back to LPFM 

page.





From: "jamrag" 
To: 


Friends

Here's the presentation I gave last night -- anxiously awaiting your
comments!

TN

Sue & Tom Ness
Jam Rag/Michigan Music Campaign/Green Party

* "Green House" Metro Detroit Area Green Party Clearinghouse:
248-336-9241 * Ste 210 * www.greenhouseonline.org

* Jam Rag Headquarters
248-336-9243 * Ste 240 * jamrag@glis.net

22757 Woodward, Box 20076, Ferndale MI 48220
SW corner of 9 Mile/Woodward, 2nd floor
Green building, above Professional Guitars
Hours: 2-8pm; closed Monday & Friday
FAX: 248-336-9251

Subscribe to Tom's Green House News: jamrag@glis.net
When reading, remember the author is quite often being silly.

Don't Let Your Dreams Get Dusty!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

("Give Me Pirate Radio" Green House presentation by Tom Ness, 9-19-01)

Let me begin by saying that this meeting was called, and the ideas I'm going
to express were developed, long before the wicked terrorist attacks of Sept.
11. Shocked by those acts, I considered canceling this meeting, but was
urged for a variety of reasons to continue as planned. Let me say that as
wildly enthusiastic I had been about tonight's discussion previously,
following the attack I've found it virtually impossible to focus on the
subject of community radio. My heart just hasn't been in this, or anything
else actually.

What happened last week changes everything. With the whole world in
upheaval, I've not been able to even begin considering the implications in
terms of community radio, although my initial reaction is that perhaps it is
needed more than ever.

So all I can do tonight is present to you the ideas as I would have on Sept.
10 -- absent, of course, the enthusiasm I felt then. It will be your job to
interpret it in light of our new and profoundly different set of
circumstances.

**************************************************

We're here to talk about the media tonight. And I'll begin by mentioning
probably the most powerful media operation on the planet, the Central
Intelligence Agency. The CIA has earned a very curious nickname over the
years, not one most people would normally first think of for an institution
like this. But in fact, because of its vast and extraordinary propaganda
efforts, the Central Intelligence Agency is often referred to as the "Mighty
Wurlitzer."

The "Mighty Wurlitzer." The CIA publishes newspapers, magazines and books,
operates radio and TV stations, etc., more than perhaps anyone else. And
where it does not publish or broadcast directly, it attempts to influence
publishers and broadcasters, either personally, or via press releases, etc.
Although no one in the general public knows for sure, I suspect it is still
true today that the agency devotes a greater percentage of its resources to
propaganda than to anything else it does   and they do a great many things
at Langley!

Of all the operations in which it engages, the CIA's propaganda work is
paramount. Like the mightiest of organs, the CIA's pipes carry the tune to
the furthest corners of the planet, the agency leading the music to which
the rest of the world is encouraged to sing along.

I'm not making any value judgements about the CIA itself, good or bad. I'm
merely making the point about the power of the media. That a clever and
extremely determined agency like the CIA is so focused on propaganda over
and above everything else speaks volumes I think, and demonstrates the old
saying about the pen being mightier than the sword.

If you can control what people think -- or even what they think about -- you
don't need expensive and messy armies. If you can control what people think,
you've no need for police because people will happily do what you want --
and think all along it is their idea. That is the power of the media, and
why tonight's subject is so acutely important.

It's important because we are living in a world where the same people
increasingly control the books, newspapers and magazines we read, the TV
networks we watch, the radio stations we listen to, the movies we enjoy.
This is extremely dangerous, and demands to be challenged.

I want to thank all my friends for coming tonight. We have here people from
every imaginable walk of life, and I'm delighted to see you all. Among us,
we have many different interests, and see the world in entirely different
ways. But I suspect most or all of us have at least one thing in common   an
instinctive love for democracy, and a longing for a more democratic way of
life.

This nation of ours, in some ways the birthplace of democracy, of course has
not yet perfected it, in fact far from it. There are many things standing in
the way of a functional, meaningful democracy in the United States; among
them the two-party duopoly, big money politics and the urgent need for
campaign finance reform, our winner-take-all electoral system. And, of
course, the domination of our mass media by corporate interests and the
wealthy.

Keeping in mind the lesson of the CIA and the penetrating role played by
mass media in a democracy, if we love democracy and want to see it flourish
then we have no choice but to find ways to democratize the media. That means
we need to make it possible for the masses of people to participate in the
national debate.

We cannot have democracy in a nation where most people have no role other
than listening passively. Where there is a lack of active participation, it
can not be considered democracy.

But tonight we are here to talk about radio. And  I say again that democracy
is not a passive act. In fact, the quality and authenticity of our democracy
might well be measured by how many are allowed to use the microphone,
instead of only the headphones.

And the question I will raise several times tonight is this: "When is it our
turn?" When is it our turn to use the public airwaves to say what WE think?
Will it be our turn tomorrow? Next year? Ten years from now? Or will it
never be our turn.

