WASHINGTON, August 20, 2009- Don't let the dog days of summer pass you by without taking a look at some of radio's latest tricks. Today the musicFIRST coalition released a compilation of radio's most egregious distortions about a fair performance right on radio called "The Radio Distortion Handbook." The handbook contains the many lies and mistruths to date used by the radio industry in its disingenuous campaign against the Performance Rights Act and those who support it. The Performance Rights Act is a bill that will bring fairness to artists, fairness to other radio platforms and fairness to radio.

"AM and FM music radio stations continue to earn billions in advertising revenue without compensating the artists and musicians who bring music to life and listeners' ears to the radio dial," said musicFIRST executive director Jennifer Bendall. "Instead, radio stations and the National Association of Broadcasters continue to run an untruthful campaign against the Performance Rights act, spreading lies and misinformation to the general public and challenging the character and integrity of member of Congress who support it."

For months, radio stations have been using the public airwaves to run ads and commentary that unfairly prey on the public's fears by calling the Performance Rights Act a "tax"- which it's not, saying all the money is going to foreign companies, which it's not, and intimating that this is a racial issue by claiming that there is no black representation in the process and that it will "murder black radio" - again not true.

"Time and time again we have been told ‘NO!' by radio stations when it comes to airing our side of the debate," said Bendall. "Many stations are rejecting our ads without even reading the script. It's an absolute sham. Ironically, they are refusing to take our money at the same time that they cry poverty to avoid fairly compensating artists for the music upon which they have built their businesses."

Earlier this month, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced it is seeking comments on the petition filed by musicFIRST. The petition details how radio stations across the country refuse to air musicFIRST ads, threaten artists who support the effort to create a fair performance right on radio and continue to run misleading ads produced by the NAB - all in an effort to further their own private commercial interests at the expense of their public interest obligations.

Here are just a couple of examples of radio's lies and misinformation:

1. From a May 12, 2009 open letter by Radio One, Inc. Chairperson and Founder Cathy Hughes:

"The bill...is the brain child of the foreign owned record industry..." (5/12/09)

THE FACTS: American artists and musicians have been pursuing the performance right for over 70 years. Over those seven decades right up to the present, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) has spent millions of dollars on ad campaigns and lobbying to kill any efforts by Congress to enact a performance right.

The original coalition in support of a performance right was the "brain child" of bandleader Fred Waring who, in 1935, organized 700 performers (including Bing Crosby) as the National Association of Performing Artists (NAPA). Since then, singers and musicians from Frank Sinatra to Gladys Knight to Bruce Springsteen have spoken out in support of this basic act of economic fairness.

2. In a May 29th letter to the editor of The Tennessean, NAB Executive Vice President for Media Relations Dennis Wharton asked, "If this legislation is aimed at "helping artists," why does it direct half of the money to giant record label companies based out of the country?"

THE FACTS: NOWHERE does the Performance Rights Act refer to "record label companies" (giant, foreign, or otherwise). The PRA would send 50% of the royalties directly to artists and musicians and 50% directly to the sound recording copyright owner. And since many artists are also the sound recording copyright owners of their music (such as Billy Corgan of The Smashing Pumpkins who recently testified before Congress in favor of a performance right), artists would actually get more than record labels. That is the definition of "helping artists."

3. In response to questions on why he refused to show up to the July 9, 2009 House Judiciary Committee hearing on minority radio to which he was invited, Radio One CEO Alfred Liggins stated: "I'm not going to sit there and get beat up" (http://www.nationaljournal.com/congressdaily/cdp_20090709_6296.php)

THE FACTS: What Mr. Liggins means is that he can't defend his position against the opposition. Had Mr. Liggins shown up, he would undoubtedly have had to explain why Radio One claims it is under financial threat when he received a $10 million bonus and a 69.3% salary increase. He also would have had to explain why he can receive this kind of payment when he refuses to compensate the performers whose work is responsible for generating these good fortunes. Congressional hearings provide an opportunity for the public and its representatives to hear all sides of an argument. They also provide witnesses the opportunity to state their case in person.

Refusing to testify is even more hypocritical given the fact that Radio One founder Cathy Hughes has inaccurately complained "...There has been only one hearing on the bill and that hearing did not have any black ownership representation. Black radio owners and community leaders including Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, Dick Gregory, Tom Joyner, and myself have all begged Conyers to at least allow us the opportunity for a hearing. He has flatly refused."

Complaining inaccurately that broadcasters have had no opportunity to testify, then refusing an offer to testify because you'd have to defend your position? That's radio distortion at its best.