Clear Channel wants the FCC to force XM / Sirius to obey indecency laws
By Paul Miller 
posted Mar 25th 2008 9:32AM
posted Mar 25th 2008 9:32AM
Apparently Clear Channel's new motto is "if you can't beat 'em, make life suck on the other side of the merger." The broadcast giant has dropped a whole big list of requests on the FCC to impose as conditions upon XM / Sirius for a merger, not the least of which is asking for broadcast decency rules be applied to satellite radio. Clear Channel feels the competitive threat of satellite radio could be mitigated a bit if the "edgy" content (Howard Stern) ceased to make terrestrial radio's edgy stuff look weak by comparison. Of course, the big difference is that XM and Sirius are paid subscription services, and we're guessing they're going to pound the "but HBO can do it" argument for all they've got, but it seems like these days no request is out of reach for terrestrial radio: Clear Channel also wants another satellite radio competitor, 5 percent "public interest" radio, and zero local programming or local advertising.
uh, FUCK THAT NOISE!
I have to say it, my play list is bigger than theirs any way... I've been sick of the Ten-Song rotation for years now. Who wants to suck on the corporate music nipple? not me. Leave it for the Tweens.
No doubt. Clear Channel is the monster that begat satellite radio. You gotta love that the company that has been allowed, through government complicity, to monopolize local terrestrial radio, is now flexing its muscle on satellite. The only thing they have in common is the word "radio." Why don't they go after services like Rhapsody?
Props to Clear Channel for unlocking the secret to maximizing the potential profit of terrestrial radio, and in turn, laying it to waste.
EXACTLY, AND WHY IS THE RECORD INDUSTRY/RIAA SO SILENT ON THIS? They should be all over it pushing for the merger (overtly or covertly). It’s an opportunity to break the Clear Channel strangle hold by creating another viable vehicle to generate revenue (fees) and to peddle their wares. It also creates a unique “clean platform” for delivering the content that people are actually willing to pay for. A merged Sirius/XM helps the “bottom line”. Yea, you go ahead and stay quiet RI/RIAA. Keep chasing little old ladies and let Clear Channel and the TORRENT’ers win, YOU SILENT FOOLS!!
How the hell do you get "zero local programming or local advertising" on a nationwide satellite service? That would effectively mean no advertising at all, no US news at all, no US sports at all, etc. All advertising will be local to somebody listening, as would all news involving anything going on inside the US, any sports events, etc. I'm listening to a talk channel on Sirius right now and just heard an ad for Geico insurance, which has offices all around the country. Wouldn't that be considered local to virtually everybody? Sirius also carries all NFL games during football season. Wouldn't those be considered local to the cities where the games are being played? You can't "black out" geographic locations with a satellite so you'd have to get rid of all this programming entirely if those idiots at Clear Channel had their way.
That's not particularly true, as they already have local channels (at least XM does) for major metropolitan areas. Think Atlanta weather, New York news and traffic, etc. It's nice, if you happen to live in one of those particular areas.
These assholes don't want to have someone else change the bullshit rules they've established to keep their profits large and keeping it a virtual triopoly with CBS and Citadel. CCU trying to make sure the new BMOC gets put in their place.
Besides, it's an f'ing subscription service; the equivalent of cable, and last I checked, no one was trying to force HBO to tame down their programming.
Yet another giant with the FCC in their pocket. We'll see how this shakes out. It's funny that it hasn't been an issue until the merger stood a chance of going through.
Well that would require some sort of a REbigulator, which is a concept so ridiculous it makes me want to laugh out loud and chortle.. MMhey,MMhey
Seriously though, Sirius already has some censored channels. hope this never goes through
XM for the most part is "clean". There are designated XL channels where anything goes, and those can be blocked on the receiver if one chooses to do so... That's not to say the occasional four-letter word doesn't fly on LUCY or ETHEL...
woohoo Ethel!!
