Posts Tagged ‘OPB’
Goddamn, Goddamn, Goddamn
Three goddamns.
That’s how many were in an interview between OPB’s “Think Outloud” host Dave Miller and “Eat, Pray, Love” author Elizabeth Gilbert in their rebroadcasted interview today from September 2015. Although not one of George Carlin’s original “Seven Dirty Words”, the trifecta reminded me of a 2009 interview NPR’s Madeline Brand had with Jeremy Renner, who had starred in “The Hurt Locker”. Words were bleeped but his use of “goddamn” wasn’t, which prompted a listener to ask the NPR Ombudsman why not?
The Ombudsman replied that “using god damn it” is not legally profane, according to the FCC. The phrase is not, in legal parlance, “actionable”. The federal agency defines three standards for language; obscene, profane and indecent:
1. Obscene content does not have protection by the First Amendment. For content to be ruled obscene, it must meet a three-pronged test established by the Supreme Court: It must appeal to an average person’s prurient interest; depict or describe sexual conduct in a “patently offensive” way; and, taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
2. Indecent content portrays sexual or excretory organs or activities in a way that does not meet the three-prong test for obscenity.
3. Profane content includes “grossly offensive” language that is considered a public nuisance.
However, a training pamphlet from KBOO Community Radio in Portland, Oregon, identifies words and contexts that apparently are to be avoided just in case an official decided to interpret the law a little more broadly. These include not playing certain songs or repeating certain song titles, sexual jokes or innuendo, creative editing of profane or indecent words or fleeting references, such as “Oh Shit!”
KBOO giving the realm of questionable language such a wide berth might have something to do with the fact that the station was fined $7000 in 2001 for violating community standards on its “Soundbox” program. The station had broadcast a poem by performer Sarah Jones that included lyrics the FCC considered indecent.
From the FCC lawsuit:
Radio Station: KBOO-FM, Portland, Oregon
Date/Time Broadcast: October 20, 1999, on the “Soundbox,” between 7:00 and 9:00 p.m.
Material Broadcast: “Your Revolution”
(Various female voices)
Your revolution will not happen between these thighs
Your revolution will not happen between these thighs
Your revolution will not happen between these thighs
Will not happen between these thighs
Will not happen between these thighs
The real revolution ain’t about bootie size
The Versaces you buys
Or the Lexus you drives
And though we’ve lost Biggie Smalls
Maybe your notorious revolution
Will never allow you to lace no lyrical douche in my bush
Your revolution will not be you killing me softly with fujees
Your revolution ain’t gonna knock me up without no ring
And produce little future M.C.’s
Because that revolution will not happen between these thighs
Your revolution will not find me in the back seat of a jeep
With L.L. hard as hell, you know
Doing it and doing and doing it well, you know
Doing it and doing it and doing it well
Your revolution will not be you smacking it up, flipping it or rubbing it down
Nor will it take you downtown, or humping around
Because that revolution will not happen between these thighs
Your revolution will not have me singing
Ain’t no nigger like the one I got
Your revolution will not be you sending me for no drip drip V.D. shot
Your revolution will not involve me or feeling your nature rise
Or having you fantasize
Because that revolution will not happen between these thighs
No no not between these thighs
Uh-uh
My Jamaican brother
Your revolution will not make you feel bombastic, and really fantastic
And have you groping in the dark for that rubber wrapped in plastic
Uh-uh
You will not be touching your lips to my triple dip of
French vanilla, butter pecan, chocolate deluxe
Or having Akinyele’s dream, um hum
A six foot blow job machine, um hum
You wanna subjugate your Queen, uh-huh
Think I’m gonna put it in my mouth just because you
Made a few bucks,
Please brother please
Your revolution will not be me tossing my weave
And making me believe I’m some caviar eating ghetto
Mafia clown
Or me giving up my behind
Just so I can get signed
And maybe have somebody else write my rhymes
I’m Sarah Jones
Not Foxy Brown
You know I’m Sarah Jones
Not Foxy Brown
Your revolution makes me wonder
Where could we go
If we could drop the empty pursuit of props and the ego
We’d revolt back to our roots
Use a little common sense on a quest to make love
De la soul, no pretense, but
Your revolution will not be you flexing your little sex and status
To express what you feel
Your revolution will not happen between these thighs
Will not happen between these thighs
Will not be you shaking
And me, [sigh] faking between these thighs
Because the real revolution
That’s right, I said the real revolution
You know, I’m talking about the revolution
When it comes,
It’s gonna be real
It’s gonna be real
It’s gonna be real
When it finally comes
It’s gonna be real
In 2003, a more forgiving FCC, after hearing from Jones herself and the station, chose to rescind the fine. Fortunately for KBOO, both the fine and the rescision were before the Janet Jackson “wardrobe malfunction” during the 2004 Superbowl. The public outrage which followed caused the FCC to jack up fines per violation from $32,000 to $350,000. Such a fine would’ve been like a planet killing asteroid smashing through KBOO’s tiny 8th Avenue studio.
