Talk:Brinkley Act

message: I just saved a substantial revamp of this article.  However, there are some things I'm still not comfortable about....
* The dates.  According to the notes in the United States Code, this provision was enacted as an original section of the Communications Act of 1934.  However, the article on John R. Brinkley suggests that he was still operating the studios in Del Rio as late as 1939.  What gives?  Did the newly-created FCC actually grant him a permit the first time around, or was there a legal challenge, or what?
* International comparisons.  I'm not sure the British comparison belongs here, particularly as it is the only one and it is so removed in time from the passage of the Brinkley Act.  If it's going to stay, it should be joined by similar cases from other countries.  I'd particularly like to see a summary of the situation with respect to Canada in the heyday of CKLW, which is the only obvious candidate from about the same time as the British situation.  (There's also the more modern case of CKEY-FM, which has gotten in hot water with the CRTC about its relationship with stations in Buffalo.)  Are there any examples from other countries (say, China and pre-handover Hong Kong, or Malaysia and Singapore, or Venezuela and the Leeward Islands)?
121a0012 05:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still needs work 

message: > still operating the studios in Del Rio as late as 1939.
The Act bans programming via telephone wire over the border. 
I believe his first move would be to move the studio to Mexico.... after all, much of his empire had already gone down there. He could also record shows and commercials in the US and ship the disks to Mexico, as was done for Radio Luxembourg. 16" transcription disks were already of quality comparable to a long phone line to an AM transmitter. Some of his talent would have consented to work in Mexico: it was the depression, jobs were thin, Mexico mighta been a good place to live with US dollars. 
I doubt exact operational details are available. Whatever logs and construction records existed 1934-1941 have probably been lost. 
"purpose of the Brinkley Act was to shut down a broadcaster"
Like many laws, it didn't work. The studio can just move. There are cost and quality issues, but if a radio station is doing well then outlawing the wire is an annoyance, not a problem. 
As WWII loomed, larger global politics got the US and Mexico together on many local issues. Border Blasters were on the table, if only so that the US and Mexico could reach their citizens in an emergency. A similar BB, Crosley's monster, was irritating Canada.  "WLW was required to cut back to 50,000 watts during the nighttime hours due to interference caused to CFRB." Wiser heads came together. Out of this came international coordination of power and channel, with a few 50KW main stations, many smaller stations, and no more 500KW beasts in regular operation. 
http://www.matthewmusial.com/brnkpgs/pg16.htm says Brinkley fought the confiscation of his transmitter but suffered a heart attack the same month. He was bankrupt and sick and died the next year. We can speculate (not on Wikipedia) that if US/Mexico tensions had not thawed, and if Brinkley had stayed strong, he'd have been throwing a megawatt up the US's butt for many more decades, despite the Brinkley Act. 
The BA didn't shut-down Brinkley. The BA remains useful to irritate "legitimate" cross-border broadcast operations. As mentioned it has been used to enforce US-politics ownership rules which attempt to reduce monopolistic media. But that's another article....
165.230.87.131 17:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ....as late as 1939 

message: Quote from History of International Broadcasting: "...out of 4 million listeners to Radio Luxembourg 2 million were in the British Isles". RL didn't specifically beam the signal to the UK. Even their website states they had an audience in Ireland. Yes, it was UK legislation, but that's a different issue. CarterBar (talk) 19:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: CarterBar, the article is specifically talking about Legislation.  The article is about American legislation (The Brinkley Act), and is making the point that similar legislation was passed in the UK. Use of the term "British Isles" in this context is wholly incorrect as the UK do not have power to pass legislation for Ireland.  Are you seriously trying to suggest that the UK passed legislation to prevent Radio Luxembourg from broadbasting into another country - i.e. Ireland?  That's more than a little daft, not to mention insulting to the Irish - we're quiet capable of passing our very own legislation, thank you.  --HighKing (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Radio Luxembourg beamed its signal to English speaking people in NW Europe, most of whom are in the British Isles. This fact is nothing to do with US legislation, it's merely stating something about the radio station - did they not broadcast to the IoM or something? CarterBar (talk) 19:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Even the reference you provided (and it is a good reference) states that the target audience was the UK.  The legislation was specifically for the UK at the behest of the BBC.  Sure, Radio Luxembourg had an audience all over NW Europe, but it was actually targetting the UK, nowhere else.  I won't revert you again today.  Think about the point.  Same with the related articles.  Talk again tomorrow?  --HighKing (talk) 19:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. I'm away now as well. CarterBar (talk) 19:52, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Radio signals have no respect for partitions imposed to appease terrorists in West Britain. EmpireForever (talk) 14:20, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree the article is about UK legislation, but that shouldn't preclude mention of where the signal was being beamed to. What were the motives of Luxemborg? Were they to beam a signal specifically to the UK, or were they happy to just beam it in the general direction of the English-speaking people in the British Isles? I suspect the latter, and the reference strongly implies this as well. However, if a reference could be found stating that Luxembourg's audience was definitey only the UK, then that would help to resolve the matter. CarterBar (talk) 20:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are many references that state that Radio Luxembourg was marketing into the UK.  Their ads were for the UK, from UK companies, etc.  The reference providede by EmpireForever on pg 44 and pg 45 also states this.  --HighKing (talk) 21:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But this one - an official Luxembourg website gives a different view. Quote "Radio Luxembourg today, as in the past, is aimed at the radio audience in the United Kingdom and Ireland..." CarterBar (talk) 20:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  British Isles usage