This clown used to be a CRTC commissioner?

It's not the purpose of radio to make weak minds weaker, but that's where we are.

Dial Twister wrote:

We have our own conspiracy theorists, right here on Big Yellow. The Internet didn't spawn them; it just amplifies the crazy.

What was messed up in their childhood, or what emotional trauma may have been inflicted on them in adulthood, to confuse them about reality and their very loose attachment to it? Who knows?

Apparently there's no way to reach them. Logic? Common sense? Verifiable truths? Nothing gets through. They'll go about their angry, sub-intellectual ways, demonstrating their complete detachment from reality, all while harming democracy, public health and the patience of everyone around them. And, there's always a Marc Patrone or a Donald tRump to take advantage of them. More's the pity.

The Science° doesn't abide.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341609819_Mental_Illness_and_the_Left

The Obama estate is on Oahu, not Maui, which would explain why it was untouched by the fire! https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2023/08/18/obamas-hawaii-home-100-miles-away-from-maui-fire-fact-check/70614090007/

Last edited by Capricasix (August 22, 2023 5:15 pm)

RadioActive wrote:

Since when do these guys let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory?

Could there be a better example than in this thread of how an outrageously pathetic source, such as Emil O.W. Kirkegaard, can be used in a discussion when a ***minimal*** amount of research would reveal how disassociated with reality this 'expert' is?

THIS, ladies and germs, is exactly how bullshit spreads.

Last edited by Dial Twister (August 22, 2023 6:04 pm)

I think you will find most of the time these people are playing a part and know full well they are play acting.
As long as they can make money off doing it they will keep it up... until Rush Limbaugh gets successfully sued for a billion dollars and financially destroyed.
Basically these people are sociopaths but they are also stupid because they can't seem to understand that at some point their scams will come back to bite them.
I don't know if you have followed the weird scam in the U-S and now creeping into Canada of people who claim to "audit" the constitution.
It does not work very well in Canada but in the U-S these 1st amendment auditors go and harass police government and even private business people claiming they have an absolute first amendment right to do so.
But there are videos of them privately admitting they know it is is all an act to make money on Youtube videos which they get paid for.
They are almost all criminals themselves with records, quite often for domestic abuse.
One of the scams they run is to get deliberately arrested by police only to beg online to their stupid followers to help them with legal fees for frivolous lawsuits
They always refuse lawyers and represent themselves.
Then they plead guilty in court and pocket all the money their supporters send them.
They don't care about having criminal records because they are all losers anyway.

 

Last edited by newsguy1 (August 22, 2023 7:19 pm)

newsguy1 wrote:

I think you will find most of the time these people are playing a part and know full well they are play acting.
As long as they can make money off doing it they will keep it up.
 

RadioAaron wrote:

I completely agree in general, but in this case I don't see how he's making money off this. He's almost certainly paying for his airtime, and doesn't seem to be recouping any of it.

He's a lunatic with enough extra cash to buy a crappy soapbox. 

He has been recently trying to monetize the show by setting up a Substack page that charges for access to his content. It used to be available free on the Sauga 960 page as a podcast, but he removed it from them and now if you want to hear or re-hear a segment, you have to pay for it. That's as close to making money off it (besides having one sponsor) as it gets. But I get the impression that he doesn't have a lot of subscribers yet - or possibly ever. 
 

Book him, Dano.
 

newsguy1 wrote:

Until Rush Limbaugh gets successfully sued for a billion dollars and financially destroyed. 

While I agree with what you're saying generally, I have to point out that he is dead.

I'm not sure about that. My sister lives in New York City and likes Coast-to-Coast AM. The subject doesn't come up often, but she's mentioned Syrett's name to me - and she's not a radio savvy person. I suspect he may still be on there occasionally as a fill-in. She told me she's heard him a number of times. 

Apparently he tones it down when he's doing the American show, because she found it hard to believe he was that "out there" when I told him some of the things he believes in and says on his local show. That tells me he doesn't express them when he's on down south. 

Hammy wrote:

RadioActive wrote:

I'm not sure about that. My sister lives in New York City and likes Coast-to-Coast AM. The subject doesn't come up often, but she's mentioned Syrett's name to me - and she's not a radio savvy person. I suspect he may still be on there occasionally as a fill-in. She told me she's heard him a number of times. 

Apparently he tones it down when he's doing the American show, because she found it hard to believe he was that "out there" when I told him some of the things he believes in and says on his local show. That tells me he doesn't express them when he's on down south. 

