…[S]eize the air. Steal it, it belongs to you. Speak out, they can’t stop you. Find your voice and use it. Keep this thing going. Pick a name and go on the air. It’s your life, take charge of it. Do it, try it, try anything. Spill your guts out, say "shit" and "fuck" a million times if you want to, but you decide. Fill the air, steal it. Keep the air alive (Pump Up the Volume, 1990).

This rant by Happy Harry Hard-On from the movie Pump up the Volume exemplifies what pirate radio ought to be, what we would all like it to be, and what, sadly, it is not. The dream of a million and one individuals using radio to speak their minds, to share their art, or to reach out to their local community. Sadly though, this dream is still fiction, at least for now.

While one might expect to find a true revolutionary voice in radio piracy, a voice that has something original, something genuine, something constructive to say, what one finds is nothing more than business as usual. Or, more accurately, what I would dub indie-fied business as usual. This is to say that, for the most part, the content of pirate radio, while it may be slightly less ‘mainstream’ than commercial radio, fails to break out of the song, comedy bit, and advertisement laden mold established by the pirates’ bigger brothers, the licensed stations.

In an admittedly limited investigation of approximately twenty recorded pirate radio broadcasts dating back to 1987, I have come to several conclusions about the broadcasts that are known as ‘pirate radio.’

First, almost all of the broadcasts are patently designed around the American commercial radio formula: music, commercials, and the occasional sketch comedy bit. Of these, music is probably the most commonly (over?)used staple, as practically every broadcast contains some musical interlude[s], provided off of industry recorded and sold records. Examples include tunes such as Ozzy Ozbourne’s rendition of the Hendrix classic, Purple Haze, and the nearly universally familiar Enter Sandman off of Mettalica’s ‘Black’ al bum, both included in a program aired on Jolly Roger International, a self-proclaimed pirate station. Of course, some stations play slightly less familiar tracks in an attempt to capture the independent and ‘non-commercial’ essence of pirate radio, but few ever take this to the extreme of doing anything more than marginally original (i.e. substitute Lou Rawls and Frank Zappa for Ozbourne and Mettalica). Instead, most are content to have their broadcasts fall somewhere between Top 40 and college radio on the spectrum between commercialism and the avant-garde.

This brings me to my second observation, which is that though American pirate radio is, in actuality, quite similar to commercial radio, almost every Dx’er (pirate radio DJ) is quick to take advantage of the rebellious and underground stigma attached to his/her actions. In fact, one would be hard-pressed to find a single pirate broadcast that does not contain some sort of attack on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), ironically blaming solely that agency for the homogeneity in American broadcast radio. Ostensibly, this sort of touting of pirate radio’s defiant and rebellious nature is at least in part, what attracts individuals to the fray, much as teenagers are attracted to cigarettes for the similar properties they possess.

Moreover, the truly radical and progressive content of all of these pirate broadcasts can be summed up in this idea alone: the FCC should relax restrictions on radio broadcasts so that any idiot (and I say that in the most endearing way possible) with a microphone and a transmitter can say whatever he pleases on the air. The most egregious example of this phenomenon occurs in a WJPL Brooklyn broadcast known as "The Dirtiest Show Ever." Containing nothing more than expletives and a bit about taking hits of nitrous oxide, this approximately forty minute broadcast can be described as nothing more than a juvenile laugh in the face of the FCC for the imposition of content and language restrictions in broadcast media. Admittedly, most complaints against the FCC are much less farcical than the WJPL production and do contain some valid argumentation regarding the extremely unegalitarian distribution of the airwaves. However, the conspicuous lack of any other non-conventional ideas or programming leads us back to the supposition that these pirates are truthfully not so much radical as they are self-interested.

So what can be said about pirate radio as a whole? To put it succinctly, despite the best efforts of radio pirates to convince us otherwise, their programs are indeed, only a mold of the commercial radio that already pervades our country. The broadcasts contain nothing that could be considered particularly deviant or even distinct, except for the token attack on the FCC, which seems to be more personally than socially motivated, anyway.

Fortunately, there is salvation. In searching the archives of ‘pirate radio’ broadcasts, one does occasionally stumble upon a golden nugget, a morsel of truth, sincerity, and non-conventionality amongst the masses of drivel that beset it. The reason that this proverbial nugget has gone unmentioned thus far is that such a broadcast should not and cannot be rightfully lumped in with all the rest of the commercial wannabe’s. Instead, much like the schism between pirate radio and clandestine/guerrilla radio, some separation needs to be recognized, which demonstrates the contrast between commercial radio being broadcast without a liscense, and the microradio broadcasts which reject both the FCC’s system of airwave distribution and the orthodoxy in programming created by it. Thankfully, the Free Radio Movement has provided an aptly suited term for just such a denotation: free radio.

