Black Radio Speaks With Forked Tongue

June 10, 2009 by admin · Comment
Filed under: Age of Conan 

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend to friendSend to friendPDF versionPDF version

by Paul Porter
Black radio owners and those who depend on them for publicity and profits are waging a propaganda offensive against a bill to compensate artists for airplay. Radio One founder Cathy Hughes “and her staff have done a great job of concealing the facts” of the legislation, HR 848, sponsored by Detroit Congressman John Conyers. Hughes has been joined by syndicated hosts Tom Joyner and Michael Baisden, and Rev. Al Sharpton, who is also a radio personality. Radio One is crying economic hardship, but the firm recently awarded CEO (and Hughes’ son) Alfred Liggins “a 10 million dollar bonus.”

<!–break–>

Black Radio Speaks with Forked Tongue
by Paul Porter
This article originally appeared in the blog of Industry Ears.
Performers should be paid for radio airplay.”
It is time that broadcasters start telling the truth. The recent flood of one-sided information by radio on the pending "HR 848 - Performance Rights Act" is uncovering a much larger problem. The First Amendment calls for "Freedom of Speech," but unfortunately broadcasters continue to feed misinformation to millions of Americans, without a murmur of opposing opinion.
Radio One founder Cathy Hughes has rediscovered her microphone after a ten year hiatus. While shaping the Performance Rights Act as an end to Black Radio, Hughes and her staff have done a great job of concealing the facts.
In a series of public service annoucements, Hughes has framed HR 848 as the end of Black radio. Broadcasters, in this difficult economy, have denied airtime to supporters of this Bill.
 In Detroit, Congressman John Conyers held a hearing on HR 848 at Wayne State University. While Tom Joyner, Michael Baisden and Hughes have continued to deliver blatant lies on air, the forum was the perfect situation to finally hear both sides.
Although invitations were extended to the entire broadcast community, only one representative stepped up to the mic. Rev. Al Sharpton, who’s syndicated Radio One show airs nationwide, presented his side and left without listening to the audience that pays his check.
Tom Joyner, Michael Baisden and Hughes have continued to deliver blatant lies on air.”
Sharpton, on his show later that day, only mentioned the forum as "one-sided" and failed to mention any of the stories shared by a short list of living legends: Dionne Warwick, Mary Wilson of the Supremes, Sam Moore, Duke Fakir, George Clinton and writer performer Rhymefest informed those in attendance of the simple facts on why performers should be paid for radio airplay.
Maybe if Sharpton, Baisden, Hughes and Joyner stop talking they might take the time to listen to some alarming facts.
*Performers are paid in over 30 countries, for radio airplay. Only the U.S., China, Iran and North Korea do not pay performers for radio airplay.
*Performers are paid for television, satellite radio, cable stations and Internet radio but not paid for terrestial (AM & FM) radio airplay.
*An additional $70 to $100 million will be paid to American artists for airplay from foreign countries.
What Black Radio is not telling you:
*Urban radio continues to be the most syndicated music format. While limiting voices and local issues, Black adults are 25 times more likely to hear syndication than Whites. Eliminating the messengers, by limiting the voices.
*Radio One, the nation’s largest African American broadcaster, has cut staff and 401k benefits for staffers, while awarding CEO Alfred Liggins a 10 million dollar bonus.
*Radio consistently makes millions from the recording industry, requiring Free promotions, Free product and Free performances that get charged back to the artist bottom line.
No matter what the color of radio ownership, serving local audiences with better music, information and content is the key to a thriving business model. American radio must finally catch up with the rest of the free world and pay performers their just due.
It is time that radio broadcasters allow audiences to hear both sides of this important issue.
Paul Porter is a founder of Industry Ears (www.IndustryEars.com), a “nonpartisan think tank aimed at addressing and finding solutions to disparities in media that negatively impact individuals and communities.”

A Federal Bailout For Black Radio​? Under What Conditions?

May 27, 2009 by admin · Comment
Filed under: Age of Conan 

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend to friendSend to friendPDF versionPDF version

By BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon

News has surfaced that powerful members of the Congressional Black Caucus are asking for a bailout of minority broadcasters, specifically black radio.  But black radio, like the rest of commercial media, has long dodged any hint of the public service obligations to which it is legally bound.  Is the crisis of black radio a chance to finally impose real public service obligations upon broadcasters?

