Pirate To Operate on 96.9 From San Diego (Sep 21, 2002)

Free Radio San Diego 96.9FM, as the outfit is calling themselves, plans to operate the station in about a month according to the post on the independent.fm messageboard.

"In October we should be able to broadcast to El Cajon, North Park, Hillcrest, Kensington, downtown, La Mesa, and have some spill over into the areas around those," says a poster calling himself "Free Radio San Diego". "We'll be up and running three days a week in the evenings on a set schedule. ( http://crash.to/frsd. )"

Also at http://pirate969.org/.

"We have our website up and running, and lots of good material on stand by ready to be played. This station is here to serve San Diego, so if you have an opinion, we'd love to hear it, because "we" is only a few folks who know how to run a radio, not some mega corporation that couldn't give a shit about you. If you want to be involved with this, please let us know. We need input on music, but more importantly we need investigative journalism, interviews, and material that would be useful to thousands of listeners across a big demographic. As things get rolling I'll post more and keep people up to speed. But again, if you have any input, ideas, or suggestions, please email us."

And he gives the e-mail as freeradiosandiego@hushmail.com

Says TGK on the board, "After the domination of the Clear Channel behemoth and new internet radio regulations are killing the college stations, it's about time that there is a counterattack on all this crap."

Says Free Radio San Diego, "Thanks for the vote of confidence. It's really pretty tragic. Legal radio stations are rather ironic, because on the one hand they play punk and all this anti - establishment music, and on the other hand they pay tens of thousands of dollars to the FCC, which fuels the enforcement agents that run around shutting down smaller stations, and squelching free speech rights in general. I don't really mind stations that don't give a rat's ass about being "rock and roll", and just sit around playing 50's music, because they're not trying to fool anyone. But when I hear a station declaring how cutting edge or independent they are, and yet they're coughing up thousands to the FCC (and the lobbying groups like the NAB, which are all about hating campaign finance reform), that seems a little backwards."

Says Stevetheovernightguy, "Get over yourself! You sound like, in my opinion, one of those people that subscribes to and believes every conspiracy theory that they come across. But, like I said, that's just my opinion."

Says ourbandrocks.com, "the current version of "campaign finance reform" is unconstitutional, and, therefore, should be "hated" by anyone who believes in their 1st ammendment rights.

Says Free Radio San Diego, "The National Association Of Broadcasters does not care about the constitutionality of anything. They are a special interest lobbying group. The reason they oppose finance reform (in any manner) is because:
a) the broadcasters they represent would be hardest hit in the pocket and purse by a reform like that
b) it would reduce the ability for the NAB to be the largest lobbyer to congress.
If the NAB and it's member stations gave a rat's ass about first ammendment issues in any other regard, I'd like to see some evidence of it. They have never once been in favor of anything that even slightly hinders their profitability. They lobbyed heavily against the LPFM legislation, dumping in over 1 million dollars to get Congress to rip the bill to shreds by sneaking the change in on a budget act in 2000. I, nor any member of this station, are conspiracy theory nuts. A lot of things are as they seem. But not everything.

Says Pikachu, "Will you be playing The Howard Stern Show at any time? If you got that off of 105.3, you'd get some attention."

Says Free Radio San Diego, "I don't think we can get the Howard Stern show. I like to listen to it personally, but it costs some cash to get that. In regards to the moderators, more likely than not they've simply emailed the station info to a manager, and from their someone might just forward it off to the FCC. I would do the same thing if I was a coporate pig."

Says kelsey, "they jumped on me when i promoted KCR. i understood. it's all good."

Says Free Radio San Diego, "I'm not familiar with 92.1's policies as much as CCC's, so I think it would be ignorant to assume they're just as bad. I know they're a member of the NAB, which means that politically they are against us, and against most forms of non coporate media, which is in their best interest, so I can't say I'm suprised. However, CCC is the tyrant, and dumps far more money into lobbying than anyone else. So on a scale of 1-10, with 10 being pretty bad, I'd give 92.1 a 2 or 3, and CCC a 928342234."

