Re: the latest article about Clear Channel

[Mike Thomas <Nostatic@earthlink.net>]

Yawn.  Pretty much the same old' crap that Boehlert spews out every 
couple of months or so.  Outside of some off the record quotes from 
unnamed sources regarding the latest events within the company, it's the 
same old thing.  Clear Channel is the whipping post for 
post-consolidation radio business.  Many of the "questionable 
 practices" that CC regularly gets accused of are also employed by 
Viacom/Infinity, Citadel, and most of the other regional and national 
chains.   At this point, no one knows why Randy Michaels is no longer 
the head of the radio division, but just because he's gone doesn't mean 
that there's some deep dark conspiracy within the company.  That's just 
dopey, grassy knoll stuff.  

What really cracks me up is that Clear Channel  gets accused of the same 
types of things that Microsoft does.  Unlike Bill Gates , who blatantly 
ripped off Apple and put many companies out of business, CC has 
purchased it's competition as part of the deregulation of the industry. 
 No one put a gun to anyone's head here.  All the mom and pop owners 
took the money and ran, and now CC is doing what no company has had to 
do up to this point--find a way to effectively run 1200 radio stations. 
   Clear Channel has purchased other businesses to become a multi media 
empire, just like a Viacom or an AOL/Time Warner.  Why should they be 
treated any differently or held to some different standard?  Despite all 
of the silly lawsuits that have been filed against the company over the 
years, has there been any major investigations by the FCC or the 
Department of Justice?  No.  Maybe it's because they've DONE NOTHING 
WRONG!  IS  CC an aggressive company that doesn't roll over for the 
music industry like the mom and pop owners did?  You bet.  Is this 
illegal?  Absolutely not.  .

 As far as the record companies complaints go, it sounds like they are 
trying to pass the buck for their mistakes onto Clear Channel.  CD sales 
are way down, the labels pay a mint to the record indies to hump their 
music, and somehow that's Clear Channel's fault?  That's just BS.   
 Maybe, just maybe, that people are sick and tired of paying 15 to 20 
dollars for a disc with two or three good songs on it.  Heck, DVD's are 
longer, have more content on them, and often cost less than a music CD! 
 With people downloading music from file-sharing sites around the net, 
the consumer  is finding other places to get music.    As far as the 
concert business is concerned, the acts that have been touring this year 
have been less than stellar.    Also, with the economy being in the 
shape it's in right now, no wonder people are staying home.    Maybe 
that's why ticket sales are down!  The music industry has some major 
problems to contend with, but Clear Channel is the least of them.   
 Maybe updating their business model to more accurately reflecct the 
digital age of music distribution and paying artists what they're worth 
would solve their problems, not whining and complaining  about a company 
that's looking out for it's best interests.  

Donna Halper wrote:

> For the past few months, Salon.com's senior writer Eric Boehlert has 
> done an interesting series of investigative articles about the 
> business practices of Clear Channel.  The newest in the series 
> addresses how CC's near monopoly on concert promotion has led to 
> rising ticket prices; it also discusses accusations of payola, why 
> Randy Michaels was asked to step down, what happened when several 
> concert promoters tried to sue CC, etc; it  can be seen at:  
> http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2002/08/07/clear_channel/index.html
>
>