Hello? Is this mike on?

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/A...-Ownership.html

FYI. ..... the head of the FCC Michael Powell os Colin Powell's son

You can file a public comment or complaint about this. I did so immediately. Supposedly they're horsetrading with Powell to get the sweetest deals. They want to stifle all competition. Where're the Teddy Roosevelt-style Republicans when you need them?

You think they care about you? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaha.... [etc.]

Some more:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003May13.html

http://www.wbay.com/Global/story.asp?S=1280838

No time to waste, it seems.

From the Usenet group rec.antiques.radio+phono and doubtless many others:

>>
WASHINGTON (AP)--The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced today that it has agreed to be acquired by Clear Channel
Communications (CCU) of San Antonio, Texas.

In announcing the deal, FCC Chairman Micheal Powell said "This transaction will greatly expedite the demise of the antiquated concept
of local ownership of media outlets. Critics of deals such as this need to understand that Clear Channel embodies all that is good and decent in the broadcast industry, and anyone that believes otherwise clearly isn't listening to the news."

In a statement issued today, Clear Channel CEO Lowry Mays said "This acquisition is a perfect strategic fit for Clear Channel. The FCC has
been a wonderful business partner for the past several years, and has carried out our directions with great enthusiasm. We are proud to welcome the FCC into the Clear Channel family of companies."

Although terms of the deal were not immediately available, It is said that the acquisition will include all components, operating units and
assets of the FCC, except for its soul, which was sold in a prior transaction to Satan, Inc. in 1996.

Clear Channel, which owns broadcast facilities, shopping malls, billboard advertising, and concert promotion units all across North
America, has been on an acquisition binge for the past several years, and has recently broadened the scope of its acquisitions to include
government entities. In a recent deal, CCU purchased a 50% interest in the U.S. Congress, and is reportedly close to striking a deal to
purchase The White House.

Clear Channel's Stock stood at $42.09 at the close of Monday's trading, up $1.39, or 3.42%
<<

The Senate is looking to pass legislation reversing these rules changes. Apparently, it is not just the American public who feel this move was ill-advised.

In a country that has always espoused the concepts of a free press that is unbiased and willing to challenge people of authority, this is a really out-of-touch ruling. All media has become completely entertainment focused, and those who own media outlets want to squelch the ability of opponents to get their viewpoints heard. This is not very in tune with our concepts of a greater country.

And even Trent Lottahate had to get in his two cents of outrage. Yep, Powell and those GOP commissioners were bought off; he actually claimed that their budget was too small ($20K the porcine young Powell whined) to have more than one public hearing, though Frank Loud-enberg actually pointed out that the commissioners actually had spent more than $2.3 million wining and dining with lobbyists in Las Vegas, among other places! What a FARCE! I did like the two Democratic commissioners were against this gross boondoggle for Murdoch and friends, and even spent money out of their own pockets to meet with Americans of all backgrounds, but WHY DO THE DEMOCRATS THEN HAVE TO BE SO MEALY-MOUTHED and not just say outright what Powell is up to? Why are they always trying to make nice? I just don't get this endlessly wussy behavior!

fantomas, you crack me up.
I agree wholeheartedly, by the way...

Oh, come on now, guys. The original FCC rules and regs were written when there were THREE networks--back when cable TV and satellite weren't even a blink in anyone's eyes.

With cable TV, satellite, and God knows what else, the rules are more than archaic. They could use an update to bring them into the 21st Century. BTW, has anyone actually bothered to READ the proposed changes? They weren't that extensive and aren't that different from what they were to begin with.

Much ado about nothing, if you ask me. This has been blown way out of proportion.

I actually disagree with the changes. However, it should also be noted that like MIB stated, in this era of cable, internet etc, the media landscape is totally different from 20 years ago.

For example, are you guys familiar with Comcast? the cable company operates under its own name as well as its subsidiaries (Insight for example) and owns directly basically 1 out of every 3 cable subscribers in the entire country. That's market domination and market penetration that even Clear Channel can only wet dream about. and with regards to satellite, If NewsCorp's plans to buy Hughes Electronics goes through, Rupert Murdoch will control basically 100% of the satellite market in the US and Worldwide.

and Fantomas.... I loved your quote. You hit on the head why the democrats have been boring and putting to sleep their voters and ceded control to the GOP

[ June 06, 2003, 07:21 AM: Message edited by: ung ]

Having more and more media outlets controlled by fewer and fewer and fewer people just can't be good. And the transformation of BET into all booty all the time after MTV's take over is proof of that, I think. For a more academic but nonetheless accessible understanding for why media monopolies ain't so good, I highly recommend Naomi Klein's No Logo.

Check out the media ownership chart on this site for some real conflicts of interest between owners and "news" organizations.

http://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/
(see the media ownership chart!)

Other links:
http://www.democraticmedia.org/issues/medi...rship/index.php

http://www.thenation.com/special/bigten.html

BET was not taken over by MTV. MTV (along with CBS and others) is a subsidiary of Viacom. It was Sumner Redstone's and Mel Karmazin's (the heads of Viacom) decision to turn BET into "Booty Entertainment Television".

ung

You are right sir. In fact, I was sassing about exactly this topic in class and another student said exactly what you pointed out!

My point, and I think we agree, is that they (Viacom jerkoids) clearly imposed an MTV framework on BET - but, yeah, technically you're 101% correct. BET is widely considered, however, a subsidiary of MTV,...and it is part of "MTV Networks."