Orwell Was 19 Years Early

Evening Update: As readers of this space surely know by now, Michael Powell's wet kiss to Big Business occurred in the FCC vote this morning. That's the bad news.

The good news is that apparent public outcry (in spaces such as the many, many blogs and grass roots organizations which have been making their opposition known of late) is being heard. CNN and Money Magazine report [1] that the Senate will consider working on a rollback of these monopolistic, anti-competitive rules imposed upon us by the Powell Commission.

Of course it makes sense to note that the 3-2 vote was split down partisan lines. Even this clearly pro-business, old-line GOP action has managed to raise the hackles of many Republicans.

Correspondence from a good many of my old buddies from the radio business, all one-time card-carrying and donating members of The Republican Party, indicate that they have now abandoned the party. Seems correct, since the party has abandoned them in favor of currying PAC money, junkets, and support, et al, from the giants of commerce.

Now is the time to make your voice heard. Write or e-mail your senator, your congressional representative. Let them know you prefer to have multiple voices in media ownership and licensing of the airwaves . . . not just Clear Channel and a few other monolithic Friends Of Republicans In High Places.

Look at this Op-Ed Piece [2] by Ted Turner from The Washington Post [3] on May 30th.

Orwell Was 19 Years Early

In the year 2003, not 1984, a variation on Big Brother seems to looming on the horizon. Colin Powellís son Michael [4], Chairman of the FCC [5], will announce tomorrow that the Commission is deregulating even further. Cross-ownership of media, greater multiple-property ownership in individual markets, and less competition and fewer media players will be the bottom line.

The folks at Clear Channel (of course, by that we mean the executive level, -- after all, theyíve cut as many jobs as possible at all other levels) must be planning a big blast to celebrate their opportunity to buy (or crush and then pick up for pennies) everything in their way.

Hereís a frightening proposition: a merger of Clear Channel and Microsoft. In that scenario, all banner ads would be their domain (pun intended).

Business Week [6] has an interesting take [7] on the Powell FCCís approach. They refer to it as a conspiracy to ignore ìoverwhelming public opposition.î Whatís odd about the BW article is the complete and total lack of any mention of Clear Channel. How, --or perhaps the better question would be why-- could the greatest beneficiary of these coming changes be completely omitted from the story?

There is no shortage of links or sources regarding Clear Channel and the ways of the company. ClearChannelSucks.org [8] is a compendium, with links to numerous other stories, articles, and such. Despite the URL name (seems so childish to me), this site is well organized and not just a lambaste-party run by an angry bunch of kids. Are you wondering what you can do about this ever-deregulated monopoly of media enjoyed by Clear Channel? Read the siteís What Can I Do? [9]page. Thereís a starting point.

Salon [10] has been covering the Clear Channel story for quite some time, and offers a host of articles [11] about the far reaching tentacles of this ever-expanding company. Thereís also an article that appeared on May 31, an interview [12] with Former Clinton-era FCC Chairman Reed Hundt, who says Monday's historic vote is "the culmination of the attack by the right on the media"
Code Pink [13] has put major energy [14] into consciousness-raising and public awareness efforts with regard to this FCC deregulation business. They organized a rally outside of one of Clear Channelís Los Angeles stations, KFI. Check it out here [15] (that link [15] goes to a photo page on John Parresí site).

In the radio business the existence of competition and variety made for choice. There might have been two or three stations in a similar format, each with a different twist or slightly modified core target audience. This allowed for programming nuance, it inspired and supported creativity, and it made programming as much an art as a science.

Now, with ìvoice tracking [16]î (a Clear Channel device in which an announcer in one city records voice-segments for many stations in varying locations) and centralized programming, radio sounds alike everywhere you go. Regional differences are minimal. The only real regional difference is one of long-standing. Go to the South and the West, and there are more Country stations. Go to the Midwest and hear more Farm and Ag programming in the early hours.

I was among a small group once. A group of just a few thousand. We were individuals or small businesses ñentrepreneurs!ó who operated our own radio stations. Now the numbers are greatly diminished. A few companies hold most of the licenses. There was a time when the FCC limited ownership to 1 AM, 1 FM and 1 TV station per market. In a market with numerous stations, that made for many operators. Now, with ownership rules relaxed and multiple-property ownership allowed, there are fewer and fewer station owners.

Some call that consolidation. Some call that monopolization. Some call that Big Business getting BIGGER. Others refer to it as the gilding of the bigbiz lilly.

When the business had many owners, many local operators, many entrepreneurs, it was a system that fostered creativity. There was also a certain brotherhood, a sense of the competitors all belonging to a common fraternity or brotherhood. ìRadio peopleî was how we were known. Are the few remaining operators known as ìClear Channelians?î Sure, a few other major companies exist, but none with the seeming passion for cutting away at costs, creativity, passion, and the excitement and variety that made radio a viable, local, grass roots entity.

Back when I was active in the radio business, there was a fellow consultant whom I always held in the highest regard, John Rook [17]. John was always known as a gentleman, a smart programmer, a good radio guy.

John found this blog recently, and was kind enough to post his thoughts on the Michael Powell issue [18] and on Deregulation [19], as contributions to this space. You can find Johnís website here [20]. Check it out, and read some of his other posts, too. The one entitled An Open Letter to Lowry Mays [21], Chairman of Clear Channel, is excellent.

Today is the day. Check to see how your local lawmakers react to the goings-on at the FCC. Your ability to hear more than just a few companiesí idea(s) on how radio (et al) should sound, what the content should be, and just what the monoliths will let you hear, is whatís at stake.