Typical B.S. Clear Channel has always had it in for Stern since he left terrestrial radio and this is just another transparent attempt to get him and his kind off the air. Of course they'd be fine with him if he worked for Clear Channel. Sirius is just like HBO - I'm willing to pay for good content and edgy stories. If you are not then there is plenty of free tv and radio to go around. It's a shame that in this country you have to pay to get better quality than what the networks give you - but such is the way it is. Sirius rules.
Yes, but your "better quality" is another man's filth. Stern is a blight on the public and I wouldn't mind him being off the air. He contributes NOTHING of value to our society. I'm not saying we should censor him, I'm just saying we should have the good sense not to listen.
Eh, you both suck... It's not about Stern, any more than it's about O&A, or Ron & Fez. It's about trying to restrict a company that might be taking your listening audience.
BretB you are a TOOL...what does your opinion on Stern have to do with the monopoly of them ALL clear channel demanding that XM/Sirius (PAY, I repeat PAY services) be censored
do you cover your ears when someone curses? you big baby
I GUARANTEE that BrettB is one of those flag-waving, nationalistic, God-fearing bible belters who scream to the world about how "they hate our freedoms" and yet wants to shut down those freedoms that don't agree with their warped Christian values (which aren't REAL Christian values).
Of course, at the same time, BrettB and his pals are tapping feet in bathroom stalls, cheating on their spouses and viewing the most hardcore of hardcore pornography.
Wait: Satan made them do it.
In other words, its not fair to compete with you, but it is ok for you to limit their broadcasts. Pffft.
can i get a 'hell' with that 'no'? thats why XM has parental controls! if you don't like adult content, you can have it blocked from specific radios. Only "XL" channels are uncensored, there is only like 10 of those. I'm glad clearchannel is shitting their pants, they are awful.
Its "hell to the no". Gotta stay current.
If I have to pay to be censored with satellite....then HBO/Showtime/Cinemax/Stars better be censored too!
But since we're talking about a 'NO' to censorship shouldn't that be a fuck no, or fuck to the no?
Well, to be fair, the argument does have some sense to it: XM and Sirius are using public airwaves to transmit their data. Why shouldn't they be forced to obey the same regulations as Clear Channel, which does the same thing?
an encrypted link is not public. you have to subsribe to it, and upon subscription you have the ability to have adult content blocked.
You've got it backwards. ClearChannel should be forced to expand its programming so that XM and Sirius are unnecessary. Start catering specifically to the LGBT community, the shock jock fans (oh wait), and everyone else it ignores or marginalizes. Oh, and don't allow it to own more than one station in any market unless it does just that.
It's so sad that CC is responding to the "monopoly" (my understanding is that each service for the foreseeable future will continue to be operated independently) by trying to create its own, but it's sadder yet that some people think that's a good idea.
Doesn't matter if they're encrypted or not. The point is, they're using a public resource (the "airwaves") to transmit this data. Ergo, they should be exposed to the same public regulation as any other data service using the public airwaves (or at least that's Clear Channel's view).
I'm not saying I agree, I'm just saying that it's not as insane as people are making it out to be.
what don't you understand. the "public" transmission is an encrypted bitstream. it is not discernible by humans, hence it can not be deemed explicit. The reason for the current FCC laws are not to stop content from being transmitted, it is to stop people who don't want themselves or their children to hear it from hearing it.
by your rationale, DirectTV/DishNetwork should not be able to carry HBO or any other pay channels. ergo your point is moot
The thing is though that only Clear Channel is following these so-called 'regulations'. They just have a stick up their ass and think everyone else should too.
Once again, HBO uses "public airwaves too" if that is your argument. You don't see NBC, ABC, CBS, and FOX going after showtime, starz, or HBO do you?
"Indecent" content is still blocked from minors by a subscriber fees (minors can't have CCs).
I have a problem with ANY company trying to take choice away from ADULTS. It makes me want to boycott any Clear Channel run stations in my area tbh.
If we are going to use the whole "free airwaves" argument...I guess the FCC should be monitoring and editing my personal cellphone conversations as well.
Sorry, but I do not see this any different than being able to order up some skinamax or hbo on my cable or sat provider.
