"misterfact" wrote in message
...
(misterfact) wrote in message
...
I'll post about 50 of them here in the next few weeks.

PLEASE DON'T!!


Well let's see. Enough theorizing! Heres another actual case:

A case from where, please--What's the source?

A county government jurisdiction proposed a law to ban the use of a
consumer product. This proposed ban made sense because according to
the product safety data sheet on the product- "continuous breathing of
the fumes can cause permanent liver and reproductive cell damage."

The talk show host called the proposed government ban "stupid". He
presented a false

How do you know the analysis was fake? Source, please?

chemical analysis of the product which "PROOVED"
that the product's fumes were NON-POISONOUS! It is quite obvious that
by lying about the health risks-

How do you know he was lying? Why is it obvious?

the host's intentions were to get the
public to apply pressure in getting that ban lifted- because the ban
had no health safety basis!

Well- let's see if that example gets any of your interest. Should we
have this talk show host investigated for receiving money from the
product's manufacturer- for promoting their product by lying about it.

What makes you think he was receiving money from the manufacturer?
Do you think he should be investigated because it's _possible_? I don't.


Or should we just sit by and twittle our thumbs and allow this kind of
broadcast fraud to continue?

That'd by my wish/

You certainly haven't presented the slightest but of evidence in the
specious example above to show that any fraud whatsoever has been committed.

Regards,

Don

Then there was WHDH....RKO...these were financial shenanigans, if I remember
correctly. So not a one lost a license based on "fitness".

The WHDH case stemmed from an improper contact between a representative of an
applicant for a TV license in Boston and an FCC commissioner (chronicled in
Sterling Quinlan's book "The Hundred Million Dollar Lunch"). In that case, the
licensee (the Boston Herald-Traveler newspaper) had been granted the license,
but at renewal time, by which time the ex-parte luncheon had come to light,
lost their "expectation" of renewal and was treated equally with other
applicants for the license. RKO-General lost their licenses (was permitted to
sell them instead of having them yanked by the FCC) for the felony bribery
conviction of their corporate parent, General Tire and Rubber Company (which
certainly qualifies as a "fitness" issue).

"Bob Haberkost" wrote in message
...

I know I had a "public affairs" show killed that we ran on WTAE years ago.
The
agency who provided, for free, the half-hour program (which aired in the
middle of
the night on Sunday, in order to meet minimum public affairs hours in the
days when
such minimums were still in force) was something like the National Coal
Producers'
Association. Routinely this program would extol the virtues of burning
"King Coal"
(often slamming other energy sources), an advocacy which I felt was too
one-sided,
and obviously so considering the source of the program. After a few
listens, the
continuity/public affairs director agreed with me and pulled the show.
What we got
in its place, though, was even more boring. Well, at least no one was
listening.

In a sense, that proved the futility of putting program quotas on stations.
I recall many times when I did ascertainment or tried to get community
programs on the air, I would be told to bug off because the real community
leaders did not have time to talk to so many stations about "nonesense" or
to do so many radio shows.

Here's the FCC's letter to me from Norman Goldstein; Complaints and
Investigation Branch; Enforcement Div; Mass Media bureau of the FCC:

It's worth noting, though, how often this particular reason has been used
to refuse
renewal of a licensee. I'd guess zero (Red Lion was fairness doctrine
violations, as
I recall, as was Media, PA...I've forgotten the calls for these....WGCL
and WXUR?
But the Fairness Doctrine is gutted, now...there isn't a station on-air
who would be
liable for it, as it's so easily sidestepped by calling it entertainment
programming.
Then there was WHDH....RKO...these were financial shenanigans, if I
remember
correctly. So not a one lost a license based on "fitness".)

Fitness has been used a few times, ususally when a licencee has been
convicted of a crime. The recent revocation of about 6 licences of a guy
from Terre Haute comes to mind.

"Sid Schweiger" wrote in message
...
Then there was WHDH....RKO...these were financial shenanigans, if I
remember
correctly. So not a one lost a license based on "fitness".

The WHDH case stemmed from an improper contact between a representative of
an
applicant for a TV license in Boston and an FCC commissioner (chronicled
in
Sterling Quinlan's book "The Hundred Million Dollar Lunch").

And that was in the general area that rendered RKO lacking the character
qualifications to hold a license. In other words, "fitness." Add the General
Tire dealings in Libya and Argentina, and you got the required divestiture
of the remaining RKO properties.

