HOME

“Baby Boy” and the Public Interest

If I were known as “Baby Boy” I would really, really fear the prospect of going to prison.  But that is apparently the worst fear of Tucson’s pendejo del mes, Mark Fontes, a 21-year-old-going-on-ten Tucsonan whose “on air name” is “Baby Boy” on what the morning puppy trainer described as “the popular ‘Johnjay and Rich’ morning show on 93.7 KRQ-FM.”  Mark is being investigated by a bunch of federal shined-shoe types for his part in a radio stunt gone awry.

The phrase “radio stunt gone awry” sounds like a defense to criminal activity, but it’s not.  It’s an admission to seriously dumb behavior that might or might not be adjudicated criminal.  A twenty-one-year-old with a capacity for reason will be held responsible for his or her actions, no matter how cool the misdeed felt at the time, or how much he or she was “used.”  That, in fact, is what Mark told the Arizona Daily Star in an article published August 23:  “I got used.”

He got “used” while battling other contestants for something known as the “psycho seat,” an amateur co-hosting job on a morning radio gig, according to the Star.  The hosts of the morning show encourage silly behavior.  Mark, for example, once belted out “I Will Survive” in a Waffle House, according to the Star.  What, Denny’s wasn’t available?

DMAFB was.  Mark dressed up in a flight suit apparently provided by KRQ personnel, bluffed his way past Davis-Monthan Air Force Base guards (!) and tried to call President Bush, who was flitting over Tucson that day for a photo-op on Mount Charcoal.  The cagey DM personnel uncovered the ruse by – sit down for this brilliance – listening to KRQ!  Mark and his entourage were escorted off the base before he was able to call the Pres.

Once Upon A Time, there was a concept called “Public Interest” that governed the license of common broadcast channels.  If you wanted to goose the golden goose of broadcast cash flow, you had to conduct surveys to find out what people in your local broadcast area were concerned about and produce programming accordingly.  That was back in the days when local radio stations actually covered news events, produced documentaries, and ran public interest programming.   Times have changed, apparently.

Would somebody please explain to me what the “Baby Boy” stunt has to do with the public interest?  Why did he have to parade around in a bogus flight suit?  Who does he think he is, the President?   Why is trespassing on a federal military installation in pursuit of the public interest?  For that matter, why is belting out “I Will Survive” in a Waffle House in the public interest?

Actually, I might concede that one.  I’ve been in a Waffle House.

While I don’t excuse “Baby Boy,” who is a legal adult and responsible for his actions, I also don’t excuse the perpetrators of the stunt: the radio station.  If “Baby Boy” is going to have to learn the Leavenworth Limbo on account of this stunt, then the radio station and its corporate owners should suffer as well.

And who owns KRQ?  Glad you asked.  The metastatic tumor of American media, “Clear Channel,” that’s who:  a monster spawned by deregulation, a monster that doesn’t really care if a station in Tucson inadvertently sends a 21-year-old semi-adult to prison in a stunt gone wrong, a monster that really doesn’t care about Tucson at all, a monster that doesn’t care about the public interest at all, a monster that cares only for the greenspawn in its maw, a monster that devours localism to feed its bottom line.  And, unfortunately, a monster without a leash.

The leash, if one existed, would be held by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the alleged “watchdog” of the public interest.  Since broadcast channels are public property they deserve, indeed require, a watchdog.  Some watchdog.  The FCC is blind, deaf, toothless, arthritic, absent-minded, and doesn’t even have a good sense of smell.  That kind of watchdog is indistinguishable from a speed bump.  Consider the helpful page published on the Internet by the FCC’s “Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau,” entitled, “Radio Call-In, ‘Shock Jock,’ or ‘Open Mike’ programs.”  It contains this little gem: 

In general, broadcasters have wide discretion in choosing their programming. The First Amendment to the Constitution and the Communications Act prohibit the Commission from involving itself in the content of specific programs or otherwise engaging in activities that might be regarded as program censorship.

That’s true, sort of.  The FCC cannot engage in prior restraint, i.e., censorship.  But the First Amendment is not an eraser to be used at will to avoid responsibility.  The FCC’s position ignores the fact that broadcast licenses are public property that must be used in the furtherance of the public interest.

What of stations that do not honor the public interest?  Take, for instance, a station that might have encouraged several federal crimes during a presidential visit?  Should the FCC at least slap its hand for that?  Uh-uh.

All comments and/or concerns about a specific broadcast should be directed, in writing, to the stations and networks involved so that the people responsible for making the programming decisions can become better informed about audience opinions.

That’s a remedy.  Give them a nice talking-to.  “Now, JohnJay, NOT FUNNY!”  Jeez.

What if the station engages in dirty talk?  Does the FCC address that?  Yes, and it does so in a wonderful and auspicious display of bone-headedness by including the following sub-headings.  I’m not making this up; this is a cut-and-paste:

Hate that “indescent” programming.  My onboard lexicographer suggests substituting “In descent.”  I think that describes American broadcasting fairly well.

So, do we sit by quietly while “Baby Boy” ponders his future cellmate and do nothing?   Probably.  But, we don’t have to.  The “public interest” law still exists, despite the self-enforced amnesia of the Bush administration and the broadcasting industry.  And there is an enforcement mechanism, despite the FCC’s current narcolepsy:  the license challenge.  This is a weapon of mass destruction too long kept in quietus.  If the community objects to cancerous organizations like Clear Channel fouling its airwaves with idiotic and illegal stunts, while ignoring community needs and avoiding news and public affairs programming, then the community can damn well rise up and do something about it:  challenge the broadcaster’s license.  Support local groups who will recognize that Tucson is a unique place, not just another deposit for anonymous voice tracking.  Let’s take back our airwaves, dammit!

And, to be generous, send “Baby Boy” a nice fruit basket.

(c) Mike Tully
August 27, 2003

All content on this page © by Mike Tully