CLEAR CHANNEL BACK TO THEIR SAME FOUL TRICKS

[joshzz]

Now Clear Channel is screaming that they should be allowed to own 12 channels per market.

Radio listeners throughout the US need to know that Clear Channel is everything that is wrong with radio. Clear Channel's CEO and board of directors see radio as a pure advertising business. Forget the community service - the localism - it is in my opinion this company is the epitome of everything that is wrong with media... If they had their way their idea of radio is to run non-stop informercials/commercials.

They have too many stations in many markets and were told to divest of their extra holding in these markets- they set up a trust company to hold these companies but make no effort to unload these stations.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Citation?

 

[TheBigA]

You really should re-read their comments. That's not at all what they said.

Also, if listeners feel CC is what's wrong with radio, they haven't shown it in the ratings. CC has top rated stations in most of the markets where they operate. And with regards to community service, CC stations are among the leaders in raising money and awareness for local charities.

Citadel runs far more commercials and infomercials than CC.

And by the way, I have never worked for them, and have no reason to stick up for them.

If you're going to rant, at least get your facts right.

 

[joshzz]

Your statements sound all well and good but vague supportive statements about Clear Channel don't give credence to your position.

If CC was so great people wouldn't be abandoning radio - It's a matter of numbers - If anyone owned hundreds of stations they're bound to have some rise to the top. That's not because they're so wonderful.

You're grabbing stuff out of the air and saying it's fact. There are a lot of independently locally owned stations doing far more good work that all CC stations combined.

FACT : TOXIC WASTE SPILL - Minot, North Dakota - January 18, 2002

ALL SIX STATIONS ARE OWNED BY CLEAR CHANNEL AND NOT ONE TRANSMITTED INFORMATION REGARDING THE DISASTER.... NOT ONE--- THEY JUST KEPT ON PLAYING THEIR MUSIC AND THE RAMBLING TALK OF LIMBAUGH ETC..
THIS IS CLEAR CHANNEL - NOT LIVE, NOT LOCAL - NOT DESERVING A SINGLE ADDITIONAL STATION-
If adisaster occurred in our region- our stations would be all over it.. not Clear "We're not Here" Channel.

 

[TheBigA]

Your statements sound all well and good but vague supportive statements about Clear Channel don't give credence to your position.

I'm not trying to support CC, as I clearly said, but point out the facts. The facts give credence to my position.

Fact #1: CC is NOT "screaming" to own "12 stations per market." They merely filed a comment as requested by the FCC, and in it suggested that caps be lifted from 8 to 12 in a handful of major markets, and increase from 7 to 10 in large markets. By the way, just because they put this in their filing is no reason to think they want to buy more stations. They just want the restrictions to be relieved.

Fact #2: CC owns the most listened-to music radio stations in NY, LA, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, DC, and Boston. They're near the top in San Francisco and Philly. Those are facts, not pulling numbers out of the air. And if you look at the overall picture, it's not unusual for them to own 3 of the Top 5. There are lots of other owners that one could blame for loss of listenership, but CC is not one of them.

As for the Minot thing, that was investigated by everyone, including Congress, and no one blamed CC. Try and come up with something recent.

Look...they're big, so people hate them. Just like the US. People in other countries hate the US and come up with all kinds of reasons to attack our country. That doesn't mean they're right.

 

[davideduardo]

FACT : TOXIC WASTE SPILL - Minot, North Dakota - January 18, 2002

ALL SIX STATIONS ARE OWNED BY CLEAR CHANNEL AND NOT ONE TRANSMITTED INFORMATION REGARDING THE DISASTER.... NOT ONE--- THEY JUST KEPT ON PLAYING THEIR MUSIC AND THE RAMBLING TALK OF LIMBAUGH ETC..
THIS IS CLEAR CHANNEL - NOT LIVE, NOT LOCAL - NOT DESERVING A SINGLE ADDITIONAL STATION-
If adisaster occurred in our region- our stations would be all over it.. not Clear "We're not Here" Channel.

Oh, gawd... the urban legend / lie again.

The spill in Minot happened at about 2 AM.

At that time the Clear Channel stations had properly installed EAS equipment that was totally functional. EAS is activated by local authorities, and in Minot, nobody in local government and emergency services knew how to make it work, despite training opportunities.

The Clear Channel stations were ready. The local authorities were not.

Very very few stations are manned after midnight until around 5 or 6 AM; nearly none have news staff on duty, even TV stations. CNN, FOX and HLN run reruns of the evening shows.

How many people in Minot do you think were listening to the radio at that hour? 50? How would broadcasting the EAS alert, if the government employees had been able to do this, have helped anyone? A cop car with a loudspeaker or an autodial phone alert would have worked better.