On 5 Jul 2004 15:37:35 GMT, pamthis (Sid Schweiger)
wrote:

RKO-General lost their licenses (was permitted to
sell them instead of having them yanked by the FCC) for the felony bribery
conviction of their corporate parent, General Tire and Rubber Company (which
certainly qualifies as a "fitness" issue).

However IIRC there was never allegation that the management of RKO
General had any participation in, or even knowledge of, the wrongdoing
of the corporate parent, nor was that wrongdoing in any way related to
broadcasting.

Mark Howell

I hardly think that a talk show host who continuously lies about facts- would
qualify as an entertainer. A broadcast "fraud" would better apply.

Your opinion.

I wasn't using the host as a reference. Since the airwaves are being used, I
have a right to expect they are being used fairly.

I love it when people invoke "rights," having no idea whatsoever whether those
rights actually exist. It must be some new thing, where just by claiming
"rights" they are magically manufactured out of thin air.

He was lying about a chemical analysis of the product which, if believed
without obtaining the safety data sheet- (and I have no doubt that his analysis
was believed by many listeners)- has no doubt caused some people to become sick
at the very least.

If there's "no doubt," then prove it. Right here. Post your proof for the
world to see.

This has been posted in this and other newsgroups for more times than anyone
can remember, but apparently you haven't bothered to read it even once: Talk
show hosts are entertainers. They are NOT sources of fact and were never meant
to be.

A person who comments on the news (wether a lawyer, garbage collector
or talk show host) is not being an ENTERTAINER- he is being- guess
what? RIGHT! A NEWS COMMENTATOR !

A song and dance man performing on stage or on the radio is called an
-guess what! RIGHT ! AN ENTERTAINER !

However IIRC there was never allegation that the management of RKO General had
any participation in, or even knowledge of, the wrongdoing of the corporate
parent, nor was that wrongdoing in any way related to broadcasting.

That is correct, but back then, character qualifications extended throughout
other branches of the same company, and IIRC that was why RKO-General was
allowed to sell the licenses rather than have them yanked.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

"Sid Schweiger" wrote in message
...

Then there was WHDH....RKO...these were financial shenanigans, if I
remember correctly. So not a one lost a license based on "fitness".

The WHDH case stemmed from an improper contact between a representative of
an applicant for a TV license in Boston and an FCC commissioner (chronicled
in Sterling Quinlan's book "The Hundred Million Dollar Lunch").

And that was in the general area that rendered RKO lacking the character
qualifications to hold a license. In other words, "fitness." Add the General
Tire dealings in Libya and Argentina, and you got the required divestiture
of the remaining RKO properties.

Okay, okay, so "fitness" relates to a number of qualities. I get you there. What I
was differentiating, though, was how a licensee could be "unfit" simply by airing
content not considered conventional or even valid....the other misfeasances, criminal
and otherwise, can certainly make a licensee unfit, but there are bigger issues with
those failures than simply giving a soapbox for goofs. Long ago (late 60s?
Certainly early 70s) the FCC made it abundantly clear (in the course of a station
sale and license transfer) that they would have no opinion on an expected format
change with the news owners (I think the station was classical, and its loss was
considered by its audience to be unacceptable).

Frankly, I still don't see what's so wrong with requiring a licensee to accomodate a
community's needs (after all, aside from that little condition, the station is free
to make as much money with the license as it can) but this clearly will never happen
here so long as the First Amendment is considered to encompass in toto the operation
of a broadcast outlet. It's free speech we're guaranteed, and until broadcasters
give out airtime for free, that's not free speech.
---------------------------------------
Nothin' ain't worth nothin' if it ain't free.
---------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-

"Don Forsling" wrote in message
...

I sort of recall revocations quite a number of years ago of all the
licenses
held by a guy named Don Burdon (Star Broadcasting?). Anyway, one of his
stations was in Omaha (KOIL) and he had several others. Anybody remember
what that was about? Rigging contests, maybe? Thanks.

WIFE-1310, Indianapolis, KBTR-710, Denver and KISN-910, Portland (Vancouver,
WA), OR. Plus KOIL-1290

He engaged in ex parte negotiations with a member of Congress. In simpler
terms, he gave a bribe. Unfit as a licensee, licenses revoked.