PDA

View Full Version : I'll Laugh If Anyone Lashes Out At This ..


Jason Tate
03/12/04, 05:24 PM
Greg Ross, CEO of Go Kart Records (http://www.gokartrecords.com), recently wrote a very well thought essay of sorts on the hypocrisy of Clear Channel Entertainment, and the obvious POLITICAL decision to remove Howard Stern from six of their stations. It is extremely crucial that we all stay informed on this topic because who is to say that our labels, bands, magazines, webzines won't be next.

Who says Clear Channel’s decision to remove Howard Stern is not political?

Earlier this week, Clear Channels Worldwide Inc., the nation’s largest
owner of radio stations (over 1200 stations in all 50 states and DC),
announced that it would remove Howard Stern from six of its stations.
"We will not air Howard Stern on Clear Channel stations until we are
assured that his show will conform to acceptable standards of
responsible broadcasting," said a Wednesday statement from John Hogan, president and CEO of Clear Channel Radio.

But the standard Clear Channels applies to radio does not appear to
apply to some of its other lucrative businesses, like the concert
venues it owns all over the country. This summer, performers like
Blink-182, the Ozzfest with Ozzy Osbourne, Britney Spears, Ludacris,
and Slayer will be performing at numerous Clear Channel-owned concert
venues.

Before I continue, let me clarify, no criticism of the performers above
is intended; rather I wish to draw attention to the hypocrisy of Clear
Channel’s recent decision.

Blink-182, a band who has a very young teen fan base, has been to known
to perform naked onstage and sing songs with lyrics such as “It's
Christmas eve and I've only wrapped two fucking presents - And I hate,
hate, hate your guts - I hate, hate, hate your guts - And I'll never
talk to you again - unless your dad will suck me off - I'll never talk
to you again - unless your mom will touch my cock - I'll never talk to
you again - ejaculate into a sock (from the song “Happy Holidays You
Bastard”). Or from the song “Family Reunion”, “shit piss fuck cunt
cocksucker motherfucker tits fart turd and twat - I fucked your mom.”
And in this time of heightened terrorist activities, check out the
lyrics from “Degenerate,” “For a hobby I make bombs.”

Or how about Ludacris’s lyrics to the song “Hos,” “Come on playa once a
ho always - And hos never close they open like hallways - An here’s a
ho cake for you whole ho crew - an everybody wants some cuz hoes gotta
eat too.”

Britney Spears has been famously pushing the envelope for years with
her sex-charged performances. How is it possible that Clear Channel
finds what Howard Stern says on the radio more offensive than the video
for “Slave 4U,” which features grinding and simulated sex. This video
has been shown, all or in part, on numerous TV shows, including on some
of the shows aired on Clear Channel-owned television stations.

A review of one of Britney’s recent performances said, “Last night, she
did her masturbation song. She had her dancers practically having sex
on stage wearing nothing but their underwear. She had guys doing guys,
girls doing girls and a silhouette of people having sex on a bed in a
hotel room.” This is something she performs on stage in front of
10,000+ people every night of her tour, with many young people in the
audience. And again, how about these lyrics, promoting promiscuous sex
“Get up, baby - We can drop a little something - Ride it, baby - We can
do a little something - Take out, baby - Wanna get a little somethin' -
You know, baby – Let’s hook up a little somethin’” and “Baby, I can’t
believe everything - Your body makes me wanna do” (from the song “The
Hook Up”). This is acceptable sex talk? How is it possible that Clear
Chanel finds this kind of performance acceptable in their concert
halls, but finds Stern’s less offensive sex talk objectionable? After
all Stern is only talking about sex, Britney is acting it out in front
of people.

One of the summer’s biggest tours is The Ozzfest featuring Ozzy
Osbourne. Ozzy’s expletives filled rants on MTV’s enormous hit “The
Osbournes” have made him a bigger star than he was in the entirety of
his career. On the show, Ozzy has talked about his drug and alcohol
addiction, as has his son Jack, while constantly being bleeped to block
out the incessant swearing. Howard Stern doesn’t swear on his show. So
why does Clear Channel support a man who calls himself “The Prince Of
Darkness,” glamorizes drugs and alcohol, and constantly uses profanity?

One of the headline bands on Ozzfest this year is Slayer. Slayer has a
record entitled “God Hates Us All.” The lyrics to the song
“Necrophiliac” include the following lines, “Virgin child now drained
of life - Your soul cannot be free - Not given the chance to rot in
Hell - Satan's cross points to Hell - The earth I must uncover - A
passion grows to feast upon - The frozen blood inside her - I feel the
urge the growing need - To fuck this sinful corpse - My tasks complete
the bitch's soul - Lies raped in demonic lust.” Again I am confused -
is Clear Channel endorsing Satanism, necrophilia and rape? After all
they are appearing at Clear Channel-owned venues, they must not have a
problem with it.

Why does Clear Channel deem it acceptable to perform songs in the
performance venues glorifying rape, promoting drug use, Satanism,
necrophilia, prostitution and profanity but find what Howard Stern does
unacceptable? Could it be that they make a lot of money from these
tours? While that is true, they also make a lot of money from Stern’s
radio show. So there must be another reason.

When Stern first mentioned that he felt Clear Channel’s actions were
retaliation for his bashing President Bush for the first time on his
show, it seemed absurd. But a closer look reveals that there may be
more to that then immediately meets the eye.

