[rfu-automation] Leaving in?

[Raymond Morales]

I understand where you are coming from and its a matter of 
personal sensibility. I don't disagree with the essence of 
what you are saying. Really though, I am in favor of going 
above and beyond the FCC rules wherever possible. 

This dialogue is important, but I am still inclined to put 
it on the backburner (table) while we hash out studio 
redesign and financial matters.

-Ray

---- Original message ----
>Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 10:08:08 -0500
>From: Joe Futrelle <futrelle at shout.net>  
>Subject: Re: [rfu-automation] Leaving in?  
>To: "Gary Cziko" <g-cziko at uiuc.edu>
>Cc: "Raymond Morales" <morales4 at uiuc.edu>, rfu-
automation at lists.chambana.net
>
>   Here's my $0.02
>   - editing is a lot of work; let's wait until there's
>   a station policy. Thanks Lynsee for starting
>   already, but we don't want you or anyone to have to
>   redo your work
>   - not being able to agree on a policy is causing
>   *lots and lots* of problems--not being able to
>   proceed on bleeping stuff is just one of many.
>   Raymond, with all respect your preferences, or mine,
>   shouldn't be the basis of our policy--we should
>   focus on FCC compliance only. For instance I would
>   prefer that we allow profanity 24 hours a day, but
>   that's a complete nonstarter because it would almost
>   certainly result in actionable cases as far as the
>   FCC is concerned. It's going to be a lot harder to
>   agree on where we would all *prefer* to draw the
>   line than where we all think *the FCC* draws the
>   line. So unless by "needless drama and attention"
>   you mean "a very real threat of an FCC fine" I don't
>   think the concern should factor into our policy.
>   That said, we should probably stay somewhere
>   comfortably below the line--agreeing on where that
>   is is hard anyway ...
>   Focusing on which words to bleep won't get us far
>   towards agreeing on a policy, since that's not the
>   basis of FCC indecency policy. Consider "ass." If a
>   song says, "I'm going to kick your ass," that is
>   clearly not indecent, since it doesn't in any way
>   refer to sexual or excretory activities. If it says,
>   "I've got a huge dildo up my ass," that is clearly
>   indecent. As much as possible we should strive for a
>   policy that makes those kind of distinctions. So if
>   someone doesn't bleep "kick your ass" but does bleep
>   "up your [bleep]" then they won't get in trouble for
>   not bleeping the former.
>   --
>   Joe Futrelle
>   Person
>   On Jun 28, 2006, at 4:29 PM, Gary Cziko wrote:
>
>     Ray:
>
>     Sorry if my last message was not clear.
>
>     I thought the developing consensus was that
>     profane and indecent stuff would be played ONLY
>     during safe harbor hours, and obscene stuff
>     never.  That is what the FCC says. I suppose the
>     question then is stuff like like "bitch" and "ass"
>     profane and/or indecent. I think it depends on the
>     context. But I'd prefer keeping any questionable
>     stuff for safe harbor time.
>
>     But as Lynsee said, we need to get input from the
>     wider group, although it would be nice if the
>     automation group could agree ahead of time on
>     this.
>
>     --Gary
>
>     On 6/28/06, Raymond Morales <morales4 at uiuc.edu>
>     wrote:
>
>       I am against songs containing profanity between
>       6am and
>       10pm. That is just needless drama and attention
>       to bring to
>       our station. Plus, I wouldn't want kids
>       listening to that
>       anyway during the day. I realize it is more
>       work, but I
>       would rather they be bleeped or not on at all
>       between 6am
>       and 10pm. Those are just my thoughts.
>
>       -Ray
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     rfu-automation mailing list
>     rfu-automation at lists.chambana.net
>     http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/rfu-
automation