Re: Songs for sale. Entercom behind the scenes.
It is what it is...easy publicity for Elliot Spitzer during an election campaign. I just wonder if it resonates with the voters of New York State, or if maybe they're more concerned with their level of taxation, or the possibility of another terrorist attack in their state.
Of course, if Spitzer can save the people from exposure to Jessica Simpson music, he can't be all bad, right?
It's my understanding that the CD Preview shows were given
> proper sponsorship identification, they were run like
> commercials as part of the traffic log. Therefore this
> specific program would not be subject to federal payola
> laws...
>
> Like I said, it only relates to the NY state law regarding
> fraud.
>
> And yes, I did read all 67 pages and all of the exhibits.
>
> Take money from record companies, don't take money, I don't
> give a crap....as someone who read the whole thing, I was
> just trying to be helpful to those who hadn't.
>
>
>
> > > The problem with the CD preview doesn't relate to the
> > charge
> > > of payola. It relates to another charge of
> > fraud....that's
> > > strickly a NY state law.
> >
> > Eliot Spitzer only has jurisdiction over New York State,
> so
> > yes the lawsuit only relates to New York State. However, I
>
> > direct your attention to page 7 of the 28 page lawsuit.
> "22.
> > Federal Law also prohibits the undisclosed sale of
> airplay."
> > And then: "According to the Federal Communications
> > Commission, "payola" statutes are intended "clearly to
> > prevent deception on the part of the public growing out of
>
> > concealment of the fact that the broadcast of particular
> > program material was induced by consideration received by
> > the licensee."It's impossible for me to read the
> evidentiary
> > emails without agreeing with Spitzer's conclusion that CD
> > Preview and CD Challenge were thinly veiled, if veiled at
> > all, attempts to circumvent the law. They were clearl
> > attempting to manipulate charts and public opinion. Legal?
>
> > Perhaps. Perhaps not. Ethical? Absolutely not.
> >
> > I don't know if you downloaded, printed and read the
> entire
> > 28 page lawsuit and 67 pages of evidence, but I did.
> > Afterwards, I felt like taking a shower. The emails detail
>
> > precisely how much pressure Pat Paxton was under from
> David
> > Field to generate revenue under this program. There is
> > evidence that the requirement that GM's sign off on deals
> > was not to make sure that laws were complied with, but
> only
> > that PD's weren't "making bad deals." (Source: Page 50 of
> > evidence exhibit. Email from Pat Paxton to Dan Perseghi.)
> >
> > There's a particularly pathetic email exchange between Pat
>
> > Paxton and Tom Teuber
> > (page 54 of evidence exhibit) where Paxton responds to
> Tom's
> > complaints about last minute "CD Previews" having to be
> > aired in rated dayparts instead of being "buried"
> overnight.
> > Paxton accuses Teuber of "inciting others to your cause"
> (in
> > complaining about the implementation of CD Preview)by
> cc'ing
> > them on emails he sent to Paxton. Paxton asks for these
> > things to be discussed by phone instead of email. "Email
> is
> > easy to hide behind", Paxton wrote. Perhaps he knew that
> > email trails are dangerous.
> >
> > Then there's the email exchange between Paxton and Field.
> > Some disgruntled PD's called Mediabase to complain that a
> > lot of reported spins were really nothing more than these
> CD
> > Previews. They wanted Mediabase to stop counting them so
> > that they wouldn't have to continue implementing the
> program
> > which, they said, was generating listener and even client
> > complaints. Paxton tried to find out from Mediabase who
> > among his PD's complained. Field writes to Paxton: "Any
> idea
> > who did this?" Paxton responds: "Rich wouldn't tell me but
>
> > he said it was more than one person." Paxton sends an
> email
> > to his PD's: "If this bullshit happens again, what happens
>
> > next won't be pleasant." Paxton persuaded Mediabase to go
> > back to counting paid spins.
> >
> > In an email dated July 20, 2004, Mike Klein sends an email
>
> > to David Field cc to Pat Paxton, and RVP Steve Godofsky.
> > Subject: Norfolk "these (sic) managment keep firing my
> > friends like Amanda today I want to work at anther
> entercom
> > station not z-104. Don is taking record company money and
> > makesme help him. he will fire me if i do tell you this."
> > Spitzer's suit says no one looked into his complaint.
> >
> > Then there's Dave Universal.
> >
> > From
[email protected]
> > Date: 07/15/2003 05:34:27
> > To: Brad Davidson@Sony_Music
> > Subject: Do you need help on Jessica this week?
> >
> > Do you need help on Jessica this week? 1250? If you don't
> > need help, I certainly don't "need" to play
> it......thought
> > I'd reach out to one my new boys."
> >
> > There is ample documentation backing up Universal's claim
> > that Entercom executives knew exactly what was going on
> the
> > whole time and their feigned shock at what was going on is
>
> > outrageous.
> >
> > Do read the lawsuit and evidence. It's fascinating.
> >
> > You gotta hand it to Spitzer. When did he decide to file
> > this lawsuit? Two days before Entercom's management soiree
>
> > in Las Vegas! The theme this year is:
> >
> > "Changing The Game. What happens in Las Vegas... depends
> on
> > how you play the game." Spitzer evidently thinks they're
> > cheating.
> >
> > Love to be on a bar stool at The Ritz Carlton Las Vegas
> this
> > weekend!
> >
>