Our thanks to Davey D for this video…

<!–break–>

A Federal Bailout For Black Radio​? Under What Conditions?

By BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon

There’s a hilarious Direct TV commercial which takes place in the boardroom of a giant cable TV corporation. The not-too-bright suits at the table acknowledge that Direct TV is killing them, but one has a solution. “Two words,” he says. “Federal. Bailout. Read a paper. Everybody’s doing it.” They all concur and nod in unison. A May 19 article in The Hill by Silla Brush confirms that reality has overtaken satire.

High-ranking House Democrats are urging the Treasury Department to prop up minority-owned broadcasters suffering from a lack of capital and lost advertising revenue amid the economic slump.

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) is leading an effort to convince Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to take “decisive action” by extending credit to this sector of the broadcasting industry.

Clyburn and other senior members, including House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), argue that minority-owned broadcasters are sound businesses, but that the recession could undermine the government’s efforts to diversify the airwaves.

A number of members from the Congressional Black Caucus signed the letter, too.

So nobody is laughing. One of the most powerful congressmen on Capitol Hill wants bailout money allocated to black radio. Why? To start with, Radio One and the other leading African American owned broadcasters are pitifully small compared to Clear Channel, CBS and the big boys. Black radio is indeed suffering, and the reasons have nothing to do with the so-called “free market.”

“Free markets,” in fact, have never had anything to do with how the U.S. broadcast industry operates. The broadcast airwaves were not invented by some smart engineer or clever entrepreneur, they are part of the electromagnetic spectrum, along with gamma radiation and sunshine. The radio-TV broadcast spectrum is thus a limited public resource. Broadcast licenses are monopoly licenses awarded by the government to a select few wealthy individuals and corporations from which those wealthy few reap tens of billions in annual profits. Though licenses are supposedly awarded on the condition that broadcasters operate in the public interest, no broadcaster in U.S. history has ever had a license revoked for flunking this test.

If a public interest test for broadcast licensees were ever administered, few if any commercial broadcasters would pass. That certainly includes black radio. Where a generation ago black radio deployed local news gathering organizations in dozens of cities across the country, with black journalists ferreting out local news, there is not a single urban radio station standing with a news gathering operation. Journalism on black radio has been dead so long that no adults under 45 can recall what it looked or sounded like. The premiere black-owned radio chain, Radio One pioneered the cutting of newsrooms and their replacement with cheaper and more profitable talk shows, mostly about celebrities and relationships.

It’s not as if black owned radio stations manage to serve the public on the artistic end either. As Davey D points out on Jared Ball’s Jazz And Justice, the playlists for white owned stations aiming their programming at black audiences are the same as Radio One’s. The corrupt regime of payola rules the airwaves on black owned stations, just as it does on white ones, depriving audiences of the opportunity to hear newer and local artists. A recent study by the Future of Music Coalition indicated that up to half the songs played on the top four radio chains are oldies. Radio One was not among the chains audited, but their playlists differ in no other discernible ways from their white owned competitors.

HR 848, the so-called performance rights legislation will doubtless further disadvantage black radio station owners because it will, in effect, legalize payola, and give the biggest chains more leverage in dealing with labels than smaller ones. Under HR 848 as presently written major chains like Clear Channel will be able, as Davey D points out, to cut deals with labels that ban airplay on competing stations. Radio One founder Cathy Hughes may not be entirely wrong when she predicts the end of commercial black radio.

Still it is impossible to justify a federal bailout of any commercial broadcaster when none of the commercial broadcasters are honoring their public service obligations. News departments on black and white radio, and on TV for that matter were dumped because, as Dr. Robet McChesney has pointed out for about a decade, entertainment is more profitable than news.

The crisis of black radio is an opportunity for African American communities, and for all Americans. It’s one of our best, and maybe one of our last chances to impose stiff news and public service requirements upon broadcasters, requirements that they have successfully evaded since the FCC was founded more than seventy years ago. If leading House Democrats and the Congressional Black Caucus are really interested in reviving and revitalizing the institution of black radio, they need to lead and participate in a public discussion of how news coverage affects communities, how payola shuts down the careers of local artists, and what the public service obligations of broadcasters really should be.