***

Even to those few who scorn democracy, I would suggest that allowing for
public expression is an important safety valve in terms of social stability.
People whose freedom of expression is stifled become frustrated, angry, and
anti-social. And not just against the government, but towards our neighbor
as well. When people lack a peaceful, polite means of expression, they will
find another and it might not be pretty. So by facilitating expression and
thereby relieving frustration, community radio can promote social stability.

***

Now, an extremely limited form of community radio has recently been
legalized, with the first stations just beginning to go on the air. And in
that successful struggle, one of our FCC Commissioners opposed to community
radio argued that if we want to enjoy our First Amendment rights we should
be satisfied with handing out flyers in the park. Of course, we don't see
companies like CBS rushing to trade their right to broadcast for our right
to hand out flyers.

This same Commissioner also said that the public no longer needs access to
the public airwaves because of the availability of things like the Internet.
But raising the issue of other communication options is a distraction. This
is about our right to use a form of public property. And this right is being
stolen from us. Now if a thief steals something of yours, it doesn't matter
whether you were using it or not   it is still theft. And when it comes to
public property, this theft of an extraordinarily valuable resource simply
must not be tolerated.

In fact, I would say that access to our airwaves is needed more than ever in
our communities.

Radio remains, and will remain for many decades to come, among the most
powerful and popular means of communication.

Radio has unique qualities. Unlike the Internet, radio is very inexpensive
for both the broadcaster and the listener, and can be enjoyed while driving,
washing the dishes, while at work. Unlike print, radio is immediate. It
allows personal nuance. It is unintrusive. In fact, in emergencies, radio is
often the communications medium of last resort.

Of all these unique qualities however, that which is most important to me is
the remarkable affordability of radio, which has obvious implications for
democracy. If we truly want democracy, that means our poorest of
neighborhoods must be able to participate. And for our poorest
neighborhoods, there are perhaps no better options for expression than
radio.

For just a few hundred dollars, a community center might set up a station
and reach out to the most isolated members of their neighborhood. A radio
station can be invaluable in promoting a neighborhood's general health and
welfare. And compare radio to say, a community newspaper, which involves an
endless flow of money on paper and ink, distribution, etc.

***

And what about the other economic implications of community radio? As the
situation exists, most small local businesses cannot afford to advertise on
the existing commercial radio stations. Instead, generally speaking, it is
the Burger Kings of the world which are alone able to exploit the public
airwaves to hawk their products. What a terrible advantage this gives to the
chains over our local small businesses.

And why would a local coffeehouse, for example, want to advertise on a
station which broadcasts over an enormous region, anyway? The small, local
businesses which make up the essential character of our communities require
more geographically-focused advertising options.

Looking at economic issues from the other side, lets not forget that the big
broadcasters enjoy enormous profits from their use of our airwaves. I don't
have the current figures, but when we were fighting this battle a few years
ago, television and radio broadcasters annually generated about $60 billion
in sales using our property. It's a gold mine   but one reserved only for
corporations and the wealthiest individuals.

***

Then there are the cultural implications of community radio which, by their
nature, are difficult to define. Everyone can appreciate the intrinsic
importance of cultural diversity, especially myself. Over the last 16 years,
I've enjoyed a unique privilege as the publisher of a local, independent
music magazine. The rest of the nation has largely tuned into the same 20 or
30 songs coast to coast and over and over again, music which rarely breaks
new ground but rather simply imitates last week's hit. But every day bands
and artists send me totally new music to enjoy. I've heard thousands and
thousands of artists you'll never hear. Not all of it is great or even good,
but quite a lot is simply sublime -- and I want you to know that you've been
cheated out of something fabulous.

Culture is at the core of civilization. Culture socializes people, teaches
us how to understand each other and how to get along. It is not something we
can afford to have controlled by a handful of gatekeepers who decide what we
read, see or listen to. For a more peaceful, happier world, we want every
human being to contribute to the collective cultural stew.

This has never been more important than today, with our new FCC Chairperson,
Mike Powell, who is determined to eliminate all remaining regulations in
regards to media monopolization. There was a time when individual
corporations were limited as to how many radio and tv stations, networks,
newspapers, etc., they could control, in a single city and across the
country. But those vital regulations are being removed from the books faster
than you can say "merger." Before the 1996 Telecom Act, no single company
could own more than about 30 radio stations across the country   now, just
five years later, the biggest media titans control 1,200. The new FCC Chair
thinks this is fabulous, and is working feverishly to make it possible for
the likes of Rupert Murdoch to own not only all the radio and TV stations in
a given city, but also all the newspapers. So if you too are concerned about
media democratization, you should pay attention to what is happening in
Washington.

I think everyone in this room who is over the age of 40 will understand the
cultural implications I'm talking about by considering the example of FM
radio. Decades ago, everyone listened to AM. It was a cultural wasteland,
controlled by the most powerful economic interests who ensured that very
little of anything new or interesting actually ever made it on to the
airwaves.