The clueless authorities tried to call the request lines. They could not figure out how to activate EAS, which is purposely not activated (other than for testing) at the station level anyway, yet the stations are blamed... yet the stations did everything required of them.

If the stations were operated by smaller companies, as they once were, they would have been signed off, as they used to be, at 11 PM or so.

 

[davideduardo]

As for the Minot thing, that was investigated by everyone, including Congress, and no one blamed CC. Try and come up with something recent.

And something that is actually true, also.

Look...they're big, so people hate them. Just like the US. People in other countries hate the US and come up with all kinds of reasons to attack our country. That doesn't mean they're right.

Having lived most of my life outside the "50 states" it's obvious that a big part of disliking the US is really envy. Same goes for CC.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Fact #1: CC is NOT "screaming" to own "12 stations per market." They merely filed a comment as requested by the FCC, and in it suggested that caps be lifted from 8 to 12 in a handful of major markets, and increase from 7 to 10 in large markets. By the way, just because they put this in their filing is no reason to think they want to buy more stations. They just want the restrictions to be relieved.

As I remberer, in another thread the person originating this topic was suggesting that Clear Channel was announcing big and loud their confidence in radio operations.... they wanted the caps lifted because they want to buy more stations.

That could be true. But, it could also be true that they would like to sell some of their stations where they don't have the dominance in the market they would like, so they want rules that would allow another large group operator in the same market to be able to buy their CC cast-offs.

So. We are left to scratch our heads and wonder if there is any message at all in their request to the FCC.

 

[TheBigA]

We are left to scratch our heads and wonder if there is any message at all in their request to the FCC.

We need to temper the CC comment with the fact that there were thousands of filings in this request for comment, and a lot of them called to completely reverse the 1996 ownership rules. I think CC just wanted to take the opportunity to present the other side.

Clearly there is very little investment money available for radio right now. It's why, despite extremely affordable prices, you've seen very few stations change hands. Plus I think some companies are waiting to see how the FCC will deal with issues like minority ownership. But the fact is, why would anyone spend money on radio stations and deal with all the regulations, when they can spend less money in new media and have no regulation?

But I also agree that the big companies want to focus on larger markets. CC would gladly give up hundreds of stations in small markets for one or two more in each of the Top 10. As a result, those who want a return to mom & pop ownership may get their wish soon. At least in small to medium markets. To them, I say be careful what you wish for.

 

[TheBigA]

One other thought: It wouldn't surprise me if this comment was designed around CC as a seller, rather than CC as a buyer. In other words, there are a few markets where I'd bet CC would like to get out of (maybe Atlanta?), but the potential buyers are all at their market cap.

 

[davideduardo]

One other thought: It wouldn't surprise me if this comment was designed around CC as a seller, rather than CC as a buyer. In other words, there are a few markets where I'd bet CC would like to get out of (maybe Atlanta?), but the potential buyers are all at their market cap.

And making comments in favor of increasing caps gives a different spin when many comments have been filed asking for them to be lowered, even if that forces sales at a loss. That could cause inpairment charges to be applied even before sales are made or forced... and its better to make a preemptive strike.

 

[Gatekeeper007]

Whether CC wants to buy or sell stations in different markets one thing is sure they don't need to have any bigger stake in the radio markets than they have now. Back before long this depression took hold of our economy and automation of radio stations put so many good and talanted people out of work my sister graduated from UK in journalism was in the top of her class and I mean the top and was voted most talanted by her class in the feild of journalism. She was unable to move or change locations at the time so she decided to try and get a job at one of the local radio stations there in Lexington. The problem she ran into was that CC owned most all of the radio stations in the Lexington area and told her for 2 straight years that there were no job openings available in that market. She tried every local mom and pop station with in 65 miles but was told that they couldn't afford to hire anyone that the big stations were killing them. So she stretched her reach and budget to 100+ miles and found a job at a medium size station 107 miles away (one way). She worked at this job for for a year and a half and won 4 awards in journalism during that time. The rattings on the station went up as did the value for many different reason combined at the time. The station owners decided to sell the station out to a large company who turned around 2 months later and sold it for a higher price to CC who already owned a number of stations in that market also. With in 6 months the staff there was cut by nearly two thirds and most of the remainder replaced by CC people from other areas. Her job lasted a little longer than most but was soon replaced by a CC worker who transfered in from another state. The stations value didn't drop for a while but it's listerenship did like a rock, I have a few friends that live in that area. Still during this whole time the Lexington market never had an opening just people transfer in from other CC areas and yes they told her she could keep a job with them if she moved 8 states away but due to circumstances that she had no control over she still could not move from her location near Lexington so once again no job and this was back when times were still pretty good. In my opion CC doesn't need anymore stations in markets where they already own existing ones, their control in these markets is already way to powerful for the good of those markets and the people that live there.

