Re: Oldies, contest?

["Dan Billings" <dib9@gwi.net>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill O'Neill" <billo@shoreham.net>
To: "Dan Billings" <dib9@gwi.net>;
<boston-radio-interest@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 5:15 PM
Subject: RE: Oldies, contest?


> How could "free speech" be a factor in the claim of construing a contest
> winner from another state to appear as a 'local?'  I'd not thought of
> "speech" in this context as being the spirit of the law.

I was responding to the specific requirements posted here.  Which were as
follows:

If stations broadcast an interview with a winner, they
"must disclose the city/state where winner resides," he
says.

. Stations cannot edit "the voice of an out-of-state winner
with the voice of a local radio personality to make it
sound as if the winner was local," he says.

The first requirement imposes a duty on the station to speak.  They must
broadcast the city/state of the broadcast winner.  Speech is clearly
implicated.  Free speech includes the freedom to speak and not to speak.

The second requirement is not as direct but I would argue that any
regulation of how a station can edit a promo impacts speech.

As Garrett pointed out, these requirements were part of a consent agreement.
As such, Clear Channel agreed to the requirements so there is no free speech
issue.

I think it could be different if the requirements were a state regulation.
States can regulate commercial speech but the regulations must further a
substantial interest and be closely tailored to the governmental interest.
Protecting listeners from deceptive contests would likely be found to be a
substantial governmental interest, but I think there is a good chance that a
court would find that the requirements quoted above are not closely tailored
to protecting listeners from deception.  Listeners could be protected by
clear disclosure of contest rules without have such a direct impact on how a
station promotes a contest and announces winners.

The station that I work for has done promotions in the past that were done
in conjunction with one of the company's stations in New Hampshire.  The
printed rules that were in a newspaper insert and on the station website and
the rules which were broadcast daily on the station, clearly stated that the
contest was being done on two stations.  Nothing was hidden, but we also
didn't mention that fact every time we promoted the contest.  If the grand
prize winner had been from New Hampshire, instead of Maine, I don't think
the winner's hometown when have been in the promos and I don't see anything
wrong with that.  Promotions are primarily about image and as long as
listeners are given the rules and not mislead, I don't think anything else
is needed.

-- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine