• 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

Pugs & Kelly Story Reminds Me Of WFAA

S

spymovie7

>Dial had heard that P&K (who were Dial's lackey's) were always saying "nasty" >things about him so he taped them without there consent. Well, Kelly who was >knocked up at the time BLEW! and sued.

This reminds me of something that happened at WFAA Radio when I was working there in 1978 as a Board Operator.

The station had a reel-to-reel recorder called a "logger tape." The engineer had adjusted its speed so that a 24 hour broadcast day could be recorded on one large reel of tape. I believe that it was recording at half the speed that a cassette records at.

One time when I was changing the reel of tape, I decided to plug in the headphones to see what the fidelity was like.

It was a stereo reel-to-reel, and to my surprise, the left channel was recording WFAA's broadcast signal, while the right channel was connected to a microphone in the studio right next to the board operator. It was obviously done so that if there was a screwup on the air, they could see what was going on in the studio at the time.

I demonstrated how the logger recorder had "bugged" the control room to the other board operators, and put in my 2-week notice that day.

If they had let us know in advance that they were bugging the studio in that fashion, it would have been okay. The fact that they had invaded my privacy in such a fashion was completely inexcusable.
 
> >Dial had heard that P&K (who were Dial's lackey's) were
> always saying "nasty" >things about him so he taped them
> without there consent. Well, Kelly who was >knocked up at
> the time BLEW! and sued.
>
> This reminds me of something that happened at WFAA Radio
> when I was working there in 1978 as a Board Operator.
>
> The station had a reel-to-reel recorder called a "logger
> tape." The engineer had adjusted its speed so that a 24
> hour broadcast day could be recorded on one large reel of
> tape. I believe that it was recording at half the speed
> that a cassette records at.
>
> One time when I was changing the reel of tape, I decided to
> plug in the headphones to see what the fidelity was like.
>
> It was a stereo reel-to-reel, and to my surprise, the left
> channel was recording WFAA's broadcast signal, while the
> right channel was connected to a microphone in the studio
> right next to the board operator. It was obviously done so
> that if there was a screwup on the air, they could see what
> was going on in the studio at the time.
>
> I demonstrated how the logger recorder had "bugged" the
> control room to the other board operators, and put in my
> 2-week notice that day.
>
> If they had let us know in advance that they were bugging
> the studio in that fashion, it would have been okay. The
> fact that they had invaded my privacy in such a fashion was
> completely inexcusable.
>
Belo gate.
 
> > >Dial had heard that P&K (who were Dial's lackey's) were
> > always saying "nasty" >things about him so he taped them
> > without there consent. Well, Kelly who was >knocked up at
> > the time BLEW! and sued.
> >
> > This reminds me of something that happened at WFAA Radio
> > when I was working there in 1978 as a Board Operator.
> >
> > The station had a reel-to-reel recorder called a "logger
> > tape." The engineer had adjusted its speed so that a 24
> > hour broadcast day could be recorded on one large reel of
> > tape. I believe that it was recording at half the speed
> > that a cassette records at.
> >
> > One time when I was changing the reel of tape, I decided
> to
> > plug in the headphones to see what the fidelity was like.
> >
> > It was a stereo reel-to-reel, and to my surprise, the left
>
> > channel was recording WFAA's broadcast signal, while the
> > right channel was connected to a microphone in the studio
> > right next to the board operator. It was obviously done
> so
> > that if there was a screwup on the air, they could see
> what
> > was going on in the studio at the time.
> >
> > I demonstrated how the logger recorder had "bugged" the
> > control room to the other board operators, and put in my
> > 2-week notice that day.
> >
> > If they had let us know in advance that they were bugging
> > the studio in that fashion, it would have been okay. The
> > fact that they had invaded my privacy in such a fashion
> was
> > completely inexcusable.
> >
> Belo gate.
>

Statute of limitations? Anyone? Brian Loncar? Hudson Henley? Johnny Cochran (sorry)? Thomas Mesereau?????
 
