[rfu-automation] Re: Explicit Lyrics on Automation
Noel L. Vivar
nlvivar at gmail.com
Fri Feb 27 16:12:23 CST 2009
I understand what Joe is saying, but I would add that the particular
context that we are looking at is automation. I think, considering how
many songs that we would go through even if we started from scratch
and only added new songs, that the bar should be set so that everyone
understands it and leaves little room for interpretation.
Whatever airshifters play on their shows as long as it fits our
policies, is okay with me.
-N
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Joe Futrelle <futrelle at shout.net> wrote:
> So you would not support airing the song "Booty" by Erykah Badu, or "Sucka
> Nigga" by Tribe Called Quest, simply because they contain that word?
>
> In the first case, the word is incidental to the topic of the song, which is
> about not wanting to be the third wheel in a romantic relationship. The TTQ
> track is all about Q-tip's decision process about whether or not to use the
> word, and describes the origin of the word and how it is perceived inside
> and outside the hip-hop community.
>
> I'm not arguing you or I or anyone should or should not air those songs,
> just pointing out some of the contexts in which that word occurs and the
> kind of artist that one finds using that word.
>
> I don't think we can deal with blanket complaints about words of phrases.
> Complain about specific content and we can deal with the context of each
> complaint. Otherwise we really are engaging in censorship, and I'd argue
> that that puts us in conflict with the community service mission. We don't
> like everyone in our community. We don't agree with everyone in our
> community. That doesn't mean we don't give them access to the airwaves. And
> I don't see such a big distinction between pre-recorded and live content.
> When we play local artists in automation, it's not an endorsement of their
> message, it's a service we're providing to artists in the community, and
> they are responsible for their content, not us. The only place we step in is
> when we need to protect our license, our tax status, and our relationship
> with the FCC.
>
> The track in question. What's the context? Has anyone listened to it? Is
> anyone specifically offended by it? Shouldn't that matter?
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Raymond Morales <morales4 at illinois.edu>
> wrote:
>>
>> I will go on the record and say that I am personally offended when I hear
>> the N-word and would not appreciate or agree with it being on songs in
>> automation.
>>
>> I say this knowing full well that I air the words occasionally on songs
>> during my radio program. I know that this may seem hypocritical, but please
>> know that this only happens when I do not have enough time to edit my songs
>> prior to broadcast. I know that it is a lame excuse, but sometimes I go on
>> the air with little time for preparation.
>>
>> Yes, I do recognize that I am on the air from 10pm to midnight and am able
>> to air whatever content that I want (for the most part). I choose not to do
>> that.
>>
>> I am not comfortable with giving artists free reign to use that type of
>> language (N-word specifically) on pre-recorded content. Live content is
>> another issue entirely as I do not feel artists should be prohibited in
>> their expression as I feel that those words would be implicitly associated
>> with the performer and not myself or the station. I still do not appreciate
>> hearing it, but I do make that nuanced distinction.
>>
>> I understand Joe's point about censorship and not wanting to go down a
>> path of making rules that limit free speech. However, we do individually
>> represent different parts of this community and, as such, bring different
>> sensibilities to the table. We each bear the responsibility of sharing our
>> respective community standards with each other. That is not to say that one
>> should not trump another, but we should be able to have a dialogue and,
>> ultimately, come to a consensus on what is reasonable. Until we do, I would
>> hope that we could air on the side of caution.
>>
>> -Ray
>>
>> ---- Original message ----
>> >Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 13:59:24 -0600
>> >From: Joe Futrelle <futrelle at shout.net>
>> >Subject: Re: [rfu-automation] Re: Explicit Lyrics on Automation
>> >To: Andrew Ó Baoill <andrew at funferal.org>
>> >Cc: rfu-automation at lists.chambana.net
>> >
>> > We're on a slippery slope here towards censorship.
>> > We are supposed to be screening automation in order
>> > to maintain FCC compliance, not in order to protect
>> > listeners from being offended in ways which would
>> > not jeopardize our FCC license--there are so many
>> > ways listeners could be offended that we cannot and
>> > should not anticipate them all.
>> > As I understand it we are not responsible for the
>> > content of what we air *except* wrt the IMC's
>> > policies, the 501c3 status content restrictions, FCC
>> > content restrictions, and any applicable laws (maybe
>> > we're liable if we air fake emergency warnings, or
>> > something like that). There's no law against the
>> > N-word, as offensive as it may be in some contexts.
>> > Our policies should not include content
>> > restrictions. Period. The only content restrictions
>> > we should be enforcing are the ones being imposed on
>> > us by our relationships with the IMC, the IRS, and
>> > the FCC.
>> > If someone is creating a hostile atmosphere by
>> > airing racist content, then we should give them a
>> > chance to correct it and if they don't, show them
>> > the door. We shouldn't just censor that content and
>> > allow the person to continue to operate in a racist
>> > manner outside of those content restrictions.
>> > The only reason to be pre-emptive about removing
>> > automation content is when it's obvious that a
>> > single complaint could cost us our license or
>> > jeopardize the 501c3 status.
>> > So in this case, just noticing the N-word does not
>> > rise to the level where we need to take action. If
>> > on the other hand one of us hears the N-word in a
>> > track on automation *and is offended by it*, then
>> > that one of us *should complain about being
>> > offended* so that we can address what is really, and
>> > not just potentially, offensive content.
>> > Otherwise we're doing our community a disservice by
>> > "protecting" them from each other's free expression
>> > and the conflict / discussion that ensues.
>> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Andrew Ó Baoill
>> > <andrew at funferal.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > The short version: we need to talk about this
>> > issue. Until then, we should remove the track in
>> > question.
>> >
>> > Can someone take care of checking the log and
>> > removing the track from the 'clean and local'
>> > listing (and Zara)?