Since radio broadcasting has never been and never will be a “free market” and the principle is well established in law that broadcasters hold their licenses on the condition of public service, the arguments about government “not picking winners” are just nonsense designed to protect the ill-gotten and irresponsible gains of those who run our airwaves for their private profit today. If a bailout of broadcasters is contemplated, there must be congressional hearings that explore what the public service obligations of broadcasters are, and stiff measures instituted to strip the licenses of those who fail to meet them. Should every station with gross revenue of say, $1.2 million annually be required to field a news department covering school boards, local issues and local politics? Should stations be required to play new and local artists in every market? What rights will the public have to police and enforce the service requirements of broadcasters?

If members of the Congressional Black Caucus are serious about saving black radio, they will need public support. They won’t get and don’t deserve it without a public discussion, without hearings in cities like Detroit, Chicago, Atlanta, Philadelphia. Before any bailout of broadcasters, black or otherwise is contemplated, we have to have this conversation. BAR reached out to the office of Congressman Clyburn early this week and received no response.  We will continue to call Rep. Clyburn’s office on this subject.

Who Killed Black Radio? — Journalist’s Roundtable at Jared Ball’s Jazz & Justice, WPFW-FM in DC

May 27, 2009 by admin · Comment
Filed under: Age of Conan 

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend to friendSend to friendPDF versionPDF version

jared showEvery Monday afternoon at 1PM on WPFW, Baltimore-DC listeners can hear a fine example of The Other Black Radio — Jared Ball’s Jazz and Justice.  This week the first hour featured HipHop historian, producer and entrepreneur Davey D, Black Agenda Report’s Bruce Dixon and longtime radio analyst Paul Porter, now of Industry Ears discussing the state of commercial black radio, and whether it’s worth saving.

Tap the flash player below to listen to or the mic to download the show.  About 60 minutes, and worth it.

2db28_mic Who Killed Black Radio? -- Journalists Roundtable at Jared Balls Jazz & Justice, WPFW-FM in DC

Find more of Dr. Jared Ball’s work at voxunion.com.  The latest headlines from voxunion.com are always available right here in the right hand margin of BAR’s front page.

<!–break–>

 

Black Radio and the "Performance Rights" Toll Booth

May 20, 2009 by admin · Comment
Filed under: Age of Conan 


f7213_radio Black Radio and the "Performance Rights" Toll Boothby BAR Managing Editor Bruce Dixon

 

The cynically misnamed "Performance Rights" legislation will not benefit performers.  It will extract a premium from radio broadcasters, killing some, and transforming others for the worse.  It will create another piece of "intellectual property" which the recording industry is poised to benefit from at the expense of artists, radio broadcasters and the public, and legaiize payola.  And once the performance rights toll booth is established in broadcast radio, it can and will be deployed elsewhere.  HR 848 is bad news for broadcasters, bad news for artists, and bad news for almost everybody.

 

<!–break–>

 

Black Radio and the "Performance Rights" Toll Booth

 

by BAR Managing Editor Bruce Dixon

Will Saving Black Radio Save Local News And Public Service?

A few weeks ago Radio One founder Cathy Hughes, echoed by Tom Joyner and dozens of other radio personalities, sounded the alarm. HR 848 they cried, a bill to make stations pay a “performance rights” fee for every song played, was a mortal threat to black radio. In a widely circulated blog post which was echo-blasted to everybody on any Radio One email list, Hughes cited black radio’s stellar contributions of news, diversity and local content as reasons why African American communities should rally to protect it. She even claimed black talk and gospel were “money losing formats” as if these were public services and tithes offered out of Radio One’s bottomless reservoir of corporate good will.

