Newberry: Royalties Fight Is Not Over
June 16, 2009: Commonwealth Broadcasting President/CEO Steve Newberry, who also serves as Chairman of the NAB Joint Board, provides this op-ed piece in response to reports of majority support in Congress for the Local Radio Freedom Act, a resolution opposing performance royalties for broadcast radio.
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED? NOT YET.
By Steve Newberry
Radio broadcasters reached a major milestone earlier this month. The Local Radio Freedom Act, a bipartisan Congressional resolution opposing the record label-led effort to charge stations for airplay, is now backed by a majority of the House of Representatives.
The Congressional support for local radio is a testament to the hard work of station operators across America, our state association leaders, and NAB staff in Washington. It also demonstrates the winning merits of our arguments: Namely, that local radio is a national treasure that provides unparalleled promotional exposure for musicians and their record label companies.
While certainly a significant achievement, our work is by no means done. The record-label proponents of a performance tax are not backing down. If anything, our success has made the record labels even more aggressive. Recently, we saw RIAA's musicFIRST Coalition file a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission alleging that unnamed radio stations were refusing to play the music of unidentified musicians supporting the RIAA-sought fees. While underscoring the undeniable promotional value of free radio airplay, the maneuver was also indicative of just how far the record labels will push to make their case in Washington.
That's exactly why radio broadcasters cannot let up. We must continue to educate policymakers on the unique promotional role provided by radio stations and the negative impact a performance tax would have on stations, listeners and musicians.
It's not a tough sell. In fact, as lawmakers' understanding of radio's promotional power broadens, so do their concerns over the pending legislation. And while the record labels would prefer to position this debate as an issue of "fairness to artists," they can't escape the fact that this legislation, if enacted, would direct more money to the coffers of record-label companies than featured musicians.
How exactly is that fair to artists?
It's not. What's more, this legislation would hamstring a musician's most important promotional partner: free and local radio. How does that help an artist?
I don't have to tell anyone how critical this issue is to the future of radio. We have a very capable staff representing our interests in Washington, but the true strength of our industry has always -- and will always -- come from our effective grassroots engagement.
Today, I'm urging stations: Meet with your member of Congress if you haven't already. Ask for their support. Meet with the philanthropic organizations that work hand-in-hand with your station. Ask for their support. Engage your listeners. Write a letter to the editor.
While you are taking those vital steps, please be assured that NAB is very much on-point and totally engaged in winning this battle. The success of recent weeks is indicative of how dedicated our Washington, DC, staff is to winning this war. In addition, they are fully supported by the NAB Radio Board, led by chair Charles Warfield.
Together, our local broadcasters, our staff and our radio board make what is obviously a formidable team. But, simply put, we can't rest on our laurels. Our very survival is at stake.
|
(7/24/2009 10:35:56 PM) I am cooled to broadcaster opposition to performer royalties because internet and satellite radio are already required to pay them. These new outlets are niched into disadvantage and a preferencial, anti competitive constraint on market share. If these royalties are a bad thing for broadcasters, I'm not aware of a valid argument as to why they ought to be fine for those of us who webcast using the same tools online. What would webcasters gain from supporting them if broadcasters kept the exemption?? |
| - John |
|
(6/17/2009 8:16:40 PM) I don't understand why musicians would support MusicFIRST or this legislation when the record companies get most of the money collected and SoundExchange seems to have difficulty finding some of the musicians they owe money to. How much of the money collected will the musicians actually see? |
| - rjk |
|
(6/17/2009 7:50:34 PM) Yo Henry Get a grip! “It would force thousands of personalities out of work?” You can count all the radio personalities on one hand. |
| - Fred |
|
(6/17/2009 7:21:51 PM) I strongly oppose passage of performance tax legislation. Such a tax would force many music radio stations to flip to a talk radio format, or even worse, to go dark. This would result in less diversity in programming for listeners, and harm local communities that partner with radio to promote local interests and rely on radio in times of need. It would also force thousands of radio personalties out of work! |
| - Henry |
Add a Comment | View All Comments
