Re: Boston radio now-- or rather, Clear Channel radio now

[Shawn Mamros <mamros@MIT.EDU>]

At the risk of playing devil's advocate...

If you look back far enough, I believe you'll find that the origins
of that "serving the public interest" chestnut that some folks like
to quote actually came from RCA's press releases made around the
time NBC was formed (which predates the original Communications Act
by a few years).  That statement may have been good for PR purposes,
but let's face it - RCA was in it for the money, first and foremost.

And that's pretty much the way it's always been with commercial radio.
Yes, there are a few individuals (hi Bob!) who are truly in it for the
love of radio, but that's always been the exception rather than the rule
as far as station owners go, no matter whether those owners have one
station or one thousand.

We've all heard the stories about the penny-pinching capabilities of
the owners of even legendary stations like WMEX "back in the day".
Examples like that (and there are plenty) show that good programming
and good (or cheap?) business practices aren't necesarily polar
opposites.

If there really are as many radio professionals (current and former)
who are disenchanted about the current state of affairs in radio as
the Salon article seems to imply, then why can't they pull together,
form their own company, and take on the Clear Channels of the world?

Before you say, "but we could *never* pull that kind of money together",
think about all of the radio talent out there that's currently going
un- or under-utilized.  A pretty large number of people, the way
the author of the Salon article talks.  Put all those talented people
together with some business-savvy minds, and you could make a heck
of a compelling case for some well-heeled financiers to provide backing
for such an endeavor.

Before you say, "but Clear Channel is too big and has way too much
power now", tell me this - where is RCA today?  Did not RCA once
wield far more influence in the radio industry (regardless of how
many stations they actually owned outright) than any one company,
including the Clear Channel of today, ever did?  It wasn't government
influence that brought RCA down - heck, if anything, government seemed
to side with RCA just about every time out - but rather marketplace
changes that ultimately made RCA a dinosaur.  Everyone seems to
complain about how bad/bland Clear Channel programming is.  Sounds
like they're ripe for picking, if only somebody is around to provide
a compelling alternative.

I also don't see how anyone should be "amazed" that our elected officials
aren't concerned.  The elected officials of today - Republicans and
Democrats alike - aren't concerned about anything other than getting
reelected and constantly bickering at each other about petty matters
that no one really cares about.  Government and the major political
parties have proven themselves to be irrelevant.  It's the private
sector that makes things happen today.  Clear Channel achieved their
current level of success through the private sector, and their ultimate
downfall will also have to come from there.

If folks were to put as much energy into doing something about CC
as they seem to do in whining about them, perhaps something could
actually happen.  But it's always much easier to whine.

-Shawn Mamros
E-mail to: mamros@mit.edu