The laughter was pretty hard to suppress. Commentators like Paul Scott and Mark Anthony Neal ran columns titled “Should We Save Black Radio?” and “Should Black Radio Die?” to which they answered “probably not” and “maybe.” The widely known fact, as BAR’s Glen Ford pointed out six years ago in “Who Killed Black Radio News” is that Radio One led the industry in purging news, public service and local content of all kinds from its airwaves in favor of cheap, syndicated, uninformed talk, mostly about celebrities and relationships. Radio One’s payola-influenced playlists are indistinguishable from its white-owned black radio competitors. Perhaps to protect their audiences from too many confusing facts, Tom Joyner, Cathy Hughes and the rest of the "save black radio" posse never mention that white broadcasters, the National Association of Broadcasters in fact, are just as opposed to HR 848 as they are, for most of the same reasons.  So the truth is surely more complicated than Cathy Hughes and her posse would have us believe.

HR 848, the so-called Performance Rights Act, which Hughes says may be the death knell of black radio is sponsored by Detroit congressman John Conyers.  It has dozens of high-profile celebrity boosters. The legislation will supposedly compensate performing artists – authors, composers and copyright holders are already taken care of by other intellectual property laws – when their work is played on the radio. Putting aside for the moment the economics of radio stations, it doesn’t sound like an inherently bad idea. Artistry is work, and work ought to be paid, right?

Will Revenue From the Performance Rights Act Actually Reach Performers?

The answers here are: not much and not likely.  Given the historic business practices of the industry, and the provisions of HR 848, it’s safe to say artists won’t see much of this money. It will be extracted from radio stations,and collected and disbursed by Sound Exchange or other representatives of the same suits who have made an industry out of stealing from artists since the dawn of time, or at least since recording business managed to make the recorded product it distributed and controlled, instead of the artists’ live performances which it did not control, the music industry’s main revenue stream. HR 848 also guarantees industry execs the right to rake an unspecified portion off the top for handling charges.

Section 6(1)(1)(a) of the law says that entitlement of the artist to these payments is “…in accordance with the terms of the artist’s contract,” rather than in addition to or outside of and not subject to the contract. In plain English that means a cleverly written or dishonestly administered contract can easily divert these new “performance royalties” to pockets other than those of the performers.

As Mark Anthony Neal put it:

Record companies are simply disingenuous when they suggest that artists will benefit from the passing of HR 848, when their own business practices guarantee the average artist less than 10-percent of profits generated from the sale of their recordings and the companies will themselves take part of the proceeds generated from the collection of a “performance tax.” If the RIAA and Record companies were really so concerned with the plight of artist, they would create less exploitive relationships with artists.

The representatives of RIAA, the Recording Industry Association of America, clearly wrote this law for their own benefit, not that of artists.  It’s no secret that CD sales, and recording industry profits have been on the downtourn for years.  The RIAA blames this on digital technologies and downloading, and it has used its lobbying muscle in Congress to pass one law after another against what it calls digital "piracy.".  According to Lawrence Lessig, RIAA has aided the Department of Justice in prosecuting 25,000 people over the last few years for downloading songs over the internet without paying license fees.  As far as anybody knows not a penny recovered has gone to artists.  Two years ago RIAA imposed a similar fee structure on internet radio, making it prohibitively expensive for many of those stations to incorporate any sort of music in their programming. The defenders of internet radio saw the handwriting on the wall; they predicted that broadcast radio would be next.  Tom Joyner, Cathy Hughes and the rest did nothing, and now the wolf is at their door.

How HR 848 Will Work in the Real World: More Payola and the Same Old Songs

In the real world, there are two economies. There’s a real economy where goods and services are produced, and where wealth is created by labor of one kind or another. There is also a fake economy, a parasite on the real one comprised mostly of the FIRE sector, (finance, insurance and real estate) along with the intellectual property racket. This fake economy lives on rents, interest payments, user fees and government subsidies. Its agents are always on the lookout for places in the real economy where they can plant toll booths to extract revenue without the bother of providing any service or adding any value.

