Ownership Questions Could Dog Clear Channel Buyout
from the own-too-much dept
Following the news yesterday that a number of private-equity firms are planning to buy Clear Channel for $19 billion, some questions are being raised about how FCC limits on media ownership will come into play. The loosening of these limits allowed Clear Channel to become the behemoth it is today, and the company has continued to fight for even less restrictions. However, some of the firms participating in the buyout already have other media holdings, and depending on how the FCC interprets their ownership role, the limits could cause them some problems. It seems likely that the firms will be able to convince the FCC that they’ll remain largely hands-off the companies, because there’s little to indicate they want to align their media holdings into one company, or have them work closely together. However, as IP Democracy points out, the real issue could be these firms’ holdings in content suppliers — with two of them part of the group that owns the Warner Music record label. Given the FCC’s interest in payola, this could cause some problems. Again, it seems unlikely that the firms would really link the two businesses, but the relationship could arrange some appearance of impropriety.
Comments on “Ownership Questions Could Dog Clear Channel Buyout”
I don't understand
Why would this be an FCC issue and not an anti-trust issue?
IANAL
But I think it has to do with the fact that Clear Channel pretty much owns the radio in America, and the buyout raises quiestions about media ownership, if you’d click the third link. I’m sure anti-trust will come up sooner or later. For now, this is an FCC issue.
The largest group involved in this is the Carlysle Group – aka Daddy Bush, The Bin Ladens and The Queen of England.
Any reason why the globalists want to control one of the largest media empires?