it became a separate "are you Hispanic?" question that was sub-defined as being or having a heritage from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Spain or other Spanish speaking country". Again, unless otherwise indicated, Hispanics were counted in the "white" column racially in the 1980 Census, the first one with that question on it.

The definition has changed somewhat with every subsequent Census.

Continuing my fondness for anecdotes, when the 1990 Census was taken in Puerto Rico, all data was collected door to door in the home. When the Census taker came to my home, I yelled through the door, as was the custom, "¿Quién es?" and was told that it was "El Censo". The did not ask me the Hispanic question. I inquired and was told, "we mark that automatically depending on the way the respondent answers the door." So I got to be Hispanic in that Census.

 

[boombox4]

I don't mean to derail the thread, but is KCAL-FM (a rock station in Riverside I think, in the Inland Empire), audible in much of LA?

 

[michael hagerty]

Weather or not David would have been selected is completely irrelevant. Neither David, you, nor anyone else can know what their selection criteria will be. I once served on an attempted murder trial where the attempted murder took place just down the street from a childhood home. I told the attorneys that. They asked if I still had a good recollection/understanding of the corner in question and I said absolutely. I thought for sure one attorney or the other would kick me off - but they didn't.

Point is, nobody likes jury duty and the fact of the matter is that normally we are not judged by a jury of our peers, but rather by a jury of people who were not savvy enough to weasel out of it through the many lawful loopholes they have, or even worse, those that want to be there for lack of any other meaningful employment. In any case, it was a civic duty he chose not to perform that day. Assuming he is an intelligent and fair juror, which I fully believe he would be, he indirectly deprived someone of their rights. It may seem like trivial point, but it isn't to me.

ChannelFlipper:

It appears to me, reading David's post, that he has or had a disability severe enough that he was not only unable to make it to the courthouse, but also to make it back to his car and to drive himself back to the radio station. I think we should be sensitive to that.

Downtown L.A. 25 years ago was not the same place it is today. It's still not a great taxi town, but there were no Ubers, no Lyfts, government agencies were less likely to make accommodation for those with disabilities (nearby parking or regular shuttles if parking has to be at a distance) and the RTD was a shadow of what it has become since. And the technology we take for granted today (get an address, put it into Google or Apple maps, check the terrain, the distance from parking and possible alternatives) didn't exist then either.

 

[radio128]

I don't mean to derail the thread, but is KCAL-FM (a rock station in Riverside I think, in the Inland Empire), audible in much of LA?

The answer is no because it shares the 96.7 frequency with KWIZ, "La Ranchera", in Santa Ana.

 

[michael hagerty]

You still are not noting that I was no longer in a condition that would have allowed me to serve anyway...

But the point does seem to be conclusive based on both Michael's experience and mine that in the overwhelming majority of cases "foreground" members of the media (on-camera, on-air, opinion makers like programmers) will be rejected summarily or by the attorneys. I know from long experience that members of the Hispanic media tend to be excused most / much of the time. I asked Michael to contribute his considerable experience about "the rest of the story" in general market electronic media.

I know my step brother, who was editor of a newspaper, was called many times and never impaneled. Same reason.

Speaking of rights, it's the accused right to not be judged by those their counsel feel would be biased on the case.

The consensus I got from the people I know who've been called, made it to the stand for potential juror questioning and then were dismissed was that in every case, one or the other attorney (prosecution or defense, plaintiff or respondent) thinks he or she has a better shot at winning with a jury that is less inclined to question pretty much everything and to be well-informed as a matter of course. So (and there are certainly exceptions), the odds are pretty high that one or the other attorney will want the media person gone.

That was clearly the case the one time (of the three times I've been called) that I got that far, and I've passed that theory by pretty much every trial attorney I've met---and they've confirmed it. One side or the other almost always sees us as a liability.

 

[gr8oldies]

I worked the 2010 census and it was drilled into us many times that "Hispanic is not a race" and the "Hispanic" question was elsewhere in the form. If a respondent insisted on their race being hispanic, we were to redirect.

Good point. The Census included Hispanics who did not define themselves as Black, Native American or Asian (yes, there are Hispanics in all those groups) were put in the "white" column.

The civil rights and EEO acts of the 60's and 70's created a need for statistics on Latinos so the laws could be applied. The Census Bureau dug up an archaic term, "Hispanic", which had meant "people from the former Roman province of Hispania" (Present day Iberia). They applied it, in the first definition, to people "now of or of the heritage of the culture that spoke Spanish".

Since the definition was not a racial one, it became a separate "are you Hispanic?" question that was sub-defined as being or having a heritage from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Spain or other Spanish speaking country". Again, unless otherwise indicated, Hispanics were counted in the "white" column racially in the 1980 Census, the first one with that question on it.