 

[gr8oldies]

Even in the good old days, when mom and pop owners supposedly bought stations only because they wanted to do a good swap shop show, it was not the least bit unusual for someone to have to move 8 states or more away to work in radio or newspaper.

 

[gr8oldies]

Started out in a place called Celina, Ohio. Worked with guys from Philadelphia, Sacramento, Minneapolis, Cleveland, Detroit and other places. Very few stayed in their home town.

 

[JimmyJames]

"By the way, just because they put this in their filing is no reason to think they want to buy more stations. They just want the restrictions to be relieved."

And why would they want them relieved? To buy more stations. Do you really believe they just filed this comment as a matter of personal opinion?

 

[gr8oldies]

They might want to buy more stations in selected major markets but the days of buying everything with a tower (got a CB? Here's $50,000) are long gone, and CC still has a hangover from that party.

 

[TheBigA]

And why would they want them relieved? To buy more stations. Do you really believe they just filed this comment as a matter of personal opinion?

Most of the people who filed comments did so out of personal opinion. Why shouldn't the largest owner have something to say about ownership rules, regardless of their intentions?

I think I dealt with that in previous posts in this thread and others. But I'll repeat them for you:

1) Because they'd like to sell stations in markets, but the likely buyers are already at their cap.

2) Because, as they mentioned directly in their filing, the investment money in radio has dried up, and a losening of regulations might revive an interest in the industry. That could help them sell some of the stations in the Aloha Trust.

3) There have been thousands of filings in this process, many from anti-media groups that want the regulations to be returned to pre-96 levels. Some even want further regulations and restrictions placed on owners. Their filing was meant to present the other side of the debate, regardless of their particular intentions. I doubt any of the groups that asked for ownership regulations to be tightened have any intention of becoming radio owners. As CC said, there is a lack of new owners interested in radio ownership. Something needs to be done to revive buyer interest in the industry. More regulations won't do that.

4) They are the largest radio owner, and that brings with it a certain amount of leadership. So when filing a comment to the FCC, they represent not only themselves but the industry. That's what leadership is all about.

5) As I said, if they could sell off the stations in the Trust, as well as a few hundred stations in smaller markets, I'm sure there are a couple large markets where they'd like to buy one station. But they have to do something about their debt first, and that means selling assets. Last week, they donated four AMs to minority owners. I'm sure there will be more donations, but they also need to SELL some stations. But there are no buyers because there's no investment money. Right now, there practically no movement in the industry. That needs to change.

 

[davideduardo]

"By the way, just because they put this in their filing is no reason to think they want to buy more stations. They just want the restrictions to be relieved."

And why would they want them relieved? To buy more stations. Do you really believe they just filed this comment as a matter of personal opinion?

I think the filing, one of apparently thousands made, is as much about not rolling back the limits as about being able to buy more stations. With all the filings asking for a rollback in market caps, I believe CC felt they needed to be on record showing the immense comepetion from new media and the silliness of measuring radio against radio instead of radio vs. all other media options. Someone with skin in the game had to say that, because it is reality.

 

[davideduardo]

... She was unable to move or change locations at the time so she decided to try and get a job at one of the local radio stations there in Lexington. ...and yes they told her she could keep a job with them if she moved 8 states away but due to circumstances that she had no control over she still could not move from her location .

So, on several occasions your sister had job opportunities but chose not to take them for personal reasons.

This is the station owners' fault?

As mentioned in multiple posts, a career in radio as often as not involves a close association with U Haul. My first decent opportunity in radio was 1900 miles from my home town, and that was followed by a position 3,000 miles away.

From others of your posts, you tend to color history through the experiences of people close to you and in disregard for the facts (saying RCA went bankrupt is an example). I think you need to step back and realize that radio has gone through many changes and it will go through more if it is to survive. And, yes, many of us will find the industry changed and not to our personal liking in the process.

 

[TheBigA]

In my opion CC doesn't need anymore stations in markets where they already own existing ones, their control in these markets is already way to powerful for the good of those markets and the people that live there.

You're assuming that others would run stations differently or hire more people. That's clearly not the case. When CBS sold their cluster in Denver to Wilks, the first thing the new owner did was clean house. Larry Wilson bought some stations in Portland, and most of the veterans who were there before are now gone. That's been the pattern in market after market.

The problem you describe isn't unique to radio. I know a young lady who graduated college with a degree in political science. She dreamed of going into government work. In case you haven't noticed, state and local governments are hurting. They're selling off assets, cutting back on services, and laying off staff. Two years after graduating, she still doesn't have a job. The economy is at a standstill, and punishing private business with more regulations isn't going to help the situation. No one is going to enter radio when they can do basically the same thing in unregulated media.

It's pretty obvious that CC wants to get out of a lot of the smaller markets. But there are no new buyers. That situation needs to change.