Spying on Jocks

I once had an engineer tell me that the GM of a particular station had him rig the mics so that he(Gm) could listen in to what was going on in studio( since the mics are somewhat hot for recording listener calls and the like.) Anytime you talked near the mic, you could be heard. Anyone ever experienced this before? Geez..and I thought cameras in the hallways were bad.


> >Dial had heard that P&K (who were Dial's lackey's) were
> always saying "nasty" >things about him so he taped them
> without there consent. Well, Kelly who was >knocked up at
> the time BLEW! and sued.
>
> This reminds me of something that happened at WFAA Radio
> when I was working there in 1978 as a Board Operator.
>
> The station had a reel-to-reel recorder called a "logger
> tape." The engineer had adjusted its speed so that a 24
> hour broadcast day could be recorded on one large reel of
> tape. I believe that it was recording at half the speed
> that a cassette records at.
>
> One time when I was changing the reel of tape, I decided to
> plug in the headphones to see what the fidelity was like.
>
> It was a stereo reel-to-reel, and to my surprise, the left
> channel was recording WFAA's broadcast signal, while the
> right channel was connected to a microphone in the studio
> right next to the board operator. It was obviously done so
> that if there was a screwup on the air, they could see what
> was going on in the studio at the time.
>
> I demonstrated how the logger recorder had "bugged" the
> control room to the other board operators, and put in my
> 2-week notice that day.
>
> If they had let us know in advance that they were bugging
> the studio in that fashion, it would have been okay. The
> fact that they had invaded my privacy in such a fashion was
> completely inexcusable.
>
 
> > > >Dial had heard that P&K (who were Dial's lackey's) were
>
> > > always saying "nasty" >things about him so he taped them
>
> > > without there consent. Well, Kelly who was >knocked up
> at
> > > the time BLEW! and sued.
> > >
> > > This reminds me of something that happened at WFAA Radio
>
> > > when I was working there in 1978 as a Board Operator.
> > >
> > > The station had a reel-to-reel recorder called a "logger
>
> > > tape." The engineer had adjusted its speed so that a 24
>
> > > hour broadcast day could be recorded on one large reel
> of
> > > tape. I believe that it was recording at half the speed
>
> > > that a cassette records at.
> > >
> > > One time when I was changing the reel of tape, I decided
>
> > to
> > > plug in the headphones to see what the fidelity was
> like.
> > >
> > > It was a stereo reel-to-reel, and to my surprise, the
> left
> >
> > > channel was recording WFAA's broadcast signal, while the
>
> > > right channel was connected to a microphone in the
> studio
> > > right next to the board operator. It was obviously done
>
> > so
> > > that if there was a screwup on the air, they could see
> > what
> > > was going on in the studio at the time.
> > >
> > > I demonstrated how the logger recorder had "bugged" the
> > > control room to the other board operators, and put in my
>
> > > 2-week notice that day.
> > >
> > > If they had let us know in advance that they were
> bugging
> > > the studio in that fashion, it would have been okay.
> The
> > > fact that they had invaded my privacy in such a fashion
> > was
> > > completely inexcusable.
> > >
> > Belo gate.
> >
>
> Statute of limitations? Anyone? Brian Loncar? Hudson
> Henley? Johnny Cochran (sorry)? Thomas Mesereau?????
>
Begs (demands) the question, "How many stations are so rigged right now."
 
> Begs (demands) the question, "How many stations are so
> rigged right now."
>

The conference room at the Madison building used to have microphones partially hidden above the conference table. The answer I got was they were for "focus groups" but I couldn't get this image out of my head of someone sitting with headphones on listening in. Paranoia? Sure. Justified paranoia? Absolutely.
 
Privacy? What?

> If they had let us know in advance that they were bugging
> the studio in that fashion, it would have been okay. The
> fact that they had invaded my privacy in such a fashion was
> completely inexcusable.
>


Wait... A brodcast company has a mic in a studio and records what that mic picks up, and that's invading your privacy? I don't think so.

That's like saying your company invaded your privacy by reading your email. Or that they invaded your privacy by monitoring your phone calls.