Says hipman, "Isn't This Illegal? Do you have any official documentation from the FCC to broadcast legally?
There was a case in 1997 where a pirate operating near Qualcomm rebroadcasted KPBS-FM's signal on 96.9 and a church out of Chula Vista broadcasting some stupid satellite religious relay on 96.9. The engineer at KPBS-FM got wind of it and got the FCC to shut them down and they were fined some couple of thousand dollars.
One pirate from 104.9 in El Cajon in 1999 and a hip hop station on 96.1 out of Normal Heights, who said they were from Tijuana, and one at 104.1 from who knows where in Spanish this year, also operated briefly. The FCC got the 96.1 pirate, but I'm not sure about the other two.
In Los Angeles, there are a few pirates on 100.7 broadcasting electronica and dance music at night. Now THAT is a format we need in San Diego. I drive through part of 101 back and forth just to hear the station when I pass on the way to Ventura to see Bill.
There's a pirate from Alpine on 105.7 relaying some San Clemente religious station like we really need it.
As for Howard Stern rebroadcasts, you can bet that Clear Channel, which owns the rights locally, will be at your doorstep if they hear him on 96.9.
Whatever you do, fly below the radar, or stream your station on the Internet like some thousand do. Be careful.

From Free Radio San Diego: " No, in fact we do have legal documentation. It's called the First Amemdment, and it takes priority over anything the FCC has to say. Blacks weren't allowed to vote for a long time, women as well, and gay rights were considered a moot point until very recently. These laws were very much enforced by authorities, and many forms of "justice" could be brought to bear upon you if you violated those laws. Much is the same right now I believe. Aside from the initial Bill of Rights given to us in 1789, I'm not aware of one liberty or freedom granted by the government, but I'm aware of many that have been stripped by the government in the name of "protecting our democracy", which seems slightly more than ironic. The FCC has already been to our web site; we've seen their IP addresses all over. They know what we're up to. But that doesn't really matter. To know what is right and not do it out of fear is the mark of cowardice, and cowards don't change the system, they merely act like part of it. I'm not trying to act like a martyr here, but I don't see anyone else doing anything about this. Our politicians are bought and sold, and there is no way that even a few thousand people signing a petition will do anything compared to the many thousands of dollars (nearly half a million was spent on successfully trying to kill the low power fm legislation alone) that can be handed over to those politicians via big lobby groups. In regards to the Internet, we strongly believe that assuming everyone who should be allowed to listen to our station should have a computer and an internet connection. That rig is about a grand, and a cheap FM clock radio is about $5. I would ask, how do you know so much and with such accurate detail of the FCC's actions, and the location and frequencies of the broadcasters? I'm not trying to imply that you are an FCC field agent, but you have to admit, you have a lot of information for an every day citizen. We have our strategy and method for dealing with the FCC. How effective it will be remains a mystery of course. May fortune favor the foolish."

And one last post, from hipman:

"Pirate Cat Radio" uses FCC loophole to broadcast on LA's Westside - Will more follow? Here's an excerpt from it of interest: "We are at war now so I'm broadcasting legally," he says, citing Section 73.3542 of the FCC regulations, "Authority is granted, on a temporary basis, in extraordinary circumstances requiring emergency operation to serve the public interest. Such situations include: emergencies involving danger to life and property, a national emergency proclaimed by the President or the Congress of the United States; and the continuance of any war in which the United States is engaged, and where such action is necessary for the national defense or security or otherwise in furtherance of the war effort." So you could be on the air legally as long as our Armed Forces are fighting in Afghanistan, is that right? Who knows. Somebody could put up stations that interfere with "Cheap" Channel's stations and the evil empire can't do a thing about it

And one last post from Free Radio San Diego:

To mr hipman: yeah, i'm familiar with that loophole, and it's possible we'll exploit it. Basicaly it will come down to the federal courts, which 99.9% side with the FCC (go figure). It kind of sucks like that, cause check out how it works if you win:

- You start broadcasting.

- The FCC sends you a Notice Of Apparent Liability (NAL), which basicly says "hey, we know what you're doing, now stop or we'll screw your day up."

- You counter their NAL with a statement (submitted to the FCC) on why you're doing it.

- If you succeed in getting them off your back (as about 3 stations in the US I'm aware of have done), that's the end of that.

The problem of course is that no precedent is established legally for the next guy. So if you want to use the same argument that someone else used, it's not a legal precedent that a lawyer can fall back on and reference a case, because it never was a case. It's a fairly interesting way of doing business.

To our band rocks:

I can not attempt to change how you view a topic. You must admit that it's suprising that for such an unbelievably important piece of law it got very little media coverage.

The First Amendment (to those who don't know, here's the exact text:

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF; OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS; OR THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PEACEABLY TO ASSEMBLE, AND TO PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES )

The big key in there is "..OR ABRIDGING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH..".

