Some Newsy Bits: CityBeat, The Reader, Former 91X DJs
A few things have come up that I thought I should get to posting:
- First, the big CityBeat local demo review will be coming out soon. Bands interested in submitting their demos must have them postmarked by Monday, February 25th. Send your demos to CityBeat/ 3550 Camino del Rio North Ste. 207/ San Diego, CA 92108. Some personal recommendations- send at least a couple CDs and read my post about the music 101 seminar that has some recommendations about packaging, CD labeling, etc. Also, grow some thick skin.
- I got a little bit more information about the supposed lawsuit against the Reader. While I don't know what instances specifically people are suing for, I was told they're going for a libel suit in small claims claims court, which has a max of $7,500 and doesn't allow lawyers. A person suing for libel has to prove two things. 1. That the libelous article printed was false and caused you embarrassment in the eyes of your peers. 2. That the libelous article written caused you to lose business in some manner. (At least per the e-mail I received. I'm certainly no lawyer and my one time in small claims was a horrible, miserable experience, despite winning my claim.) I think it's gonna be a tough case to win, because journalists have a lot of protections. Ken can write what he wants and protect sources (or make them up, or pretend he tried to get sources but they were unavailable or refused comment, or just twist the shit out of their words which is his usual M.O.). I would just suggest if you're contacted by the Reader because they wanna cover your band, first, ask for Jay Allen or Bart or someone else to do the interview, second, record your own conversation so you can see if, in fact, you were misquoted, and if that doesn't work, just flat out refuse the coverage; sometimes its just not worth it.
- A follow up with the 91X DJ sitch. While Ruggy has taken over as BMOC at Yelp or something like that, I'm told he's still with 91X and helping with production and promotion and other duties. Chris Cantore has been keeping up his blog quite frequently and he's begun some pod-casts for people who miss hearing his voice in the morning (and I know there are thousands of you wondering where he is, judging by how frequently you all are Googling him and finding my site). You can find his podcasts here. He plans on doing 2-3 per week. If you wanna catch him in person, it is highly likely that he'll be at Marco Collins' going away party on Sunday. Also, Marco's working on a podcast of his own with 120 Minutes veteran Matt Pinfield and Rich McLaughlin of Left of Center that will be available soon on iTunes. Last with the 91X crew, Jennifer White has been at Radio Sophie for some time now, but if you wanna meet her, or at least see her in person, head over to the Karma Lounge at the W Hotel this Thursday, when Jen becomes a celebrity bartender.
- Last thing, perhaps you noticed a post I made about a certain summer tour that would be back in San Diego. The information is still accurate but I pulled it down because, let's just say I blew my wad prematurely and the info wasn't ready for release. Anyway, if you're savvy, you can still find the post- because nothing ever leaves the Internet once it's posted, but I'll repost it later when the organizers are ready to spill the beans.
I found it online...
Is it the one about SOCO music festival?
The lawsuit is about a Blurt Ken wrote concerning a battle of the bands type show at Qualcomm last year. The Blurt quoted people saying the prizes weren't as advertised, and others who took issue with event backers not posting clear results on the website when promised. Nothing remotely slanderous or libelous was said in the Blurt itself. Some of the website comments left by site visitors made allegations that may or may not be unsubstantiated - however, when one registers to post comments, you indemnify the Reader from litigation regarding your comment(s). As such, the lawsuit has no basis, and there's almost no way Ken or the Reader could lose, since neither committed any actionable offenses - you can't [successfully] sue a paper or reporter for quoting people's honest assessments and opinions of a situation. Besides, the people who filed the lawsuit actually admitted the Blurt was essentially true in their OWN comments on the site! The litigants' issue appears to be that the Reader pointed out to a large audience the very same thing they themselves were saying privately, and eventually said on their own event's website. Had they/the litigants said the exact same thing on their own site, on the day they said they would, the Blurt would never have been written --- that's my personal take, anyways (I'm NOT speaking on behalf of the Reader or Ken).
Post a Comment