I would imagine that anything said in a broadcast studio is owned by the company. I know that any idea that I have that I work on while on the company clock or on a company computer or on a company phone belongs to my company. As I am not an on-air personality, I don't do any talking in any studios, so I don't know how that works, but I would imagine that if I talk about it on a company mic, or speak where a company mic can pick me up, then it's my own damned fault.

Anyone agree or disagree? And why?<P ID="signature">______________
"Right you are, Ken."</P>
 
The foldback transmitter on 450.2375 that sent IFB back to KZPS remotes was often left in transmit constantly. One could hear everything the jock said or did, as the mic. in FM control was always hot. If he talked on the speakerphone, you got it ALL!

I had a lot of fun with that!


> > Begs (demands) the question, "How many stations are so
> > rigged right now."
> >
>
> The conference room at the Madison building used to have
> microphones partially hidden above the conference table.
> The answer I got was they were for "focus groups" but I
> couldn't get this image out of my head of someone sitting
> with headphones on listening in. Paranoia? Sure.
> Justified paranoia? Absolutely.
>
 
Re: Privacy? What?

Keep in mind we are talking about jocks...I know I have heard conversations that would stand your hair on end!LOL This is especially true if you are doing a morning show...you talk to one another during songs and there is no telling what is said. It is one thing to be broadcasting, yet another to be chatting with your partner. You are right about the company emails and phone calls, but compare this to a mic being at your desk picking up every conversation that you have( since the control room is essentially the jocks office.)


> > If they had let us know in advance that they were bugging
> > the studio in that fashion, it would have been okay. The
> > fact that they had invaded my privacy in such a fashion
> was
> > completely inexcusable.
> >
>
>
> Wait... A brodcast company has a mic in a studio and
> records what that mic picks up, and that's invading your
> privacy? I don't think so.
>
> That's like saying your company invaded your privacy by
> reading your email. Or that they invaded your privacy by
> monitoring your phone calls.
>
> I would imagine that anything said in a broadcast studio is
> owned by the company. I know that any idea that I have that
> I work on while on the company clock or on a company
> computer or on a company phone belongs to my company. As I
> am not an on-air personality, I don't do any talking in any
> studios, so I don't know how that works, but I would imagine
> that if I talk about it on a company mic, or speak where a
> company mic can pick me up, then it's my own damned fault.
>
> Anyone agree or disagree? And why?
>
 
Re: Privacy? What?

> but compare this
> to a mic being at your desk picking up every conversation
> that you have( since the control room is essentially the
> jocks office.)

So, the jock is on company time, in a company 'office', working with company equipment, and this jock expects that they have privacy?

I'm sorry, maybe it's just me, but I don't see your point. I understand that things are said when the mic's are off, and that there are a helluva lot of 'blue' conversations that happen, but do you seriously believe that your employer doesn't have a right to hear everything?

There is a difference between on-air conversation and chatting with your partner off-air. But there is a difference between bashing the bosses in the office and bashing the bosses at the bar down the street. You have more of a right to privacy in the bar.<P ID="signature">______________
"Right you are, Ken."</P>
 
Re: Privacy? What?

True...there is no true privacy at work....but a bug is a bug is a bug no matter the form and a little nerve racking.My big fear was always letting something slip on air..the thought of having to also worry about that "off" air would be maddening.:)


> > but compare this
> > to a mic being at your desk picking up every conversation
> > that you have( since the control room is essentially the
> > jocks office.)
>
> So, the jock is on company time, in a company 'office',
> working with company equipment, and this jock expects that
> they have privacy?
>
> I'm sorry, maybe it's just me, but I don't see your point.
> I understand that things are said when the mic's are off,
> and that there are a helluva lot of 'blue' conversations
> that happen, but do you seriously believe that your employer
> doesn't have a right to hear everything?
>
> There is a difference between on-air conversation and
> chatting with your partner off-air. But there is a
> difference between bashing the bosses in the office and
> bashing the bosses at the bar down the street. You have
> more of a right to privacy in the bar.
>
 
> The foldback transmitter on 450.2375 that sent IFB back to
> KZPS remotes was often left in transmit constantly. One
> could hear everything the jock said or did, as the mic. in
> FM control was always hot. If he talked on the speakerphone,
> you got it ALL!
>
> I had a lot of fun with that!
>
>
> > > Begs (demands) the question, "How many stations are so
> > > rigged right now."
> > >
> >
> > The conference room at the Madison building used to have
> > microphones partially hidden above the conference table.
> > The answer I got was they were for "focus groups" but I
> > couldn't get this image out of my head of someone sitting
> > with headphones on listening in. Paranoia? Sure.
> > Justified paranoia? Absolutely.
> >
>
For the days when a room had bugs the exterminator was called in.
 