While many radio-pirates posit that the difference between the terms ‘pirate’ and ‘free’ radio is only a matter of semantics, verily, this is not the case. Indeed, ‘free’ radio, which developed out of pirate radio, has come to have a whole separate set of meanings and associations quite apart from those of its more traditional counterpart.

The term ‘free radio’ was coined sometime in the late ‘80’s pursuant to the beginning of the micro radio movement. The creation of this ‘new’ form of pirate radio, which is defined as broadcasting an unliscenced station under the 100-watt minimum demanded by the FCC, is generally credited to Mbanna Kantako. In 1986, Kantako, a blind African-American man, set up an openly broadcast one watt station (Black Liberation Radio) in a project in Springfield, IL to fill a void that he felt existed in the media outlets to which his community had access (Coopman, 1997; Shields & Ogles, 1992). Having been raided and repeatedly shut down in recent months, Kantako is currently non-operational, but over the course of his decade and a half of broadcasting, he has catalyzed a revolution, the Free Radio Movement (Mbanna Kantako/Human Rights Radio Raided, 2000).

The Free Radio Movement incorporates a couple of substantial changes that are quite foreign to the comparatively antiquated "pirate radio."

Most importantly, whereas pirate radio broadcasts resemble, for the most part, commercial broadcasts, free radio broadcasts actually succeed in providing otherwise inaccessible information and opinions to the public at large. Kantako broadcasts to spread his views about the marginalization of his people, views which he (quite rightfully) believes are not expressed by any major news outlet (Shields &Ogles, 1992). Similarly, Stephen Dunifer, the organizer behind Free Radio Berkley, began a free radio station in 1990 as a result of his disgust with the way that the US handled the Persian Gulf war. In particular, Dunifer cited the misuse of the media by the US government as a tool to spread propaganda (Coopman, 2000). In fact, virtually all free radio Dx’ers have some political or ideological goal that drives them to speak out. This, naturally provides quite a contrast with pirate radio Dx’ers, who, as explained by Ted Coopman, "are usually not part of an organization, do not have a political agenda, and are not rooted in their communities (Coopman, 2000)." He even goes on to note, "The main goal of [pirate] broadcasting [is] technical in nature, the ability to produce a quality signal. Anonymity and avoiding detection [are] primary aspects of this activity." Thus, while pirate radio focuses mostly on the process and the technology, free radio’s roots are much more in the content of the message.

Some time should be taken here, though, to clear up another blurred line, and that is the one between free radio and clandestine radio. One might ask after reading the preceding paragraph, if politics and ideology are what set free radio apart from traditional pirate radio, then how is it distinct from clandestine radio, which shares the same properties? The answer is that while clandestine radio is intended to subvert governmental power, free radio is only intended to inform and expand the marketplace of ideas. Furthermore, free radio occurs in the open. It is a form of overt, rather than covert radio, the latter of which is part of the very definition of ‘clandestine.’ Moreover, the idea of overt versus covert broadcast ties back into the distinctions between pirate and free radio.

This provides the second divergent feature between free and pirate; exercise of free radio is in essence, an act of civil disobedience, while exercise of pirate radio is merely criminal disobedience. The difference here lies in the nature of the broadcast method itself. Whereas radio pirates take every precaution to insure their anonymity, free radio programmers do nothing to hide their identity and in fact, invite government intervention of some sort. The reason for this is that government intervention draws attention and, in the process, furthers the cause of the Free Radio Movement by publicizing it. To this end, much of the programming on free stations is dedicated to sharing the experiences of government intervention that have befallen them. Probably the most well-known example of this sort of programming is Mbanna Kantako’s recording of the FCC seizure of his equipment on December 1, 2000, which has become a rallying cry for free radio enthusiasts across the country (Mbanna Kantako/Human Rights Radio Raided, 2000).

Essentially, the hope of micro radio broadcasters, then, is not that they will be able to broadcast and "get away with it," but that the events that unfold will inspire more and more stations to pop up until the FCC is overwhelmed by their shear number. In this way, free radio can also be understood to embrace a sort-of collective interest in a way that is not feasible for the nomadic and secretive operators of pirate radio.

