Clear Channel: Media Consolidation Only Okay When It's Clear Channel Consolidating

from the please-explain dept

Clear Channel Communications, the huge broadcasting conglomerate, has spent a lot of effort lobbying the government to relax media ownership rules that have limited what Clear Channel can own within a specific market. The company and its lobbyists consistently make arguments for why it should be allowed to continue to gobble up radio stations, and how the media market can't just be defined by terrestrial radio stations. Of course, Clear Channel has also clearly said that it competes with satellite radio, and therefore wants to burden the satellite radio providers with additional regulations. Therefore, the latest move by Clear Channel should come as no surprise. It has come out strongly against the proposed Sirius/XM merger. Like the NAB, Clear Channel is put in something of an awkward position. First, it needs to explain why it's even concerned about the merger if it claims that Sirius and XM would create a monopoly. If it's truly a monopoly, then terrestrial radio stations shouldn't care. Second, it has to explain away earlier statements about competition from satellite radio that were, in part, used to justify the requests for easing media ownership rules. Finally, it would be nice to explain why all of the other arguments that Clear Channel has used to claim relaxed ownership rules make sense for terrestrial radio don't also apply to satellite radio. So far, the company's best answer appears to be admitting that it's arguments "might be a little skewed toward our specific goals." Shocking.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Charles Griswold, Apr 17th, 2007 @ 6:18pm

    The Obvious Solution (To Me At Least)

    To me, the obvious solution is to take Clear Channel's objections to heart and prevent the merger of Sirius and XM . . . and then break up Clear Channel.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    david b, Apr 17th, 2007 @ 7:02pm

    Re: The Obvious Solution (To Me At Least)

    here here!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Misty Olen, Apr 17th, 2007 @ 7:33pm

    Tune Out Clear Channel

    I have XM Radio and the day Clear Channel started adding commercials to their stations was the day I quit listening to Clear Channel stations. It's obvious they don't get how things are evolving. Clear Channel is just like any other broadcast media company and we as the public should just continue tuning them out.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 17th, 2007 @ 11:15pm

    "Finally, it would be nice to explain why all of the other arguments that Clear Channel has used to claim relaxed ownership rules make sense for terrestrial radio don't also apply to satellite radio."

    No, they won't have to explain jack shit. Yes, they made stupid arguments in the past, do you actually think that anyone will care now? Everyone in congress is too damn lazy to even read what they're signing anyway, why do you think they'll be any more inclined to think about this doublespeak coming from clear channel when they're also being treated to god knows how many free dinners/gifts from clear channel?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Debbie, Apr 18th, 2007 @ 10:07am

    NO CITIZEN'S MEDIA

    Anericans are already without any free speech or free press against the Criminal Corporte World!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Howard Stern, Apr 19th, 2007 @ 6:29am

    Why me?

    Why is everyone picking on me? When I was in high school the black girls beat me up, I wish it was off.
    The merger should go through so I can hang out with OPRA (black negro from the south), we could be like brother and sister.
    There is no reason this merger should not pass!
    I have to go now, Beth "O" is here for my morning bj.
    Baba Boooie.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Thomas, Apr 20th, 2007 @ 7:57am

    merger

    The ex attorney general is against this merger after he was for this merger.Who ever pays the most.How can you be against something that is losing money and giving the goverment so
    much money in taxes so that they can spend it on stupid hearings.[Howard Sterns taxes pay for these bums himself]
    And like you said those jerks at clear chanel should talk about monopolys.Balls said the queen,if i had them i would be king.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This