Are you allowed to call up a woman randomly in the phone book every hour and tell her you're going to rape her? Of course not.

Are you allowed to yell fire in a movie theatre? Of course not.

Are you allowed to start broadcasting from a transmitter, and in the process of doing that cause interference for air traffic control, ambulances, fire departments, and police officers? Of course not.

Are you allowed to broadcast on an unused frequency that causes no damage or harm to any other signal or entity? We believe you can, because there is no measurable negative impact, except for the government losing control, which they don't really dig on so much.

How this related to campaign finance reform:

"Clean Money". I think this is heavily in the interest of the general public. Have you ever tried to meet your congressperson? They don't give a rat's ass about you. Sincerely. Do this:

- Call your congressman (or congresswomen), and tell them that you would like to talk to them about a vote coming up.

after they say no:

- Call back and tell the secratary that just hung up on you that you would like to donate $10,000 to mr. or mrs. so and so's election campaign fund, and see if you don't get a better response.

Politicians are bought and sold. We did a little math work, and figured out that it would be easier to buy off the city council, which is legal, than to get a petition signed. Either raise around $15,000, or get 64,000 signatures.

Seriously.. why the hell should a group bother with signatures, when it's easier just to raise the money and give it to them?

Things like this make me a big fan of clean money.

- Clean Elections, or the concept of regulating airtime.

I reference this article:

http://www.commoncause.org/publications/040297_rpt1.htm

It shows the power of the media, which is our eyes and ears, to control what it is that we think.

So if we can prove (which isn't hard), that with money you can buy yourself the votes you need (hell.. you can even put the guy you want in office, because the more money you have = the more effective your campaign. rarely does the winner of an election spend less than who he or she loses to), and you can buy public opinion with media spots, I feel that's about as contradictory to free speech as you can get.

Because you're not using the First Ammendment for it's power, you're instead using money, media, and the First Ammendment as a medium to assume more power.

And just like calling "fire" in a crowded movie theatre; you are not allowed to put your own agenda ahead of public safety.

And yes, I believe (and obviously many others do as well or this act wouldn't have so much steam) that the money dumped into media and politician's pockets is so extreme at this point that it is easily not within the betterment of our cititzenry.

You don't have to prove that it's within your First Amendment rights, because nearly everything is.

You have to prove that you're not harming anyone in commission of those actions. Who makes that decision? Judges, the public, and hopefully for not too much longer rich media mongers.

END OF SPEECH

Some data from the 96.9 website is shown to illustrate what they plan to do.

Free Radio San Diego's Mission: Free Radio San Diego was started in 2002, knowing full well that in a corporate dominated media environment like San Diego, we would soon be attracting attention from the FCC. We broadcast because we believe in the right to freedom of speech and peaceful assembly. Corporate radio has long since stopped representing the people, and Internet broadcasting assumes everyone has a $1000+ computer, which is absurd. We have spent many hours ensuring our signal does not harm any other broadcasters, spill into any other frequencies, or create any type of interference. Since we are causing no measurable harm, and merely excersing a right given to each citizen in the Constitution, we feel that we are in no way violating any just or legal laws. Legislation was passed to allow for the licensing of low power fm (LPFM), but due to lots of money being dumped into congress by the National Association of Broadcasters, they bought congress off and destroyed the legislation. It is now impossible to apply for a LPFM license in San Diego, and as such we must operate against the wishes of the FCC. Not all laws are legal. There were laws about people of color not being allowed in many public facilities. There were laws about women not being able to vote, or being allowed to be beaten by their husbands. These laws are not, were not, and never will be just. Following them because "they are the law" is playing into the hands of an oppressive government. The government exists to serve the American people; we do not exist to serve it."

Their initial schedule seems to have the station operating at 7pm on Sundays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays.

Says another page on their website, "What do we do? Well, we try to keep the music lively. We have music from big bands, local San Diego bands, little bands from other places, and stuff like that. We have tons and tons of mp3's that play right into the transmitter, so it's super easy to play a variety of great stuff. And with the Internet, it's real easy to get ahold of new music in digital format. Most of our music is punk, rock, ska, old country, blues, folk, and occassionaly some real funky stuff to break it up a little bit."

On the front page, they're trying to get the listeners/readers involved by having them write the local mayor, city manager, deputy mayor, and attorney general. Unfortunately, only the U.S. Government arm of the FCC is allowed to regulate the American airwaves; the city governments cannot do a thing about it, not even control the number of stations Clear Channel can operate locally either.