I pay for sirius content because I don't want want commercial vanilla radio.
on last thought....If CC is able to steer the FCC, doesn't that mean that they are acting like a monopoly? These rules are put in place to keep competition and limiting one company or provider from dictating the marketplace.
Erwos, the atmosphere is filled with all kinds of electromagnetic waves. If you take that "airwaves" are public just because they're just there, then every secret government communication is also public, as it is your WPA'd wifi and your wireless keyboard strokes.
Direct TV uses the same public airwaves right and they broadcast porn. Cable companies deliver porn from Satellites broadcast to there head sites. Hotels major chains like Hilton and marriott have porn in there rooms all broadcast encrypted from space.
leave Sirius and Xm alone clear channel you are looking stupid
Sorry, fellas, but Erwos is right. Note: this doesn't mean that CLEARCHANNEL is right, and that XM/Siruis should be brought under the same rules - largely because of the encryption/subscription issue.
Even though their signal is encrypted, they are still using "public spectrum" to broadcast their signal. Think about the recent FCC spectrum auction. Nearly every "radio frequency" that is useful is licensed for use by the government. XM/Sirius license their broadcast spectrum just like Verizon, AT&T, your local ABC affiliate, and yes, Clear Channel radio stations. This means that the SPECTRUM is in fact "public," even the content of the BROADCAST is not "publicly accessible."
This is what differentiates HBO and the other premium channels. There is no public spectrum in use. The FCC hasn't licenses any radio frequencies to those service providers. They aren't "broadcasters" in FCC-speak. They are content providers for cable operators, and the cable operators use closed networks to push the content to paid subscribers. There is no "public spectrum" in the mix. So to say that "HBO can do it" is irrelevant. They don't fall under the same set of rules because they don't use the public spectrum.
Again, this doesn't mean ClearChannel has a leg to stand on. The FCC's decency rules stem from the fact that any person with access to ubiquitous hardware can access most "broadcast" content. That is clearly not the case with satellite transmissions. The FCC would have to expand its justification for the decency rules to encompass applying it to these facts--something that they have been loathe to do in the past, and which they would have a very hard time justifying due to the "difficulty" and deliberate choice involved with accessing a satellite transmission.
oh @Andyo: secret government transmission are in fact on "public airwaves," but access to those airwaves is restricted--folks aren't allowed to build hardware that accesses those frequencies without a closely controlled license from the FCC, and even then the transmissions are encrypted. And Wifi signals are on "unlicensed" spectrum, and don't involve "broadcast" (indiscriminate blanket transmission)--so while technically on the "public airwaves," they fall under different rules.
Using the logic that the "airwaves" are public, the following items would be subject to the same scrutiny, and censorship: Satellite TV, Wireless Data (Wi-Fi, WiMax, Point to Point Licensed links, etc.) Cellular, any part of the internet which relies on wireless backhauls. I think you get the point. SatRad is no more public domain than any of the other items I have named.
Jake: One hole in your argument is that DirectTV and Dish Network do license their airwaves, and do broadcast encrypted HBO and other similar channels. HBO as sent over cable might not qualify, but HBO sent over satellites does.
There's another major hole in Jake's argument, CC didn't BUY the airwaves nor did broadcast TV, they were given them gratis provided they obey a set of decency regulations. Anyone can broadcast so long as they follow the FCC rules regarding interference, decency and public service. The rules change significantly once you've paid for the use.
@ Kazriko:
You are correct that satellite TV is a similar model. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a "whole," because I again never said that "satellite radio should be subject to the same rules," only pointed out the deficiency in the "HBO does it" argument. More of an oversight. ;-)
That said, satellite transmission of subscription-based programming, like HBO on DirecTV, is an apposite comparison, and is a good precedent for XM/Sirius to point to. The FCC either 1) has an exception in place for DirecTV/Dish, etc, or 2) has been overlooking them entirely on the decency front (not likely). XM/Sirius can make a very strong argument that they should be treated exactly the same: they offer many channels, not all of which feature "indecent" content, and few of which feature nothing but indecent content, all on a closed distribution network.
