Clear Channel ban

2

Comments

  • Posts: 3,326
    sapperskunk wrote:
    And Faith no More, totally does a better version anyway.
    Myself ... I liked "Iron Man" on the ukelele.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • Posts: 1,350
    Commy wrote:
    shouldn't radio stations play music that people want to hear? should they be deciding what we listen too? with 1200 radio stations Clear Channel kinda determines what is played and what isn't, for a lot of areas in the US.

    even if they ban Creed I'm against it, and there are no words to express how very much I hate Creed.

    It would be a good business model to play what the customer wants to hear but they cannot be forced to play anything. I would only be against banning if the government was doing it. Clear Channel cannot imprison people for disobeying. This is not censorship nor is it unconstituional. There is a lot of music that I would rather hear than the shit that is on when I turn on the radio. I just don't listen to music stations anymore. I leave that for those who like what is played. Forcing a private company to play certain music is way too far for the government to step though.
  • Posts: 186
    i like how "all songs by rage against the machine" is censored
    Fuck clear channel radio
    PJ at MSG in 2008! Mission Accomplished

    The band all knows. We're too afraid to mention.
    Don't want to be part of Frank's luncheon.
    Lose weight. Be safe. Where's Mike McCready?
    My god he's been ate!
  • Posts: 1,350
    T-Case wrote:
    i like how "all songs by rage against the machine" is censored

    If you read further, you will see that there was no censorship and it was a myth.
  • Posts: 4,984
    T-Case wrote:
    i like how "all songs by rage against the machine" is censored
    Fuck clear channel radio
    it really says a lot about Rage doesn't it?

    yeah, clear channel has monopoly and they are using that power against the majority of the people.
  • Posts: 4,984
    zstillings wrote:
    If you read further, you will see that there was no censorship and it was a myth.


    gov't censorship, corporate censorship, its all the same thing.

    They don't gotta burn the books they just remove em...

    or songs, in this case.
  • Posts: 1,350
    Commy wrote:
    gov't censorship, corporate censorship, its all the same thing.

    They don't gotta burn the books they just remove em...

    or songs, in this case.

    It's nowhere near the same. One is the government restricting freedom of speech, religion and press. The other is a business deciding what to sell and how to sell it.
  • Posts: 4,984
    zstillings wrote:
    It's nowhere near the same. One is the government restricting freedom of speech, religion and press. The other is a business deciding what to sell and how to sell it.

    either way the public is not allowed access to certain ideas. it doesn't matter who bans the material, the results are the same.
  • Posts: 1,350
    Commy wrote:
    either way the public is not allowed access to certain ideas. it doesn't matter who bans the material, the results are the same.

    The public is fully allowed to access certain ideas. They just cannot do it through that company. They would need to access it from another source. When the government bans something, it's gone.
  • Posts: 10,560
    What they don't play Ministry? Or they didn't make the list?

    Lame, ultimately it's their choice, but if it were my station I'd be playing "War Pigs" instead of cutting it.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • Posts: 4,984
    zstillings wrote:
    The public is fully allowed to access certain ideas. They just cannot do it through that company. They would need to access it from another source. When the government bans something, it's gone.
    but we're dealing with 1,200 major radio stations. millions of listeners. they are having an impact on public opinon. its a form of propaganda.
  • Seattle Posts: 7,177
    Commy wrote:
    but we're dealing with 1,200 major radio stations. millions of listeners. they are having an impact on public opinon. its a form of propaganda.
    Are you telling me the only music you listen to is music Clear Channel plays for you?
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Posts: 1,350
    Commy wrote:
    but we're dealing with 1,200 major radio stations. millions of listeners. they are having an impact on public opinon. its a form of propaganda.

    Most of the websites cited on this board are propaganda as well. I don't want the government telling them what articles they have to print either.

    All of these bands reach a lot of people too. More than just those who listen to these 1,200 radio stations. Maybe the government should write their lyrics for them as well. It's "censorship" since they don't allow other points of view in their lyrics.
  • Posts: 4,984
    jeffbr wrote:
    Are you telling me the only music you listen to is music Clear Channel plays for you?


    mmmh.