The so-called Performance Rights bill is a toll booth the recording industry wants to place in the middle of radio broadcasting. It creates a new class of “intellectual property” supposedly for the benefit of performing artists, but subject to the artist’s contract, administered, and easily tapped by the record labels and their reps. The possibilities for abuse by labels and the recording industry are mind boggling, and include the outright legalization of longstanding industry practices of payola and reverse payola.  While standard fees will be set, rates are open to bargaining between broadcasters and labels who supposedly represent artists. Labels will be able to offer one station or chain of them a lower rate on the songs of preferred artists if they take less preferred ones as part of the package. Labels already pay for remotes, contest premiums, and the personal appearances of station personalities with their artists.  The "performance rights" revenue stream will be just one more channel they can adjust upward or downward in their bargaining with broadcasters.

They can offer a station or chain a lower rate for reducing the airplay of a competitor’s music or scrubbing it from the playlists altogether. Labels can demand a higher compensation rate than that offered to other artists, and where they have the bargaining power, some stations can demand lower rates than other stations.  The largest chains, like Clear Channel, will be in a better bargaining position than smaller ones like Radio One.  Just as Cathy Hughes and the “save black radio” crowd are saying, smaller chains, smaller stations, and the relative few minority station owners will be disproportionately endangered.  Black radio as we know it truly is in mortal danger.

Will HR 848 Put More Money in the Pockets of Up and Coming Artists?

No way. Beyond the fact that the suits will intercept most of the funds before artists ever see them, you have to get radio airplay to get paid. Most artists can’t get played on the radio now, and HR 848 doesn’t change that. Labels will have little incentive to press lesser known and new artists onto the stations, since they’ll make more money on the higher fees established artists will command.

If Cathy Hughes and black broadcasters wanted to call the bluff of RIAA and the pro "performance rights" people on showcasing new artists, they could garner unprecedented public support and look like real heroes in this.  All it would take, one industry insider told BAR, would be for them to throw away their payola-influenced playlists for a couple days each week and play nothing but new, unknown, up-and-coming artists.  "That’s what they’d do if they really wanted to be the good guys in this, if they had the imagination and the nerve," we were told.  But don’t look for that to happen.

Where Will the Recording Industry Plant its Next Revenue- Extracting Toll Booth?

Two years ago it was internet radio.  This season broadcast radio is in the crosshairs.  Once the “performance rights” toll booth is planted in broadcast radio, it won’t be long before the RIAA demands payments from nightclub disk jockeys, who unlike radio broadcasters, do not have their own paid lobbyists, or from the guy down the street you hired to spin records at a birthday party last week. Think about it.  What if innovators like DJ Kool Herc and Afrika Bambatta were forced to pay a "performance rights" fee?

Ultimately, this is where the creation and expansion of new and old "intellectual property" rights leads us:  to the place where artistic innovation and simple truth telling are squashed by the need to maximize the profit of somebody who doesn’t do the creating, the labor and the performing in the first place.

Runaway “intellectual property” rights are the problem, not the solution

Eyes On The Prize, the award winning 14-hour documentary first aired on PBS in 1987 and 1990 is a great example of how intellectual property rights are used to strangle free expression in the public interest. When the work was produced in the 1990s, its authors could only raise the money to get time-limited rights to the archival news footage and music used in this thirty-year chronicle of the Freedom Movement and its aftermath. When the rights to the music and news footage ran out in the 1990s, the program could no longer be broadcast anywhere in the U.S. Copies were pulled from shelves no DVDs of it were produced. By 2005 the asking price for copies of Eyes On The Prize was $1,500 on ebay, and the only publicly viewable copies were on the shelves of public libraries. This invaluable history was lost to a new generation. Why?

Because major news organizations like CBS and NBC claimed they had to get a cut every time it was broadcast since pieces of their news footage was in it. The authors and composers of songs played in the documentary insisted their “rights” were violated if the show was broadcast and they were not reimbursed. There’s a scene in which Dr. martin Luther King’s aides surprise him with a birthday cake and sing a verse of “Happy Birthday.” The multinational firm which owned the rights to the song demanded $20,000 to keep the scene intact. It’s all a perfectly legal part of the intellectual property racket.

Another example of the absurdly parasitic nature of the intellectual property regime, is the classic 1942 movie Casablanca. Since it was made almost seventy years ago, every human being involved in writing, producing, performing, and editing it, those who catered the food, mixed the sound, worked the cameras, sets, costumes and makeup and the rest have all passed away, most of them decades ago. We don’t have to worry about the movie’s revenues encouraging these people to keep up their creative work because they are long dead.