@Brent:
1) That is not accurate. CC may not "buy" the airwaves, but their individual broadcasters (stations) do pay for the local license. That license contains the conditions. It is a distinction without a difference. Few if any operators "buy" their spectrum in the manner of the national cellular carriers. Most spectrum is licensed. Now, your point MIGHT be relevant if XM and Sirius actually have purchased rights to their spectrum, rather than "leased" it--but I don't have that information nor do I care to look for it right now. If that's the case, you are right, the rules change.
2) Again, I'm not saying CC should prevail, just that they have a jurisdictional argument. I'm not really "making an argument" so much as "adding information to the discussion." Or at least that's my intent. ;-)
@Jake
Local licenses are fees though, not leases for the airwaves. It's a crappy distinction, but one that exists nonetheless. There is no cost as such for the right to use the airwaves. I guess I could be wrong in terms of radio, but I know this is the television standard. I believe they follow the same regulation. Whether XM/Sirius leases or has purchased it's spectrum it does not operate in the open frequency between 89.1 and 107.9.
Clear Channel destroyed radio (repeat DESTROYED IT) so I hope SiriusXM ads 100 million subscriptions over the next year and drains every available ad sales dollar from terrestrial radio until CC is balled up on the floor in the fetal position...that goes for the NAB too.
Clear Channel and the FCC both destroyed radio.
Clear Channel gobbled up all of the local stations, and the FCC is pursuing "obscenity" more and more. Nobody listens to the radio because nobody wants to hear dead spots and blanks where their music used to be. In order to cover costs from a falling listener base, Clear Channel crams in more and more ads, and fewer and fewer people listen.
When was the first time that you heard a song on MTV and they censored the word "green" or something similarly ridiculous? Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.
I completely agree. CC is the owner of WAXQ 104.3 here in NY, and it's really a terrible station. Its the same tired songs over and over. 102.3 (WBAB) is a much better station, and it's owned by Cox.
Clear Channel can go to hell. I didn't really read it, but CC is such a pile of shit and has driven many good radio stations out of the Twin Cities.
I am glad that 93x, my favorite radio station, isn't owned by them and they won't be able to take them out since they are owned by ABC Disney.
That's ABC Disney ESPN to you, sir.
Milwaukee has the greatest radio station ever. INDEPENDENTLY owned by a guy with enough money that he has no interest in selling. They at one point hired a consultant to help out with their market share, then got complaints that their programming had gone to crap because it was all the mainstream stuff so they fired the consultants and now run a truly independent station. Nice mix of alternative and rock, a little indie hour on Sunday nights with the occasional bigger band mixed throughout. They also have fewer commercials than any of the other stations. 102.1 if anyone's ever in the area....
They obviously only want the Sirius/XM to have to obey these rules because the uncensored nature of satellite radio gives it a competitive advantage over terrestrial radio. They could also have chosen to ask the FCC to just remove the law for terrestrial radio, because that would also remove the competitive advantage.
They get the same business result either way, but they choose to fight for the option that is worse for the consumer. Yeah, way to make people hate you more than they already do.
This is an interesting point. Has anyone ever seriously proposed a radio "V-Chip"?
Granted the TV V-Chip doesn't seem to be used, although I believe that the broadcasters are required to encode the information to make it work. Even cable tv and sat tv have parental controls, yet I don't know anyone who uses them.
It's unfortunate that people will complain about content, even though they potentially have the ability to restrict that content from the privacy of their own homes. Instead they figure that NO ONE should hear/see things that they don't want to see.
Who needs the FCC when we have these people called "parents?" The "parents" have the job of filtering what there children can and cannot watch. Why are we paying idiots to tell me a four letter word is "bad?"
I meant THEIR children. My fingers don't work...lol
What's a parent?
I find it funny that a company like clearchannel is complaining considering they are as close to a monopoly as regs allow. Ever wonder why you hear the same songs over and over and on different channels. Yep, blame C.C.
From the Wiki:
"With 1,200 stations, Clear Channel is the largest radio station group owner in the United States, both by number of stations and by revenue. According to BIA Financial Network, Clear Channel Radio recorded more than $3.5 billion in revenues in 2005, more than $1 billion more than the number-two group owner, CBS Radio."