There are close ties between Clear Channel and President Bush. The Vice
Chair of the company is Tom Hicks, a member of the Bush Pioneer club
for elite (and generous) donors. When Bush was governor of Texas, Hicks
was chairman of the University of Texas Investment Management Co.,
called Utimco, and Clear Channel's chairman, Lowry Mays, was on its
board. Under Hicks, Utimco placed much of the university's endowment
under the management of companies with strong Republican Party or Bush
family ties. The contracts were given to firms politically connected to
both Hicks and Bush, including the Carlyle Group - a firm which has the
first President Bush on the payroll and had the second one on the
payroll until just weeks before receiving this lucrative business. The
board of UTIMCO also included the Chair of Clear Channel, L. Lowry Mays.

In addition, Hicks purchased the Texas Rangers from George Bush, making
him a wealthy man through a deal that was partially sweetened by a
shiny new taxpayer financed stadium, which included valuable land
obtained at below market rates through the use of eminent domain.
(“Radio Ga Ga,” New York Press, March 20, 2003)

Not only that, but when the country was divided about going to war with
Iraq, many of the pro-war rallies all over the country were organized
by Clear Channel affiliates. (“Clear Channel Has Ties to Bush”, March
26, 2003, The International Herald Tribune)

Theoretically, none of Stern’s recent problems would have occurred it
not for Janet Jackson exposing her breast at the Super Bowl, so it is
entirely possible that Clear Channel’s timing has nothing to do with
Stern’s bashing President Bush on his show.

But there is a pattern.

If quality programming really is a top priority, why did Clear
Channel recently hire Michael Savage at Houston 's KPRC? Isn't Mr.
Hogan aware that Savage was fired from MSNBC for referring to a caller
as a "sodomite" who should "get AIDS and die"? And, if vulgarity truly
is the issue, what was Clear Channel's complaint against disc jockey
Charles Goyette?

In an article entitled "How to Lose Your Job in Talk Radio: Clear
Channel Gags an Antiwar Conservative," Goyette discussed why he
believes he was removed from his prime-time spot at KFYI in Phoenix.
"Why did this happen? Why only a couple of months after my company
picked up the option on my contract for another year in the
fifth-largest city in the United States, did it suddenly decide to
relegate me to radio Outer Darkness?" he asked. "The answer lies hidden
in the oil-and-water incompatibility of these two seemingly
disconnected phrases: 'Criticizing Bush' and 'Clear Channel.'"

Saying that badmouthing Bush and his fairy tale war was enough to
derail his career, Goyette explained a policy that, from his vantage
point, seemed to be company wide. “Criticism of Bush and his
ever-shifting pretext for a first-strike war (what exactly was it we
were pre-empting anyway?) has proved so serious a violation of Clear
Channel’s cultural taboo that only a good contract has kept me from
being fired outright,” he wrote. Fellow Clear Channel D.J. Roxanne
Cordonier (Roxanne Walker), however, wasn’t so lucky. “Her lawsuit
against the company alleges that she was belittled on the air and
reprimanded by her station for opposing the invasion of Iraq. Then she
was fired,” Goyette explained. (Buzzflash.com, March 2004)

And in a shocking twist, one of the people Howard Stern attacks the
most on his show is defending him, in a twisted way of course.

"I've never heard Howard Stern. But when the federal government gets
involved in this, I get a little frightened. If we are going to sit by
and let the federal government get involved in this, if the government
is going to 'censor' what they think is right and wrong... What happens
if a whole bunch of John Kerrys, or Terry McAuliffes start running this
country? And decide conservative views are leading to violence? I am in
the free speech business. It's one thing for a company to determine if
they are going to be party to it. It's another thing for the government
to do it." (Rush Limbaugh, DrudgeReport.com)

More shocking than the support from Limbaugh, is the lack of support
Stern has received from the many entertainers and politicians he has
helped promote on his hugely popular show in the past. The former
Governor of New Jersey Christie Todd Whitman and current New York State
Governor George Pataki both benefited from Stern’s endorsement. In
Whitman’s case, many believe Stern’s endorsement was the difference
between her getting elected and not getting elected (she thanked him by
naming a rest stop on the Jersey Turnpike after him, strangely
appropriate).

Where are all the entertainers who have been happy to promote their
latest project on Stern’s show? Stern’s influence with his die-hard fan
base has helped sell a lot of tickets and CD’s. In New York City, when
Stern promotes a band on his show, that bands records quickly sell out
in the area stores.

Ozzy Osbourne has been a frequent guest on the Stern show, so why
haven’t Ozzy and his wife Sharon spoken out about this?

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the new Governor of California and a frequent
Stern guest, went on Stern’s show to help garner support for his
gubernatorial bid . Why has the Governator suddenly gone so quiet?

