[BC] Public File proceeding

[Mike Erickson]

My point is, when you are the operator a broadcast station in the United
States, there are certain requirements you are expected to meet.

When you purchase a radio station, it's very obvious that maintaining a
public file is part of the requirement.  If that means that crossing every
"t" and dotting every "i", so be it.  If you do not have the financial means
to operate your station, sell/donate your station or turn in the license.
Why bother?

Owning and operating a radio station requires a great deal of time and
bother.  Any other way is the lazy way out, which seems to be the modus
operandi of some broadcasters today.

=Mike Erickson=

On 6/12/06, ACN <ACN at qwest.net> wrote:
>
> Mike, with all due respect I think you missed the legal point regarding
> the
> LPF.
>
> I agree we need to and we do serve our community as I am sure you do an
> excellent job.
>
> We are not suggesting for a second that stations do not serve their
> community or keep records for their own renewal process, the point is that
> many FCC attorneys require a great deal of time and expenses on the part
> of
> stations to cross every "t" and dot every "i" for a process that is not
> serving the public.
>
> FCC inspectors don't even agree on the exact form of the LPF material.
> Yet
> the FCC gives fines to small stations because one program in the required
> "list" did not note the length of the program as required by the rules.
>
> We would prefer to spend the staff time and money on making possible guest
> editorials for airing from the public than maintaining a LPF that the
> public
> does not use or care about.
>
> Let's do a better job on local programming, and I am speaking for myself
> not
> reflecting on the job any of the rest of you are doing.
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
> ACN
>
>
>