Re: Privacy? What?

> I'm sorry, maybe it's just me, but I don't see your point.

My point is that they should have let us know in advance that there might be hidden cameras or microphones in the building. They didn't have to show us where, but just let us know.

When I picked up my last check at WFAA Radio, Joe Holstead and Jess Smith supported the idea that they'd had this "bug" on the logger tape, and said that I'd had no right to plug my headphones into the recorder.

Ironically, despite the fact that I'd quit to get away from these two characters, three years later when I was doing weekend News at K104, after I'd been working there about a year, Jess Smith was hired as News Director.
 
Re: Privacy? What?

> > If they had let us know in advance that they were bugging
> > the studio in that fashion, it would have been okay. The
> > fact that they had invaded my privacy in such a fashion
> was
> > completely inexcusable.
> >
>
>
> Wait... A brodcast company has a mic in a studio and
> records what that mic picks up, and that's invading your
> privacy? I don't think so.
>
> That's like saying your company invaded your privacy by
> reading your email. Or that they invaded your privacy by
> monitoring your phone calls.
>
> I would imagine that anything said in a broadcast studio is
> owned by the company. I know that any idea that I have that
> I work on while on the company clock or on a company
> computer or on a company phone belongs to my company. As I
> am not an on-air personality, I don't do any talking in any
> studios, so I don't know how that works, but I would imagine
> that if I talk about it on a company mic, or speak where a
> company mic can pick me up, then it's my own damned fault.
>
> Anyone agree or disagree? And why?


Recently, courts have ruled that e-mails are not private communications when transmitted over company computers.

I have mixed feelings about it just as I do phone monitoring.

Just a warning: Be careful about what you type into or look at on your company's or station's computer.

Even if you erase the history and all the rest, it could remain on the hard drive for a period of time.
 
Re: Privacy? What?

Unless I am mistaken, commercial radio facilities are private property. Therefore the owner has a right to install whatever they want at their discretion without disclosing this information to employees.

R

> My point is that they should have let us know in advance
> that there might be hidden cameras or microphones in the
> building. They didn't have to show us where, but just let
> us know.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by RobertBass on 07/02/05 12:40 AM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: Privacy? What?

> Unless I am mistaken, commercial radio facilities are
> private property. Therefore the owner has a right to
> install whatever they want at their discretion without
> disclosing this information to employees.


EXACTLY! Thank you, R...<P ID="signature">______________
"Right you are, Ken."</P>
 
Re: Privacy? What?

Ok, if that's the case, then why is it that a mother was charged for phone tapping her daughter's phone? It's her house, her property, her phone line... Why did that not stand up in court?

Then again, in Texas as long as one party member of the conversation is aware, it doesn't matter who else is involved and if they're aware.

I do all my Internet side stuff from work on my laptop. They don't have a problem with it, however, I know that they collect the packets to see where I have been over their network. I can still get fired for looking at inappropriate material on my laptop over their network. They still own the pipe line.

When I do email, all sensitive mail is done through secured HTTPS. That gives me a little more security, it's encrypted, but that will at least keep the honest out.

Where ever there is a mic or any type of recording equipment, I just assume that they can record anything thing that I say or do. You take your chances in a public venue for ease dropping, what makes a room filled with recording equipment make it any different?

So today is no different than it was yesteryear. If someone wants to ease drop bad enough, they'll do it. Cordless phones are still up for grabs! Remember the Dallas Council Member who was busted for his phone conversations that was picked up off his cordless phone? It was a legal recording cause he was broadcasting on unprotected freq. and it's was considered as a public broadcast as far as the FCC was concerned.

