WPST Phone Scam

[TGunn]

Another fake phone scam today heard .........on WPST..
Just by chance I tuned in to Chris and the Crew.. She reads a letter from some guy who says his wife found a kitten and is the type to take strays in and since they already have two cats she put out an ad to find it a good home. He asked if the Crew could help him out and do a phone scam on her.

Chris had her male co-host do the dirty deed..
The actress wife answers the phone and then the co-host says he wants the kitten..already has two cats..then these noises start sounding like several cats and he says its feeding time hold on.
Actress puts on this shocked response..and asks him how many cats he has.. Then she keeps chastising him for having so many cats. She wants her kitten to have a good home blah blah blah.. Eventually the phone hangs up.. and they never tell her she's been phone scammed by her husband and WPST.. Just some disclaimer comes on saying the people involved gave permission to be on air.


Anyone else heard this on other stations yet?

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

All of those are fake, nationwide. That, the "War of the Roses" bit, pretty much any controversial morning show bit you can think of... they're all fake. This is nothing new, either, it's been going on for decades. Stations would open themselves up to all kinds of lawsuits if they were actually doing these things with real people. Plus, most states have laws about recording telephone conversations, some of them requiring informed consent, which means the people on the line would have to be notified before anything took place that they were being recorded. Many stations do that regardless of their state laws just to be on the safe side. So any time you hear something on the radio in which the callers sound pissed off at what's being done to them by the hosts or their significant other on the line, you can rest assured: it's all for show, none of it is real, and someone less aware than you are is still buying the whole thing.

 

[Fakeem]

All of those are fake, nationwide. This is nothing new, either, it's been going on for decades. Stations would open themselves up to all kinds of lawsuits if they were actually doing these things with real people. Plus, most states have laws about recording telephone conversations, some of them requiring informed consent, which means the people on the line would have to be notified before anything took place that they were being recorded. Many stations do that regardless of their state laws just to be on the safe side. So any time you hear something on the radio in which the callers sound pissed off at what's being done to them by the hosts or their significant other on the line, you can rest assured: it's all for show, none of it is real, and someone less aware than you are is still buying the whole thing.

I wish the listeners of "Nephew Tommy" or whoever Steve Harvey uses knew this. I hate that part of his show, as it always ends up in a cuss fest that gets most of the segment bleeped. I always wondered why he hadn't been sued. Glad to know why.

 

[frankberry]

All of those are fake, nationwide. That, the "War of the Roses" bit, pretty much any controversial morning show bit you can think of... they're all fake. This is nothing new, either, it's been going on for decades. Stations would open themselves up to all kinds of lawsuits if they were actually doing these things with real people. Plus, most states have laws about recording telephone conversations, some of them requiring informed consent, which means the people on the line would have to be notified before anything took place that they were being recorded. Many stations do that regardless of their state laws just to be on the safe side. So any time you hear something on the radio in which the callers sound pissed off at what's being done to them by the hosts or their significant other on the line, you can rest assured: it's all for show, none of it is real, and someone less aware than you are is still buying the whole thing.

It's not State law, it's FCC Rules:

"The Commission's rule regarding broadcast of telephone conversations is set forth at Section 73.1206 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. § 73.1206.

Pursuant to this rule, before recording a telephone conversation for broadcast, or broadcasting such a conversation simultaneously with its occurrence, a licensee shall inform any party to the call of the licensee's intention to broadcast the conversation, except where such party is aware, or may be presumed to be aware from the circumstances of the conversation that it is being or likely will be broadcast. Such awareness is presumed to exist only when the other party to the call is associated with the station (such as an employee or part-time reporter), or where the other party originates the call and it is obvious that it is in connection with a program in which the station customarily broadcasts telephone conversations."

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

The FCC rule applies overall, yes, but there are state laws in addition to that. Many times, the FCC's rule -- particularly the part that says "or broadcasting such a conversation" -- is taken to mean that the station can inform the person on the line that they've been recorded after the conversation has taken place, and they can give their consent or refusal at that point in the call. Yes, that may be taking it out of context, but in practice, that's how it's been interpreted many times. Some states make it explicitly clear in their own laws that that is not to be done, that the informed consent must be given first. This is why it's been known for some time now in industry circles that Howard Stern has massive collections of recorded phone calls that he can't broadcast because the people on the other end of the line did not consent after the fact.

 

[frankberry]

You are wrong. The station must get permission BEFORE the conversation is recorded or put on the air live.

Please read the FCC Rules.

 

[Bill_981]

I agree with FB. If you read what he posted, which is exactly how the rule reads, it states BEFORE RECORDING, etc. That means, get the permission before starting the recorder. It's also a good idea to ask again once the recording starts, in such a way as to make it clear that permission was previously obtained. Somethng like, "You did give me permission to record, right?"

If you watched an early version of Big Brother's live show, where the houseguest was able to talke with a family member, the HG was told to ask for permission first thing, and you didn't hear the other person answer the phone. Only once the producer heard the OK, was the phone potted up. So having the recorder running then the phone is answered is a no-no, because you didn't have permission to record the "Hello?"

This has been an ongoing issue especially with morning shows. The meaning of the word "before" seems to elude them in the name of "creativity" and "excitement."

 

[Bob Eubanks]

We're talking about 20-something years ago, but I do recall Dennis Malloy back on Sunny doing actual phone bits. Granted, they weren't designed to be outrageous, just in good fun. And, to me at least, that made them more fun than any of the contrived stuff that's populating the airwaves today--the Jerry Springer-esque scenarios and faux drama.

 

[Ravens]

I've said it before, but it bears repeating. These phone scams are lowest common denominator stuff. They're not made for anyone who actually knows they're fake. If you fall for one, you deserve it.

 

[Bill_981]

And there are jocks out there that still do it, and think it's funny. Sometimes it is, but that doesn't excuse the rule violation. Remember the Miami jocks that got tagged for calling Fidel Castro and putting him on the air without first getting permission to do so? And the list goes on.

 

[Bob Eubanks]

Like anything else, there are listeners who find it entertaining. Nothing is universally liked or loathed, but these bits are generally going to continue so long as the audience, collectively, likes them. Of course, they're also not going to be concerning themselves (nor should they) over analyzing issues about rexording rules and other such matters.

 

[Fingers41]

john Debella is a tool!

 

[Steve Green NEPA]

While answering the phone one afternoon at a restaurant, me apron and all, I got a gag call from a station. They asked if we delivered food, and I said yes. Then the guy on the phone asked me what I thought was 'How many new customers do you get every week?'
I actually said, 'Shrug. Two, maybe.' This drew gales of laughter on the station's end.
Well, he had to explain for me that he'd asked how many NUDE customers we got each week. I was going along with it. But then, exhibiting small-market technique, he suggested that our place needed new phones for more accurate delivery orders.
That did it.
I no longer played along. I told him that he was the so-called professional communicator in this case and was the one getting paid to make himself understood clearly. I told him that he was the one who had to touch up his speaking and discussion skills, and that maybe then he'd be ready for the big time -- all the way to Shamokin radio.
And I said that I didn't mind if the station aired the call, but that if they had any guts they'd air the whole thing -- including my statement that not being informed beforehand that it was being recorded was illegal.
Well, we kissed and made up over the phone. The call ever aired. And the people I later met at the station were all good people. They're a fine station that deserves their listenership and their success. It's just that, in their zeal to be zany and trendy and maybe a little blue, they weren't aware of the limitations.

Lol -- one limitation was being unaware that the person they called had worked in radio for 26 years.