Still, Casablanca remains the private intellectual property of its vampire owners, who had nothing to do with creating it. You cannot broadcast, perform, duplicate or sell a DVD of it without paying them. This is precisely what the Performance Rights Bill will do for radio; it will set up another deathless toll booth to extract payments, mostly for works decades old, on behalf of investors who had nothing to do with creating or performing it, but supposedly in the name of the performing artists themselves.

Two wrongs are just twice as wrong: oppose HR 848

HR 848 is bad news, no doubt about it, and should be defeated. Cathy Hughes and her posse dare not tell us exactly why, because the more we understand about the recording and radio industries the guiltier she and her colleagues look for helping construct and profit from this system which has now turned upon them. Black commercial radio is very much corporate radio and every bit as much the enemy as the corrupt recording industry. Commercial black radio does not deliver news or public service or local content. It doesn’t showcase new talent. Black radio as we know it has never defended nonprofit community radio stations, or low power FM radio. Like the black business class itself, black radio has become incapable of defending itself by painting an accurate picture and simply telling the truth – black radio refused to step up when the performance rights toll booth was imposed on internet radio, by which time any fool could see they were the next target.

Where Do We Go From Here?

We have to look beyond old John Conyers, his celebrity spokespeople and the lobbyists who pull their strings. We have to ignore the hypocritical squeals of Cathy Hughes and corporate black radio. The broadcast radio and intellectual property regimes are both in need of deep and thorough reform.

Corporate actors need to be held responsible directly by the people. Black audiences need to demand that the corporations who aim their broadcasts at black communities:

Support HR 1147, the Community Low Power Radio Act

This law enables nonprofit community broadcasters to operate low power radio stations with three to six mile footprints in thousands of urban, suburban and rural communities. Low power nonprofit broadcasters will provide news and public service and access to audiences for local artists.

Support community radio and nonprofit broadcasting

Hundreds of community radio stations already exist to provide cultural and news programming that corporate outlets refuse to. They too will be adversely affected by the performance rights toll booth.

Remove the “performance rights” toll booth from internet radio, and prevent its extension to deejays and others

The proliferation of “intellectual property” toll booth is virtually strangling the new medium of communication in its cradle, and the reach of the intellectual property rackets threaten film, video, the internet and the emergence of new art, artists and means of expression. Ways must be found to compensate artists, not investors.

Allow CDs and DVD mixtapes and videos to be sent through the mail at no cost

For most of the 19th century, newspaper postage was free. When Frederick Douglass and others started anti-slavery newspapers they paid no postage, and newspapers were most of the post office’s traffic. Technological advances have placed audio and video production within the reach of many, but corporate lobbyists have rigged the postal code to prevent the sharing of CDs and DVDs with mass audiences.

Demand that the FCC conduct real inquiries into payola

This is the dead dog in the room that neither the “save black radio” crowd nor the recording industry will talk about. But it’s real, and it’s the main barrier to new and diverse artists being heard on the airwaves.

Shorten the broadcast license term to three years

Under Ronald Reagan broadcast licenses were extended to eight years, making broadcasters much less responsible to the public and thwarting the public accountability at renewal times. Acting FCC Commissioner Michael Kopps has already suggested this reform, though he says it will be up to his successor appointed by the Obama administration to carry it out. That means it’s up to us to demand it.

Demand that black radio employ journalists and a newsgathering operation or lose the good will of black communities.

This is a demand communities can make directly upon the corporate license holders. A generation ago black radio did exactly that, and provided news and public service to its audience, something we will not see again without a demand.

Use the transition to digital radio as the occasion to redistribute broadcast licenses.

Like the transition to digital TV, the switch to digital radio broadcasting means that many more frequencies will be available. But instead of the time for voices to be heard, a corrupt deal gave all the new digital TV channels to existing holders of broadcast TV licenses. That must not happen with digital radio.

BAR managing editor Bruce Dixon can be contacted at Bruce.Dixon(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.