But then in the '60s the FM band was opened, and independent stations went
on the air   and the whole country changed. At first, everyone laughed at
FM, and predicted no one would listen to the amateurs broadcasting there.
But, without concern for the bottom line, these stations felt free to
experiment, and began programming something so totally new, diverse and
original that listeners flocked to the new spectrum.

Partly as a result of the FM phenomenon, our nation experienced a musical
renaissance. The rock 'n roll revolution is linked in significant ways to
the FM experiment. Music was allowed to evolve, and as a result we basked in
an explosion of creativity and new ideas. This is a perfect example of the
potential cultural implications of a meaningful community radio service,
should there emerge the political will to demand it's creation.

***

We need to provide public access to the airwaves to advance democracy and to
promote social stability. We need to defend our legitimate rights to radio
as our public property. And the poorest, most vulnerable among us need the
unique benefits of radio as a simple survival tool. Community radio is
essential to the economic health of our communities, and the right to profit
off the public airwaves should not be reserved for the rich. And community
radio advances culture, for the fundamental benefit of all.

***************************************************

Now, people mean many different things when they talk about community radio.
For the purposes of this presentation, let me explain what I mean.

When I say community radio, I mean small, independent, locally owned and
operated stations which might have a broadcast range of a few miles,
covering neighborhoods and cities, not entire regions and so-called
"markets." And I mean stations whose programming is focused on the local
community in which they exist.

When I talk about community radio, I mean stations which might be operated
by local community groups, city governments, and also small, local,
independent businesses.

When I talk about community radio, I do NOT mean a nationwide network of
mega-watt so-called "public" stations, existing under the NPR hierarchy. I
very much enjoy WDET, and I'm not criticizing that station. But I'm talking
about something different. Instead of one station for the entire city, I'm
talking about dozens of small stations which exist independently of each
other. That is a formula which much more effectively advances our culture
and democracy, I think.

The closest existing model for what I'm talking about are college and high
school stations which illustrate the potential for real community radio,
although in the most marginal manner. The Metro Detroit area is actually
blessed with a large number of these stations, and everyone knows they serve
a unique and valuable role. But what if we could vastly expand that model so
that community groups, political organizations, churches, municipal
governments and small businesses could participate as well? When will it be
our turn?

A meaningful community radio service, in my eyes, should be substantive
enough to serve the entire range of diverse interests in our region:
cultural, political, ethnic, religious, etc. That is, of course, a very tall
order, and perhaps simply impossible because of the laws of physics alone.

But just for the fun of it, let's forget about physics, along with existing
political realities, and envision what a perfect world might look like in
terms of community radio. For example, there is a large Hispanic population
in the Clark Park area of Detroit. For an area of that size, one could
easily imagine two or three not-for-profit stations operated by Hispanic
community groups. Then, there might be a couple run by businesses as well.
Of course, there are lots of other ethnic groups living there who might want
a station. Then there are all the religions represented. And what about the
Greens or the Libertarians, or any of the other myriad of political groups?
What about stations which might focus on local music, or perhaps a neglected
style of music   and I'm thinking of the WQRS classical music fans who were
left out in the cold a few years back. What about local government,
education, police and fire departments?

Surely, most of these interests could be combined, and people could share a
station and a spot on the dial. But it is easy to imagine a perfect world
including dozens of community radio stations just in the Clark Park area
alone. Extended throughout all of Metro Detroit, one might envision a
thousand and across the country perhaps 100 thousand stations. That's a
vision of a truly meaningful community radio service.

For perspective, our own analysis a few years back determined a need for a
minimum of perhaps 100 such stations in order to begin serving Metro
Detroit's enormously wide range of communities and interests. And when LPFM
community radio was finally legalized in January 2000, some 60 or 80 groups
in our area expressed interest in applying for such a license. But in the
end, we were told that there wasn't room for even ONE in the whole City of
Detroit. So again I ask, "When will it be our turn?"

**************************************************

Now, I wasn't around at the time, but as I understand it, radio came into
existence at the beginning of last century in a manner similar to the model
I espouse -- radio was largely developed by independent hobbyists and
amateurs. But, as the medium grew in popularity, the most powerful
commercial interests moved in and the amateurs were squeezed out.

In 1934, the Federal Communications Commission was created, with the mandate
of administering the public airwaves in the "public necessity, interest and
convenience." Of course, as with just about everything else in Washington,
in reality this has meant the CORPORATE necessity, interest and convenience,
and has essentially meant the elimination of the citizen broadcaster.

For many years, however, there remained something called a Class D license,
which allowed for 10-watt stations available to a handful of non-profit
groups. But in the late '70s, the big commercial and public broadcasters
banded together and successfully lobbied for the elimination of Class D
licenses. From that point on, with the exception of grandfathered stations,
the legal use of the public airwaves was put out of reach of the vast
majority of the population.

One response to the elimination of Class D licenses was the dawn of a mass
pirate radio movement. And, of course, so-called "pirates," or unlicensed
stations, have existed since the day licenses were first required. But
beginning in the '80s, a pirate radio MOVEMENT came into being, eventually
consisting of thousands of stations and typified specifically by a general
criticism of FCC policies and the express desire to elevate those policies.

