[Fmpro] Doug Wood: FMPRO list = "misinformation"

[Tracey Larvenz]

I was hoping that this exchange wasn't going to be like similar "drive-by
emailings" that we've seen in the past from DW, where he posts and then
drops out of sight for about 8 months.  Please Doug, from Marilyn Bergman's
statement "Because ASCAP is a membership organization, with a Board of
Directors that answers only to its membership, the Board believes firmly in
our core values of treating members fairly" (from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_pwwi/is_200009/ai_mark03015924) it
seems that you are almost obligated to respond to our questions, as many of
us are members...

Tracey


On 7/20/07, leshurdle <leshurdle at avradionet.com> wrote:
>
> Joel
>
> Some of us have spent decades dealing with this exact same PC garbage.
>
> You're not helping.
>
> L
>
>
>
> On Jul 20, 2007, at 2:13 PM, jbrave wrote:
>
> > Let's take apart DW's post:
> >
> > "I agree with many of the sentiments expressed here, but some
> > misinformation
> > has been posted (there's a surprise!) and rumors have been posited
> > as fact"
> > Doug said "...some misinformation..." He didn't say "FMPRO is full of
> > misinformation"
> >
> > Where DW went wrong in this paragraph was with the remark "...
> > (there's a
> > surprise!)..." which is sarcastic and a self defeating comment.
> > Someone
> > in his position needs to build alliances for change not just within
> > his
> > organization, but with those outside of his organization. This comment
> > is alienating to FMPRO subscribers in my opinion.
> >
> > Doug said "...rumors have been posited as fact..."
> >
> > This does not appear to be a blanket condemnation of the information
> > generally posted on the list.
> >
> > Doug said:
> >
> > "Second, broadcasters do not pay $123 for a minute of music. Most
> > broadcasters have a blanket license with all three PROs under which
> > they
> > have the right to broadcast anything in the PRO's repertoire for a
> > flat fee.
> > The license covers every piece of music they use over a five year
> > period. So
> > the PROs try to keep track of the music that a licensee broadcasts
> > during a
> > quarter (plenty to discuss here, but not now) and distribute the
> > broadcaster's license fee among those composers and publishers
> > according to
> > their various distribution formulas."
> >
> > Here he specifically pointed out what he felt was misinformation. No
> > need for him to repost the same paragraph.
> >
> > Doug said:
> >
> > "If you can avoid the name calling, the rumor
> > mongering, the half-truths, the distortions, and the temptation to
> > jump to
> > other subjects, we can get this done."
> >
> > This language is inflammatory and is what I think Mark Northam is
> > responding to. A perceived lack or actual failure to communicate
> > important information to ASCAP membership is the reason why there
> > might
> > be rumors, distortions and half truths - if the ASCAP organization was
> > doing a good job of communicating information to it's membership,
> > these
> > problems would not exist. They exist because of a failure in clearly
> > communicating and listening to, and responding to the needs of the
> > portion of the ASCAP membership that composes instrumental music for
> > films and subscribes to this list. This is a failure at a basic level
> > that can ultimately be the undoing of an organization. Take heed.
> >
> > Joel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > The Film Music Pro List is sponsored by Film Music Magazine -
> > http://www.filmmusicmag.com
> >
> > To edit your list options or unsubscribe, visit:
> > http://nxport.com/mailman/listinfo/fmpro
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> The Film Music Pro List is sponsored by Film Music Magazine -
> http://www.filmmusicmag.com
>
> To edit your list options or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://nxport.com/mailman/listinfo/fmpro
>



-- 
      Tracey Larvenz
www.melodiousthunk.net