If a single factor had to be picked, this awareness of public interest and public good is that which most critically informs the crucial differences between pirate radio and free radio. The political nature of free radio and its practice as a form of civil disobedience both arise out of a certain content-consciousness that is the product of our attentiveness to social concerns. When our greatest concern is avoidance of punishment instead of communication of content, as is the case with pirate radio, the message gets subordinated to the process. In the last couple of years, however, we seem to have seen a bit of an intermingling between traditional pirate radio and the more modern and political free radio. This has occurred primarily as more and more people begin to experiment with low-power FM broadcasting or micro broadcasting, and is beginning to create a separation between the once synonymous "micro radio" and "free radio."

Back in 1986 when Kantako pioneered micro radio, the yet to be invented word "free radio" would have meant the exact same thing. After all, Black Liberation Radio was the only example that could be found of either type of station, so a distinction between the two terms would be meaningless. This is not the case today though, as micro radio is growing to encompass non-ideologi-political broadcasting.

What was once pirate radio, normally broadcast on short-wave frequencies by hobbyists, is making its way into low-power and FM bands. The reasons for this are not entirely clear, though much of the impetus for this movement may be found in a couple of factors pertaining to the properties of this specific band. First, a few experts are speculating that because they pose less of a threat to interfere with non-commercial radio bands, FM micro broadcasters are, for the most part, tolerated by the FCC until a complaint is filed (Coopman, 2000). Also, a second major advantage of the FM band that seems to be drawing Dx’ers is the wide availability and ownership of devices that can "listen to" that band of radio. Prior to the micro radio movement, the majority of a pirate’s audience was likely to be other hobbyists. Now, this is not necessarily the case. And finally, in a seemingly reactionary attempt to keep the micro radio movement from getting out of hand, the FCC has begun the LPFM (Low Power FM) initiative, which supplies permits to a limited number of non-profit educational organizations that wish to broadcast somewhere between 1 and 100 watts effective power.

So, what do these things mean for the actual content of the broadcasts? No one can be sure quite yet where the cards may fall, but current micro radio shows may give us some clues. One radio show, the Voice of Bob, contains political content while maintaining a light-hearted tone. This broadcast, which compares the voice of Bob to the voice of God, is tailored toward the working-man, urging him to let go and find ‘slack,’ our natural ability as humans to "get things to run smooth without trying." Another broadcast, Ask Julie, is simply a thrity minute rant about the evils of Oprah Winfrey and her book club. And still other broadcasts fall perfectly into the subcategories of free radio and pirate radio. The only trend that can really be identified then, is that micro radio is growing in every which direction, and for the moment, it shows no signs of slowing.

Pirate radio began as nothing more than a cheap facsimile of the "real" thing. With their roots in commercial radio, short-wave (and the occasional normal band) pirates broadcast what were essentially commercial radio shows that were heard almost exclusively by other hobbyists. It was not until the micro radio movement began in the late 80’s that the prospect of real practical value was introduced to the concept of radio piracy. Instead of increasing the supply of pop songs and advertisements, the Free Radio Movement that spawned from the early experiments in micro radio sought to bring together communities and represent those who had no voice in current media. Then, even more recently, the free radio movement branched off in several directions, no longer being confined to the socio-political ‘minorities’ that had been taking advantage of it for the last decade. Now, low-power radio is fast becoming an extremely diverse field and indeed, it may soon be a viable option for anyone and everyone who wants to have his/her voice heard. So while the dream of a totally egalitarian use of the airwaves is still fiction, we may not be far from the day when it is a reality.

Ask Julie. [http://www.members.nbci.com/billfinn/audio/askjulie.ram].

Coopman, Ted. Herding Cats: Anarchism, Organization, and Free Radio. [http://www.roguecom.com/rogueradio/herdingcats.html]. 2000.

Coopman, Ted. Free Radio v. the FCC: A Case Study of Micro Broadcasting. [http://www.roguecom.com/rogueradio/casestudy.html]. 1997.

Kantako Raided Again - 12-01-00 - Extra Edition. [http://www.radio4all.org/news2/hrr_raid.html]. 2000.

WJPL Brooklyn. [http://www.joplin.com/554/ramgen/frnaudio/vob.smil].

The Voice of Bob. [http://www.joplin.com/554/ramgen/frnaudio/vob.smil].

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pirate Radio

by Aaron Biek

Comm 141

April 24, 2001