By Eliot Van Buskirk EmailOctober 24, 2008 | 10:59:45 AMCategories: Music News

600pxusfccsealsvg_2 Despite a 2007 agreement between the FCC and the country's largest radio conglomerates, payola (copyright holders paying for airplay) still appears to be influencing stations to play music from the world's four major labels, according to a study released earlier this week by The American Association of Independent Music (A2IM) and the Future of Music Coalition (FMC), which brokered the agreement.

CBS Radio, Clear Channel, Entercom Communications and Citadel Broadcasting signed the "Rules of Engagement" document declaring to the FCC that they would pay the government $12.5 million, provide 8,400 half-hour segments of free airtime dedicated to indie labels and local bands and cease the practice of accepting cash and gifts in return for inserting songs into their rotations.

The plan does not appear to be working. A survey of indie labels undertaken by A2IM and FMC found that over 92 percent of indie labels reported "no change in their relationship with commercial radio" after the agreement went into effect. Almost half of the respondents said payola "remains a determining factor in commercial radio airplay" and approximately one quarter of respondents said they had been "approached, directly or indirectly, with requests for payola since the signing of the FCC settlement."

The study does not include any hard data from these stations because that information was embargoed, according to a Future of Music Coaltion spokesman. However, a June 2008 FMC filing with the FCC (.pdf) says playlist data supports indies' claim that major labels continue to dominate commercial radio: "The data strongly suggests that local radio is still effectively closed to independent or local musicians, calling into question the effectiveness of the consent decrees signed by the four largest radio groups and the Commission in April 2007."

However, A2IM radio committee chair Daniel Glass says it could be worse. "To paint 100% negative picture is wrong," he stated. "There are success stories. But we are disappointed to see independents are still reporting lack of access and cooperation, despite the new agreements."

"The plan does not appear to be working."

Radio and the labels have been breaking this law for decades. The FCC lets them off on a promise to do the right thing.

Someone had to do a study to find out that *shock* *awe* *surprise* *didn't see that coming* nothing changed.

"The study does not include any hard data," so the only thing "the data strongly suggests" seems to be that someone thinks radio still matters and we are still trying to get there.

In reality, the important thing, if this is true, is that the radio stations are still whoring out their broadcasting license in violation of the law and should have their licenses revoked, which is probably the only penalty that will stop this practice.

Radio used to be important. You had to get on the radio. Now, you have to get on people's iPods. Otherwise, even if you are on the radio, they're still not gonna hear it.

Yes, radio is now irrelevant. It will and always forevermore be irrelevant due to consolidation and RIAA influence.

It is such a sad thing. Radio COULD be a great benefit to society if it primarily focused on local and independent music (and/or other audio arts & info.)

But alas. The RIAA and USA's over-corporate mores have killed its' potential.

I cry inside whenever I think about it.

Radio COULD be a great benefit to society if it primarily focused on local and independent music (and/or other audio arts & info.)

While we're doling out the blame on the RIAA, don't forget Clear Channel's rotten role (in this suppression of local & independent music).

. . . in regard to de-localizing radio stations, I mean.

Ok... so where's the Justice Department in all this? Isn't payola clearly a way for the larger RIAA companies to prevent the smaller independents from getting air time? Doesn't that make payola, aside from already being illegal, a blockage of free enterprise?? Isn't it a monopolistic tactic??? So why isn't the Justice Department DOING SOMETHING about it?

Oh yeah that's right, I forgot. The Justice Department is too busy looking for a copyright czar and chasing 12-year-old girls, dead grandmas, disabled moms and college students for listening to music, to be concerned about REAL issues they should be checking in to.

I think radio could return to being useful. It probably won't, but it is possible. I don't think you even have to go to the other extreme and make the primary focus local and indie music. Some communities simply wouldn't have much to play.

As long as radio is willing to sell airplay to the highest bidder, it loses its value both as a source for new music and as a filter.

Clear Channel hasn't so much suppressed independent music as it has repressed music in general. Every song has to be familiar, but the second, most important, qualifier is that no one will say, "What the hell is that?" and change the channel.

That's what the banned list of songs was about, and the Dixie Chicks, and Bruce Springsteen. Songs with opinions or controversy might cause you to change the station. If a segment of society will be annoyed by a song, it probably won't get played on Clear Channel.