I’m surprised the CRTC hasn’t been involved. They’re usually quick to crack down on hate. 

As of now, there's a two year wait on complaints. By then, it will be all but forgotten.

To be honest, he intimated more than came out and directly said anything in the small portion of his show that I heard. And the implied conclusion was that the "elites" and the "billionaires" don't want to share paradise. He definitely did use the sentence, "they want it all to themselves." 

And it wasn't really hate. It was just nonsensical, completely unprovable garbage. I'm not sure if that's against the rules. But it sure doesn't help his reputation or the station's very much. (I suppose that's why they run a disclaimer at the top of every hour of his show noting the following opinions aren't those of Sauga960.)

OK everyone let's all take a deep breath!.  The CRTC does not investigate on-air content on its own volition.  The CRTC does not "monitor" Patrone's show nor are the obligated to monitor the show.  But there are pathways to dealing with objectionable programming.  Sauga960 would be a member of the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC).  I was a (regional) member of the CBSC many years ago so I am familiar with the complaint process.   Sauga's "standard" conditions of licence require that it remain a member in good standing with the CBSC.  That means, the station must comply with the "Broadcast Codes" including the RTNDA code.   It would also have to comply with any ruling of the CBSC, including airing an appropriate statement of "guilt" if it violated the Code(s).   If a member of the public complained about Patrone's comments or other programming aired on the station, and they wrote to the CRTC, the CRTC would refer the matter to the CBSC.  The CBSC would provide the complaint to Sauga and the station would have a period of time to respond.  There is an escalation process, if the (Sauga) response does not meet the CBSC's obligations.   So if anyone on this board, has a complaint about Sauga's programming or more specifically Patrone's show,  by all means write or call the CBSC.  The staff is well versed in the parameters of broadcast law and the applicable codes.  I have confidence that the CBSC would properly and fairly vet any complaint(s) regarding Patrone.

https://www.cbsc.ca/make-a-complaint/The CBSC administers codes of standards for television and radio broadcasting. The codes were drafted voluntarily by industry groups to serve as guidelines for their industry. They are revised from time to time.The CBSC has no involvement in the day-to-day operations of stations; broadcasters maintain complete creative, managerial and journalistic independence. The CBSC recognizes that freedom of expression is a fundamental principle in a democratic society. The codes are not inconsistent with that social value; the private broadcasters voluntarily created standards for themselves in order to demonstrate their commitment to responsible broadcasting and their sensitivity to the communities they serve.The codes and the activities of the CBSC are intended to balance broadcasters’ right to freedom of expression with their desire to best serve the public. The CBSC does not monitor programming, nor does it pre-clear or pre-censor programming. In order for the CBSC to initiate its complaints process and examine a program, it must receive a complaint from a listener or viewer who has heard or seen something that concerns him/her, that was broadcast by a participating broadcaster.
If anyone seriously believes that there was "hate speech" aired on the station, that may be a breach of the Criminal Code.  The CRTC would not have jurisdiction over "hate speech". - at least in the first instance. Law enforcement agencies have jurisdiction to take action against individuals engaging in hate speech.   If anyone wants any additional information please email me through this forum.

Last edited by tvguy (August 23, 2023 4:13 pm)

Art Bell never said to my knowledge that he believed any of the guests he interviewed . He was a master of interviewing the fringe element. I find it  somewhat unfair to categorize him in that light.  His accomplishment from a small local broadcast overnight, to a world wide syndicated show speaks for itself. 

tvguy wrote:

OK everyone let's all take a deep breath!.  The CRTC does not investigate on-air content on its own volition.  The CRTC does not "monitor" Patrone's show nor are the obligated to monitor the show.  But there are pathways to dealing with objectionable programming.  Sauga960 would be a member of the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC).

Alas, CKNT is not a member of the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. You can see the list of members here: https://www.cbsc.ca/associates/radio-associates/

Membership is voluntary - and one reason stations join is to provide a buffer between listener complaints and the CRTC (I believe CHIN-FM only joined a few years ago after having to deal with complaints made directly to the CRTC and deciding they'd rather not have to do that).

You are correct that in the case of CBSC members the CRTC would refer complainants there and only, as a rule, intervene if the station ignored CBSC rulings - but when a station is not a CBSC member then the only path is to first make a complaint to the station and if they do not respond satisfactorily, escalate the complaint to the CRTC (within 30 days of the broadcast, if memory serves. 
 

Last edited by Hansa (August 23, 2023 6:11 pm)