Sting, Pam Anderson, Kid Rock, Bon Jovi, Gilbert Godfried, Richard
Belzer, Jenna Jameson, John Stamos, Rebecca Romijn-Stamos, Andy Dick,
Ben Stiller, David Spade, Magic Johnson, Kevin Bacon, Kyra Sedgwick ,
Julianna Marguiles, Heather Locklear, David Blaine, Ivan Reitman,
Garry Shandling, Flavor Flav, John Bon Jovi & Ritchie Sambora, Willie
Nelson, Richard Lewis, James Brown , Al Sharpton, Maury Povich, Chuck
Norris, Janice Ian, Mario Van Peebles, Boy George, Penn & Teller,
Melissa Gilbert, Phil Hartman, Belinda Carlisle, Rip Torn, Milton
Berle, Jason Priestley, Tom Jones, Zsa Zsa Gabor, Suzanne Vega, Geraldo
Rivera, Joan Rivers, Andrew "Dice" Clay, Robin Leach, KISS (Gene
Simmons & Paul Stanley), Richard Marx, Don King, Fabio, Donald Trump,
Dick Cavett and Marg Helgenberger have all appeared on the show when
they needed Stern’s promotional muscle, and the list could go on and
on. The question is, why are you are all so quiet? Do you all believe
once the FCC is done with Howard Stern it will end there? Do you all
think if you keep quiet nothing will happen to your careers? If it is
true that Clear Channel took Stern off the air as favor to George Bush,
then this is just the beginning. It will get worse.

And less than two weeks after Sterns diatribe against President Bush,
and less than a week after Clear Channel removed Stern’s show from its
stations, the FCC announced that it was, “close to levying about two
dozen fines for indecency against radio companies, including Viacom
Inc.'s Infinity Broadcasting (Stern’s parent company) and Clear Channel
Communications Inc.” (“FCC Planning Two Dozen Indecency Fines Against
Radio,” March 5th ,Bloomberg.com). By the way, the current chairman of
the FCC is Michael Powell, the son General Colin Powell, the current
Secretary of Sate and a close advisor to both Bush administrations.

Starting to get the picture?

I am reminded of the famous words of Pastor Martin Niemöller’s, “First
they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said
nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a
Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but I
was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was
not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no
one left to stand up for me.”

We must not repeat those mistakes. We shouldn’t have to fear our own
government.

inanechild
03/12/04, 06:23 PM
Dun dun DUUUN!

Why don't all you kids come up to Canada, where the biggest nightmare in radio is just jock rock stations?

piebaldkid42
03/12/04, 06:29 PM
wow, damn good article, im surprised i read it all but its very interesting. i suggest everyone reads this, the whole issue is very interesting. i think we should all take the time to see whats going on

A_Lost_Romance
03/12/04, 06:54 PM
Yes, this is a very interesting article, but what is wrong with freedom of running your own business? O.K. it does seem that he flip-flopped, but so what? He runs his own business. Nobody tells Jason Tate how to run his website. This country was built on Freedom. Freedom to free speech and freedom to run your own business how you want. What really irritates me is the singleling out. No one throws this much of a temper-tantrum when a liberal politician flip-flops on the war issues of this country. How they don't vote against war legislation, but during election time are all about anti-war ideals. Make no mistake the uproar is nothing more than a temper-tantrum. Someone did something alot of people didn't like and are whining about it. Why are we focusing of t.v. instead of issues that matter? How about the people who don't have t.v.'s, that are dying because of hunger and malnutrition or the poor state of education in this country. You may not agree with how Clear Channel is being run, but it is their constitutional right to run thier business as they seem fit.

Albino_Virgin
03/12/04, 07:29 PM
But everyone should have the right to free speech. They can run their damn company however they want, until it gets onto infringing on peoples basic rights. Who are they to decide who we can listen to and who we cant, and who is "indecent" and who isn't. They simply should not.
I personally don't care for Howard Stern, but he along with every other person out there have the right to do what they do. It's not like he's forceing kids, or just anyone that finds it offensive to listen to him. If you don't like it, change it to NPR. Don't take him off the air. Damn you Janet.

Jason Tate
03/12/04, 07:36 PM
Yes, this is a very interesting article, but what is wrong with freedom of running your own business? O.K. it does seem that he flip-flopped, but so what? He runs his own business. Nobody tells Jason Tate how to run his website. This country was built on Freedom. Freedom to free speech and freedom to run your own business how you want. What really irritates me is the singleling out. No one throws this much of a temper-tantrum when a liberal politician flip-flops on the war issues of this country. How they don't vote against war legislation, but during election time are all about anti-war ideals. Make no mistake the uproar is nothing more than a temper-tantrum. Someone did something alot of people didn't like and are whining about it. Why are we focusing of t.v. instead of issues that matter? How about the people who don't have t.v.'s, that are dying because of hunger and malnutrition or the poor state of education in this country. You may not agree with how Clear Channel is being run, but it is their constitutional right to run thier business as they seem fit.


it's different when it's one huge company (monopoly involved in payola that in the past the government would of stepped in to break up.. but, not anymore. yay big business) - that is infringing on freedom of speech. if a company wanted to practice genocide would u say "let them run their company however they want?" - doubt it.

lifepostponed10
03/12/04, 07:50 PM
yes that was a damn good article(and long). makes u wonder

worldstheory
03/12/04, 07:57 PM
it's different when it's one huge company (monopoly involved in payola that in the past the government would of stepped in to break up.. but, not anymore. yay big business) - that is infringing on freedom of speech. if a company wanted to practice genocide would u say "let them run their company however they want?" - doubt it.
There's a BIG difference between this and genocide.