I remember being a guest on such a pirate station right here in Detroit in
the early '90s. The atmosphere was like occupied France in WWII. The station
was accessible only through a hidden trap door into an attic space, and I
was immediately warned that as a result of merely participating in an on-air
interview I might be subject to enormous fines and other penalties.

But by the late '90s there were so many unlicensed stations on the air that
it became a much less paranoid and often a very public endeavor. Some cities
had dozens of stations. Thousands of people who asked the question, answered
it themselves by saying, "It will be my turn today."

***

Now in 1996, my wife and I launched the Michigan Music Campaign,
specifically with the goal of reinvigorating our dismal local music economy.
If we are to enjoy the benefits of cultural diversity, musicians and artists
need to feed themselves, of course, among other things. So how could we get
people to consider spending a portion of their entertainment dollar on
local, independent original music?

We began with a series of public meetings where musicians and related
business owners discussed the matter. And what we unanimously concluded was
that very few people would ever buy local CDs or go to local music shows
until we could get our music on the air where people might hear it. Much
like the Detroit Hip Hop Coalition, we put friendly pressure on local
commercial stations, and even won some minor concessions, such as WRIF's
still-running Sunday night local music show.

But early on we realized that if we were going to get meaningful airplay for
local musicians we were going to have to start our own radio stations --
because those that existed were utterly in bed with the major labels, who
naturally want to keep the billions spent on music in this country to
themselves.

We became aware of the pirate radio movement exploding around us, and also
of a growing and eventually successful mainstream lobbying effort to change
unfair FCC regulations. We dove right in, and I'm very proud to say our
awesome volunteers quickly lifted the Michigan Music Campaign into a leading
role of that lobbying effort.

In the Summer of 1998, a number of formal rulemaking petitions were
submitted and eventually accepted by the FCC, calling for the creation of a
community radio service. These petitions, I must mention, although a good
start, certainly came nowhere near to demanding what we as citizens deserve,
after all, as owners of the airwaves.

The mandate of the FCC again, is to administer the airwaves in the "public
interest, necessity and convenience, so we set to work with our allies
across the country to demonstrate public demand for community radio. And it
was easy. Virtually everyone in this country has an instinctive love for
democracy and free speech, and we had a very difficult time finding anyone
opposed to the idea of community radio. We gathered perhaps 10 thousand
supporting letters from the public at large, along with 47 supporting
resolutions passed by city and township governments representing millions of
people.

Gathering those resolutions was particularly instructive because, of all 47,
there was just a single vote cast against us. Of perhaps 400 mayors and
councilpersons, only one disagreed with what we were trying to accomplish.
That's quite remarkable!

Then we went to Lansing, and tried to get a supporting resolution from our
state government. It was very interesting, because at that level the
influence of the Michigan Association of Broadcasters is rather
intimidating. The MAB fought us tooth and nail, desperate to maintain their
monopoly over the public airwaves. And they successfully pressured the
legislative leadership to bury our resolutions in committee. But
nevertheless we were eventually able to demonstrate the support of a
majority of the State House along with about half the Senate.

Then we went to Washington, where the power of the broadcast lobby casts a
shadow over every institution. Our Congress and Administration cower before
the people who own the radio and TV stations, and it was difficult to find a
friend anywhere. For perhaps two years, Rep. David Bonior was the only one
of 535 members who dared speak out on our behalf. And Mr. Bonior was simply
fantastic. But for myself, seeing firsthand the striking dichotomy between
our responsive local government and our dysfunctional federal government,
convinced me that we will never have democracy in this nation until the
two-party duopoly is broken, and until it is possible to find more than one
person in Washington willing to speak for the citizens over the
corporations.

Nevertheless, the FCC rulemaking petitions progressed to an actual
rulemaking procedure and, by Washington's standards, at lightning speed.
Along the way, a record amount of public comment was filed on this issue
with the FCC   more people responded about this issue than anything else in
the agency's 70-year history. And virtually all of it was in favor of
community radio.

And then on Jan. 20, 2000, a mere year and a half after we'd joined the
battle, the FCC formally announced the creation of the new Low Power FM
community radio service.

It was rather amusing, at this point, to watch members of Congress jump on
the "me too" bandwagon, and trumpet how they'd been for community radio all
along.
But it's important to understand that at every step along the way, the
original plan kept getting scaled back, with endless compromises to placate
the monopolistic commercial and public mega-broadcasters. So what we
eventually ended up with was perhaps one percent of what we'd asked for
and what we'd asked for was nowhere near what we deserve!

And that's when things really got interesting, because with record speed the
broadcast lobby demonstrated its notorious muscle and got a bill to decimate
the FCC's new plan introduced into a House subcommittee. The bill raced over
to the full committee and then to the floor for a vote in mid-April, where
it passed overwhelmingly. We were able to stall things in the Senate, but
eventually it was attached as a rider to an appropriations bill and, as one
of his last acts as President, Clinton signed it, and reduced our
hard-fought victory to something largely meaningless.

