Clear Channel Censoring Content

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SMM, Oct 31, 2007.

  1. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #1
    Well, here we go again. Corporate media is trying to prevent the American public from learning the truth about domestic and international affairs. The latest victim is Bruce Springsteen's latest release, Magic. There are few things which I view as un-American than this.
     
  2. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #2
    Doesn't Clear Channel have the right to determine what is played on its radio stations?

    Air America doesn't have any conservatives on it, but I don't hear anyone calling censorship about that.
     
  3. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #3
    This seems to be a quickly strung together series of diatribes and fear-mongering. First they say that he's being suppressed because he's "progressive." Then because he's too old. Do they actually produce evidence of either?

    Don't get me wrong... I disagree with ucfgrad93. I feel major sources of information such as syndicated television, broadcast radio, and newspapers are "quasi-public" and citizens do have a vested interest in their openness. There're plenty of historical examples supporting the notion that Americans take this view broadly. I'm not at all sure that means that my poor ears should be subjected to Bruce Springsteen's whining, though.

    P.S. Call me back when Springsteen sells as many albums as Kanye.

    P.P.S. If this same logic applies to keeping Britney Spears off the air, it might even be called a public service. :D
     
  4. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #4
    Bruce Springsteen? Didn't he have some hits like 30 years ago? So, once someone has a hit album all they have to do is show up in a studio, record something and then expect every media outlet to help promote it? I think that Bruce is just having trouble accepting that his time has come and gone.
     
  5. SMM thread starter macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #5
    It (the music) should stand/fail on its own merits, not because of a 'front office' decision.
     
  6. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #6
    Sorry, but not every song or group gets air time just because it's good. It's entertainment and every "front office" can decide what it's going to air to run the business. If it's a good decision then everyone wins, if not then they lose potential revenue.

    If Bruce's music is so good, then he can sell it directly off his website and cut all the radio stations out of the loop. More power to him.
     
  7. SMM thread starter macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #7
    Clearly, they have the right. Just like I have the right to take exception to it. Air America is news/talk from a liberal perspective. You would not expect to find right-wing propaganda there. Clear channel is music. It is quite usual to have a message, or theme in a rock song. I bet you could find numerous songs played there, with an anti-war theme. Heck, that made up 25% of 60's/70's music.

    No, this is corporate America showing support for the authoritative right-wing agenda. You, of course, can look at it any way you wish.
     
  8. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #8
    its clear channel. isn't this to be expected from them by now?
     
  9. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #9
    Stop listening to Clear Channel. That's your answer.
     
  10. SMM thread starter macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #10
    Personally, I would not go out of my way to listen to BS - not to my taste, understand. But, he still has a large following. I do not think for a minute the 'front office' decision is based on market, ROI, etc. I think it is purely a political decision. That makes your point rather moot. Of course, you can a position that this is an economic decision, which brings us to impasse.
     
  11. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #11
    Given that a lot of posters here believe that businesses are pure money ho's, I doubt very much that a company in the business of making money from broadcasting music is going to pass on someone like Springsteen for political reasons.

    If your reasoning was sound, what is the list of hard conservative music groups that supposedly dominate the airwaves? I've never heard of any and I'd like to be enlightened.
     
  12. SMM thread starter macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #12
    Actually, Lee, I do not listen to them. I really do not know anything about them. I was under the impression they are an ISP, like Comcast. I was going to check them out later today (just to satisfy my curiosity).
     
  13. saltyzoo macrumors 65816

    saltyzoo

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #13
    Why do people think free speech means other people have to listen - or broadcast what you say? If everyone had that kind of free speech life would truly suck.

    Free speech is writing a sign and putting it in your yard. Free speech is NOT painting your message on your neighbors mercedes (unless he agrees to it).

    Clear channel owns the equipment and the license to broadcast. They have the right to determine what they do with that equipment and license as long as it is within the law.

    If you want to exercise your free speech by broadcasting messages on the radio that you agree with - start your own radio station.

    It is not censorship to decide what you broadcast on your own equipment and license, unless you are a government agency. It's a business decision, not censorship.

    Now, if the government told clear channel that it was not allowed to allow Bruce to be on their radio station - THAT would be censorship.

    PS> I really wish you wouldn't have let me post in this forum. I can see by reading the past threads that it's only going to make me miserable.
     
  14. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #14
    Nope- they're not an ISP that I can find, just a crap media company.
     
  15. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #15
    And you know for a fact that didn't happen?
     
  16. saltyzoo macrumors 65816

    saltyzoo

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #16
    LOL Oh my.
     
  17. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #17
    Why the laugh? I'm not suggesting it happened, just pointing out how uninformed we might all be.
     
  18. saltyzoo macrumors 65816

    saltyzoo

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #18
    I only see three possible ways to react to that statement. Panic, paranoia, or humor. I choose humor.
     
  19. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #19
    so you see no reality in that it might actually be true?

    again not saying that it is, but there is a possibility.
     
  20. saltyzoo macrumors 65816

    saltyzoo

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #20
    I think it's so remotely unlikely that to consider it a realistic possibility without even a shred of evidence is more than a little paranoid - and frankly, laughable.
     
  21. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #21
    Laugh away then, but if you always expect the links between business and politicians to only be used for the good of the general population I'm afraid you'll end up being disappointed.
    Well, maybe I'm overly cynical, but having gone out for two years with a lobbyist I have a bit of an inkling into just what sort of stuff does go down. Therefore I don't consider the suggestion impossible just because it's unlikely.
     
  22. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #22
    Perhaps panic is the word you meant to use. Anytime a radio station refuses to play a best selling album, their only justification for doing so must be political.

    It could also be a sign as faux news has suggested, of inherent ageism at cloudy channel. Despite the fact that the largest growing demographic group is the over 50s, they've evidently choosing not to play music by older performers.

    cc's only real source of revenue these days is from concerts. They know the market for fake radio is disappearing so I wonder why they're turning it into a political minefield?

    In the end, who listens to radio anyway?
     
  23. saltyzoo macrumors 65816

    saltyzoo

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #23
    Do you guys have any idea how big a corporation Clear channel is? The number of people that would have to be involved to pull such a thing off?

    Sorry. It's laughable. In fact, it's a little silly to think they'd risk something like that to not air such a meaningless piece. Clear Channel runs a guy on my local AM station for 3 hours every Saturday that's practically a socialist. I think they'd get rid of him first.

    :eek:
     
  24. saltyzoo macrumors 65816

    saltyzoo

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    #24
    I didn't say it wasn't political. They are allowed to be political. It's their business, they can run it any way they want. Like someone already said, nobody cries censorship regarding Air America. Heck, if the prez asked the CEO of clear channel personally to not run it and he didn't, that's STILL not censorship. If the government FORCED him not to run it against his will. Then it's censorship.

    Nice twisting of reality though.
     
  25. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #25
    I fail to see how this is any different than Wal-Mart only selling "clean" versions of certain CDs in their stores. If Clear Channel was an agent of the government, public library, or a smiliar venture then there would be a case, but as they're not, nothing to see here.
     

Share This Page