The FCC determined that community standards were not violated. It is an example of how the law regarding obscenity, indecency and profanity, whether gratuitous or not, is and isn’t written in stone. There may be several standards at work when stations chose to allow or restrict language that may or may not cost them big bucks, public support or both.
I was so Disappointed
As I listened to the Friday News Roundtable, which is hosted every week by OPB, one of the panelists said how “disappointed” they were that Republican nominee Donald Trump did not pick a more explosive and contentious vice-presidential running mate.
I thought to myself, “So, to be clear, you are disappointed that a potentially destructive candidate did not pick a more equally destructive running mate because that will make for a more boring story for you to report.”
This is another one of the long list of problems I believe permeate the news biz.
I loved the mid 2000’s TV show “Scrubs” because of its biting commentary on medicine, hospitals, doctors and culture. One episode I remember was an argument between long time staff nurse Laverne and Chief of Interns, Perry Cox. Laverne was asking about the tendency of surgeons to always choose exploratory surgery over other options and Cox said, “When was the last time you ever met a cutter who didn’t want to cut? Laverne! You have been here 40 years now, have you ever heard such a thing?”
Likewise, news people apparently don’t prefer a news story that is interesting but without the poisonous consequences over one filled with prurient and insane interest that also results in horrible consequences. Part of the reason, I think, is because the more messy, complex, bigoted, disgusting story is guaranteed to have plenty of news babies; each of which can then be teased out ad nauseum and in gruesome detail.
They might say they don’t choose the stories they must report, and I expect that’s right. One problem with the media is it is a competition. Whoever can claim to be the fastest to report is seen as the best, the “news authority”. That brings ad dollars. And the worse, the better. But there are a list of other “reasons” that I’m sure would be a counterpoint to each of the four points in the code of ethics for the Society of Professional Journalists.
But here’s the bigger problem. Societies run by demagogues or plagued by fanned fires don’t suffer free media for long. And I harken back to a Saturday Night Live bit for some support. When Sarah Palin had appeared on the October 22, 2008 airing of SNL, with her Tina Fey doppelganger, there was a segment with Ms. Palin seated comfortably in an easy chair facing and talking to the camera directly. And she essentially said that once she and John McCain become president, there would be some changes in how a TV show like Saturday Night Live could parody cultural figures.
I couldn’t tell if she was kidding or not. After all, SNL is a program of humorous satire. But there was no hint of humor, and her veiled threat of censorship sounded less like satire and more like a warning. If Trump becomes president and if he had, instead of choosing Mike Pense, chosen Newt Gingrich or Chris Christie or even Sarah Palin, I wonder how long the sometimes, nose-high Fourth estate would continue feel invulnerable. He has already threatened the media and the constitutional basis of a free press. A story that delights for its messiness, but raised to a sufficient temperature, can cook up some really nasty policy consequences.
So when I hear news people lament over how they wish a political story was more spectacularly shit-filled, or how they futz that a personal collapse is less compelling because the sufferer isn’t doing more to blow themselves up in front of cameras or microphones, I wonder if the American people (whoever that really is) might have a point when surveys show large swaths on both sides of the political spectrum say they don’t entirely trust the media.
I don’t mean the hard working journalists who report the facts and refuse to prognosticate or editorialize. I mean what’s left.
When Someone You’ve Interviewed Dies
Robert LeVoy Finicum died on Highway 395 late yesterday afternoon, somewhere between the towns of Burns and John Day, Oregon. Mr. Finicum was the spokesperson for the occupiers at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge. Eight others were arrested. As of yet, law enforcement has not given any details about what transpired on that highway.