***

Now, on the bright side, we should be proud of our victory, the first time
in decades that a citizens' movement was able to defeat the awesome
broadcast lobby at anything! In fact, NAB leadership often said this was
their most important battle in 30 years   and we beat them. In fact, at
least a thousand new stations are now going on the air. And because of the
regulations we inspired, they can only be owned by local, independent
non-profit organizations   for the time being, the media titans are
forbidden from snatching up these new stations. Under the circumstances,
this is an extraordinary victory.

So what is wrong with our new LPFM radio service?

* Above everything else, the most crushing blow is the fact that we will see
absolutely zero new LPFM community stations in any of the top 50 markets. We
are told that there is simply no room for community radio in Detroit, New
York, Los Angeles, Miami or any of the other major metropolitan areas. Of
course, there is plenty of room for McDonald's commercials, but not even the
tiniest spot on the dial for you or I. And of course, it is precisely in our
urban areas where community radio is needed most! Essentially we have been
told that we can have our damn radio stations anywhere we want, so long as
there are no people around who might listen to them.

* Also, the civil disobedience free speech heroes who animated this movement
the so-called "pirates" -- have been barred from the new licenses, because
of a question about their "character" because they intentionally broke the
law. What an outrage! This is like telling Rosa Parks that she must remain
at the back of the bus even after the rules are changed because she lacked
the "character" to follow an unjust law.

* Furthermore, the new service protects the profits of the existing
corporate stations by only allowing for non-commercial operation of the new
stations.

* As well, the rules restricting ownership of the new stations to local,
independent community groups are only temporary, so one can imagine a day in
the future when these new stations are all consumed by the titans, and
community radio is literally converted into "McRadio," just another tool in
the corporations' marketing arsenal.

* And as it stands, the FCC is forbidden to expand on the existing LPFM
service without the express consent of Congress. And Congress is against us,
and will be for a long time

There are many other problems. So only those with the least expectations of
their rights as citizens could be satisfied with this victory.

Simply enough   we cannot stop here. And in fact, my tech-minded friends
tell me that if American citizens are ever to launch a battle to reclaim
even the tiniest portion of our public airwaves, we'd better do it right
away. Because with the advent of IBOC digital, wireless, satellite, and a
million other technological advances I can only begin to understand and keep
up with, there is a fierce battle going on in Washington as corporations
carve up the remaining slices of the airwaves. Very soon, I'm told, the
framework will be put in place which will lock down their control of this
uniquely valuable resource for decades to come.

***

So what is to be done?

First, we need to convince Congress and the FCC to take this matter
seriously. And that task is utterly enormous. We must convince Congress and
the FCC that they simply have no choice but create a meaningful community
radio service. This will be terribly difficult for them, for example,
because ultimately it may require the most powerful interests to actually
give up their spot on the dial in some cases. Certainly no one in Washington
can imagine that today   and that's why they will only respond to this issue
when our elected officials and public servants are convinced they have no
other choice.

If we can accomplish this first task, that of being taken seriously the
rest, I suspect, will actually be relatively easy.

*************************************************

The question of how we might convince Washington to take this seriously
leads directly to the matter of civil disobedience.

I believe in the rule of law. And especially in these trying times following
Sept. 11, my desire for the rule of law has greatly intensified, as we've
all witnessed the very worst kind of lawlessness. I want to live in a safe
and civilized world, and that requires law.

I also believe in a regulated broadcast environment. Much to the dismay of
my anarchist and libertarian friends I'm sure, let me say that I respect the
authority of the FCC. Because without a regulated broadcast environment, I'm
pretty sure that Westinghouse will build a gazillion-watt transmitter and an
antenna which reaches to the moon, and when we turn on our radio we will
hear nothing else. I believe that without a regulated environment, the poor
and working class of this country will never have their turn at the
microphone and a spot on the dial. So I respect the authority of the FCC,
and believe that our task is that of convincing the agency to put a much
higher priority on media democratization.

Now, in our country, we have a legislative branch which creates the law, an
executive branch which administers it, and a judicial system which
interprets it. And the role of the citizen is largely that of obeying the
law. That's okay with me. I believe that for democracy to function, we must
generally recognize the will of the majority, and submit to the rule of law.

But there are times when citizens are duty-bound to play another role. Our
public servants generally do a good job, and for the most part pass good
laws. But they sometimes make mistakes. And sometimes unjust laws and
regulations are put on the books.

In those circumstances, I believe citizens are duty-bound to speak up, and
lobby for change. And that's precisely what we did with community radio
between 1996 and 2000.

In fact, I believe citizens must do everything in their power and exhaust
every possible avenue in challenging unjust laws and regulations. And again,
we feel we did precisely that.

But having exhausted every avenue and finding oneself still burdened with an
unjust law, citizens are left with but one honorable option, and that is
civil disobedience.

