Spitzer's Office Will Charge Station Owners/Personnel

[dampier]

Some off hand remarks from Spitzer today and yesterday to the press announcing the web site press release and documents: Spitzer's office is moving in stages on the payola scandal:

1) National record companies - several major labels have been document dumping and the payola problem "is pervasive."

2) Station group owners - If management knew, station group owners will be prosecuted and "substantial fines" will be in order PER STATION. Apparently some of the e-mails don't just list DJ's but also PD's and comments about station/regional management. Oops. Criminal investigations for station groups is being handled by Ricardo Velez of the Criminal Prosecutions Bureau. Entercom and Clear Channel are mentioned in the documentary evidence, so could they be targets?

3) Individual on air personalities - referrals to the IRS and the NY State Department of Taxation are already part of the plan, but local district attorneys may also get copies. Velez is also heading up this and will be responsible for any local criminal referrals. Dave Universal's next move may be to a station in a country that won't extradite.

Spitzer says only NY stations/personalities will be under his jurisdiction, but you can be sure dozens of other state Attorney Generals are going for their piece. The Sony settlement is good for NY. Wait for NJ, PA, MA, CT, et al. They are all going to want their piece too.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by dampier on 07/28/05 02:37 AM.</FONT></P>

 

[SirRoxalot]

Jocks at risk?

> Apparently some of the e-mails don't
> just list DJ's but also PD's and comments about
> station/regional management. Oops.

I saw very few mentions of jocks, and no instances of jocks getting payola directly unless they were "Mix DJs" or syndicated program providers. The focus of the investigation falls on PDs, with the AG bloodhounds following the money trail up the corporate ladder.

What's the point of targeting jocks? They don't control "spins", and they don't make enough money to be worth the effort. The broadcasting and record companies have the deep pockets. String up a couple of PDs as an example, and the rest will fall into place.

 

[Bob1370]

Re: Jocks at risk?

> > Apparently some of the e-mails don't
> > just list DJ's but also PD's and comments about
> > station/regional management. Oops.
>
> I saw very few mentions of jocks, and no instances of jocks
> getting payola directly unless they were "Mix DJs" or
> syndicated program providers. The focus of the investigation
> falls on PDs, with the AG bloodhounds following the money
> trail up the corporate ladder.

This time you won't see air personalities figuring prominently in this, the way you did during the last payola scandal in 1959. The jocks have essentially no control over what they play and when they play it. Ironically, stations took control away from the air personalities and put the playlists in management's hands as a response to the last payola scandal, with the idea of minimizing the risk of corruption. What they appear to have accomplished instead, is just shifting the location of the corruption from the jocks' lounge to the front office.

> What's the point of targeting jocks? They don't control
> "spins", and they don't make enough money to be worth the
> effort. The broadcasting and record companies have the deep
> pockets. String up a couple of PDs as an example, and the
> rest will fall into place.

Now you've got the theory behind the current government strategy. They're going after the people who are responsible for corrupting the process and distorting what you hear played on the air. Unless a particular jock witnessed a payoff and can supply testimony on it (those will be few since they're largely left out of the loop), this time the air personalities are going to be bystanders to all of this. Some of them may be adversely affected if any stations end up losing their licenses and being forced off the air at the end of it all...but my guess is, there will only be a token number of station licenses pulled at some of the most blatantly corrupted local clusters, if any licenses get yanked at all.

 

[Desi_Bell]

Re: Jocks at risk?

my guess is, there will only be a token
> number of station licenses pulled at some of the most
> blatantly corrupted local clusters, if any licenses get
> yanked at all.
>


This unfortunately sounds so right. I don't know how much money Enterconm cycles into political campaigns, but I can't see Clear Channel getting anything more than a slap on the wrist for anything they MAY have done to promote the practice of payola.

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

Re: Jocks at risk?

Isn't Eliot Spitzer now considered the odds-on candidate to win the election for Governor in New York State next year now that incumbent Governor George Pataki has said that he will not run for re-election??

Could you imagine his commercials?

"Eliot Spitzer. He cleaned-up radio. He'll clean up Albany".

 

[talkinthewalk]

Does anyone know if Spitzer is going to go after the pharmecuetical industry next? Since they're guilty of the exact same practices the record industy is but deals in far more addictive, and in some cases dangerous, product than an insipid pop record. It'd be nice, but I doubt it.