During its online Radio Town Hall, Monday (Aug. 23), NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith — along with Joint Board Chair Steve Newberry, Radio Board Chair Caroline Beasley, Immediate Past Radio Board Chair Charles Warfield, and Executive Vice President of Radio John David — told radio broadcasters that they really only have two choices: Negotiate a good deal with the recording industry — The musicFIRST Coalition and its parent RIAA — or face a long battle, possibly for years to come, that could keep radio bogged down with the fight over the Performance Rights Act, and possibly deflect from the radio industry's ability to get "the things that you may want."

On the surface, that sounds good. It seems to make sense. But does it? Does the entire process now being presented by the NAB make sense? The NAB has long been calling performance royalties a "performance tax." The cry has been "no performance tax." Now, it seems, NAB is telling radio broadcasters, "A smaller tax is better than a bigger one. Let's do a 180 and support a new 'tax' on radio."

After hearing all that's being said, and reading all that's being written, Mark Harris Broadcast Consulting (MHBC) founder and radio programming consultant Mark Harris has carefully concluded that there are only really two choices: An immediate change of leadership at the NAB — or a mass radio exodus from the organization in favor of a new one representing only the radio industry, including smaller radio companies, that will indeed fight for radio's BEST interests — not the better of two alternatives.

For this reason, says Harris, he is calling for the immediate resignation of Gordon Smith as NAB President and CEO. Harris writes, "At first, I thought the former Senator was more of a diplomat than his predecessor, toning down the rhetoric and being willing to negotiate instead of openly fighting. 'Maybe this is good,' I thought. However, it has become clear to me that he does not represent the interests of radio, either personally or in his role heading up the National Association of Broadcasters. He may or may not represent the television industry, but definitely that's not the case for radio."

Harris continues, "I do not think he will resign, or even acknowledge my call for him to do so. Therefore, I am urging radio en masse to quit the NAB and form a new organization dedicated only to radio. It must be one that carefully represents not only the largest radio corporations, but also the smaller groups and the few remaining mom-and-pop radio station operators. It must be an organization, however, that represents ONLY Radio, and does not have to also divide its efforts with the concerns of the television industry, which clearly has its own issues and concerns."

"I am not just some crackpot blogger, or a johnny-come-lately to radio and its concerns," writes Harris. "My professional broadcasting career dates back to July 4, 1962, when exactly one week shy of my 15th birthday, I began with a small hometown 250 watt AM radio station doing weekends (Saturday noon-6pm and Sunday 6am-noon). In the past 48 years, I have seen more changes than I would have believed possible, in the industry and its technology. I've advanced from reel-to-reel tape to cart machines and ultimately computer hard drives; from turntables to cassettes to CDs and ultimately hard drives there as well."

"One thing," says Harris, "that hasn't changed is the record label/distributor promotion people who do everything possible to get a radio programmer to give on-air exposure to new recordings by other than well established artists. I won't say publicly how many times I've been offered 'payola' to play a newer recording by an unknown or lesser known artist. When has Gordon Smith ever served as a Program Director or Music Director of a radio station? My point? Does he really understand the value of — not just what we claim, but what recording industry promoters themselves place on — radio airplay for newer recordings, even often by established artists?"

Harris writes, "I see many things missing from the current 'fact sheet' provided by the NAB offered in the discussions with musicFIRST. There are, however, two which are glaringly not present. The second most important to my thinking — as a radio broadcaster who has worked as an on-air host, Music Director, Program Director, Operations Manager, Station Manager, and News Director/anchor, among others — is a provision for a 'rebate' on any royalty fee paid by a station to the recording industry for promotional airplay sought by them. Yes, that would effectively be legal 'payola.' However, aren't performance royalties, of any form or amount, a reverse payola? We pay them so we can play their recordings, the ones we choose to play based on station format. So why can't they pay us for playing the recordings they want us to play?"

However, the MHBC founder says the biggest issue missing from what has been revealed by NAB so far is the most glaring one of all. "I do not see one word about bringing the leadership of Congress, both houses, both parties into the discussions or negotiations currently underway. Not one word! Will radio, if it accepts a NAB-negotiated deal, have any guarantee that the exact terms of any agreement will be those actually legislatively enacted? Suppose CTIA and CEA pressure on Congress strips the mobile device FM chip proposal from the final bill? Suppose House leadership raises the 1% to 3% or 5%? Suppose they reject eliminating the Copyright Royalty Board from setting radio rates?"

"Mr. Smith clearly concedes the NAB, under his leadership, cannot guarantee lawmakers will honor the much-heralded Local Radio Freedom act that has been subject of so many NAB news releases in the recent past. So how can he guarantee that those same legislators will honor ALL of the terms of any deal with musicFIRST/RIAA?" questions Harris. "I hear nothing from the Smith-led NAB that even hints at an answer to that question."

In a much-ignored and even derided-by-some posting, Harker Research's Radio InSights writes: "When’s the last time you heard Gordon Smith say anything good about radio? When’s the last time you saw the NAB out-front promoting radio, countering the endless parade of moronic musings about the death of radio? Go on the NAB Website. Does that look like an organization that represents the best interests of radio and understands radio’s challenges?" Harris says, "Without getting into the merits of other points made by Harker, I will state that the comments quoted here are ones with which I heartily agree. Two years ago, under the leadership of David Rehr, the NAB still, indeed, DID represent the interests of the radio industry. Very regrettably, that is no longer the case, despite any pre-packaged responses that can be thrown together by NAB PR guy David Wharton." Wharton's actual title is NAB EVP of Communications.

Mr. Rehr also did not have a broadcasting background before becoming President and CEO of the NAB, but he knew how to sell beer. And he did the same for radio. Mr. Smith still thinks and acts like a U.S. Senator seeking bipartisan support for pending legislation, when not sure how the full Senate will vote, or if the House will concur.

The bottom line, writes Harris, is: "I call upon Gordon Smith — a call issued not in a back room with a few people secretly rushed in to a hastily arranged meeting, but in front of the whole WWW world — to immediately resign. Further, I call upon the National Association of Broadcasters to replace him with a true Broadcast Professional with at least 20 years of full-time broadcasting experience, including a minimum of 10 years in the radio sector."

DISCLOSURE: Mark Harris Broadcast Consuting (MHBC) is the parent of TotalPopularMusic.com and TPMedia. Mark Harris personally serves as Publisher and Editor-in-Chief of TPM Website content, including TPMedia News.

ADDENDUM: Since this Editorial was first published early Tuesday morning (Aug. 24), we have heard from many smaller broadcast group owners who say they essentially agree with much, if not all, of what is offered. And late Tuesday afternoon, RBR.com published an article: "Saga CEO Ed Christian says labels need radio airtime, not cash." Mark Harris says he's glad to see at least one of the bigger players echo some of his sentiments. Christian tells RBR the bottom line is: “I hate to see the NAB capriciously give away $100 million dollars of our money.”