http://stumptownblogger.typepad.com/stumptownblogger/2009/04/index.html

I came across this photo and had to express my feelings about radio then & today. Your comments please!

Almost makes one cry to see that photo. It brings back such a flood of fond memories. Thanks Dave!

Who is on the air behind the glass in this pic?

JACK SUNDAY!

I think that the person who posted that photo is correct in saying:

---

quote:

...we will never see this energy again. Never.

---

Stoner's right...it was JACK SUNDAY, who went on to be PD at KNEW-Spokane and transformed them into KJRB...then joined KJR as PD...Pat O'Day was GM by then. I programmed KOL against Gary on my return to Seattle in early 1970.

Who are the DJ's in the Beatle wigs:
ADDIE BOBKINS in front...FRANK BENNY...TOM
MURPHY...and I don't recognize the guy in back,
but suspect it's THE REAL DON STEELE.

Another picture exists featuring STEELE, BENNY, MURPHY, and JACK SUNDAY on a ladder wearing Beatle wigs. Well....Murphy didn't need one.

Funny thing, I thought the sign (left of the turntable) said "Jack Sunday", but when I searched this site for the name, I did not come up with a match anywhere... odd to say the least. The info under the photo indeed does identify the other four and "Feather".

"Wearing their Fab 4 Beatle wigs are (from the top) The Real Don Steele, Frank Benny, Tiger Tom Murphy, Addie Bobkins and his dog "Feather"."

that's a nice piece of radio history but then the author goes on a rant about Reagan and deregulation and ' wall street thugs and gangesters' ruining radio in the 80's... Reagan killed the Fairness Doctrine in the 80's and advocated deregulation, but it was Bill Clinton who signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

Radio has changed drastically but to whine about neocons, wall street and the salad days is sad and delusional. Perhaps with Obama in office, radio in the States can adopt the BBC-Paternal way of doing things, with lots of NPR stories and a restriction on free speech in general (unless parried with equal time, of course)

"It takes the people involved in executing the format to do that. Corporate branding campaigns can't do it. Machines can't do it."

So true, Alfredo_t. So true.

What a cool photo . I just now noticed it in my e-mail. Don Steele I think looks like John Lennon. The dog at the bottom looked familiar because I never missed Addie's show from 4:30 to 6pm. I think it was called "Popeye's pier 12." He showed the Mickey Mouse Club reruns and the 3 stooges. Thats where I first learned to like them. I don't remember him showing many cartoons. Of course Tiger Tom, Don, and Frank Benny were other reasons why KISN was so popular with the kids.

My only bugaboo was the rant against Reagan because if it weren't for him we might have had the "Fairness Doctrine"

I'm not trying to make this political, but how did the Regan administration make the "holy grail of errors" when deregulation I believe began in 1996? Or perhaps I should ask when the 7AM/7FM ownership cap was eliminated?

Hmmm... let's see now.
Reagan: 1981-1989
Bush I: 1989-1993
Clinton: 1993-2001
Bush II: 2001-2009
Obama: 2009-

Whatever the politics of it, the relaxation of ownership rules and the buying spree at any cost that followed is the root of radio's trouble today. But let's not hang it on the politicians alone, greedy and reckless owners taking on way too much debt and stockholders seeing no future but up all contributed as well.

Ironically, I think this will lead to a return of the small operator once reasonable valuation makes itself apparent.

Tom P...

Hopefully in MY lifetime!

Just for clarification, deregulation of ownership limits began with the Reagan administration. Remember duopolies? I don't have the time or desire to look up the legislation, but Reagan, a former mediocre player in Hollywood, believed the government should have no say in regulating broadcasting ownership, content, and short of blatant interference and pornography, thought that Broadcasting was not unique enough to warrant special rules of any kind.

The 1996 Reform Act had been penciled out by Republicans before they came to power in '94, taking until '96 to pass because of Clinton/Democratic concern over diversity of ownership. The reason Clinton signed it was that the various lobbies for the bill convinced him that the benefits far outweighed the risks. Those benefits included the rollout of high speed internet to more rural areas, especially in the South (a Clinton protectorate of sorts) where distances to customers from existing backbones were too expensive for the giants of infrastructure to bother pulling fiber to to pick up a few farmers. Unfortunately, few of these areas got new service as a result of non-follow through by Congress.

> Those benefits included the rollout of high speed internet to more rural areas, especially in
> the South

Was the 1996 Reform Act one of the pieces of legislation that Al Gore was referring to when he made his infamous comment, "...I took the initiative in creating the Internet." I am not intending this as a loaded question; I am just looking for some clarification on the quote.

http://stumptownblogger.typepad.com/stumptownblogger/2009/04/index.html

ANOTHER GREAT PHOTO TAKEN ON NW 10TH & BURNSIDE

Great stuff.

Thats on Robin's website too. They have one thats similiar to the Beatles one

Yes great photo. I can just hear the cue burn coming off those 45s.

Hey Dave...is it my imagination, or is that top photo printed reversed???? Look at the KISN sticker on top of the triple-stack cart decks.

YES..TAKEN FROM THE BIG MIRROR THAT WAS BEHIND US.

I like the custom-made board, with integrated cart decks, that appears in the last two studio photos!

And we need to also blame people like Wozniack and Gates and others who changed the technology. Without that, much of what we view with dismay today wouldnt have existed.

Yep the "KISN window on the world" I believe they used that line for a time...great line..descriptive and believable at a time when listening was just as important as seeing or reading. Listening is more like reading, you use your imagination to a greater extent. Visual stimulus leaves less to the imagination IMO.

Gee I wish Gates, Wozniak and Steve Jobs didn't come along with their technology and ruin radio, what with the ability for voice tracking, automation which enabled today's McRadio to flourish. I wish the governement would lay the smack down on radio fatcats and corporate suits just like they did with the auto industry.

I really miss the horse and buggy. And an outhouse in the backyard ( conserve water--if it's yellow let it mellow if it's brown flush it down)

Sarcasm aside, I think that what people are (in my opinion rightfully) complaining about is specifically the elimination of talent and creativity. Most of the complainers would probably be happy if there were Internet streaming radio stations that applied the KISN programming philosophy. Yet, nobody is stepping up to do something like that. Why? (This is an open-ended non-rhetorical question.)

Well internet streaming is a wide open market. I believe that it is catching on to some extent. You can make the sound really much easier than with the technology of the " old days " .

Now all you need is the numbers aka the revenue. They have them in NYC from a recent article I read about some station that had an alleged 3.2 All persons on the streaming signal vs a 3.0 on the aired signal. Well , that is NYC...not typical of the rest of the country by a long stretch.

There are internet royalties issues that are not completely resolved. Internet broadcasters pay higher rates than terrestrial broadcasters.

It wasn't computers that ruined radio, it was too many stations. The FCC acted on the premise that the more diverse the voices, the better the community would be served.

How ironic. Hannity is now on 540 stations, most of the AM band is unlistenable at night, music FMs sound the same in every market, and there are 50+ stations in most large markets fighting over the ad revenue pie.

One big feature we forget about the beginnings of dereg in the 80s was the elimination of the requirement to maintain a presence in your city of license, consisting of an office, the public file, and origination of at least some programming. Creative owners engineering move-ins were already doing the minimum necessary for compliance by that point, but in about '85 it was no longer even a formality.

....internet streaming is a wide open market.....

and that is where KORC is going....

And yes the airwaves need to have the herd thinned. both station licenses, and market clutter.

The latest sponsors on my Internet station are Home Depot, Geico, NBC TV, The CIA!, ESurance and Lending Tree.

So, the advertisers are getting hip. However it takes those sponsors to pay for the song rights and the computer/streaming. I still make nada! But, I believe that will change.