If this was the government "infringing on free speech" like you say, that would be one thing. But this company is under no obligation to broadcast anything that they don't want to broadcast. The Bill of Rights has nothing to do with it.

A_Lost_Romance
03/12/04, 08:42 PM
Jason, it not it is not an infringement on freedom of speech. Howard Stern still has the right to say what he wants. Good thing i am in constitutional law. Here's an analogy. Take Limbaugh when he was a announcer or whatever on ESPN. Limbaugh was a separate entity providing his services (in that case his commentary) to a huge company ESPN will broadcast Limbaugh on Sunday NFL Countdown. After limbaugh said his controversial statements ESPN took him off the air. Jason if you are arguing that stern should be kept on, then you be arguing that Limbaugh should still be on ESPN. Stern was a separate entity providing his services (his radio show) to Clear Channel. In that Clear Channel has the right to take him off the air just like ESPN had the right to take Limbaugh off the air. Get it straight. Stern still has the right to say what he wants. Come on you are a smart guy. If you want to argue on the hypocrasy you are exactly right, but on the constitutionality and issue of freedom of speech is a different story. Clear Channel was in the right. If you want Supreme Court cases and documentation supporting this claim, i be happy to provide it.

A_Lost_Romance
03/12/04, 08:54 PM
Jason, here is a another comment and ccrrect me if I am wrong only because this is my understanding conserning the forum policy.

We can use the forums and participate in them while they are being posted to a mass of people, but if we say or do something that is out of line (or out of line to you b/c you run the forums) You (Jason) have the right to block or stop our use of the forums.

If this is right, it would sound a whole lot like the Clear Channel situation. Talk about interesting.

masonic
03/12/04, 09:10 PM
Jason, here is a another comment and ccrrect me if I am wrong only because this is my understanding conserning the forum policy.

We can use the forums and participate in them while they are being posted to a mass of people, but if we say or do something that is out of line (or out of line to you b/c you run the forums) You (Jason) have the right to block or stop our use of the forums.

If this is right, it would sound a whole lot like the Clear Channel situation. Talk about interesting.

Yes, he is allowed to do that, because ap.net is owned by Jason and he can do with it what he wants. But I also hope that we are allowed to state on the boards that we think the banning of someone is wrong if we feel it to be so, just like Mr. Ross is doing in Howard Stern's case.

I think Clear Channel has the right to take Howard Stern off the air, even if it is wrong. I don't agree with it, and it is up to the people to let Clear Channel know their displeasure with its decision. THAT's what free speech is about.

A_Lost_Romance
03/12/04, 09:16 PM
Thanks, someone gets my point.

aesopsphere
03/12/04, 09:23 PM
This is absolutely ridiculous. Look in any newspaper. They make fun of Mr. Bush all the time. Is Bush going to get his "contacts" and put them all out of business? Absolutely not! Howard Stern's cancellation has nothing to do with bush. It has to do with Janet Jackson. After her super bowl stunt thousands of people called the FCC and complained. I love the Howard stern show but anyone in their right minds know that most of the topics on his show are un-ethical (funny as hell however.) The FCC started cracking down on other forms of entertainment. That’s why clear channel booted stern. He's been pissing people off for a long time! This article is just justifying Stern's bad behavior by pointing other forms of bad behavior.

This article mentions Britney Spears and Blink 182. It's a shame that Stern was attacked but, nothing happened to these people! Wrong! Britney Spear’s video "toxic" and Blink 182's "I miss you" were both cut from daytime MTV rotation which without a doubt hurt both artist's record sales. As For Ludicrous; no one in their right minds would criticize Ludicrous or any Gangster rap music because they would be branded a racist. I also wouldn't doubt that MTV keeps a close watch on what Ozzy does.

Why do people have to take every little issue and find a way to attack Bush? Why can’t an election be about showing both sides views and letting people freely decide; instead of personal witch-hunts against someone character. I encourage everyone of age to go vote but, find out "both sides" of every story. Decide for yourself. Don't believe other peoples propaganda.

Jason Tate
03/12/04, 10:28 PM
"After years of profiting from some of the most vulgar shows on radio, the broadcast behemoth has suddenly turned puritanical. It couldn't have anything to do with those congressional hearings, could it?" - Salon.com

Go read up on what clear channel is (http://www.salon.com/ent/clear_channel/). i swear, whenever politics become involved only the people that have no idea what is going on start talking .. where are all the bright eyes and sage francis fans at a time like this? where are all the people that can use their brains? Did you not read all the connections with Bush? Do you not understand the consequences of censorship? It's not about it being 'their business' (it's called monopoly), it's about the sort of control and manipulation that is being forced into our media. Not only tha but Clear Channel is what is keeping indie music off of the airwaves, basically - the downfall of music, the radio, and obviously now free speech as well - and you idiots are backing it? Here, go read - stop being another Joseph Goebbels' monkey:

http://www.amconmag.com/1_19_04/article3.html
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/02/27/clear_channel/index_np.html
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F40810FC39540C768 EDDAA0894DB404482
http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=8728
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,54036,00.html
http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2004/17.html
http://www.takebackthemedia.com/radiogaga.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/landau05132003.html
http://www.corporateswine.net/clearchannel.html
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=15281

.. and those are just what I have bookmarked from when I did some research on the topic a few weeks back when I found out about this. Use your head - get educated.