In fact, so many of the best things in this country and around the planet
have only been accomplished through civil disobedience. Women and minorities
have won the right to vote, ghastly labor practices have been ended, unjust
and insane wars have been stopped, empiric armies have been sent home. The
human history of civil disobedience deserves our greatest reverence because,
simply enough, there are times when governments need the guidance of their
citizens.

***

Of all the various forms of civil disobedience, so-called "pirate" radio has
some real advantages. It is purely nonviolent and generally nonintrusive
if you don't like what you're listening to you can just turn the dial!
Pirates naturally choose empty spots on the dial and avoid interfering with
larger stations primarily out of a sense of honor and engineering pride, but
also out of common sense   what's the point of competing with a signal that
vastly overpowers yours?!

Pirate radio is relatively inexpensive, and plenty of people have gone on
the air for little more than $100. For $2,000-3,000 thousand dollars, one
can have a first-class station.

Unlike protesting on the streets of Seattle or Genoa, for example, pirate
radio broadcasters are not likely to be beaten or killed, a benefit which
should not be underestimated.

In the process of operating a pirate station, one can do extraordinary
community service, which is its own reward.

The media finds this form of civil disobedience to be sexy and thrilling,
and it's proven to be an excellent way to attract coverage for your cause.
As well, the public at large tends to have a romantic empathy for pirate
operators.

And of course   it's fun! Who wouldn't like to operate their own radio
station?!

Let's also look seriously at the potential ramifications. Of course, a small
number of people in this country have paid a heavy price for engaging in
pirate radio. But for the most part, and to their credit I think, the FCC
has taken a relatively benign approach to pirates. Generally speaking, if
you take to the air without a license, you might receive a letter or a
visit. If you persist, you might receive another letter. If you continue
further, you will almost certainly have your equipment confiscated, but that
is probably all. However, you may also be hit with a fine, and you may even
find yourself forced to pay it one day.

I know my pirate friends will be horrified for saying so, but I think the
FCC has acted in relatively remarkable restraint. But as things grew totally
out of control in the late '90s, there was an attempt to make an example out
of Lonnie Kobres, a far-right wing activist of Florida, who utterly refused
to respect the FCC's authority, and continued to broadcast after repeated
warnings and raids. I like Lonnie and respect his integrity, and was shocked
when he was charged and convicted on 14 criminal counts of unlicensed
broadcasting, facing a potential sentence of life in prison and a
multi-million dollar fine. But this tactic of making an example out of
Kobres backfired on the FCC and, as a result of an enormous public outcry,
he ultimately received a $10,000 fine and one year of mere home arrest.

Having said all this, I must also mention that our new FCC Commissioner is
moving towards a greater crackdown with more serious penalties for pirates.
This should be seriously considered before anyone thinks about launching a
station.

***************************************************

Now, tonight I will discuss one possible strategy involving the coordinated
creation of dozens of pirate radio stations for the express purpose of
encouraging the FCC and Congress to revisit the matter of community radio.

I am very grateful to my lawyer friends who seek to keep me out of jail. And
out of respect for their goals, allow me to clarify that I am merely
speaking speculatively. I am not encouraging anyone to engage in pirate
radio or to actually adopt any part of this plan.

Well beyond the legal ramifications   I'm really not! I like to think some
of my ideas are good. But I've heard many other excellent ideas which run
entirely counter. So I am not at all seeking the adoption of my plan
tonight.

All I want tonight is to initiate a dialogue, and inspire some momentum.
Perhaps the correct approach is another letter-writing campaign, and if
that's what people choose to do, I am delighted. But most important is
simply that we take up this fight. So all I want is that we ask the
question, "When is it our turn?"

This strategy rests entirely on the principle of "united we stand." Over the
last decade, hundreds of stations have been raided by the FCC, picked off
one by one. And I am reminded of the Allied invasion of Normandy in WWII.
Correctly, our generals chose not to send over one boat at a time over the
course of months or years, allowing the Axis forces to pick them off one by
one. Instead, we patiently gathered our forces, amassed our numbers and
assembled our resources -- and waited. And we proceeded only when we were
able to present a force too great to be resisted. That is the key, I
suspect.

Allow me to follow the militaristic metaphor of the last paragraph by saying
that I recommend borrowing from Ghandi in terms of the overall character of
this project. We should be patient, polite, respectful, kind, playful,
inviting   and I did indeed invite the FCC to be here tonight, with an
interesting and friendly response. And we must always be utterly
non-violent. But at the same time, we must be absolutely firm in our
determination to accept nothing less than what we deserve. And in this fun
and friendly but firm atmosphere, we must present a great deal of trouble
for Congress and the FCC.

Now, today, when one person launches a pirate station, eventually the FCC
finds them and shuts them down. If ten people launch stations, one by one
they too are shut down. But the agency has severely limited resources, and
there is only so much they can accomplish.

