Re: Oldies, contest?

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

----- Original Message -----
From: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
To: "Dan Billings" <dib9@gwi.net>
Cc: <boston-radio-interest@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: Oldies, contest?


 > But it is already well-established that free-speech rights of
> broadcasters are limited in a number of ways (see /Pacifica/),

Sure, but those cases deal with federal regulation.  States might have a
harder time sustaining such regulation.

>and
> even for non-broadcasters the distinction between ordinary speech and
> ``commercial speech'' still persists,

I addressed that in my last post.

> As we know, stations are required to accept political advertising from
> candidates for Federal office.  Stations are also required to clearly
> distinguish between ``content'' and ``advertising'': all advertising
> must be clearly identified or identifiable as such.  (That's why you
> often hear the announcers on WBZ say, ``The following is a commercial
> message'', before launching into a live-read Vermont Teddy Bear spot
> or a other commercial which sounds confusingly similar to an actual
> news broadcast.)

I think the FCC could regulate radio contests closely, but I think it would
be tougher for states to impose such regulation.  There is a possible
preemption issue and the states do not control the limited spectrum that is
being regulated, which is part of the rationale for federal regulation of
broadcasters.

> A radio station promotion, no less than any other sort of advertising,
> falls under long-standing deceptive-advertising and unfair-competition
> law at the state and Federal level -- which in most instances has
> withstood decades of constitutional scrutiny.

Sure, but the requirements that started this discussion go well beyond
limits on deceptive advertising.  The requirements would cover things that
are in no way deceptive.  There is a major difference between being
deceptive and creatively presenting information.  Lots of advertising would
be deceptive without the fine print.  Radio stations can present the fine
print without making a contest ineffective by hitting listeners over the
head with the details.

By the way, I'm not defending what Clear Channel has been accused of doing,
but not all multi-market contests are inherently deceptive.

-- Dan Billings, Bowdoinham, Maine