Here's one from another page, "Interference / Planes Falling Out Of The Sky / etc, etc, etc: The biggest argument that the FCC and corporate media will use is that they are protecting you by shutting us down, because we pose a public safety hazard because we can cause interference to airplanes, hospitals, and all kinds of other bleeding heart cases that will make the American public get weepy. We can cause that damage. So can any station broadcasting. There is equipment to stop that interference. We use the same stuff the corporate stations do. No big mystery. But they will always fly the rhetoric flag of interference, and we can promise if we're ever aired on corporate media, the anchor will have some grave face and say "the FCC remarks that stations such as these can cause interference to planes, ambulances, and fire fighters.""

So KGB is a public safety hazard by causing interference with the mental health of humans? KIFM is a public safety hazard by making drivers drowsy with music too relaxing for the driver to operate the car? Rock 105.3 is public safety hazard by making brain surgeons too edgy to operate? Sure. Every radio station is a public safety hazard. Let's shut down every radio station in town.

What about interference? Let's repeat a quote, "In October we should be able to broadcast to El Cajon, North Park, Hillcrest, Kensington, downtown, La Mesa, and have some spill over into the areas around those," says a poster calling himself "Free Radio San Diego".

Okay, now, how much power would it take to reach all those areas? Sounds like it could be operating from an area from Qualcomm to East San Diego. Could be 1,000 watts, but to get into El Cajon, it's more like 10,000 watts if we're talking about the valley.

Interference? If you have a small radio, and you live near the future 96.9 transmitter, it can leak into the signals of 97.3 and 96.5, which is called alternate channel interference. An FM tuner with better selectivity can allow you to get, say, KRTH 101.1 out of Los Angeles, without interference from the locals at 100.7 and 101.5. Now, if you tune in 101.1 and you get leakage from either station, then you have a cheap tuner, and you may have problems getting KYXY and KSON if you're in an area where 96.9 is broadcasting.

If it was an low power FM station, which can exist only on the frequency of 105.9 in San Diego according to the FCC, it would legally operate at only 10 or 100 watts, tops. Alternate channel interference at 0.4MHz on a cheap radio tuner, commonly found at K-Mart and Wal Mart, would deny the listners the right to listen to smooth soft rock KYXY or country KSON in the area these stations are licensed to serve. Would a 10 watt station on 96.9 cause that much interference for the radio listener with a cheap tuner near the low power transmitter? Is there any proof that it does? If there is no proof, then why are low power stations at 10 watts not legally alloted the alternate channel slots to broadcast on these possible San Diego low power frequencies: 92.9, 93.7, 95.3, 96.1, 96.9, 98.5, 103.3, 104.1, 104.9, 105.7, 106.1, and 106.9?

As it is, LPFM stations can broadcast at 0.6MHz from a local station in the area, so its possible to broadcast on the frequencies of 98.7, 104.3, 99.1, 99.5, 104.7, 105.9, 107.1, 107.5, and 107.9, unless Clear Channel Los Angeles and other broadcasters complain that they could interfere with reception of these stations in parts of San Diego. They could broadcast near the Mexican frequencies 0.2MHz apart, as long as the Mexican station nearby in frequency doesn't complain about it, but they can't regulate what goes on in American radio, but we can't regulate Mexican radio, and they put up a 90.7 classical station interfering with reception of 90.7 in Los Angeles. So why not put the LPFM stations on near or on top of some of the weaker Mexican radio signals?

There is also a pending case with a pirate broadcaster on 87.9 FM from the Malibu area, who states that they can broadcast as long as, among other things, the United States is engaged in war, in this case, with Afghanistan. Would that reasoning justify 96.9 broadcasting legally?

Maybe there is hope for DFSX on a pirate frequency after all.

Here's more on the 87.9 pirate:

"Pirate Cat Radio" uses FCC loophole to broadcast on LA's Westside - Will more follow?

Posted by peter on 9/19/2002, 11:59:00 24.126.114.208

Daniel Roberts operates his own radio station. Roberts runs Pirate Cat Radio - 87.9 on your FM dial in the Central and West Los Angeles Areas - from the living room of his Hollywood apartment.

The broadcast facility consists of a desk in a corner of the dark room. On it sits two computers, a mixing board, amplifier, CD player, cassette deck and turntable. A thick, black cable runs along the ceiling from a nearby shelf on the wall holding a 30 watt transmitter on top of a pool cleaner pole on the roof of the apartment building near the West Hollywood border.