So let's look at this from the other perspective. What if every single one
of the almost million residents of the City of Detroit decided to launch a
pirate radio station? Certainly that is high enough of a number that the FCC
and Congress would simply throw up their hands and be forced to deal with
the issue. Of course, it may be difficult to get everyone to participate
but we'd surely still succeed if with half a million stations, or even 50
thousand, or even a thousand in a single city. Or a hundred in several
cities. Or a dozen each in hundreds of cities.

What is the exact number, I wonder, needed to convince Washington to take
this seriously? What is the formula is for success? I'd really like to know!
And I think there is a way we can find out.

***

We begin by finding five or ten groups in Metro Detroit who might consider
launching a station. These could be individuals, but more valuable are
community groups which are already serving their neighborhoods and
demonstrating their public commitment. We start by researching the subject,
and learning all there is to know about radio: not only the technical
aspects, but the political and legal ramifications as well. We reach out to
the media and let our intentions be known to our community. We attempt to
initiate a dialogue with the FCC, and alert our members of Congress.  We
also begin developing teams of lawyers and engineers whose legal and
technical expertise might be shared among everyone who participates.

As we progress, we reach out to five or ten more groups. At this point we
begin discussing where we might locate our stations, planning out their
operation, etc. Perhaps one will go in this person's garage. Perhaps another
group will consider locating one above a storefront.
We continue approaching the media, Washington, reaching out to our
communities, continue building the shared legal and other resources.

We find another five or ten interested would-be broadcasters. At this point
perhaps we begin raising money for equipment. And it won't be much, a few
thousand for each station. So we start organizing benefits, bake sales,
rummage sales, anything. We're in no hurry! Like Ghandi, we are patient,
relaxed   but determined. Of course, these events will be of interest to the
media and the surrounding community, not to mention fun!

Now we number perhaps 20 potential stations, which is certainly enough to
get the media's attention. And it is also enough to start expecting some
friendly attention from our Congressional representatives. And here in Metro
Detroit, we currently have quite a sympathetic delegation: Rep. Bonior, who
is our hero, is all over community radio. Reps. Conyers, Kildee, Kilpatrick,
Levin and Rivers all voted with us. I've described Rep. Dingell as "the man
who killed community radio," and Senator Stabenow was an enormous
disappointment, but Senator Levin is friendly.

We find another five or ten potential stations. At this point, some of our
groups are well along, while others are just getting started. But now we're
up to maybe 30 groups, many of which are recognized and respected in our
community.

By now, people in plenty of other cities will have taken notice. If history
is any guide, lots of them will pick up our pattern in their towns. In fact,
lots of people around the country are already interested!

Now we begin buying equipment, turning the money we've raised into actual
broadcast equipment. No laws have been broken, other than the most
ridiculous kind of "conspiracy laws," which will be very difficult to use
against us, especially if we have built up solid community support. But a
key function of this strategy is to break no laws until we absolutely have
no choice and until we have organized a support network large and strong
enough to defend ourselves.

We find another five or ten potential stations, and now number 40 or 50 in
Detroit alone. Perhaps at this point this is being duplicated in a dozen
other major cities, and many more smaller population centers as well. We
continue to appeal for dialogue with the FCC, and by now there will likely
be something serious in that regard. And as our numbers grow, experience
leads me to believe that growing numbers of Congress, seeing which way the
popularity wind is blowing, will be eager to carry our flag.

We find another five or ten. Now we begin installing our equipment, plugging
everything in. Testing everything, perhaps, except the antenna. Of course,
it is not against the law to learn about radio, nor to buy or own a
transmitter, nor to set it up in your basement. One only breaks the law by
turning it on. Of course, over-enthusiastic prosecutors have often made hell
for people who've never broken a serious law   but if we've grown our
numbers sufficiently and built up our support network properly, no one will
dare attack one of us in such a vindictive manner. And they will not have
the resources to attack us all.

Five or ten more. At this point, stations begin really planning their
programming, building up a staff of potential DJs and hosts. Building up
music libraries. Contacting groups and individuals who might be interviewed.
It will be helpful to gather supporting statements from members of the
community, groups, businesses, everyone. Stations should accumulate
thousands of these.

Five or ten more, and we are now 60, 70, maybe 80 stations strong in Detroit
alone. By now, in our city we should have at least a couple dozen lawyers
and an equal number of engineers helping. Momentum and excitement around the
country should be enormous. If we can get this far, it's likely that things
will spin right out of our control, and we might see members of Congress
stepping over themselves to introduce favorable bills.

At this point, some of the earliest stations will need to sit patiently, and
allow the newer participants to catch up. Fundraisers can continue and
stations can develop a financial surplus. Stations can conduct tours, and
otherwise continue building support. By now we will also be of such a
substantial number that we'll have to work out time-sharing plans between us
you may get Mondays and Thursdays, while another group gets Tuesday and
Saturday, etc. There will simply be more stations than can possibly
broadcast at the same time!

Five or ten more. The pressure will be unbearable. By now, if we haven't
already reached some kind of acceptable understanding with Washington, we
will have to begin making some difficult decisions. That is to say, we might
have to think about firing up our transmitters.