This post was inspired by OPBs host of it’s midday news program, “Think Outloud”. Dave Miller talked with Mr. Finicum twice in the last week about the standoff at the refuge. This isn’t about the developments at the refuge. Readers can find that in a number of other places, especially at the OPB website.
This is about when someone you’ve interviewed dies. And of course, I can’t speak to what Mr. Miller may or may not be feeling in the wake of Mr. Finicum’s death. But I can talk about my own experience and it has only happened to me once. In 1980, I was stationed at Ft. Devens, MA, which was about 35 miles west of Boston via Route 2A. I was a new Army Broadcaster and my first job was to operate the post’s closed circuit radio station, WFDB. But I wasn’t content with playing the impressive collection of albums and 45s. And when I found a 1976 Billboard Talent Directory, I knew what I was going to do.
I started calling promoters and agents of stars who were performing in Boston. I told them I represented a military audience of several thousand (the number of active duty at Ft. Devens) and it worked. In my year there, I interviewed A-listers of the day; Harry Chapin, Kenny Rogers, Bob James, Gladys Knight and Kool and the Gang. Kool was a phone interview. I talked to Mr. Rogers as part of a press pool in Manchester, N.H. Mr. James and Ms. Knight and the Pips performed at the Berklee Performance Center in Boston. I talked with Mr. Chapin on May 31, 1981. He was performing at Chateau DeVille in Framingham.
Mr. Chapin, I remember, was clearly stoned. But he was funny and warm and genuine. Coming and going to the interview, I was singing every song of his in my head that I knew; Cats in the Cradle, Taxi, She’s Always Seventeen, W.O.L.D. and others. I was thrilled to talk with him. And I rushed back to edit and play our conversation on the cable radio station. About eight years later, I loaned the tape to a co-worker at one of my broadcasting assignments and absent-mindedly forgot to get it back before I left the service.
Anyway, about six weeks later, on July 17, 1981, I heard that Harry Chapin had been killed when his little car pulled in front of a fast moving semi-tractor trailer on the Long Island Expressway. I was stunned. I’d grown up with his music. Cats in the Cradle, especially, had a big effect on me and my Dad. I think it’s a song many sons and fathers have in their minds whenever life changes their relationship.
Hearing about his death, it felt weird. An interview is like a speed date. It’s not like somebody you pass on the street or see everyday on the bus. But it’s not like you’re exactly good friends either. It’s somewhere in the middle. You get to know people deeply and intimately, but quickly. And just as quickly, you may never see them again. It’s kind of a shock to think that you were just laughing at this person’s jokes, admiring (or being intimidated by) their work ethic, or noticing a tell or some personal mannerism that makes them uniquely them … something other people might not have noticed.
And then, they’re gone.
Mr. Chapin’s death changed how I looked at life. I could die like that. I could die at any time. Everything I plan could go unfinished. I might not die in my sleep or surrounded by loved ones or saving someone else’s life. It made me ask harder questions like what should I be doing and how much shit will I put up with from others in my own life?
And his death changed how I would do interviews in the future. I would not ask pedantic questions because every second with someone with a story to tell is a gift and every question needed to answer somebody’s else’s question. I would tell them how much I admired whatever they excelled at but not gush because they get enough of that and they have to be somewhere else soon enough. I would research the hell out of them so they knew I did my homework and could feel respected by the effort on my part. And I would always try to remember to show my appreciation by saying “thank you” for their time.
Someone like Terry Gross or Charlie Rose has probably figured a way to ease themselves through the loss of someone they’ve come to know through a good, long talk. Like I said, it’s only happened to me once. I don’t know how many times it’s happened to Mr. Miller.
But every brutal goodbye is a rough one.
Bye Bye Q
It is interesting that John Sepulvado of OPB, who was one of two fund drive pitchers for OPB’s one-day, end of year drive early this week, talked up the interviews of “Q”, the Canadian radio variety program that was airing at the same time. But OPB is dropping Q as of January 4, 2016. And nowhere in any of the pitches during that hour of Q was that mentioned. Also, nowhere in any of the announcements from OPB that “All Things Considered” is moving from 4 p.m. to 3 p.m. PST was it said that as PRI’s “The World” moves from 3 p.m. to 2 p.m., that Q is disappearing completely. They have been announcing the coming change for about two weeks.