Roberts, a slight young man with plastic rectangular framed glasses, dark hair pushed up into a modified mohawk and a browm Germs T-shirt -- rushes into the apartment and heaves himself down on the couch, apologizing for being late.

But almost immediately, he's up again and sitting down in the chair behind the desk in the corner. He picks up a microphone, cuts off the Jesus and Mary Chain's "Head On" in a mid-feedback screech and gets on the air.

"Hey, it's the Monkey Man, and your listening to "Pirate Cat Radio", Roberts purrs into the mike. "And I've got some visitors here tonight" he says, forcing his guests off the couch and onto the air as he opens the CD player to put in a disc by The Deep End, a friends band.

"It's what I do", he says after he cuts the mike and restores the music to the airwaves. "You can't take it away, It's my outlet."

Broadcasting his own pirate radio station --defined by the FCC as a station without a license --is what Roberts has been doing fora better part of the last five years, shuttling back and forth between Hollywood and the Bay area.

Part of his movement stems from FCC scrutiny, part from moving out on his own and part from work. Yet throughout, he has taken his transmitter and his antenna and set up shop on the dial at 87.9FM.

He began as a teenager who taught himself how to build a transmitter by reading "Electronics Made Easy" and then made an antenna by soldering copper coat hangers together with PVC pipe.

"I did it before because I was bored," Roberts says, Then it was rebellion. Now it's like watching TV."

What comes out over the airwaves is a wildly eclectic mix of music heavy on the 1970's and early 80's punk rock and new wave, accented by the occasional piece of classical music and "cheesy" songs. Interspersed are bits of talk (much of it too coarse to repeat here), joke public service announcements and reminders that you're listening to Pirate Cat Radio and can always call (323) 876-8800 to make a request or order a Pirate Cat Radio T-Shirt or G-string.

Roberts has been on the air uninteruppted in Hollywood since September. And although the FCC is aware of his presence and occasionally darkens his doorways with threats, he says he's bulletproof.

"We are at war now so I'm broadcasting legally," he says, citing Section 73.3542 of the FCC regulations, "Authority is granted, on a temporary basis, in extraordinary circumstances requiring emergency operation to serve the public interest. Such situations include: emergencies involving danger to life and property, a national emergency proclaimed by the President or the Congress of the United States; and the continuance of any war in which the United States is engaged, and where such action is necessary for the national defense or security or otherwise in furtherance of the war effort."

Roberts has run his interpretation of the regulations by some lawyers who, he says, concur that he's in the clear and in turn would spread the word through the pirate radio community.

"Technically, you can use it for the War on Drugs," he adds. "It's awesome loophole."

The FCC is mum on the issue. Department officials failed to return phone calls for this story, and Roberts says that when he explains it to them, they reply, "We'll get back to you on that."

"They haven't gotten back to me yet," he says.

Up to now, Roberts says his battles with the FCC have only cost him emotionally.

"I spend more money fixing stuff than fighting the FCC," he says, estimating he pays $60-$75 a month on bills.

However, if the FCC does decide to come down on him, Roberts could face a $10,000 a day fine or two years in prison.

Until that day comes, however, he intends to keep on keeping on.

Each morning as he heads off to work at MCA/Universal Records, where he is a web developer, his computer takes over Pirate Cat Radio, sifting through the playlists he has crafted and queuing choices from the 300 gigabytes of MP3 files on his hard drive.

The phone in the apartment, which doubles as the station's number, rings continuously with requests from listeners, bands looking to get their CD's in Roberts hands and criticisms.

"It's either too much The Smiths or Depeche Mode", he says, "Everybody's a critic."

Roberts is also trying to branch out and grow Pirate Cat Radio.

He's looking for donations of equipment, especially an 8-track player so he can dip into the boxes of tapes he picked up recently.

"Maybe I want to hear 'Barry Manilow's Greatest Hits' one day," he says. "Shut up, there's some decent stuff."

He's also beginning to take Pirate Cat Rado out on the road, doing more remote broadcasts such as the monthly broadcast of punk bands playing acoustic sets he started last Saturday.

Mainly he stays on the air because he can. Roberts says occasional offers come in from commercial stations like KROQ to do a graveyard shift, but the sacrifice he'd have to make by shutting down his own radio station just to get paid to be on the radio is not worth it.

"I spent two months off the air last year, and I found life's more stressful without it," he says. "This is like my diary of sorts."

Source - LA Independent - By Brian Lewis