Now, I really hope that we can accomplish our goals without ever breaking a
single law, even something as harmless and benign as broadcasting from a
tiny station without a license. And I really believe it can happen. But if
it comes down to it, we must be prepared to broadcast, if necessary. This
won't work if it is merely a bluff.

So at some point, we may have to decide that this is it, and on a certain
day or week, we are all going on the air together. I suppose there will be
lots of Internet and email debate. Perhaps conferences will have to be
hosted throughout the country. But the net result will be a decision that on
a particular date, unless satisfied, we will all go on the air together.

And it will have to be made clear that the hundred or thousand or ten
thousand of our stations across the country will act together, and that if
one of us is threatened we will respond collectively.

And what an exciting day that will be, as thousands of stations everywhere
heat up their transmitters collectively! What a historic event that will be
when we finally decide together that our turn comes today.

Actually, such an event seems so inspiring, I'm almost inclined to hope it
comes down to that! But frankly, I like my friends at the FCC, and I know
they are reasonable. In fact, there are lots of people at the FCC who
support community radio completely. As far as Congress I am confident that
WHEN they realize we are serious and that we have overwhelming popular
support, they too will only be too eager to champion our cause.

So I believe that we can and will succeed without firing a single shot, so
to speak. We will win without ever breaking the law, or infringing on a
single regulation.

***

Then there remains the extremely difficult task of actually finding a way to
put all these stations on the air. Of course, at this point it is largely
the FCC's problem, although I'm sure we will want to help.

How can one squeeze several dozen new, if tiny stations on already congested
radio dials? Most easily, as called for in the original FCC plan before it
was subverted by Congress, the so-called third adjacency protection can be
lifted. There are already hundreds of such stations operating around the
country, so we know it can be done without interference. This will very
easily allow us to squeeze more stations onto the existing dial.

Still, this might only create room for, at best, a few new stations in a
city like Detroit. And unfortunately, other options are much more
problematic.

One possibility is that the FCC might carve out an entirely new portion of
the spectrum for community radio. This will be painful because spectrum is
already scarce and subject to enormous competition. And then of course, we
will all need new radios which can receive that part of the spectrum. All
very, very difficult   but on the other hand, people happily bought FM
radios the last time a major change like this occurred.

Another option I've heard is for the FCC to mandate that radio manufacturers
produce receivers of much more exacting standards, capable of defining many
more signals in the same given amount of spectrum. Again, this would mean
that listeners would need a new, more modern radio.

Now, we come to my favorite solution, politically the most painful of all.

There are, in this country, companies which have essentially owned their
spot on the dial for decades now, and will continue doing so presumably for
eternity. It is as if they've reserved a lane of the public highway for
their own use. This is because the FCC has a policy which presumes automatic
license renewal, barring any unforgivable act.

This doctrine exists in respect to those corporations which spend millions
setting up their station. And surely it is not realistic to grant say, a
one-year license after a company has made that kind of investment.

But as it stands today, if you are lucky enough to grab a spot on the dial,
it is presumed to be yours forever. And keeping in mind the scandalous
amount of money generated off of our public airwaves, I simply find this
unacceptable!

I'd guess that anyone who's been lucky enough to profit off the public
airwaves for, in some cases, 70 years now, ought to be plenty grateful and
rather polite about giving up their license so someone else might have a
turn.

And I hope you also find this to be reasonable attitude. But such talk is
considered pure heresy in Washington.

But frankly, I don't understand how our democracy can ever function without
precisely this fundamental reform.

The presumption of license renewal must go. I'm rather certain of that,
regardless of how ridiculous it sounds to some.

If the FCC approaches even just one of the corporations in a city, and
politely insist they surrender the license of just one of their massive
stations which covers our entire region, even just one will make room for
dozens of small stations.

Where there is the will, there is a way. And if we have enough self-respect
to demand our rights as citizens, Washington will find a way, however
difficult, to accommodate us.

This leaves one final problem. Of the thousands of stations who might
participate in this project, a good many of them might not ever be able to
go on the air, again simply for lack of spectrum space. Surely we will have
to learn to share this precious resource. Perhaps in some cases it will mean
combining our stations. Perhaps stations might time-share, taking different
days, or taking turns month by month or season by season, etc. We'll have to
figure out ways for everyone to participate.

But I just can't imagine anyone will be disappointed for having participated
in a project like this. If we succeed, we will have elevated our democracy
to an entirely new level which no one could ever have expected. What a
wonderful gift to future generations, and the planet as a whole.

I'll conclude by saying that whether or not this strategy has any value, and
whether or not it is set in motion, something must be done to promote media
democracy, to allow many more voices to be heard.

And I also want to say that life is short and best spent in adventurous
pursuit. We ought not waste our precious days. What an honorable thing it is
to aspire to greatness, to follow bold visions, and to appreciate that
history is not just something to be read, but also to be made.

So let's make history. And so, of the question, "When will it be our turn to
use the public airwaves," I say that the answer is entirely up to us.




back to LPFM 

page.