There are plenty more reasons not to like them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_Channel_Communications#Criticism_of_Clear_Channel
Wow! What a bunch of whiners! I knew Clear Channel had morons working for them, but I didn't realize the Execs were still sucking milk from their Mothers.
Clear Channel can drop dead. The FCC need to be disbanded. This is completely reticules!!! OH if I hear a BAD word I'll turn to a rock....FUCK these people.
Send your comments to the FCC at FCC.gov I did last night. Look for the link to comments on the merger. Do it, Do it NOW!!!
Be nice and state just the facts and how you feel!! Fill they in box!!
I hope you spent more time and care writing your letter to the FCC than you did on this post.
Yes I did, A little busy here at work...
The thing is, the government doesn't listen to shit over the internet. To have any impact, you have to send them a letter, in the mail. Even then, they probably won't read it.
"reticules"?
typing with left hand. there are 3 keyboards or my desk....busy to day, just trying to get a thought out. And I know for a fact that they read e-mails. They are required to. I know someone that works there.
"reticules"?
I believe he is Hercules second cousin and Testicles brother.
Clear Channel can drop dead. The FCC need to be disbanded. This is completely reticules!!! OH if I hear a BAD word I'll turn to a rock....FUCK these people.
Send your comments to the FCC at FCC.gov I did last night. Look for the link to comments on the merger. Do it, Do it NOW!!!
Be nice and state just the facts and how you feel!! Fill they in box!!
Amen to everyone. You all get a Plus from me (I'm just too lazy to click all of them). Except Earl. Somebody needs to feel like the ugly duckling. Sorry Earl.
I also hate Clear Channel, and honestly, their hosts don't obey by really any of the rules the FCC lays out. I work for a small, independently owned jazz station, and we have to be very careful what is said on the air. Most of what you hear on commercial radio really doesnt jive with the FCC. So I suppose my station should be asking the FCC for conditions to keep Clear Channel on air - perhaps those broadcast decency rules they are so trumpeting?
The concept of the World Wide Web has blown up the mass-media model. The fact that Clear Channel continues to think the way it does it called a "dillusion."
Im in the Uk so excuse me if im missing something but...
How can CC argue this merger creates a monopoly when they are a radio company offering radio programming the same as XM and sirius?
just because they are sent in different ways doesnt affect the fact theay are both 'radio'.
Now CC are saying that sat radio should be regulated... seems a poor attack by me! if Sat radio is its own industry and thus a monopoly why are CC getting involved at all.
You are right in the sense that Clear Channel's demands are a desperate attack to weaken Sat Radios main advantage.
However, concerning the monopoly I happen to agree.
Even as a daily Stern listener I have always considered this to be a monopolistic merger.
There are currently only TWO options if you want broadcast, uncensored content available for the entire country. After the merger there will be only one (aka The Quickening).
Arguing that iPods and Radio compete is kind of like saying that the Television Studios compete with DVD sales so every Television studio can be bought up by one company.
That being said, I do not believe that the NAB or ClearChannel are fighting this merger to protect the people of America. They are fighting it to protect their own markets which, while not competing directly, will benefit if these companies don't merge and face bankruptcy.
The sad thing is that CC has people in D.C. who will push their wishes and see that this gets passed at FCC. Its more than XM and Sirius combined.
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib.asp?Ind=C2100&Cycle=2006
XM/Sirius better dig deep in the war fund and not bid on the senators for sale.
I HATE CLEAR CHANNEL!!! I live in Houston where they have stranglehold on our airwaves and let me tell you that all our stations suck. It's a bunch of censored pussy shit that plays over and over again and drives me insane. Every time I go to another city with non Clear Channel stations, I remember that radio doesn't have to suck. They are nothing but a tool for the record labels and religious fanatics. You hear me Clear Channel? You die. You die and go to hell.
Does anybody know what the rules on Sirius/XM are for obscenity? It seems like I still hear the same sanitized crap on Sirius that I've heard on the radio. Is that because the labels send them the "radio cut" and they just play what they get?