Tom Joyner, Steve Harvey, Tavis Smiley, and the Impoverishment of Black Media

April 15, 2009 by admin · Comment
Filed under: Age of Conan 

joyner, havey, smileyby BAR Managing Editor Bruce A. Dixon

When the Tom Joyner Morning Show was pulled first from Chicago, and then from other markets early this month, Joyner counseled listeners that "…black radio will never be what it once was, and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it."  This message of powerlessness and permanent defeat, of resignation to someone else owning and controlling the black conversation may be all we can expect from Joyner and the rest of the black elite.  But is it the real answer? Does it even address the crucial question of how we might have and our own black civic conversation?

 

<!–break–>

 

Tom Joyner, Steve Harvey, Tavis Smiley, and the Impoverishment of Black Media
by BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon
The cancellation provoked outrage among fans because the Tom Joyner Morning Show is about as good as commercial black radio is allowed to get nowadays.”
‘The bottom line,” radio fly-jock Tom Joyner told fans in his blog, “is that black radio will never be what it once was, and there’s absolutely nothing we can do about it.” Joyner tried to put the yanking of his show by Clear Channel into perspective for fans, who deluged his blog and email with expressions of support, and even talk of consumer boycotts. Joyner discouraged boycott chatter, and like Steve Harvey, who seems likely to replace him on many Clear Channel outlets, declared it was all “just business.”
The cancellation provoked outrage among fans because the Tom Joyner Morning Show is about as good as commercial black radio is allowed to get nowadays. Despite the show’s limited playlist of corporate-approved music and periodic descents into minstrelsy, Joyner regularly set aside a small amount of time for commentary, issues and appeals addressed to African Americans as a community. It was never much time, and the issues, the commentary were relatively safe stuff on the whole. But to the news-starved audience of black commercial radio, Tom Joyner, like his colleague Tavis Smiley, stand out like rare gulps of fresh air.
But sustaining the life of a community takes more than an occasional breath. Community and democracy demand a steady diet of news to fuel civic engagement and public conversation in the public interest.
As BAR’s Glen Ford pointed out all of six years ago in ‘Who Killed Black Radio News,” the owners of commercial black media have for a generation enforced a no-news policy, justifying it with the unsupportable claim that all black people want is to be entertained." The fact is that news is less profitable than 100% entertainment. PR firms and the celebrity industries provide their own “news” releases complete with commercial tie-ins, and already segmented to the age and income divided groups that marketers love. Black radio owners decided not to do news because corporate media has consciously decided not to recognize African Americans as a people or a polity with our own set of collective experience and political will. In a media regime that lives and dies by advertising alone, black commercial radio will only recognize black communities as marketing contraptions, as audience segments whose ears and eyeballs it can deliver to sponsors. The owners and managers of commercial black radio and TV are not the least concerned about our past or future, our housing or health care crises, the black imprisonment rate or the digital divide or the education of our young or the dignified security of our elderly. To them we are just a market, passive consumers to be sliced and diced according to marketing industry guidelines. A hip hop station, an oldies station, an easy listening urban station, a gospel station, all under the same ownership with no news on any of them, forever and ever, amen. If this is what Joyner meant, and we think it was, when he described the current state of black commercial radio, he was right. Except the “forever’ part. Except when he told fans ‘…there’s absolutely nothing we can do about it.”
Commercial black radio and TV have not always been hostile to and incompatible with journalism. There was a brief period, back in the early and mid 1970s when journalism flourished on commercial black radio. Local teams of African American journalists competed with each other to report and package non-entertainment news directed at black communities. News gathering and reporting operations on commercial black radio played a key role in the black conversation, enabling African American communities to define themselves as more than passive masses of consumers and voters. They heyday of black broadcast journalism didn’t last long. News was never as profitable as entertainment, and as limits on how many stations one owner could have were removed, owners borrowed heavily to get more stations, and cut costs to reward themselves and repay the loans. News was the first casualty, reported Glen Ford six years ago.
There need not have been a contradiction between Black ownership and community access, including the maintenance of quality news operations. In a betrayal that, we believe, has been a major factor in the relentless decline of Black political power, many Black radio owners have adopted business plans identical to their white corporate peers.