>> >
>> > ***
>> > I talked briefly with Stephen about this last
>> > night. It seems likely that the word, if it
>> > occurred, was in a track that intended to use it
>> > in a 'reclaiming' fashion. However, that may not
>> > be sufficient for our purposes.
>> >
>> > First:
>> > - The word is not likely to fall foul of the FCC's
>> > indecency and obscenity rules
>> > - The IMC has a commitment to providing a
>> > welcoming space for all, and in particular of not
>> > permitting racist behavior [I make no judgement on
>> > whether the use *was* racist in this case]
>> > - It is possible that use of the word could cause
>> > offense or, to put it mildly, confusion to a
>> > casual listener, irrespective of the intent of the
>> > artist, or the person who adds it to automation
>> > - Automation does not allow us the opportunity to
>> > add context and explanation to listeners when
>> > airing individual songs, and tracks may air at any
>> > time of the day, separated from tracks of similar
>> > genre or context
>> >
>> > My suggestion:
>> > - As an interim measure we seek to remove the
>> > track in question from automation until we reach
>> > consensus on a long-term solution
>> > - We discuss the matter at the next Automation
>> > meeting, with proposals on policy to be brought to
>> > the general meeting
>> > - I believe any policy should recognize the
>> > special situation of automation, as opposed to
>> > individual shows, where a presenter can choose a
>> > mix of songs and give context.
>> > - Any rule should be simple to implement and
>> > monitor.
>> > -- That suggests it may be best to have a policy
>> > of removing certain words from all tracks entered
>> > into automation, even though in some cases this
>> > goes beyond what would be required to adhere to
>> > FCC rules (and will not, in other cases, be enough
>> > to ensure compliance).
>> > -- It also suggests a different standard be
>> > expected of live shows.
>> >
>> > Andrew
>> >
>> > On Feb 27, 2009, at 12:00 PM,
>> > rfu-automation-request at lists.chambana.net wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 1
>> > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:18:29 -0600
>> > From: "Noel L. Vivar" <nlvivar at gmail.com>
>> > Subject: [rfu-automation] Explicit Lyrics on
>> > Automation
>> > To: WRFU Automation
>> > <rfu-automation at lists.chambana.net>
>> > Message-ID:
>> >
>> > <c3649b070902261218w45bd9511meabc649b3cb23290 at mail.gmail.com>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> >
>> > at around 12:10, I'm pretty sure that I heard
>> > "nigger" on the air. Is
>> > this ok with us? I'm at the station right now,
>> > but I'm not sure how to
>> > check the automation. How does our system work
>> > on that computer?
>> >
>> > I'll talk to Stephen if I get the chance.
>> >
>> > -Noel
>> >
>> > --
>> > Noel L. Vivar
>> > 505 E. Clark St., Apt. 24
>> > Champaign, IL 61820-4420
>> > 630.740.5775
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 2
>> > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:48:57 -0600
>> > From: Stephen Fonzo <fonzo.stephen at gmail.com>
>> > Subject: Re: [rfu-automation] Explicit Lyrics on
>> > Automation
>> > To: "Noel L. Vivar" <nlvivar at gmail.com>
>> > Cc: WRFU Automation
>> > <rfu-automation at lists.chambana.net>
>> > Message-ID:
>> >
>> > <887c6a420902261548n70b19b7aw7e06962ca352008f at mail.gmail.com>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> >
>> > I'm not sure how we should deal with this case.
>> > However, to check the
>> > automation, you need to view the ZaraRadio logs.
>> >
>> > Here's how:
>> >
>> > 1) After logging in to JIMBO, open the Content
>> > [G:\] directory and at the
>> > bottom open the Zara files folder.
>> > 2) There is a log folder - open this and view
>> > the contents by date (they are
>> > also named by date).
>> > 3) The logs have the time that each file played,
>> > and the name of the file,
>> > as well as any notes about errors.
>> >
>> > If we decide that this is explicit enough to
>> > take out of rotation, we don't
>> > actually delete the file. Search for the song
>> > in iTunes, and change the
>> > label so that it does not include [clean] in the
>> > album or song title.
>> >
>> > -Stephen
>> >
>> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Noel L. Vivar
>> > <nlvivar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > at around 12:10, I'm pretty sure that I heard
>> > "nigger" on the air. Is
>> > this ok with us? I'm at the station right now,
>> > but I'm not sure how to
>> > check the automation. How does our system work
>> > on that computer?
>> >
>> > I'll talk to Stephen if I get the chance.
>> >
>> > -Noel
>> >
>> > --
>> > Noel L. Vivar
>> > 505 E. Clark St., Apt. 24
>> > Champaign, IL 61820-4420
>> > 630.740.5775
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rfu-automation mailing list
>> > rfu-automation at lists.chambana.net
>> > http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/rfu-automation
>> >
>> > --
>> > Stephen Fonzo
>> > Media Training Advisor
>> > AmeriCorps CTC VISTA
>> > Urbana-Champaign Independent Media Center
>> > -------------- next part --------------
>> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> > URL:
>> >
>> > http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/rfu-automation/attachments/20090226/75e376af/attachment-0001.html
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rfu-automation mailing list
>> > rfu-automation at lists.chambana.net
>> > http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/rfu-automation
>> >
>> > --
>> > Joe Futrelle
>> > Person
>> >________________
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >rfu-automation mailing list
>> >rfu-automation at lists.chambana.net
>> >http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/rfu-automation
>
>
>
> --
> Joe Futrelle
> Person
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfu-automation mailing list
> rfu-automation at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/rfu-automation
>
>
--
Noel L. Vivar
505 E. Clark St., Apt. 24
Champaign, IL 61820-4420
630.740.5775
More information about the rfu-automation
mailing list