Disasterof83
03/12/04, 10:39 PM
"Not only tha but Clear Channel is what is keeping indie music off of the airwaves, basically - the downfall of music, the radio, and obviously now free speech as well - and you idiots are backing it? Here, go read - stop being another Joseph Goebbels' monkey" - Tate

Tate, I love how you keep a level head and an objective outlook on this board by calling everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi. That's classic.

Jason Tate
03/12/04, 10:45 PM
"Not only tha but Clear Channel is what is keeping indie music off of the airwaves, basically - the downfall of music, the radio, and obviously now free speech as well - and you idiots are backing it? Here, go read - stop being another Joseph Goebbels' monkey" - Tate

Tate, I love how you keep a level head and an objective outlook on this board by calling everyone who disagrees with you a Nazi. That's classic.


objective? lol. hillarious. and technically, i'd be calling you a monkey that follows a nazi.

aesopsphere
03/12/04, 11:20 PM
Because of Janet Jackson the FCC is really cracking down on entertainment. I am not only blaming the FCC I agree with you Tate clear channel is shit. I will be attending the FUCK Clear Channel tour tomorrow. I respect you a lot Jason. This site is absolutely incredible. You ask, where are the people who hate clear channel? They are here bud, on your site. You can never get away from politics as long as money is involved. I think you should start some kind of attack on clear channel. You are the leadership; you have the power to go against something you don't believe in. It may be a small impact, but I feel if you hate clear channel so much that you can dig up and post all these links then you should use your creative mind and think of something anti-clear channel you can do.

As for the links you researched a lot of good information, I learned quite of bit but, I did not accept it all. The problem is every one of those links
Was one sided. Like it or not Tate you are a journalist.

A Good Journalist:

1. Presents an analysis of the situation from the side they believe
2. Presents the other sides point of view
3. Tells what they feel about the situation and debates the side they did not agree with.

For example, I see a lot of post you post about on punk voter.

Well why don’t you then go to conservativepunk.com's website get their point of view. Post that, then debate the view you don't agree with?
Then include links to both sites. This gives you the opportunity to speak your mind and give your readers all the information to decide for themselves.

As for the models of what company’s are in cahoots with who, don't you think that the democrats don't have their influence on big corporations. You need a lot of money to run for office, you have to depend on special interest groups.

As for everything I hope you Tate personally start some kind of action against clear channel beyond a news post. But give both sides, THEN your opinion.

aesopsphere
03/13/04, 01:53 AM
Also in respons to some guy on the post. Radio exists for one reason only. To please advertisers; thats why ("hip pop" sex/violence) is so popular because beer companies want to put adds on stations playing that kind of music.

xThursdayxPTWx
03/13/04, 06:01 AM
All I can say is wow. This guy is educated and knows what he's talking about. I never really looked to deeply into the issue because I don't really listen to the radio, thus not listening to Stern's show much. The Stern shows I have heard I would prefer just not hearing because it seems all he talks about is sex and boobs. However, when the government steps in via a very popular radio broadcasting and concert agency to rape your freedom of speech away, someone must speak up. This man has basically said any and everything that needs to be said about the issue.

Just_Insane
03/13/04, 06:03 AM
awesome article...very interesting......and scary

inanechild
03/13/04, 07:34 AM
Aren't any of you kids moderately upset that soon your radio stations will all be the same preprocessed pop/dance/jock rock, and indie radio stations will have no hope of getting off the ground? Do any of you know that the Dead Kennedys were sued for the contents of their CD? It's a slippery slope. The days of the PRMC really aren't that far off.

TylerH03eXc
03/13/04, 08:58 AM
the radio sucks so why even bother listening to it? the stadium for the texas rangers was built before tom hicks was the owner, the tax jason is talkin about applies to the new arena for the mavericks/dallas stars. The tax on things such as car rentals and hotels were raised so the citizens of texas did not have to pay for it, but so that visitors did. ozzy does not glorify drugs, i don't see how any person who had a drug addiction and realizes how horrible it was could glorify it. Clear channel is a monopoly but everyone can complain about it, or if you really are that worried then do something about it. and to call fans and readers of ur site idiots is absurd, just because someone disagrees with you does not make them a nazi monkey or whatever.

AndrewLikeFire
03/13/04, 09:14 AM
clear channel is a ridiculous company that in itself should be stopped due to it's monopolistic qualities. any single company with that much power in so many markets (that all benefit one another) is horrible.

but further than that, the idea of the government stepping in with it's close ties to clear channel is a scary thought indeed. there's no need for all the indecency hearings and finings that are going on now. is tv and radio really that much worse than it was 2 or 3 years ago? no. but because clear channel says that it is, the goverment is taking charge. they know where their support is coming from. if they don't play ball with the corporations they're not going to get the support (Read: money) that they need.

stop listening to the radio. stop going to clear channel owned venues. support bands and record labels that avoid clear channel (ALL jade tree recs bands, sage francis, bright eyes etc). visit www.clearchannelsucks.org. call into your local radio station that broadcasts howard and let them know you support his freedom of speech.

nick_a
03/13/04, 09:47 AM
where are all the bright eyes and sage francis fans at a time like this?

So just because you listen to a certain band you should adopt their views? Thats the problem with most people, they dont think for themselves. How ignorant would someone be if they followed this way of thinking?

Conor Oberst thinks clear channel sucks, I listen to Bright Eyes, well, I guess I better hate Clear Channel too.
Ludacris is degrading to women, I listen to Ludacris, well, I guess women really are nothing but bitches and hoes.

I see this all the time with the whole "punk" attitude. People use the "If you are really punk" line to promote their political views. I think this is exploitaion and I think the whole Punk Voter deal is guilty of that. They are using the idea of being "punk" to promote thier political views and sway impressionable kids to believing what they, the true punks, have to say. I dont think this is very repectable at all. Why not call it Educated Voter, or Young Voter?

In conclusion I am not defending Clear Channel or Bush, nor am I condemming Punk Voter. I am just presenting these viewpoints for people to explore while practicing the wonderful art of thinking for yourself.

Thanks,
Nick

staygold
03/13/04, 01:13 PM
President Bush thinks that Jesus speaks to him at night in the white house. There is a group of senators and congressmen who live in million dollar housing provided by a group called the fellowship. A religious group who holds prayer meetings for these representatives of our government. If you dont like Stern turn the fucking dial. This is a freedom of speech issue. He has said nothing "indecent" at all. He spoke out against the president and now is being silenced! THATS THE ISSUE. They are trying to control and monopolize everything. Freedom of speech has to be protected.

blt430
03/13/04, 01:32 PM
I would like to start off by saying what a great, well written article Jason wrote. Expanding the forums to be about music and all the effects thereof, no matter how small the link, makes this site great.

Now, In my opinion the removal of Howard Stern's radio show from the Clear Channel Stations has nothing to do with Stern's comments about President Bush. This event and all events here after will be a direct result of the incidents that occured during the halftime show of the Superbowl. The backlash of this event will continued to be felt until a moral order is restored in the minds of those who embark on this mission.

I believe that this process was put into order by the Bush Administration. In this presidential election year both candidates, Bush and Kerry, will search for platforms on wish to take a side and gather potential alliances and in the end, votes. The societal outlash of the Janet Jackson Halftime debacle created in opportunity for the Bush to assert himself even more as a religous, moral man. This can also be seen in his push for an additional Constitutional ammendement making marriage strictly between a man and a woman (i.e. Outlawing homosexuality marriage).

In essence, I'm sure Bush called for the FCC to crack down on the "immorality" of television, radio, music, and movies of today. However, an across the board moral sweep is not needed. Only a small effort so that Bush can say that he is taking measures to clean up the airwaves for the American family. Coincedentally infact, Howard Stern through his negative comments on Bush was targeted not by the FCC but by an organization under the control of the FCC. Thus, a platform is created. All this breaks down to is a way for Bush to make himself out to be a President that is doing something to "clean up" an exsisting problem that many voting blocks are interested in. It's pandering, it's alligning voters, it's a Presidential election.

All this being said I would like to clarify that I will probably vote for Bush because I am Republican and agree with him on most points econmically and support him with the War on Terror. On the other hand, I am intrigued by a Kerry/Edwards campaign. Edwards reminds me of a better version of Bill Clinton, and will be a formidable Democratic candidate for years to come.

Lastly I would like to say that freedom of speech is a constitutionally covered right and should not be infringed upon just because of the ridiculous acts of a halftime show. For the moral elite of America who are calling for a widespread cleansing of our culture: Learn to adhere to rights that this country was built upon. In the end, Just turn the channel, change the station, rent something else, and let the rest of enjoy our freedoms.

"Is that what you call a getaway? Tell me what you gotta way with. Cause I've seen more spine on jellyfish. I've seen more guts on eleven-year old kids. Have another drink, and drive yourself home. I hope there's ice on all the roads. And you can think of me when you forget your seatbelt and again when your head goes through the windshield."
Brand New

MistaChang
03/13/04, 01:38 PM
Just reminds me of how fucked up and corrupted U.S. politics are... especially under Bush. Very well written article... if Bush doesn't go down in this election, I'm saying goodbye to the US and howdy fuckin ho to Canada.

Nichols
03/13/04, 01:51 PM
Tate, never live in Canada...you'd probably be more disgusted with our corrupt Liberal government than anything your American colleagues can offer up...do some research on the Liberal government's money/sponsorship scandal and you'll be surprised...

Jared Kaufman
03/13/04, 02:10 PM
Anyone that says this has nothing to do with Bush is out of their mind.

Guess who is working very closely with the FCC and the fines looming over Howard's head and everyone elses in the business...

COLIN POWELL'S SON

And ask yourself why they WON'T let Howard go to court to defend himself. This is more than just Janet Jackson's breast here ppl .. you gotta realize that.

And even if Bush wasn't a part of this, you still have to be real and admit that what Clear Channel is doing is hypocrisy.

goblue19
03/13/04, 02:24 PM
Here's an idea. Now just look at this as a business decision. Clear Channel owns 6 stations that carried Stern. That means besides those 6 markets Stern was what to Clear Channel?!? That's right boys and girls, he was a competitor. Do you not think Clear Channel would knock the wind out of him in those 6 markets to force others to get rid of him? Now the competition in the other markets just went bye bye. See where I am going with this?!? Does it suck? Yeah, I listen to Stern everyday. Does it make sense on a business end? Hell yes it does.

Sink2TheBeat
03/13/04, 02:34 PM
yeah, clear channel is definetly ruining entertainment,
i was way pissed when i decided to take my first trip up to the warped tour last summer and i bought my ticket through ticketmaster (don't even get started on those assholes) and saw printed on my ticked "clear channel presents the Vans Warped Tour" i don't know if that was venue specific or just the whole tour, but man...i felt dirty inside

skaught
03/13/04, 02:55 PM
how could fat mike and company go on a tour supported by a corporation that is in a symbiotic relationship with each other (Clear Channel and Bush)?

blt430
03/13/04, 02:57 PM
I didn't read the intro carefully enough, and I thought Jason Tate wrote the article. My bad. Still a good article though!

Sink2TheBeat
03/13/04, 03:16 PM
how could fat mike and company go on a tour supported by a corporation that is in a symbiotic relationship with each other (Clear Channel and Bush)?

i really don't know if/how clear channel is involved with warped, it might just have been cuz it was at a clear channel venue (the milwaukee place), i'm just saying that it was kind of sick seeing Clear Channel AND ticketmaster on my warped tour ticket. i really don't have much info on that

Sloaner
03/13/04, 03:41 PM
I didn't read the intro carefully enough, and I thought Jason Tate wrote the article. My bad. Still a good article though!
idiot

strobelite33
03/13/04, 06:55 PM
Some of you people make me want to throw up. If you think it's ok to allow this government to continue taking these steps towards censorship in the name of "purity" then you should not consider yourself American. How the hell can our society and especially our generation, that seems so obsessed with rebelling and protecting our rights, deem it acceptable for some corrupt regime to force us into a factless war and then allow it's ideals begin to trickle down into the things we listen to and what we believe?

"Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety"
--Ben Franklin

splitsecond
03/13/04, 06:59 PM
I hate Clear Channel as much as the next person, but Howard Stern ceased being funny about 10 years ago. He should be pulled of the air for being an uncreative hack.

However, trying compare a concert and a radio brodcast is completely asinine. There is far more control over who goes to shows than who hears a radio broadcast. Also, a concert is not broadcast freely to anyone who has a radio. Anyone with half a brain can see that this comparison is no more than ignorant.

greggokart
03/13/04, 07:39 PM
Hi Everyone -

First off, I want to thank Jason for posting my article and also thank all the people who read it and replied.

A few clarifications though:

Clear Channels has a right to air whatever it wants, however, as a publicly traded corporation, they are also supposed to be doing what the is best for their investors. Since Stern’s show was the most listened to show in many of those markets where he was removed, I can't see how that their decision can be good for the stock price.

Also, I never said Clear Channels didn't have a right to remove Stern. I said that IF Clear Channels removed Stern because of pressure from the White House, THEN we have a serious problem.

Yes all of this started thanks to Janet Jackson baring her breast, but it is entirely possible that the White House saw this as an opportunity to push THEIR moral standard on radio stations and silence some of their critics. Many people are saying the same thing about the war in Iraq, that the Bush administration used the events of 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq. There is a lot of evidence to support that claim especially considering that many people in the Bush administration were members of a think-tank known as the PNAC (project for the New American Century). The PNAC wrote a letter to President Clinton on January 28, 1998 that aggressively mapped out "America's global leadership" and demanded Clinton change his relationship with the UN and Saddam Hussein The letter said the following (amongst other things):

"In the short term this means being ready to lead military action, without regard for diplomacy. In the long term it means disarming Saddam and his regime. We believe that the US has the right under existing Security Council resolutions to take the necessary steps, including war, to secure our vital interests in the Gulf. In no circumstances should America's politics be crippled by the misguided insistence of the Security Council on unanimity."

The people who signed this letter include the following:

"They are Dick Cheney - Vice President, Lewis Libby - Cheney's Chief of Staff, Donald Rumsfeld - Defence Minister, Paul Wolfowitz - Rumsfeld's deputy, Peter Rodman - in charge of 'Matters of Global Security', John Bolton - State Secretary for Arms Control, Richard Armitage - Deputy Foreign Minister, Richard Perle - former Deputy Defence Minister under Reagan, now head of the Defense Policy Board, William Kristol - head of the PNAC and adviser to Bush, known as the brains of the President, Zalmay Khalilzad - fresh from being special ambassador and kingmaker in Afghanistan, now Bush's special ambassador to the Iraqi opposition. (Written by Jochen Boelsche, Der Spiegel)

So if you believe that the Bush Administration wanted to get rid of Saddam and used 9/11 as it's excuse (as well as weapons of mass destruction that don't exist and ties to Al-Queada that haven't been proven), is it so far fetched to believe they would use Janet Jackson’s breast as an excuse to silence their critics.

As I stated in the letter, no one knows why Clear Channels dismissed Stern, other than the reasons they have given, which may be the truth. But there is a pattern developing that could be very scary and that’s why we need to make sure that our politicians are not silencing their critics. That is where the issue of Free Speech comes in. Not in Stren being fired, but in having the ability to question OUR government.

This election is very important - not just for Americans but for the rest of the world. The goal of the letter, this site and many others, including ConservativePunk.com is to make sure that everyone has as much information as possible when they vote. Whether you choose Bush, Kerry or Mickey Mouse, please educate yourself as much as possible. Read everything both sides say. I personally do not agree or disagree entirely with either party and I imagine many people are the same way. In the end, no matter what Jason, Fat Mike or anyone else says, the choice is yours, but please have as much info as possible when you go into that booth as possible.

Once last thing – I apologize for the length of both of these letters, the reason the Warped Tour plays in Clear Channel owned venues is they have no choice. Clear Channel owns that many of the venues across the country.

Greg

Jared Kaufman
03/13/04, 08:54 PM
I hate Clear Channel as much as the next person, but Howard Stern ceased being funny about 10 years ago. He should be pulled of the air for being an uncreative hack.

However, trying compare a concert and a radio brodcast is completely asinine. There is far more control over who goes to shows than who hears a radio broadcast. Also, a concert is not broadcast freely to anyone who has a radio. Anyone with half a brain can see that this comparison is no more than ignorant.

Really? Did you read his description of a Britney Spears concert? Well, the attendance at one of those is majority pre-teen/young teenage girls. There is no way in any shape or form more control over who goes to a show as opposed to who listens to the radio. And second, a Britney Spears concert is GRAPHIC VISUAL depiction of sex. The way to monitor and control and censor whatever is "corrupt" is by letting the parents train and monitor their children when it comes to what they watch, read, listen to, etc. This goes for what the child listens to on the radio and what shows they go to.

Sink2TheBeat
03/13/04, 10:34 PM
greg your research amazes me, well done

thanks for clarifying the warped tour thing...does anyone know if the Tweeter Center in chicago (tinley park) is clear channel, cuz if it isn't i'll just go there instead of milwaukee this year.

even if they do have to play clear channel venues (understandable) i'm still gonna be angry seeing that on my ticket

Jason Tate
03/14/04, 12:07 AM
just want to extend a personal thank you for not only the letter, but for the clariffication post here. that and having my name included in the same sentance as fat mike - i feel my punk points rising: plus+2. o wait, i like yellowcard: minus-5

AndrewLikeFire
03/14/04, 08:06 AM
Originally Posted by splitsecond
I hate Clear Channel as much as the next person, but Howard Stern ceased being funny about 10 years ago. He should be pulled of the air for being an uncreative hack.

haha. i listened the other day for the first time in a while (i'm never up that early) and it wasn't that funny. he actually seems super depressed/pissed about what's going on, so maybe that was to blame.

SonnyPunk
03/14/04, 02:30 PM
I think you can dismiss the whole part about The Britney Spears and Blink concerts...people have to pay for a ticket to a concert...they know ahead of time what they are going to go see. Its not like a group of nuns are going to be bored one night and decide to go to a "Slayer" concert...thus becoming seriously offended. Radio is different.
But I agree that something doesnt seem right regarding Howard. His show is the biggest revenue-grossing radio show in the country...if Clear Channel takes him off the air they are losing money. His show hasnt changed much in years...now all of a sudden they take him off the air a few months before the election? The Janet Jackson excuse is getting old. Nobody wanted to see that nasty boob anyway...

Jared Kaufman
03/14/04, 03:04 PM
I think you can dismiss the whole part about The Britney Spears and Blink concerts...people have to pay for a ticket to a concert...they know ahead of time what they are going to go see. Its not like a group of nuns are going to be bored one night and decide to go to a "Slayer" concert...thus becoming seriously offended. Radio is different.
But I agree that something doesnt seem right regarding Howard. His show is the biggest revenue-grossing radio show in the country...if Clear Channel takes him off the air they are losing money. His show hasnt changed much in years...now all of a sudden they take him off the air a few months before the election? The Janet Jackson excuse is getting old. Nobody wanted to see that nasty boob anyway...

The point of the Britney and Blink comments are that ClearChannel supports THAT when they say they're against anything indecent. I find visual graphic depections of sex to be far more offensive (if it did offend me at all) than hearing jokes / comments on a radio show. And everyone knows what they're getting when they tune into Howard Stern.

Jim Morgan
03/14/04, 05:42 PM
this world needs a change.... its always the same... the government's tactics are getting so lame..

I feel inspired... this world needs fixin....

FarPastGone
03/14/04, 07:42 PM
I really found truth in that essay; it was written very well.

SonnyPunk
03/14/04, 09:02 PM
The point of the Britney and Blink comments are that ClearChannel supports THAT when they say they're against anything indecent. I find visual graphic depections of sex to be far more offensive (if it did offend me at all) than hearing jokes / comments on a radio show. And everyone knows what they're getting when they tune into Howard Stern.

Just because an artist or group performs a show in a venue that Clear Channel owns doesnt mean that Clear Channel supports them. What they do in a show is performed in front of a private audience. These bands dont represent Clear Channel...if they sing about performing fellatio on their Fathers then that just makes them look foolish, it doesnt give Clear Channel a bad reputation.
Dont get me wrong though...Im totally against what they are doing with Howard Stern...I just dont think the first part of the article was relevant. The difference is that The Howard Stern show is broadcast on Clear Channels radio stations all over the country...anyone can flip on a radio and listen to what they deem is inapropriate. Howard is under contract with them so they can basically control him to some extent. If they barred artists from performing in venues they owned then those artists could just find another place to play...so basically Clear Channel would lose money and they'd just be hurting themselves. But by censoring Howard they are causing far more damage. Somebody needs to do something or who knows what will happen next.