    What I'm trying to convey here is not that complicated. public opinion is very important in the United States. More important than say Russia or China or Pakistan, or anywhere else in the world, for a number of reasons. In China, if someone disagrees with the gov't they can throw em jail or dissapear them or remove them somehow, without worrying about laws and constitutions and legal restraints. They don't have that luxury in the US, tho the Patriot Act is making that closer to being a reality. So instead of controlling us with force they control our opinion, and there are literally millions of example of State sponsored propaganda. An entire industry has been created for this one purpose, its called public relations.

    When a company as large as Clear Channel removes certain ideas from its broadcasts, it effectively removes those ideas from certain members of the public. When you combine Clear channel with Fox and a dozen other media outlets you are doing more than denying the public access to certain information, you are manufacturing consent-for whatever issue. In this case a war.
  • Posts: 4,984
    zstillings wrote:
    Most of the websites cited on this board are propaganda as well. I don't want the government telling them what articles they have to print either.

    All of these bands reach a lot of people too. More than just those who listen to these 1,200 radio stations. Maybe the government should write their lyrics for them as well. It's "censorship" since they don't allow other points of view in their lyrics.


    every piece of information is propaganda in a way. the idea is to make all information available to everyone and allow them to make up their own minds. when you narrow the spectrum of thought, you are actively affecting the opinion of the public.
  • Seattle Posts: 7,177
    Commy wrote:
    mmmh.


    What I'm trying to convey here is not that complicated. public opinion is very important in the United States. More important than say Russia or China or Pakistan, or anywhere else in the world, for a number of reasons. In China, if someone disagrees with the gov't they can throw em jail or dissapear them or remove them somehow, without worrying about laws and constitutions and legal restraints. They don't have that luxury in the US, tho the Patriot Act is making that closer to being a reality. So instead of controlling us with force they control our opinion, and there are literally millions of example of State sponsored propaganda. An entire industry has been created for this one purpose, its called public relations.

    When a company as large as Clear Channel removes certain ideas from its broadcasts, it effectively removes those ideas from certain members of the public. When you combine Clear channel with Fox and a dozen other media outlets you are doing more than denying the public access to certain information, you are manufacturing consent-for whatever issue. In this case a war.


    I get the concept. The solution you're implying sounds quite distasteful and unconstitutional.

    And unnecessary. If Clear Channel doesn't want to play songs that millions of people want to listen to, what a great opportunity for Entercom to capture market share, as well as little or big independents like KEXP. If Fox News doesn't want to carry coverage of a hot scandal in the administration that millions of people care about, what a great opportunity for CNN, MSNBC, and the networks to cover it and capture market share.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Seattle Posts: 7,177
    Commy wrote:
    every piece of information is propaganda in a way. the idea is to make all information available to everyone and allow them to make up their own minds. when you narrow the spectrum of thought, you are actively affecting the opinion of the public.

    Let's be more specific since you seem to beat around this one. Should the government require stations to play certain songs, or cover certain stories?
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Posts: 4,984
    jeffbr wrote:
    Let's be more specific since you seem to beat around this one. Should the government require stations to play certain songs, or cover certain stories?


    the government represents the people, insofar as the country is democratic, right?

    a private corporation (a fascist institution by definition) with an agenda-in this case pro-Bush/pro-war-shouldn't be allowed to narrow the spectrum of information, it amounts to censorship.
  • Posts: 10,118
    much ado about nothing
  • Seattle Posts: 7,177
    Commy wrote:
    the government represents the people, insofar as the country is democratic, right?

    a private corporation (a fascist institution by definition) with an agenda-in this case pro-Bush/pro-war-shouldn't be allowed to narrow the spectrum of information, it amounts to censorship.

    So you want the government to mandate playlists.

    Would you have the government mandate that every station play the same playlists, or would you have the government divide the spectrum and assign genres, with appropriate playlist requirements?
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register

Quick Links

Categories