I've got a rental car right now that has Sirius, and I drove halfway across country in a car equipped with XM 3 years ago. I love satellite radio, it's awesome.
But the simple fact of the matter is there's no way in hell I'm going to pay for a crippled product. Getting people to pay for radio is hard enough, but the satellite services seem to be unable to give us a compelling reason to think they're much different from broadcast stations.
And I hope the FCC realizes how much they stifle consumer adoption of products.
It makes me furious I pay $80+ a month for cable TV and yet it's under attack from whiny nanny-staters who can't be bothered to take care of their own kids. The argument used to be that since cable TV was a premium service, it shouldn't be regulated by the FCC, but now, ZOMG WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN, almost everyone has cable TV, and big PTA needs to swoop in and fix the problem.
Exactly. The big difference between the ClearChannel monopoly and XM/Sirius is that I pay for XM. If I'm going to pay for radio or TV, I want to hear it as the artist intended. It's not like preventing foul language on the airwaves is going to magically make the "problem" disappear. It pisses me off that I pay for cable TV but everything on basic cable is censored. "Oh no, I can't let my child hear swearing" People need to grow up. It's language kids hear every day. Deal with it. Block the channels if you don't like it. Don't make the rest of us live in your fantasy world. Personally, I don't swear but I don't force that attitude on others. In the immortal (censored) words of John McClane, "Yippee-kay-yay, mothertrucker!"
I cuss like a drunken sailor, but I don't require it in my music. I don't mind listening to obscenity-free music, I just hate the bleeps and blank spots and tortured word replacements of censored music.
I'm not sure about XM, but I know that Sirius even has a "kids only" channel that my parents put on when the youngin's are in the car. Clear Channel is grasping at straws and it's really funny to watch. My only fear is that the FCC will buy into their nonsense.
Haha, FM sucks. Scared are ya? Clear Chanell is clearly sucky.
Not new...
http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/clear-channel-outlines-siriusxm-merger-concessions.html
If only there was a company with similar clout in the live music space, maybe *they* could have whined like little babies when Clear Channel took over that market and started imposing ridiculous fees for everything.
Wow, I wondered when someone was going to bring a Jewish conspiracy into this. Now my internet morning is complete.
CC is basically throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks right now, there is little need to worry. However, if you want to fight back, do so as a consumer, where it has a chance of hurting them. Find out who thier largest national advertisers are, and call them to let them know you are boycotting thier products because they advertise with CC, and cite your reasons. Then tell all your friends to do the same thing, and to tell thier friends to do the same, and so on.
On another note, i'm sure CC would like to censor my cd's and mp3 player too :P
Clear Channel all but destroyed all the good radio stations in this country, all for the almighty dollar. DJs are not about the dollar (most), they are about the music. Clear Channel basically said, why are we paying these DJs when we have computers? Guess what? It ain't the same. I switched to Sirius as soon as it seemed like it might be the best option. I will NEVER go back. I love listening to DJs. I love the anecdotes. I love the break from the music every once in a while. I hate rock blocks. DJs keep you interested in the bands, not just the music. DJs wake you want to buy the albums, not just listen to what they are feeding you via the airwaves.
Clear Channel can suck an egg. Us fans of DJs and the music they select will prevail because Music is about freedom. Freedom to choose. Freedom to play what you want. Freedom to sing like an idiot while the guy next to you listens to his NPR.
Sirius and XM offer something that Clear Channel can't. Freedom.
Public vs private airwaves. It is my understanding (please correct people if I am way off) that regular radio stations pay for the right to use signals from the government spectrum. Ergo they are using the governments signals and therefore are subjected to the iron fist of the FCC. Whereas Satellite radio uses signals from a satellite dish that they own that is flying high in the sky. So yes the sky in which the signal is traveling through is indeed public but the signal is owned and encrypted by the satellite company and is therefore private...meaning that the FCC has no jurisdiction.
Clear Channel is a sad entity. I hate how the issue of free speech is constantly questioned. How can we put down the middle east for strict and then turn around and prevent our own citizens from hearing what they want?