The definition has changed somewhat with every subsequent Census.

Continuing my fondness for anecdotes, when the 1990 Census was taken in Puerto Rico, all data was collected door to door in the home. When the Census taker came to my home, I yelled through the door, as was the custom, "¿Quién es?" and was told that it was "El Censo". The did not ask me the Hispanic question. I inquired and was told, "we mark that automatically depending on the way the respondent answers the door." So I got to be Hispanic in that Census.

 

[davideduardo]

I worked the 2010 census and it was drilled into us many times that "Hispanic is not a race" and the "Hispanic" question was elsewhere in the form. If a respondent insisted on their race being hispanic, we were to redirect.

And the difference between the race question and the "Hispanic Question" tends to be horribly confusing to Mexican origin Hispanics.

In Mexico, the literal translation of race which is "raza" can mean not just the four separate physical races, but also "a group of friends or social circle" as well as a regional group with commonalities. It can also mean "breed" as in Corgis and Boxers and Yorkies.

It's common for a guy meeting friends at a bar or a game to greet them as "¡Eh, raza! upon arrival. So the word, for predominantly Spanish speakers, does not translate quite literally. And English only speakers who are not Hispanic will think the use of the word to indicate some form of reverse racism, which is untrue.

For example, the bus card and billboard campaign over 10 years ago for KLAX said, "El Cucuy es Raza". That meant that the morning show of El Cucuy de la Mañana was "where your friends are". And the station name, "La Raza", really means the same thing... your group, your pals.

 

[LKellerIII]

The consensus I got from the people I know who've been called, made it to the stand for potential juror questioning and then were dismissed was that in every case, one or the other attorney (prosecution or defense, plaintiff or respondent) thinks he or she has a better shot at winning with a jury that is less inclined to question pretty much everything and to be well-informed as a matter of course. So (and there are certainly exceptions), the odds are pretty high that one or the other attorney will want the media person gone.

That was clearly the case the one time (of the three times I've been called) that I got that far, and I've passed that theory by pretty much every trial attorney I've met---and they've confirmed it. One side or the other almost always sees us as a liability.

I was rejected for jury duty once by the defense because I said I worked in Human Resources management. I have no idea why, but probably had something to do with the nature of the case. The woman rejected just before me was the wife of a cop, and they couldn't get her out of there fast enough.

 

[LKellerIII]

What I described were multiple affirmative action programs that are designed to hire in large quantities people of color who were held to lower academic standards than their non-minority competitors. People like me had to work even harder to get there for just those reasons - spots were specifically held open that were not available to us. That is the complete opposite of "White privilege". And the next time I see the media not take the "minority viewpoint" will be pretty close to the first.

It is absolutely amazing to me that you put down America, the country that has provided you so many opportunities and benefits in your own life. Instead of using your own example to lift people up and be an example to them of the greatness of America, you use culturally offensive terms such as "White Privilege" that I am sure you are aware only serves to alienate and divide people from each other (and frankly, has no business being on a website such as this).

PS - before you go on saying there is another world that I know nothing about, I will tell you I spent several of my formative years growing up in an almost exclusively Hispanic neighborhood and school in Highland Park after attending kindergarten across the street from the Coliseum. I can guarantee you there was no "white privilege" going on in either place.

Pardon my second post on this thread this morning. I know from over 20 years of working in public sector that "affirmative action" is a double edged sword. I'm quite sure I got a job in my former agency because the department was predominantly African-American and female, and I'm a white male, so I ticked two boxes. I have also felt that I lost opportunities for the same reason, though I couldn't prove it.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

I don't mean to derail the thread, but is KCAL-FM (a rock station in Riverside I think, in the Inland Empire), audible in much of LA?

This thread needed to be derailed. Thanks!

can you hear KCAL-FM in LA? Not at all. Signal starts to fade right about the LA County line. Amazing how that works.

KCAL-FM also has a bit of history, but I haven' been in the I.E. for many years, so someone else is best to note it. Some of the DJs there have worked there for a long time, particularly "Darryl" who I believe is still there and if so, has been for decades. Even in the 80s I always thought he was a throwback to the 70s, and on the rare times I have heard him since, I still have the same impression.

 

[34james]

This thread needed to be derailed. Thanks!

can you hear KCAL-FM in LA? Not at all. Signal starts to fade right about the LA County line. Amazing how that works.

KCAL-FM also has a bit of history, but I haven' been in the I.E. for many years, so someone else is best to note it. Some of the DJs there have worked there for a long time, particularly "Darryl" who I believe is still there and if so, has been for decades. Even in the 80s I always thought he was a throwback to the 70s, and on the rare times I have heard him since, I still have the same impression.

Yes Darryl is still there. However the rock genre is 90's till now. They took out all 80's and 70's from the playlist.