RIAA coming after digital radio
- Thread starter Harry
- Start date
- Status
W.B.
Member
I see something very sinister in their motives. One bane of the major media (i.e. Clear Channel, Infinity) has been people who've recorded off the radio to monitor "indecency" (as in such famous instances as the individual who taped Mancow Muller shows in Chicago, or those who've recorded Howard Stern programs over the years) and report same to the FCC. One problem is that with the ability to record these things, it makes it that much more difficult for the media moguls and/or so-called "talent" to deny that such things ever happened.
I will give another example: A few weeks ago, an openly left-wing talk-show host named Mike Webb, on the air, openly advocated the death penalty for President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. It was recorded and the focal point of an article here. It should be pointed out that Webb denied ever having said those things -- despite the proof offered -- and blamed the ensuing controversy upon some conservative groups with an axe to grind. (Among other things, the article hinted that these comments, if said by anyone else, would be the subject of a Secret Service investigation.) Certainly I can imagine Webb and his ilk favoring a "broadcast flag" on all radio -- so no-one can tape their stuff, and therefore would make it all the easier for them to deny such a thing happened, and thus compelling the "sheeple" to take their denials at face value.
For, after all, if something can't be documented, it goes from being conclusive, irrefutable proof to something resembling mere circumstantial evidence (or, to put it another way, speculation).
That the FCC has even considered this proposal, may have something to do with Chairman Michael Powell's diktat that his agency would be open to approve indecency complaints based on mere hearsay. Because he knows that within a few years, our ability to tape off the air -- whether TV or radio -- may full well disappear completely, by the time the RIAA and MPAA have completed their goal of usurping our freedoms.
I will give another example: A few weeks ago, an openly left-wing talk-show host named Mike Webb, on the air, openly advocated the death penalty for President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. It was recorded and the focal point of an article here. It should be pointed out that Webb denied ever having said those things -- despite the proof offered -- and blamed the ensuing controversy upon some conservative groups with an axe to grind. (Among other things, the article hinted that these comments, if said by anyone else, would be the subject of a Secret Service investigation.) Certainly I can imagine Webb and his ilk favoring a "broadcast flag" on all radio -- so no-one can tape their stuff, and therefore would make it all the easier for them to deny such a thing happened, and thus compelling the "sheeple" to take their denials at face value.
For, after all, if something can't be documented, it goes from being conclusive, irrefutable proof to something resembling mere circumstantial evidence (or, to put it another way, speculation).
That the FCC has even considered this proposal, may have something to do with Chairman Michael Powell's diktat that his agency would be open to approve indecency complaints based on mere hearsay. Because he knows that within a few years, our ability to tape off the air -- whether TV or radio -- may full well disappear completely, by the time the RIAA and MPAA have completed their goal of usurping our freedoms.
Steven J. Gross
Well-Known Member
The whole concept of what the RIAA is proposing is just flat-out stupid. For one, XM is probably installed in more vehicles than homes. Second, the quality of XM's audio is about as good as FM--about the same frequency range, but it has noticeable digital artifacts. And despite what the RIAA wants us to believe, anyone with a cassette recorder and an audio output cable can tape XM's broadcast. There's nothing XM or anyone can do to prevent the recording of their broadcasts via analog. XM doesn't even have digital outputs, unless the receivers are modified to do so. Plus, the whole process of cherry picking the songs is too slow for the kids today: kids would rather drop in a CD and rip the entire thing to the hard drive in about 2-3 minutes. They are not going to spend the time to tape a song, open it in an editor to trim off the heads and tails, encode it as MP3, then upload it. It's too much work. And not to mention that most of what XM delivers doesn't even appeal to the Kazaa Kiddiez who download that crap.
RIAA, clueless as usual, trying to ruin something else we like.
RIAA, clueless as usual, trying to ruin something else we like.
Rudy said:
I think the RIAA is targeting another form of digital radio - IBOC (In Band On Channel). It's a way for mainstream terrestrial radio to enter the digital age. Supposedly FM will sound more like a CD, and AM will sound more like FM does currently. IBOC allows current radio stations to continue with their current analog broadcasts while also using the same frequency to broadcast digital information.