-Doc

> > Unless I am mistaken, commercial radio facilities are
> > private property. Therefore the owner has a right to
> > install whatever they want at their discretion without
> > disclosing this information to employees.
>
>
> EXACTLY! Thank you, R...
>
 
Crashing the Russ Martin Show Live

This just got me thinking... What's to stop some one from sitting out in the parking lot of the KLLI with a scanner looking for the FRS freq. that the RMS uses to talk on the 2-way?

All you would have to do is get a scanner in the FRS range (can't remember with out pulling the list) get the PL tone they use to block all other traffic and TX across the 2-way while they're live and you can drop all kinds of bombs on KLLI's dime.

Damn, I guess I just gave a guide how to hack the RMS like they did for tampering with the milk supply. Granted, this is for informational purposes only. Use of this information to create harm or personal gain is at your own risk and not that of Doc Bryce or anyone associated with Doc Bryce.

Just the thought of doing it, is enough to not make me want to do it. Not only that, I don't have time to go hacking people's public Freq. I got that out of my system as a teen ;)

Besides, I doubt anyone in here would stoop that low. We're are professionals!

-Doc





> The foldback transmitter on 450.2375 that sent IFB back to
> KZPS remotes was often left in transmit constantly. One
> could hear everything the jock said or did, as the mic. in
> FM control was always hot. If he talked on the speakerphone,
> you got it ALL!
>
> I had a lot of fun with that!
>
>
> > > Begs (demands) the question, "How many stations are so
> > > rigged right now."
> > >
> >
> > The conference room at the Madison building used to have
> > microphones partially hidden above the conference table.
> > The answer I got was they were for "focus groups" but I
> > couldn't get this image out of my head of someone sitting
> > with headphones on listening in. Paranoia? Sure.
> > Justified paranoia? Absolutely.
> >
>
 
Re: Crashing the Russ Martin Show Live

> This just got me thinking... What's to stop some one from
> sitting out in the parking lot of the KLLI with a scanner
> looking for the FRS freq. that the RMS uses to talk on the
> 2-way?
>
> All you would have to do is get a scanner in the FRS range
> (can't remember with out pulling the list) get the PL tone
> they use to block all other traffic and TX across the 2-way
> while they're live and you can drop all kinds of bombs on
> KLLI's dime.
>
> Damn, I guess I just gave a guide how to hack the RMS like
> they did for tampering with the milk supply. Granted, this
> is for informational purposes only. Use of this information
> to create harm or personal gain is at your own risk and not
> that of Doc Bryce or anyone associated with Doc Bryce.
>
> Just the thought of doing it, is enough to not make me want
> to do it. Not only that, I don't have time to go hacking
> people's public Freq. I got that out of my system as a teen
> ;)
>
> Besides, I doubt anyone in here would stoop that low. We're
> are professionals!
>
> -Doc


Right.

So when are you going to do it?

I want to hear it :)



>
>
>
>
>
> > The foldback transmitter on 450.2375 that sent IFB back to
>
> > KZPS remotes was often left in transmit constantly. One
> > could hear everything the jock said or did, as the mic. in
>
> > FM control was always hot. If he talked on the
> speakerphone,
> > you got it ALL!
> >
> > I had a lot of fun with that!
> >
> >
> > > > Begs (demands) the question, "How many stations are so
>
> > > > rigged right now."
> > > >
> > >
> > > The conference room at the Madison building used to have
>
> > > microphones partially hidden above the conference table.
>
> > > The answer I got was they were for "focus groups" but I
> > > couldn't get this image out of my head of someone
> sitting
> > > with headphones on listening in. Paranoia? Sure.
> > > Justified paranoia? Absolutely.
> > >
> >
>
 
Re: Crashing the Russ Martin Show Live

> > Besides, I doubt anyone in here would stoop that low.
> We're
> > are professionals!
> >
> > -Doc
>
>
> Right.
>
> So when are you going to do it?
>
> I want to hear it :)
>
>

Yeah, let's go Doc! :)
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom