|
|
Posted by Steve Guidry on 12/30/05 15:57
I don't believe the station is discriminating. This is the Bible belt.
The church is one block from the station. Staff attends the church. The
church has been a pillar of their Sunday morning programming for 25 years.
The only preempt us twice a year - - Indy 500 and British Open. They had a
chance to kick us off when we said "no dice" to their fee increase last
year. But they kept us at the same rate and time. They value us.
They've just got a bunch of ninnies in their corporate counsel's office who
are playing it safe. Our lawyer will be eating their lunch next week.
Steve
"doc" <doc@drdimento.net> wrote in message
news:5iZsf.3931$yx.1082@trndny01...
> I agree. I think they just don't want to air the church's programs
because
> of the religious content. If I were them, that's the argument I'd take to
> the court instead of argue the FCC rules, because the rules are clear and
> thus the station doesn't have a leg to stand on there because it is a
black
> and white written conclusion by the FCC themselves. However, and since it
is
> in black in white, a suit against them over discrimination is much more
> challenging to their FCC license, wherein they refuse to air a program
that
> has formerly been aired and choosing not to air it over FCC rules that are
> clearly non obligatory to the church with regard to getting FCC approval
> written or otherwise under the self-implementing rule in 79.1.d
>
> thus, this could be a good one for the grounds of the protection of
> religious rights.
>
> drd
>
> "Steve Guidry" <steveguidry@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:BLEsf.3687$R84.479@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > Hmmm . . .
> >
> > The latest is :
> >
> > The station has refused to allow us to self-exempt. They say "If you
> > present a tape without captioning or a copy of you formal waiver request
> > letter to the FCC, we're not going to air it."
> >
> > The church's attorney has decided to file for the formal waiver in order
> > to
> > get some additional time to make the argument with the station's general
> > counsel.
> >
> > As the producer, my company doesn't really have a dog in the fight. In
> > fact, if the church ultimately is compelled to caption its show, then my
> > company stands to benefit from the additional work. I just don't
> > appreciate
> > the way the station has handled the issue.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > "doc" <doc@drdimento.net> wrote in message
> > news:RcBsf.3458$7S2.2645@trndny09...
> >> yep. unless they can demonstrate clearly that they have a legitimate
> > reason
> >> for not airing the program that is not religious related or some other
> > very
> >> strong content against a specific group of viewers (like your message
is
> >> strong against jews, blacks, etc.) then they are obligated to abide by
> >> the
> >> FCC rules that relate to freedom of speech airing and would be in
> > violation
> >> of broadcast rules and would therefore be in risk of losing their
license
> > if
> >> they were to not air your program so long as you have qualified under
FCC
> >> law/rules. follow?
> >>
> >> drd
> >>
> >> "Steve Guidry" <steveguidry@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >> news:JwVqf.1813$nu6.982@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> >> > What do you mean "the station is obliged to abide by their exemption
if
> >> > they
> >> > apply" ?
> >> >
> >> > Do you mean that if we just present a letter to the station, they
have
> > to
> >> > accept our determination that we're exempt ?
> >> >
> >> > Steve
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "doc" <doc@drdimento.net> wrote in message
> >> > news:KXLqf.2002$ul2.893@trndny05...
> >> >> sorry charlie on the signer, the CC'ing law isn't centered around
just
> >> >> for
> >> >> the deaf, it's also for the hearing impaired and few of them know
> >> >> sign.
> >> >> therefore, the law is particular on the "how" it must be presented.
> >> > either
> >> >> roll up (worst) or pop up, and that's it. one can sign if they
want,
> > but
> >> >> that won't satisfy the law.
> >> >>
> >> >> anyways, they probably are exempt anyway if they just read the law.
> > AND,
> >> >> the station is obligated to abide by their exemption if they apply!
> >> >>
> >> >> drd
> >> >>
> >> >> "nobody special" <msu1049321@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> >> news:1135302315.261853.303660@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> > Steve, I think they are using the captionin grles to chase your
> > program
> >> >> > off so they can sell the time for more money to someone else, with
a
> >> >> > different program. In the short term, you'd best caption it, but
> >> >> > if
> > I
> >> >> > was you, I'd just open-caption it, to spite them and make it
faster
> > for
> >> >> > you: this way you just use the existing Cg gear you have now.
Your
> >> >> > regular audience probably won't complain too much.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Or, you could beat the captioning by hiring a live signer, put
them
> > in
> >> >> > a corner box wipe, while the lawyers wrangle.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|