134
The broadcasting industry response to my letter was generally very
favorable. Although a few broadcasts [sic] viewed even this
informational mailing as a veiled attempt at censorship, many felt
that it raised an issue deserving of immediate attention. Top
management, even in relatively small station groups, must delegate
most day-to-day decisions about what's on the air to program staff.
In a number of cases, senior executives wrote or told me in person
that they had not been aware of the explicit nature of some of the
music being played on their stations until they received my letter.
Some songs they found inappropriate for their audiences were removed
from their playlists, and new releases are being monitored more carefully.
Through the letter itself, and through numerous articles about the letter
and the reaction to it which appeared in the trade press, I believe the
industry now has a higher level of sensitivity to this problem, and to
the general desirability of maintaining certain levels of good taste
in programming. In many cases programming changes have been made, and
that will continue.
Several weeks after I sent out the letter to the group owners, we
discussed the "porn rock" problem at a meeting of NAB's Executive
Committee. That is the group of broadcasters elected by our Board of
Directors to oversee the organization's day-to-day operations. The
conclusion was that one way in which we might be able to help our members
respond to the "porn rock" problem would be to ask the record companies
to supply copies of the lyrics when they make new records available
to broadcasters.
Thus, on May 31, 1985, I wrote to the chief executives of 45 record
companies that together account for the sales of over 90 percent of
the nation's records, and asked that "all recordings made available to
broadcasters in the future be accompanied by copies of the songs' lyrics."
I explained that we were asking for this assistance not only to help the
station program directors, but also to aid station owners and managers in
going through the dozens of new releases, many of them recorded in a
way that makes understanding the lyrics quite difficult.
Although there was a good deal of support for this proposal among
broadcasters, our friends in the recording industry were not overwhelmed
by the idea. Only a handful of responses were received, and they were
generally negative in tone, although one very small company did send a
copy of the lyrics it had supplied with a new singles release. Most
recently, the Recording Industry Association of America has formally
rejected the proposal on behalf of its members, arguing both that the
record companies don't always have the right to reproduce lyrics for
such purposes, and that it's the responsibility of every station to know
what it broadcasts.
Since NAB got involved in this issue, I and other members of our staff
have been in regular contact with Tipper Gore, Susan Baker and the other
leaders of the Parents Music Resource Center. We have striven to
understand their concerns, and to assist them in familiarizing themselves
with the workings of our industry. Last week, at the Radio '85 Management
and Programming Convention in Dallas, I chaired a panel session on "porn
rock" which featured a lengthy presentation by Mrs. Gore. I am pleased
that Stan Gortikov, the president of RIAA, also graciously agreed to
participate on that panel. I view this panel as another step in our effort
to make broadcasters aware of the public concern about this issue, so that
they can formulate their own response.
The FCC expects each licensee to determine what the words or lyrics on a
record are before the record is broadcast, and the FCC holds each broadcast
licensee responsible for what it puts on the air. But even more importantly,
broadcasters are held responsible by their local communities. We are there,
every day. Indeed, every hour our communities vote on how well we are
doing. If our listeners and our advertisers are not pleased with us, they
will turn away, in the ultimate censure of our activity.
Each station must choose for itself how best to serve its community, and
not all listeners will like what every station in the marketplace has to
offer. That is part of the extraordinary diversity of our industry, and
that is as it should be. NAB will never attempt to intrude into any
station's programming judgments. That would be improper both legally
and as a matter of policy. What we have endeavored to do is to balance
the need for voluntary industry restraint with a strong sensitivity to
First Amendment concerns. I think this effort has been successful.
Everyone in our industry now knows that there is a problem to be
addressed, and that they must
|
previous | next | contents