Our AM radio station is one of the first in the country to be broadcasting in IBOC digital, more as an experiment than anything else. There are currently no IBOX receivers out there for consumers, only prototypes. Word is that these could begin appearing later this year and the first ones will naturally be rather expensive.
The downside to this for broadcasters is that the IBOC siganl does degrade the analog signal a bit. Our AM station now sounds quite a bit "thinner" on regualr radios, losing some highs and lows that we used to have. It also adds somde digital "hash" to the signal just above and below the main frequency, blocking out the tuning in of adjacent frequencies from another town.
Harry
...with some words about IBOC, online...
Even with IBOC, the RIAA's totally out of tune (no pun intended) with radio programming. With so many DJ talkovers and song segues, kids won't have the patience to edit the song appropriately to post it for downloading. (And if they did, it would be crude...songs abruptly cut off. They don't have the bucks to spend it on a digital editor.) And even there I doubt, again, radios will have digital outputs, except in more expensive equipment that these kids couldn't even afford to own. The RIAA sees the word "digital" and panics, as usual.
There's something similar happening with hi-def television as well--they want digital copy protection on the HD signal.
There's something similar happening with hi-def television as well--they want digital copy protection on the HD signal.
jfiedler17
Well-Known Member
Rudy said:The whole concept of what the RIAA is proposing is just flat-out stupid ... despite what the RIAA wants us to believe, anyone with a cassette recorder and an audio output cable can tape XM's broadcast ... RIAA, clueless as usual, trying to ruin something else we like.
It IS flat-out stupid, I agree ... but really, are we surprised? I mean, the RIAA's tried to block EVERYTHING. The RIAA tried to get blank tapes outlawed. They tried to get used-CD sales outlawed. I'm surprised they haven't just starting suing libraries everywhere for lending out CDs for free.
If the RIAA had its way on everything, they'd send the industry's profits plummeting to new depths 'cause just about every means of the music getting out there to people and catching on to more and more people would be outlawed. They just don't get it.
The best send-up of the RIAA I've ever seen ... there was a really great piece in the parody-newspaper The Onion maybe two years back with the headline "RIAA Sues Radio Stations for Giving Away Free Music." There were great fake quotes from RIAA members like "It's criminal. Anyone at any time can simply turn on a radio and hear a copyrighted song." "If we don't shut down the so-called Top 40 stations, the entire economic infrastructure of the recording industry will collapse!"
Whether it's satellite radio, IBOC, standard AM/FM, or even the Music Choice channels I get over DirecTV (and local cable TV), the end result is the same: the music is getting broadcast for free. Why don't they just target everyone and get ALL broadcast music shut down? Anyone taping from radio to post it online for downloading is going to have to do it in real time anyway--what's the difference if it's a digital output or analog? (In fact, just about every computer with a sound card has a line input; fewer have S/PDIF digital inputs.)
Remember, in the early to mid 70s, home taping was killing the industry. And yet, the industry had record years until the early to mid 80s. The problems with the music and radio industries are elsewhere...and legal downloads through sites like iTunes are almost making free downloading obsolete. (Especially since the newer free download systems also come loaded with viruses or spyware.)
The RIAA just has no clue as to what the problem is, and would rather act like thugs and threaten consumers and the electronics industry than go to the root causes. (And they're not really an expert on anything--the RIAA was simply formed as a lobbyist group, a voice for the recording industry in Washington DC!)
Remember, in the early to mid 70s, home taping was killing the industry. And yet, the industry had record years until the early to mid 80s. The problems with the music and radio industries are elsewhere...and legal downloads through sites like iTunes are almost making free downloading obsolete. (Especially since the newer free download systems also come loaded with viruses or spyware.)
The RIAA just has no clue as to what the problem is, and would rather act like thugs and threaten consumers and the electronics industry than go to the root causes. (And they're not really an expert on anything--the RIAA was simply formed as a lobbyist group, a voice for the recording industry in Washington DC!)
- Status