 |  |  |  |  |
the
current
Monday
Report
below!
This week's report by Tom Hendricks of Musea
Payola
This ULA Monday Report shows what the FCC considers as
payola, and my ideas on how that extends beyond music to
publishing (and film) promotion on radio (and tv.)
The FCC has sent a basic response to my complaint about
Payola. I post it below with my comments on not only music
payola but how the same practices extend into publishing payola.
First some quick background.
Payola charges now are on the 4 major record companies
Sony/BMG Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group,
Universal Music Group, and EMI Group, that make up 80% of
the recording industry; and four of the largest radio chains that
control thousands and thousands of stations across the US:
(Clear Channel, CBS Radio, Entercom Communications, and
Citadel Broadcasting Corp.). The FCC will soon officially
address the industry wide payola problem.
I encourage anyone reading this to send your
comments/complaints to FCCinfo@fcc.gov
Let your voice be heard.
----------------------------------------------------------
FCC wrote:
You are receiving this email in response to your inquiry to the FCC.
Dear Tom Hendricks,
Thank you for contacting the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC).
Section 317 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
U.S.C. § 317, requires broadcasters to disclose to their listeners or
viewers if matter has been aired in exchange for money, services or
other valuable consideration. The announcement must be aired
when the subject matter is broadcast. The Commission has adopted
a rule, 47 C.F.R. § 73.1212, which sets forth the broadcasters'
responsibilities to make this sponsorship identification .
Tom Hendricks:
Note that the law is not limited to music. And remember that two
of the music companies involved, Warners, and Bertelsmann, are
major US publishers, and that two of the music companies,
Warners, and Sony are major film companies as well.
The point is that payola includes interviews with writers or
filmmakers of these companies if it is in exchange for 'money,
services or other valuable consideration'. Thus any interview
show on radio that interviews artists from these companies, while
not interviewing any independent authors, or filmmakers, is
just as guilty of payola.
We must consider radio interviews as a large part of the
promotion of any book or film.
FCC:
Section 507 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. § 508, requires
that, when anyone provides or promises to provide money, services
or other consideration to someone to include program matter in a
broadcast, that fact must be disclosed in advance of the broadcast,
ultimately to the station over which the matter is to be aired. Both
the person providing or promising to provide the money, services or
other consideration and the recipient are obligated to make this
disclosure so that the station may broadcast the sponsorship
identification announcement required by Section 317 of the
Communications Act.
Failure to disclose such payment or the providing of services or
other consideration, or promise to provide them, is commonly
referred to as ``payola'' and is punishable by a fine of not more
than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than one year
or both. These criminal penalties bring violations within the
purview of the Department of Justice.
Tom Hendricks:
The FCC rules are clear. It is also clear that the payola does not
stop with music companies. The same parent companies of these
music companies also control film, tv, book publishing, and
numerous media outlets. Their policies for promoting book
authors, or filmmakers or film stars, is the same as their
policies for promoting musicians. Radio shows that interview
their authors, and film stars exclusively, while at the same time
not interviewing independent authors, and film stars etc. suggest
that payolais more widespread than just music payola.
Three of the 4 main record companies accused of payola are also
involved in film and publishing.
How is it that the FCC sees the illegal 'money, services or other
considerations' from these companies to be exclusively for music
and not be part of the same promotion process for their films and
books?
Thus I ask the FCC to look into the same payola type practices
from the same companies in other art companies that these same
companies hold. Surely the fact that no book show ever talks
about independent publishing - example the entire zine
community of thousands of thousands of independent publishers
over the last 2 decades - shows that these companies payola music
policies are rampant in promotion of publishing and filmmaking
on radio - and tv too.
Also I ask that these companies:
1. Lose their licenses to broadcast in the case of radio or tv
broadcasters.
2. Be threatened with jail terms if they are not totally
forthcoming about these payola policies.
FCC:
More information can be viewed at:
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/broadcast/sponsid.html
Thank you again for your comments.
Mike Landis
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Consumer Inquiries & Complaints Division
1-888-225-5322
===============================================
Tom Hendricks is the editor of www.Musea.us
===============================================
GO HERE TO ENTER THE MONDAY REPORT BOX.
