Recently, a teacher at Overland High School in Colorado named Jay Bennish was brought to the spotlight after making comments comparing President George W. Bush to Adolf Hitler, bashing the United States, and attacking capitalism in a manner similar to what one would expect to hear from a Communist/socialist. The one who blew the whistle on the teacher was one of his students, Sean Allen, who recorded it all for all to hear.
But this isn't about the issues of “free speech” or “leftist indoctrination,” nor is it about how such teachers like Bennish are part of the reason why students fare poorly in such basics as math and geography, as this is a site relating to the long-standing campaign against the RIAA. Rather, what is at issue is that Mr. Allen made his recording on an MP3 machine.
This was brought to the fore in a recent column by Walter E. Williams, who put it better than I could have (though he didn’t specify which equipment Sean used):
“The unique aspect of the Overland High School affair is the hard, undeniable recorded evidence. Without it, teachers and administrators might have lied, denied or misrepresented what was said. After all, it would be the word of a teenager against an adult professional. Today's microtechnology, might be just what the doctor ordered to put a stop to teachers using their position to indoctrinate our youth.”
And the lessons go far beyond this one case, especially as it relates to the RIAA and their ongoing anti-technology jihad. Many years ago, you may recall, the RIAA had used their extensive clout in Congress to try to outlaw MP3.
And this is why all of us should react with horror and outrage over their latest gambit to try to outlaw home recording on digital radio. Given what has been exposed by media-watchdog groups about the increasingly blatant leftist bias from the “alphabet networks” (CBS, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, NPR et al.), on the face of it the RIAA’s initiatives would also serve to protect the liberal-leftist media, for if you or I were prohibited by law to record from digital radio there’d be no way we could prove their blatant preference for some voices over others (i.e. so-called “peace mom” Cindy Sheehan over another mother, who lost her son in the Iraq war but supports the campaign and thus has been completely ignored by the media) or their particular slant on political figures or agendas. It would also have implications for talk radio (remember the one about the left-wing Seattle radio talk show host who once advocated the death penalty for Bush and Cheney, and when caught, at first denied having said it but after his words were played back blamed the controversy on the “vast right-wing conspiracy”?).
And one is likewise forced to conclude that the RIAA is also unwittingly providing cover for future Jay Bennishes to carry out their particular outrages with no interference from any stinking technology that could record what they’re saying. After all, without it all on tape or other media, it becomes a “we said – they said” charade, thus making it easier for those in authority to dismiss the ones screaming about them as partisans, lunatics or worse. And one has to assume that’s how the RIAA and their stooges want it.
Think about it . . .

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/education/article/0,1299,DRMN_957_4514358,00.html
Tell the whole story Mr.William Brown not what the R. wants you to say. As for the mp3 player, tape away my friends. Freedom, Freedom. But play the whole tape my friend.

Mr. Brown obviously leaves no doubt about his partisanship (which emits the sound of an elephant trumpeting).
Or about his devotion to thoroughness (which is sadly lacking).

I'm not sure I follow this train of thought. William, are you saying that the RIAA is behind a left-wing conspiracy to block people from recording speeches that can be used by the right-wing as "evidence" against the speaker in the court of public opinion?

If so, I don't buy it. The Riaa and the content industry as a whole could care less about left-wing or right-wing social agendas beyond what it takes to make an unfair marketplace in their own favor. They don't care who is in office so-long as the ones in office are bought and paid for.

The RIAA is neither left nor right. The RIAA is simply greedy and evil.

...but even though I may disagree with your position, I like this post very much. Although it does seem partisan, it does take care to state a view and opinion about the Riaa.

if You give up a little freedom for more security You will have neither

Just leaving out parts of the whole to suit your needs. It is something meant to deceive you. Nevertheless it just gives the wrong impression. The story here is more about his agenda, than with the riaa. He is using the riaa for his propaganda to make his point. The riaa is just thrown in here and there.

"teachers using their position to indoctrinate our youth.”

Isn't that exactly what they're hired to do?

Folks, I don't give a shit if anyone tries to sneak in republican or democrat, liberal or conservative ideology into the debate.

...as long as you develop SOME kind of position against the RIAA (the flavor doesn't matter) ...I will call you FRIEND!

(...but, dont you DARE try to take OVER our debate and turn it into a left/right - elephant/donkey thing!)

Partisan political party battles belong at OTHER websits/forums.

HERE we fight the RIAA! (Dems, Repubs, Libs, Conservs, Mods, alike!)

independent
(a left/right - elephant/donkey thing! ) I'm neither left or right. I do not care what party anyone likes or dislikes. I do not like bias reporting or half truths. My thing has nothing to do with with any party. If it is wrong it is wrong. Veracity, verity, verisimilitude.

The point, my friends, is this, regardless of the issue at hand: If the RIAA, G-d forbid, had succeeded in their quest to outlaw MP3 (or other) technology - or for that matter any kind of technology of that nature (as witness their bid to ban home recording of digital radio), it would've made it far easier for any kind of official in authority - whether it be school administrators / officials, the news media, or whatever - to deny that whatever was said, was said, and/or try to spin it to their advantage, as well as the ol' "we-said / they-said" cant of making those who quote them seem like partisan lunatics or whatever.

The RIAA themselves may not be consciously aiding and abetting such interests, or working hand-in-hand with such groups, but by default and the larger scheme of things they end up doing so "unwittingly" or "unintentionally," that's the point of the article. Surely, you have to have all heard, at one time or another in your lives, of the laws of unintended consequences (one of the few not bought and paid for by expensive lobbyists - not yet, anyway), which was the point I sought to raise here. The Bennish case is just a small example (among others) of how fortunate for society the RIAA didn't get their way.

And as for the media watchdog groups that may be adversely affected by this latest audio broadcast flag proposal: It isn't just the conservative-leaning groups such as Accuracy in Media and Media Research Center, but also the more left-oriented FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting). I was once to FAIR's offices for a party because a friend of mine knew people connected with the organization - and saw rows of VHS and Beta machines (this was in the early 1990's) for taping evening newscasts, as well as audio recording equipment for recording radio newscasts - and I thought to myself, what if, G-d forbid, the movie studios had succeeded in outlawing Betamax back in 1984 (and the RIAA, likewise, for home taping)? In short, everybody, of all political persuasions and stripes, are affected in different ways by the RIAA's (and MPAA's) shenanigans.

And one other thing, just to show this article was no "partisan" rant: Suppose, in the 1950's-1960's, the RIAA had a campaign to outlaw home reel-to-reel tape recording and (G-d forbid) succeeded . . . seems to me we wouldn't have had the Nixon tapes for posterity.

The RIAA DID try to stop "home-taping" (and, in effect are STILL trying to do so.)
=======================

I encourage you to keep submitting your ideas W-B. (And, I appologize if I didn't completely "get" your point and/or took things you were trying to say the wrong way. You seem to have some insight on things that I, myself don't yet have.)