It’s reasonable for Q’s loyal listeners to think that if ATC is moving, and PRI is moving, Q must also be moving. Why not just say it’s not?
They will no doubt meet the disappearance with first, confusion. Then anger and then, possibly, resignation. But I wonder what kind of explanation they will get. They may never know why Q has gone away. That public radio stations regularly do this is not unusual but it is, at the very least, insensitive to the people who support their favorite programs as a demonstration of trust in the stations which air them. They deserve more than that.
The omission of the future of Q shows how public radio is so afraid of criticism that it talks up the positive while avoiding anything that could possibly stir up bad feelings from listeners and jeopardize future giving. This is an example of much I’ve read about the need for greater transparency in public radio. I mean, if an opportunity to say something so logically obvious and appropriate was so purposely avoided, listeners might reasonably wonder what else isn’t being told especially when openness is the supposed currency of public radio.
Don’t Forget the X Factor
Oregon Governor Kate Brown said Oregonians have a moral obligation to accept Syrian refugees despite reports that one of the Paris attackers had a Syrian passport. According to NPR, this has led 23 governors to say they do not want any Syrian refugees and that the President should reconsider his policy of admitting up to ten-thousand refugees.
In a subsequent OPB story, emphasis was placed on the number of single, combat aged men, who assumedly are most capable of conducting such terrorist operations. However, the story ignored the number of single, combat aged women. Jayne Huckerby, an associate professor at Duke University law school who advises governments in counter-terrorism strategies told the Los Angeles Times that female terrorists have a long history of exploiting gender stereotypes to avoid detection, and through counter-terrorism measures, have become more effective. She says women account for about 10% of those joining Islamic State from Europe and about 20% of those joining from France.
Female terrorist ranks include 57-year old grandmother Fatima Omar Mahmoud Al Majjar. She attempted to kill two Israeli soldiers in 2007. Also, Samantha Lewthwaite, the infamous “White Widow” for her involvement in a case in Kenya in 2011. According to Philip Perry of Liberty Voice, female acts of terrorism have skyrocketed since the 1980s, taking place in such countries as Palestine, Iraq, Israel, Chechnya, Lebanon, Egypt, Morocco and Sri Lanka. Half the suicide bombings in Turkey, Sri Lanka and Chechnya since 2002 have been perpetrated by women. In 2008 Iraqi female bombers had detonated themselves 21 times before the year was even halfway over.
The moral obligation of the United States to help people fleeing for their lives remains unchanged. And as these stories are told, the media must continue to struggle to not profile. But newsworthy statistics that are part of the equation should also be part of the story.
Women are equally deadly.
Photo by Hanna Kozlowska of the Chauthi Duniya newspaper
What Time is it Really?
We have all been conditioned to believe that when a TV or radio program begins at the “top” or “bottom” of the hour, it means the program is starting at exactly 1 p.m. or 5:30 a.m. or whenever.
But it’s not that simple.
First, understand that official United States civilian time is maintained by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Boulder, Colorado. Those are the people who are responsible for ensuring the official weights and measures for the US, including time. And precision is important to these folks. Time, i.e. the length of a second, is determined based on the vibrations of Cesium 133 atoms. This was represented by a clock NIST called the “F1”. But in 2014, they supplemented the “F1” clock with the “F2”, which unlike the previous clock, will not lose one second in 300 million years, making it three times more accurate than the F1.
Meanwhile, US time is synchronized with the rest of the world via something called Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), although it used to be commonly referred to as Greenwich Mean Time (GMT). Greenwich, by the way, is a real place. It is the location of the Royal Observatory in a municipality of London. GMT was the international civil time standard until recent years when there has been a hot debate about what GMT is and whether it deserves to be the standard it has historically been.
These two may not seem to have much in common; the measurement within time versus coordination of the World’s clocks. But they are intimately connected. To demonstrate this, imagine hearing a band playing Beyonce’s “Single Ladies”. Then imagine another band starts playing it, but is one beat off from the first band. The beat within both songs is the same length but the starting point of the song is different. Which beat should each group of musicians keep time to, their own or that of the other band?
