|
Payola Probe Hits Clear Channel, Entercom, Infinity
By Paul Heine and Katy Bachman, Mediaweek, 2.18 Clear Channel has confirmed that it has received a subpoena from Eliot Spitzer, as part of the New York State Attorney General's investigation into allegations of payola in the radio industry. In a statement, the company said it is âcooperating fully with [Spitzer's] investigation into the industry's use of independent promoters and associated allegations of 'pay for play.'â In the statement, Clear Channel also noted how it severed ties with independent promoters in April 2003 âto avoid even the appearance of impropriety,â and expressed confidence that âthe investigation will show the company is in full compliance with the law.â Clear Channel isn't the only company to be subpoenaed as part of the investigation. Both Entercom and Infinity also received subpoenas. Contacted by Billboard Radio Monitor, Infinity declined to comment on the report and officials at Entercom weren't immediately available to comment. All three companies have recently terminated programmers over allegations of improper relationships with record companies. Meanwhile, Clear Channel emailed employees Friday morning an update on payola investigations underway in the industry and a reminder of the companyâs zero-tolerance payola policy. In the internal e-mail obtained by Billboard Radio Monitor, the company says it âhas absolutely no tolerance for the participation by any of its employees in arrangements that might constitute payola.â The communiquà reminds employees that everyone involved in programming its stations is required, âto swear in writing that he or she has not engaged in payola, and understands that Clear Channel prohibits any such conduct.â The company previously required employees involved in programming to sign a Payola Affidavit & Responsible Broadcast Initiative Certification. The memo, authored by the companyâs chief legal officer, also says that CCâs goal is âto eliminate the opportunity for the occurrence of even unintentional acts that might be perceived as payola.â The legal definition of âpayolaâ is also included in the email, along with the notice that a finding of payola doesnât require a showing that the material was actually broadcast. Rather a âfinding that payment was made to have the material broadcast (without on-air disclosure) is sufficient for a conviction.â |
_______________________________________________ IRCA mailing list IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://dallas.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/irca Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx