CC: Cry me a river...

[dj_niceshot]

Anyone have thoughts on the below comment from Mark Mays:

MAYS said "free radio needs Congress to relax outdated restrictions on our operations... Free radio is not asking for much more room,"

CC is requesting from Congress more relaxed ownership restrictions. More????

Suggestion: 10 stations in markets with 60 or more, 12 with 75 or more

Mays uses the XM analogy which says Satellite can own nearly 150 channels in every market, while CC can own ONLY Eight. This is highly suspect, given that the business models are completley different; one relying on commercials, and on relying on mostly subscription revenue.


We knew the day would be hear... give an inch, they take a mile...

 

[SirRoxalot]

Protecting Clear Channel

My heart bleeds for Clear Channel. I think we should relieve them of the pressure of operating and maintaining unprofitable radio stations. Instead of allowing them to have more stations so they can gut local programming and replace it with syndicated and/or voice-tracked content and homogenized playlists, I think we need to lower the ownership limits.

We'd only be protecting Clear Channel from themselves. It's our civic duty!

 

[Yeziknoradio]

This is a very good posting. Was it also discussed on the Coast to Coast board? <P ID="signature">______________
"If you never say NO, How much is your YES worth?"
</P>

 

[dj_niceshot]

> This is a very good posting. Was it also discussed on the
> Coast to Coast board?
>
I am not sure.

I saw it on the new and improved All Access.com

 

[SirRoxalot]

> This is a very good posting. Was it also discussed on the
> Coast to Coast board?
>
Move your mouse to the left, slide it upward until the pointer rests over "Coast to Coast". Now click the left mouse button...


But seriously, folks, there's a well-populated discussion on Coast to Coast...

 

[Element9]

Re: Protecting Clear Channel

> My heart bleeds for Clear Channel. I think we should relieve
> them of the pressure of operating and maintaining
> unprofitable radio stations. Instead of allowing them to
> have more stations so they can gut local programming and
> replace it with syndicated and/or voice-tracked content and
> homogenized playlists, I think we need to lower the
> ownership limits.
>
> We'd only be protecting Clear Channel from themselves. It's
> our civic duty!
>

There's a good discussion, as noted, on the Coast to Coast Board.

When I think of what Clear Channel has wrought, I immediately think of Wal-Mart. The Mays family simply adopted the Walton business platform and modified it for radio.

We may bitch up a storm about it, but the public doesn't give a rat's asset. As long as they can by a DVD for 89 dollars at WM and win Hi-Lo on their favorite Clear Channel AC station, life's good. Most radio listeners don't know what we know and couldn't care less. Radio's free and as long as they're getting their Ten in a Row and Free Workday Cash, who cares about the jocks, traffic people, promotions people, production guys and salesmen who work in the trenches.