This didn't just exclude indie music (not familiar), but anything new, edgy, political, opinionated, and songs with too many notes. They neutered rock and roll.

I wrote:
"Radio COULD be a great benefit to society if it primarily focused on local and independent music (and/or other audio arts & info.)"

I worded that wrong, and it came out extreme.
My intended meaning was:
"Radio COULD have been a great benefit to society if it had continued to respect local preferences, but still included a sampling of independent music to go along with the dominant mainstream big labels."

I have no idea how I screwed up my message the way I did! (Other than maybe I shouldn't have had that last drink before writing it.)

Clear Channel took over the local stations and sterilized music. And the local DJs somehow were supplanted by other, often national ones.
Meanwhile, indie music was given even less attention.

Yes, and the rest is just like George wrote so well.

Thanks, George, for pointing out my goof-up.
[turning an embarrassed beet red]

Pessimist -- I didn't view what you said as being wrong.

A lot of small-town newspapers run on the "only local news" game plan. I've worked for two of them. It is an extreme, but not an unheard of position for local media to take. Cities like New York, LA, Nashville or Chicago radio wouldn't have any problem filling airtime with all local acts if that's the way they wanted to go.

It worked for Motown in Detroit and they really only had one band that supported the entire roster of singers in the studio.

So why isn't the Justice Department DOING SOMETHING about it (payola)?

Because the RIAA fired Hilary Rosen and replaced her with Republican-friendly lobbyists after Bush was elected. Bad as she was, Rosen had insisted that the record industry would never sue individual music fans. She was barely out the door before they started doing exactly that.

And who exactly is going to complain? Not the radio stations who are the recipients of the bribes. Not the record labels that are paying them. Not the artists whose hit song is getting played 10 times a day on every station. Besides, one of the terms of an artist's contract with a major label is that they are not allowed to discuss the terms of their contract.

In 2003, Don Henley did bring this up in front of a Senate Commerce Committee (mentioning that doing so was a violation of his contract). There was some bluster for a couple of weeks. Orrin Hatch announced at some Grammy function that the Judiciary Committee was going to launch an investigation within 60 days. Never happened.

A few months later, a webcaster tried to get me to pay for web airplay. I tried to find out if this was illegal and, if so, I was going to report him. Since John McCain was chairman of the Commerce Committee at the hearing where Don Henley spilled the truth, I started there. One person in John McCain's office said they knew what payola was, but couldn't answer my question. They took my information and promised to find out, but I never heard back from them.

In pursuit of an answer, I called local authorities, the FBI, DOJ, FCC, FTC, Orrin Hatch's office, and the Senate Judiciary Committee. Not one person in any of these offices knew the meaning of the word payola. That is not an exaggeration. The FBI hung up on me. They had more important things to do. At Orrin Hatch's office, there was no investigation going on. It's hard to believe that there was even a widely distributed memo.

Why wasn't/isn't anyone doing anything about payola? In 2003, no one even knew what the word meant. A couple of years later, Elliot Spitzer suddenly remembers all about payola. Everyone involved quickly settles without admitting guilt and promises not to do it again, not that they ever did it before. The RIAA estimates a $10-million annual savings from ending this practice even though they never did it in the first place, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more.

Now we're back to not knowing what it is.

"The FBI hung up on me. They had more important things to do."

Yep, pretty soon they won't be chasing terrorists, but will be doing the RIAA's dirty work and start chasing those 12-year-old girls downloading music.

"Now we're back to not knowing what it is."

And the never ending cycle continues. SO where's Elliot Spitzer these days?

Spitzer was New York's Attorney General. He wanted to be governor of New York, but someone spotted the payments to a high-priced hooker he was fond of.

We won't be hearing from him again, which is why payola is once again in style.

Hmmm... If we had a team of pirate hookers work its way through the Justice Dept...

"but someone spotted the payments to a high-priced hooker he was fond of."

Gee I wonder how THAT happened? I bet the RIAA has a few high paid hackers on their hidden payrolls. Why aren't we hearing about those?

Just brings home even more... SUPPORT NON-COMMERCIAL RADIO!

www.coopradio.org