In a recent email sent to its members, the NAB has conceded that supporters of the XM/Sirius merger "are winning the war of words at the FCC."

Citing Siriusbuzz's FCC Comment Scorecard, the NAB asked their members to not let their members "win the war of words" and to "submit comments to the FCC opposing the merger!"

The NAB even said they are "working hard to derail the merger" but even so, they asked members to "enlist station personnel, friends and family" to aid their cause.

As of June 22nd, nearly 2,600 comments have been filed to the FCC regarding the Sirius-XM merger, and over 2,000 are in favor of it.

If you would like to submit your comments to the FCC, you can do so through the easy to use forms located on both XMmerger.com and SIRIUSmerger.com. They are definitely far easier to use than the FCC's own form.

At 1pm ET today, various artists and music groups announced the launch of a new coalition: musicFIRST (Fairness in Radio Starting Today).

The group's members include Christina Aguilera, Michael Buble, Jimmy Buffett, Celine Dion, Toby Keith, Godsmack, Ludacris, Rihanna and Gretchen Wilson - over 100 artists in all, and growing at a rapid pace.

The coalition's goals are to ensure that all performers are paid a performance right when their music is aired on the radio. MusicFIRST wants to hold the multi-billion dollar radio industry to the same standards as its competitors.

Of course, the NAB doesn't agree.

"NAB will aggressively fight RIAA's proposed performance tax on local radio stations," said NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton. "Congress has long recognized that radio airplay of music generates millions of dollars in revenue for record labels and artists. Were it not for radio's free promotional airplay of music on stations all over America, most successful recording artists would still be playing in a garage."

It's funny to hear the NAB talk about a level playing field, yet they don't pay the same performance fees as satellite radio or Internet radio (or Apple for that matter). It's not like terrestrial radio is a nascent industry either, they've been very profitable for many years. So terrestrial enjoys the monopoly of "localism" combined with cheaper-than-everyone-else royalties. All under the guise of "serving the common good."

How convenient. 

Now, don't get me wrong, there's no question as to the music industry's motivation here. But entertain this as a thought: if terrestrial radio was paying performance fees - just like everyone else is - perhaps the royalty fees of other broadcast mediums wouldn't be so high?

[musicFIRST] 

In a recent Op-Ed piece to the New York Times, FCC Commissioner Michael Copps questioned the public service interests of free broadcasters, and called for the FCC to reform its license renewal process.

"Our policies should reward broadcasters that honor their pledge to serve that interest and penalize those that don’t," wrote Copps.

He continued to call for a shortening of the license renewal process, currently set at every eight years (commonly rubber stamped), to a more frequent three-year renewal period. Copps also called into question broadcaster's intentions for providing children's educational programming, election coverage, and "improve the generally shoddy coverage of minority and other underserved communities."

"If you need convincing that something needs to be done, consider that only about 8 percent of local TV newscasts in the month before the last presidential election contained any coverage whatsoever of local races, including those for the House of Representatives," Copps wrote. "This low number is just one example of how poorly stations are serving their viewers."

XM recently announced POTUS '08 - a 24/7 channel providing election coverage - as well as covered, and is a lead participant, in the Children's Miracle Network $10 Million fundraiser. Both Sirius and XM broadcast CNN en Espanol, ESPN Deportes, a wide variety of Latin music channels, and many public radio channels nationwide. In 2005, Red Cross Radio was established during the Hurricane Katrina aftermath to provide free satellite radio based services to workers on the field during a time when local radio towers were simply not functioning.

Of course, NAB President/CEO David Rehr doesn't agree with Commissioner Copps. He fired back a letter to the New York Times editor disputing Copps' statements. Rehr feels that broadcasters go through "enormous lengths" to fulfill their public interest rolls. He specifically cited Amber alerts, disaster coverage and polls that say broadcasters "do a good job" of covering elections.

Yet, earlier this year, the NAB backed the "Local Emergency Radio Service Preservation Act of 2007" legislature that would prevent Sirius or XM from broadcasting Amber Alerts, as well as transmit local traffic, weather, and other public safety/emergency information. Funny, that seems to go against the public interest, and only serve the broadcaster's own monopoly of localism.

So, exactly who's interests is the NAB serving?

[NYTimes: Commission Copps' Op-Ed Piece]
[NY Times: Rehr Letter's to the Editor]

The National Association of Broadcasters has been relentless in its opposition against the Sirius-XM merger. But now they mean business. Now they're going to show the nation that they're fighting the good fight. Now it's time to take off the gloves.

Now is the time... to hang a banner!

Oh sure, the NAB may hire the American Antitrust Institute who opposes media consolidation of all kinds (wait, isn't Clear Channel an NAB member? tee-hee!). But nothing shows opposition better than large amounts of vinyl, written in children's handwriting!

Along with their defiant banner-hanging, the NAB has officially launched their own anti-merger website (which was actually was unveiled back in early April, but was riddled with missing links) sporting the crafty URL xmsiriusmonopoly.com.

Admittedly it's a great name for a website, because it's so concise. Personally, I'm half considering registering thenationalassociationofbroadcastersisabunchofhypocrites.com, but I'm almost certain it's already taken. 

The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) president and CEO, David Rehr, sent a 3-page letter to Sirius Satellite Radio CEO Mel Karmazin over comments made at a conference last week.

Karmazin had called the NAB "disgraceful" because of its opposition to the merger, and added that the NAB paid organizations and individuals to write letters urging regulators to block the combination.

The resulting letter from Rehr said that he was "disappointed" by the comment, adding that the NAB "serve the public interest with distinction." (Keep in mind that the purpose of the NAB is not to serve the public interest, it's sole purpose is to advocate for its members.)

Rehr continued to explain to Karmazin how the technology of satellite radio works, and that Sirius and XM use "incompatible delivery systems." The NAB president proclaimed to Karmazin that "the laws of physics would seem to prohibit a monopoly Sirius/XM from being able to free up any channels," apparently because Rehr knows the inner-workings of Sirius better than Mel does.

The rest of the letter simply parrots the NAB's rhetoric, which is likely why it was made public to begin with.

Hollywood Reporter points out that it's unusual for the head of a major trade organization to send a personal communication during a merger dispute.

"Mr. Rehr's actions speak more clearly than his words. Anyone so determined to stop the Sirius-XM merger must fear the competition that will result," Sirius spokeswoman Kelly Sullivan said. "We're thrilled to have the support of such a wide range of diverse groups, representing rural, African-American and Latin consumers. Given how traditional media has historically underserved these constituencies, it is disappointing but not surprising that NAB would try to be dismissive of the significance of their support."

[Read the full letter here (PDF)] 

David Rehr, CEO and El Presidente of the NAB, bestowed his wise words of wisdom regarding the Sirius-XM merger at the first in a series of Wachovia conferences last week.

Rehr said that he believes the deal would create a "merger to monopoly" because essentially no viable competitors would be left in the satellite radio sector. Rehr also feels that there's a good chance the merger will be blocked, thanks to the NAB's aggressive lobbying.

Rehr also continued to say that Mel Karmazin's "salesman persona" has worked against the satellite radio companies' efforts.

In Rehr's opinion, Karmazin will only receive approval for the merger if he convinces the DOJ that it is not a monopoly. (And I actually agree with him on this. The DOJ's definition of the relevant market will make or break the discussion with the FCC.)

[Radio Ink]