That can be a problem for time keepers and, coincidentally, broadcasters. For decades, FCC regulations required holders of broadcast licenses to announce who and where their stations are before beginning a program. If you are watching KOIN in Portland, Oregon, when the previous program ends but within a minute of so of a new program, you see promos for upcoming local and network shows. Then, there will be a graphic somewhere on the screen that says you are watching KOIN 6 in Portland, Oregon. Or, if you’re listening to KOPB, you’ll hear promos, then the list of affiliate stations of Oregon Public Broadcasting and their individual locations. By law, you must see and hear these very close to “top” of the hour.
Then the next program begins, supposedly, “straight up”. But if you open the NIST’s time widget before the stations identify themselves, you notice that neither the radio or the TV program starts at the NIST’s official “top” of the hour. In the accompanying video, the CBS and NPR networks the locals go to are about 12 seconds behind the NIST. Twelve seconds might not seem like a big deal. But since billions of dollars are invested in advertising, technology and legislation for time to be both accurate and consistent, why isn’t it a big deal? Otherwise, why have a standard at all?
From simply an economic standpoint, how can stations afford to be off by up to 12 seconds an hour considering how important every moment is for generating revenue from commercials. I blogged about that a few years ago.
Anyway, I’ve had the larger question since my amateur radio days when I used to “DX” WWV, an NIST radio service that used to broadcast official time. If the NIST is the “official” US civilian timekeeper, why don’t broadcasters follow it?
*Accompanying audio and video are used under the Fair Use doctrine for the purposes of criticism, comment and news reporting.
The Power of the Can
OPB’s Kristian Foden-Vencil (love his name) did a story last month for OPB about how the community of Gold Beach on Oregon’s Pacific Coast was building a hospital. That wouldn’t normally be news except that Gold Beach and practically every other community along the upper West Coast of the United States is tsunami ground zero from the next Ocean based earthquake.
The US Geological Survey says there is a 37% chance that a 9.0 magnitude level earthquake will strike the West coast within the next 50 years. His story focused on what seemed to the locals to be a reasonable balance between what was necessary for safety, what was needed for the community and what they could afford.
But Mr. Foden-Vencil’s story just, this minute, finished airing on NPR’s All Things Considered.
In journalism parlence, his story was “evergreen”, meaning, some stories hold their age well and can be told now or later because there isn’t anything that locks them to a specific date. And evergreen stories tend to end up “in the can”, another colloquialism of journalism that means a place where we keep evergreen stories to run them when we need them.
A station needs a cache of such stories. Sometimes it’s a slow news day. Or, sometimes, you’re short staffed. Or sometimes, the editorial calender keeps pushing your story out of the way for more timely stories. And I’ve talked about the necessity of a can full of such stories before. The point is, you dear listener, may hear a story that sounds hauntingly familiar.
To coin a term from the last century, you are not being gas lighted.
Remarkable?
Listening to a promo for an interview between Dave Miller on OPB’s “Think OutLoud” and incoming and outgoing Portland police chiefs, I was struck by something outgoing Chief Mike Reese said. Mr. Miller asked him if he has seen a change in the use of force by Portland police during his more than four year tenure. Paraphrasing Mr. Reese, he said he has seen a remarkable drop in force related incidents by the police against Portland’s citizens.
His use of the word, “remarkable” was what got my attention. The definition of remarkable is “worthy of being or likely to be noticed, especially as being uncommon or extraordinary”. I think the first part of the definition applies. The drop in the use of force by Portland police, if it has in fact occurred, is certainly worth noticing. But the second part of the definition was bothersome.
“Uncommon” means “not ordinarily encountered” with a second definition being “remarkable and exceptional”. Meanwhile “extraordinary” means “going beyond what is usual, regular or customary”. Its second definition uses “remarkable” as a synonym.
I think you can see the problem here.
If Portland’s outgoing police chief considers “remarkable” the drop in the use of force by the Portland police, it makes me wonder what he and the Portland police consider “routine” treatment of those same citizens. In other words, how rare should this be? I mean, shouldn’t it be “remarkable” when an incident occurs rather than when one doesn’t occur? To call a drop in the occurrence of something toxic “remarkable” implies that the drop was never expected and is, in fact, surprising. And that speaks volumes to the problems currently orbiting police culture across the country. This is one of those situations where I would’ve liked to see the interviewer ask what “remarkable” meant in that context.
And to that sentiment, I want to use an antonym.
Pitiful.