[BC] Look for a very old Public Notice - 1975

[Bruce Doerle]

Donna,

The station manager wants to get her hands on this Public Notice in order to include it each on-air employee's file along with their signature.  The best info I could find was from Shaw Pittman LLP which recommends: "We also recommend that you create a payola/plugola file that contains the following documents: (a) copies of Sections 317 and 507 of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended; (b) a copy of Section 73.1212 of the Commission's regulations; (c) a copy of the FCC Public Notice released September 3, 1975, which outlines 36 interpretations of these provisions; (d) a copy of the FCC Public Notice released May 18, 1988; (e) a "Statement of Station Policy"; and (f) payola/plugola affidavits."   We've got everything but 'C'.

I am not sure that there was a specific action that the FCC was writing about as maybe more a state of the industry at the time.  Apparently it was a landmark statement by the Commission regarding a stern warning to the broadcasters and what they considered to be inappropriate concealment of payment to broadcast specific content.  I actually was hoping you would have this in your files considering your expertise and background.

Thanks,

Bruce

>>> On 2/3/2009 at 6:52 PM, in message
<20090203235204.F1C191E166F at relay10.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com>, Donna Halper
<dlh at donnahalper.com> wrote:
> At 05:37 PM 2/3/2009, it was asked:
>>>Might someone have or know where to find an electronic version of 
>>>the FCC Public Notice released September 3, 1975 setting forth the 
>>>Commission's 36 interpretations of Section 317 and Rule Section 
>>>73.1212.  It deals with PAYOLA.
> 
> If you recall what station was accused, I can check my files.  I 
> absolutely do recall how that game was played, since I was a music 
> director back then and saw first-hand how record promoters worked 
> with certain key top-40 stations to get records added.  I wasn't 
> working at any top-40 stations at that time, but I knew many people 
> who were involved, and I certainly saw how business was 
> conducted.   Promoters got something called a "spiff" (a bonus) for 
> every one of the key top-40 stations that added the record and 
> reported it to Radio & Records.  Some of the music and program 
> directors would not really add the song (a procedure called a "paper 
> add"-- it was reported to R&R but never played) and they would split 
> the bonus with the record promoter, or in some cases, the currency 
> wasn't money-- it was cocaine or in one case, the record company made 
> the PD's mortgage payment.
> 
> The losers in all of this were the artists from the smaller labels-- 
> they suffered because the smaller labels couldn't buy their way onto 
> the R&R charts or bribe PDs to give their songs a chance, whereas 
> some of the big-name labels were able to easily manipulate their 
> chart position due to this collusion between dishonest promoters and 
> dishonest PDs. The honest PDs and MDs who only wanted to add records 
> they believed in also were put at a disadvantage.  It was a very 
> shady time in the record biz and in radio as well...      
> 
> 
>