Such is certainly the case with Radio One. "The company’s voraciousness mirrored the consolidation throughout the radio industry after rules limiting the number of stations one company could own nationally were lifted in 1996," wrote the Washington Post, in a February 5, 2003 showcase article. Radio One boasts a 60-person research department that "randomly calls thousands of people and conducts 20-minute surveys of those who tune in to its radio stations." Do the people want news? The subject isn’t broached by either Post reporter Krissah Williams or her main interlocutor, Radio One Chief Operating Officer Mary Catherine Sneed. Instead, the conversation is all about the sales value of entertainment programming. "If you’re not [at parties, clubs and grass-roots events], you’ll never be a big personality in the community," Sneed said. "Those are the things that separate stations from one another."
News isn’t even on the radar screen. Indeed, so insidiously have disc jockey patter and the talk show format been substituted for news that large segments of the Black public may no longer know the difference.
Reclaiming commercial black radio would mean rediscovering the Freedom Movement’s traditions of disrespect for illegitimate authority.”
It may be that way now, but it doesn’t have to be. Contrary to Joyner’s wisdom, there’s plenty that African American communities can do to influence the behavior of commercial black radio. But seeing the way forward, much less actually organizing it, requires thinking well outside the boxes that the black misleadership class, of which Joyner and Tavis are a part, are used to drawing for themselves and for us. Today’s black notables are too respectful of illegitimate authority, too preoccupied with their own careers, too deferential to corporate power to acknowledge the true dimensions of the crisis, or help us solve it.
Reclaiming commercial black radio would mean rediscovering the Freedom Movement’s traditions of disrespect for illegitimate authority. It would mean confronting the white and black absentee owners of corporate black radio and TV, like Clear Channel and Radio One at their own public events, like live remotes, and demanding news for the people. It would mean mobilizing people from black journalism schools and black communities to demand the reanimation of black journalism. It would mean insisting on the establishment of local news gathering operations at black radio and TV stations as a condition of the continued good will of audiences toward their owners and advertisers. That is a tall order, well outside the vision of a Tom Joyner or even of a Tavis Smiley, who sometimes pretends to be a journalist.
Leadership is seeing a way where the wise and informed tell you there is no way, and organizing people to take that way. Neither of these guys is in the leadership business. Joyner and Smiley are in the business of marketing, assembling ears and eyeballs for delivery to sponsors. In Tavis’s case, those sponsors include Wal-Mart and McDonald’s, two of the nation’s biggest and most notoriously low-wage employers, along with payday loan and housing bubble profiteers Wells Fargo and Bank of America. This seriously limits the problems one can mention on the air, let alone the solutions.
Media are the circulatory systems of modern societies. Mass media can empower us. They can enable us to carry on our conversation about what we expect from society and from each other. Or mass media can distort our public conversations and our private lives, instilling anti-cooperative and antisocial values in young and old alike. Look at BET.
African American communities are not the only ones that suffer from the slow death of journalism. Civic engagement in the larger American polity is withering too, and for the same reason. Newspapers are folding not because they are unprofitable, but because even after cutting actual journalism to the bone, they don’t bring in the fifteen and twenty percent returns that the bubble economy has accustomed investors to. A well-run newspaper can consistently bring in a seven to nine percent annual return on investment, which in pre-bubble days was considered just fine. The very few newspaper corporations that remained family owned, or that went nonprofit are doing journalism as well as ever.
Forty-some years ago, Dr. Martin Luther wondered aloud that all his life’s work might have been the integration of African Americans into a burning house. King answered his own question by declaring that if that was the case, we would have to be the firefighters, not just for ourselves, but for the whole American polity. If the demand for news, news for the people, is ever to be raised inside corporate boardrooms and in the street at live remotes, it will happen first in African American communities. Or maybe not at all. There is no legal road to this. It can only be done by confronting owners of commercial black media and making the price of a no-news regime too costly for them.
We can be firefighters, struggling for a democratic, responsible media, trying to reanimate old and configure new models of journalism for our own and the larger American community. We can disregard Joyner’s advice, and struggle to free the black conversation from corporate gatekeepers who would monetize, militarize and privatize it. Or we can burn with the rest. And watch Black Evil Television.