Response to station manager's clarification
By Hannah Larking
News Editor
March 4, 2009
I am writing in defence of the letter written by CJAM station manager Adam Fox about my article printed in the last issue.
While his defensiveness is understandable, I believe “wildly inaccurate” as a description of my writing in a previous, unpublished letter is both over-exaggerated and hypersensitive.
Let me begin by emphasizing that it was always my intention to support CJAM in their “plight,” as it was Robert Woodrich’s.
Woodrich’s quote that two Detroit radio stations are “nearly certain to limit the reach” of CJAM’s signal is not much different than Fox’s defence stating the power change will be “noticeable to the outer extremity of [CJAM’s] coverage area.”
In the interview before the article, Fox is quoted as saying that the coverage will decrease on the fringes of CJAM’s Canadian broadcasting area. Fox’s “fringes” imply “the reach” that Woodrich refers to, and the fact that there will be any modification to CJAM’s current range, slightly or otherwise, was the point that was being made.
Woodrich points out the existence of a translator for a Lansing, MI mega-station. He is never quoted as saying that it will affect CJAM’s application; he even adds that their power is limited to 40 watts, thus emphasizing their insignificance.
Woodrich was only trying to stress the urgency of CJAM’s situation by describing the busyness of the area in an effort to gather more support on Fox’s behalf.
Woodrich also states “CJAM’s troubles are not likely to end with a successful license application.” Aside from the fact that this is quoted, and thus really no more than an opinion, Fox admitted that the new station will alter the limitation of CJAM’s range. I have a representative from Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) quoted as saying that safety from the possibility of interference is never entirely guaranteed, and until the switch is made, it cannot be conclusively said that no problems will be identified.
This sentiment was shared by an Industry Canada (IC) representative in the Toronto branch of Spectrum Management.
Fox’s qualms with Woodrich’s quotes are more a matter of tonal preference. Woodrich’s quotes may be worded in a way that embellishes CJAM’s circumstance, but only with the intent of stressing CJAM’s urgency in an effort to help CJAM. Let’s remember, Woodrich is campaigning on Fox’s side.
Woodrich may not be currently affiliated with CJAM, but the fact that he is a founder of the campaign to save CJAM coupled with his past experience makes him a reputable source.
Woodrich completed his high school community service hours at CJAM hosting a Saturday morning show, and later hosted a twice-weekly news program in 2006 for work-study.
In addition to this, he is the president of the University of Windsor’s social science society and currently running for the position of vice-president of university affairs in the UWSA.
I’m not sure what additional credentials Fox was requiring in a student liaison on the subject, but I thought those sufficed. In addition to this, Woodrich has also been interviewed by Ryerson University, Fanshawe College and St. Clair College about the issue.
Fox has accused me of conveying a negative tone because the cover reads “CJAM’s latest crisis.” I don’t design the cover of The Lance. My job as news editor is to write and edit newsworthy stories pertaining to our campus; I don’t have a say with what makes it to the front.
However, Fox is quoted in the article as saying that CJAM’s license has always been a potential problem. He’s quoted as saying (paraphrased) that this is not the first time CJAM has been threatened. He’s quoted as saying that there have been problems in the past with CJAM’s request for a signal increase because the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has always been concerned about how CJAM’s signal would interfere with others.
CJAM is unprotected, and, according to Fox, when you’re unprotected, “It’s almost like you don’t exist.”
Another recent problem for CJAM occurred when CBC applied for their frequency in October and then, fortunately, withdrew. Historically, CJAM was previously powered at a mere 50 watts, making it difficult for audiences to hear them at a distance just off campus given the wrong weather, and then there’s the bit circa 1990 when CJAM was having problems with drunken hosts (the source for that would be CJAM’s own website). In 1997, CJAM’s boost in power from 50 to 1,000 watts caused problems in Michigan when it started to interfere with their university station.
Aside from those more technical aspects of the station, The Lance has previously covered a story on CJAM’s difficulties with transparency in their hiring processes. Perhaps it is a stretch to label these issues as “crises,” but they are certainly problems that could merit the cover being as it was, and I’m sure CJAM, as a fellow member of the media business, would understand the need for eye-catching displays to attract readerships and audiences.
Finally, I find Fox’s personal attacks on my diligence as a news editor, and his insinuation that I did not check my facts more amusing than insulting, as he did not even fact-check the spelling of my name.
I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate that the article was never supposed to be anything but supportive of CJAM. The Lance was only attempting to spread the word in their favour.
|