The audience is totally there, there is hardly a city or country that doesn't have music fans who listen to my little station.

Do you plan to incorporate personalities into your station?

"It wasn't computers that ruined radio,"

Depends on who you ask...some people believe computers did ruin radio, by allowing automation and voice-tracking, thus no need for a live body in the studio for most stations late at night.


".... it was too many stations. The FCC acted on the premise that the more diverse the voices, the better the community would be served."

If you want diverse, you can go to KBOO. One minute they are playing Balkan reggae, the next it's songs on how to cook vegan potstickers.And if that isn't your cup of tea, there's always NPR.

"How ironic. Hannity is now on 540 stations, most of the AM band is unlistenable at night, music FMs sound the same in every market, and there are 50+ stations in most large markets fighting over the ad revenue pie."

So is it the government's job to enforce radio that appeals and stimulates the disaffected eggheads of the culture? Hannity is not my idea of good right wing radio (or radio in general) so I take the initiative to find something better. And that's where the internets come in. I like the radio versions of the Twilight Zone. Not easy to find on any station but all it takes is effort, as the show is easy to find online. In this era of radio, the audience that wants niche programming or content that is not always available, they will go online.

I don't think that consensus can ever be reached on this "did computers/new technologies ruin radio?" question because this is one of those issues where economics, technology, and art intersect.

The art part is the rub here because there are some people who fell in love with the techniques that they used for producing radio programs some 15-50 years ago, when some of the newer options weren't available (such as remote voice-tracking via computer). Reciprocally, there are people who fell in love with the idiosyncrasies of the radio sound of yesteryear (such as aggressive processing, tight talkovers, "energetic" production and delivery, and jingles).

In my opinion, comparing the old ways to the contemporary ways is like comparing playing a drum set to programming a drum machine. Both approaches can produce rhythms for a piece of music. The drum machine is more flexible and often cheaper than the real drums. Programming a drum machine isn't done in real time, so it doesn't require the coordination required to play a drum set, and mistakes can be avoided. However, there are people who enjoy the experience of playing drums, and there are listeners who would rather hear a drummer playing real drums than the perfectly timed rhythms of a drum machine.

Alfredo_t asked, "Do you plan to incorporate personalities into your station?"

Yes... I use a personality now, but the ultimate would be to go live, making my Internet station be what most all of us on this board would go for. Predictable unpredictability. That's my goal.

Computers didn't ruin radio, owners did. Computers only do what they are told to do.

There were automated stations way before the PC. I'm not sure Spartamation and all those relays caused any more dead air than NextGen.

"So is it the government's job to enforce radio that appeals and stimulates the disaffected eggheads of the culture?"

No, but the FCC thought it was government's job to make sure every minority was represented in ownership and formats. What it got was the opposite of localism and diversity.

What really went wrong was the FCC worrying more about radio's potential to profit owners than its role in serving the public. They swallowed the argument that removing caps would produce "synergies" and "critical mass" to boost ad revenues. "Serve the public interest as a public trustee" never really had a chance, despite the lip service in the mandatory renewal notices.

Think not? In an age when spectrum is auctioned for billions, why do broadcasters get frequencies for life without license fees?

"Visual stimulus leaves less to the imagination IMO."

I agree. Webcams, for example. When you listen to radio and a jock having fun on the air, you get a picture in your mind; it stimulates your imagination. Then you watch the show on webcam and you see a guy in a tiny room picking his fingernails while he spins around in his chair between breaks. Kind of destroys the illusion.

Here is a site for you to check out if you want a blast from the past:

www.radiotapes.com

It's mostly all old Mpls/St. Paul airchecks, video from the news channels doing stories on the stations, photos, etc. They have stuff from as far back as the Kennedy assassination coverage, 60's, 70's, etc. Maybe they are trying to stay MN, but if you have old airchecks you'd like to share, they might be interested.