Actually, if I remember correctly, radio stations are allowed public airwaves as long as they deliver "news", some sort of current information. That qualifies them to use the airwaves.
Any notice that ClearChannel is primarily a Republican (ie NeoCon) supporter. They want to turn the American society back to 1950...
dude, don't make this a political argument. There are tons of repubs that love XM/Sirius for its unabashed uncensored airwaves. Its the DEMS who want to censor this stuff to protect everyone from getting offended and to not upset anybody. Get your facts straight. Repubs are for free airwaves, Dems are for "free" censored radio BS ie clear channel.
You are an ignorant anti-Semite.
Hell Yeah
Wes, no you don't deserve a "hell ya". In fact, what you will get is a "shut the hell up".
bababooey?
What happened, Clear Channel? HD Radio not doin' it for you?
My brother used to work for a CC station in L.A.
His only description of the media giant? "Cheap Channel."
And I want a pony!
Friggin' babies! CC has to be the most deluded company on the planet (after Verizon, of course)
CC --- BITE MY BIG FAT ASS
LOL @ calling Stern "edgy". He's a hack.
what a ridiculous request. With the exception of some sports broadcasts, there really is no other reason to pay for satellite radio, since half the music stations have commercials anyways. Clear channel knows if they were forced to follow traditional broadcast regulations no one would have any reason to pay for the same old shit.
i personally can't stand the repetitive nature and shitty quality of radio, thats why once i could hook up my ipod to the car, i haven't listened to any more radio than the traffic reports.
Clear Channel will lose, unless our loverly politicians bow to their wishes.
You see, Satellite Radio a lot like Cable or Satellite TV. The rules that apply to terrestrial broadcasts (major networks) do not apply in the paid realm because terrestrial broadcasts use public airwaves (i.e., everyone can access them for free).
Terrestrial radio has been losing listeners in droves. All the stations that used to carry Howard Stern are now in the toilet. What does that tell you?
The NAB (ruled by Clear Channel) created this mess by playing the same crap over and over while drowning listeners in commercials. They can't compete... and we all know that when an industry can't compete they break out the lawyers and lobbyists (e.g., SCO going after Linux).
Clear Channel and the NAB can piss off...
Suck my ass, CC. No, I don't mean kiss it. I mean syphon my sphincter dry and die the slow e. coli-induced death you deserve. Hey Anonymous, here's another nice target for you, once you're through dethroning Xenu!
Without the freedom to say anything, Satellite Radio is completly pointless. Then again, I only see a few things compelling about XM/Sirius, Listening to your local Baseball/NFL games anywhere in the country and listening to the audio stream of CNBC. Anything else, I can get from my iPod/iPhone and my iTrip. Oh, and don't say Howard Stern, local talk radio is always better. Viva Rick Emerson!
TEG
Amen!
Clear Channel can suck my balls! What a bunch of assholes!
What the terrestrial radio stations don't understand, is that if I'm not listening to satellite radio I am listening to my iPod. I don't want to hear their advertising, period.
Local radio blows...
mel karmazin is jewish too
This just in: asshat with monopoly wants fewer monopolies in the world, outside of his own.
F Clear Channel.
Clear Channel is a monopoly in many markets (controlling radio, billboards, etc) and has deliberately kept some programming off the air because of the political affiliations of its board and yet now they're crying foul?
Sorry CC, I have no tears for you.
Screw radio, I prefer watching TV while I'm driving!
you forgot to include opie and anthony in the post. very dissapointing.
Most of these comments are stupid. The government would only get involved if Sirius becomes so big it is in every house regardless of pay. HBO and cable are two different pay services, yet cable is regulated mostly and HBO is not. Sirius will work the same way if 100 million people have access to it. At 15 million they may not care, at 6 million they do not.
However if every car has a radio and kids can easily get it wherever they want, the government will come in (as they should) and start restricting them in some way. I doubt that will be now though. This is coming from a Sirius subscriber since 2003, and a Howard Stern fan that would not want my daughters listening to him at all.