« Tenable | Main | Material »
ClearChannelisIrrelevant.org
Someone wanted me to talk about rock n' roll.
So I got to see Broken Social Scene perform to a sold out crowd at The Black Cat last week. I discovered the joys of this band last year. I was one of the many pitchforkmedia.com readers who read this review last February and heeded its advice to order the album from hmv.ca. The album did not disappoint, and I gushed over it, placing it on the top of my best of 2002 list even though I hadn't discovered it until 2003. I did everything in my power to share the joy of Broken Social Scene with my friends: I burned copies of the CD, shared mp3's, and lauded it ad nauseam. The result? Last week I finally got to see the band perform with not one or two, but with five of my friends.
The show was great, more than I had expected, and my love for Broken Social Scene has grown ever deeper. Nonetheless, Torquil, a singer for the opening band, Stars, managed to bring out my snotty side: he gave the requisite "f*** you" to Clear Channel.
For those of you that don't know what Clear Channel is, I'm just going to go ahead and quote this post, which sounds like it's quoting something else.
ClearChannelSucks.org is a free speech website dedicated to educating the public about entertainment giant Clear Channel. Clear Channel owns over 1,200 radio stations and 37 television stations, with investments in 240 radio stations globally, and Clear Channel Entertainment (aka SFX, one of their more well-known subsidiaries) owns and operates over 200 venues nationwide. They are in 248 of the top 250 radio markets, controlling 60% of all rock programming. They outright own the tours of musicians like Janet Jackson, Aerosmith, Pearl Jam, Madonna and N'Sync. They own the network which airs Rush Limbaugh, Dr. Laura, Casey Kasem, and the Fox Sports Radio Network. With 103,000,000 listeners in the U.S. and 1,000,000,000 globally (1/6 of the world population), this powerful company has grown unchecked, using their monopoly to control the entire music industry. If you find this alarming, ClearChannelSucks.org is the place for you. Go there!
OK, so Clear Channel is a huge corporation. Big deal. If you check out their website, you'll notice that they are able to spend quite a few of their dollars on cancer research initiatives, family violence prevention groups, and other community causes. Of course, many cynics have been trained to view such activity as mere pandering to the masses, token gestures to hide the great evil they're doing to everyone else by owning radiostations. The fact is they're giving back to their community, and I think it's great, whatever their motivations.
Now, if you try to go to "free speech website" clearchannelsucks.org, you'll notice that it no longer exists. In a response to the post I quoted above, someone named Roger expressed the following concern when he noticed that clearchannelsucks.org wasn't working:
I've been trying to visit the clear channel sucks website for several days now to no avail.I wonder if time warner which is my isp is in clear channels pocket ? Anyone else having any luck getting on that website ? Any comments would be welcome. Thanks.....Roger
Ah Roger! A conspiracy theory! Yes, Time Warner is in on the whole deal to force you to listen to terrible music that you don't like! Oooo! I'm sorry, but I doubt it. I imagine that clearchannelsucks.org couldn't afford to maintain their server or their heavy bandwidth, as it was likely flooded with hits from goofy emo kids on a fool's errand to somehow convince Clear Channel from making profits by filling the airwaves with the schmaltz that the masses need to get them through their days. I wish the site were still up, as I'd like to see what it hoped to accomplish, how it hoped to do it, and how its mission would be funded.
Make no mistake, I hate Nickleback, Yellowcard, Fuel, Creed, Evanescence, Godsmack, etc as much as the next music snob, but why should I care do anything about it if other people like to listen to it. Clear Channel has managed to get so big because it, in cooperation with major music labels, is able to gauge what most people who listen to the radio want to hear and then play it for them. It's that simple. If they weren't playing music that most people didn't want to hear, they wouldn't be making money or expanding. I have a hard time believing that there is a huge corporation on a mission to foist terrible music upon a helpless public. Then again, it's not like mainstream hip hop isn't shattering conventions every two weeks, challenging listeners all over the world, and making everyone get freaky at the same time. Oh wait, it is.
Anyway, I'm confused as to what the elitist Clear Channel haters seek to accomplish. Do they want to force everyone to share their taste in music? I'm almost positive they don't. Being a music snob myself, I know that nothing sours my affection for a band like widespread popularity and incessant radio play. Here's the deal though: Clear Channel doesn't matter. The internet, cheap recording technology, and lean indie labels are running circles around radio and old school music promotion. Did I mention that Broken Social Scene sold out the Black Cat having released its album in the United States only five months ago? (Broken Social Scene has yet to sign a traditional record distribution contract, the group leased the rights to their last LP, they'll regain complete rights when the lease is up) I know that I didn't mention that Postal Service, Death Cab for Cutie, The Shins, and The Wrens have sold out shows there, all of which are bands that get little to no Clear Channel radioplay. I guess I should also point out that independent record labels are gaining market share just as quickly as large labels are losing it. It seems that the Clear Channel juggernaut is barreling down the wrong highway, as it doesn't seem to be running over anything in the indie world.
While I kind of miss the old 99.1 FM WHFS that introduced me to "alternative" music back in 1991, I prefer today's pitchforkmedia, bleep.com, word of mouth, and easy file sharing to old fashioned radio. Thanks to the internet and other newfangled devices, I find myself drowning in music every day. There simply isn't enough time to listen to it all anymore, and interesting new bands are becoming epidemic as recording and distribution are cheaper than ever. A few weeks ago, some friends and I discovered a local band named Delegate that was able to record an brilliantly produced album without a major label budget. How? Because technology makes recording and publishing so much easier. Those advances in technology are fueled by trade and competition, or...er, capitalism.
So, Clear Channel hatas! Listen up! Clear Channel is not a threat to music. Keep pumping your allowances, student loans, and tips into the music you like. It's all you need to do to keep it going, so enjoy it. Terrible music will exist no matter what; get over it.
I think I agree with a lot of what you said. I know you've got no problems with the big corp. but I'm not sure that they're all harmless.
(I'm sorry to know that the earlier essay about Conner Oberst is vitally linked to this one when he also was a kindly deliverer of that requisite eff you to CC.)
I was over at the TV ON THE RADIO--thanks for the intro--website which links to a blog which seems to be run by them or their cohorts and found this interesting bit of text which basically adds nothing to your discussion of Clear Channel:
Friday, February 06, 2004
dear CLEARCHANNEL,
I am an independent promoter/polish bassplayer in the new york / new jersey / new moon-on-monday tristate area and i noticed that you were planning on booking jesus christ for his "second coming" tour.
i would like to offer a suggetion , if i may, to assist you in tapping into the youth/optimist/showersinger
demographic [which i have on 'lock-down"] ..if we can go to bed together on this concert series, i can not only GUARANTEE that no other promoters will eat for at least a year ... but we can also crush all the stupid "idealists" by showing them that there is absolutely NO POINT in even dreaming one more stupid independently promoted dream when we are in town... i suppose by now you are just dying to know what my grand scheme is... well ... have a seat and smoke a corporate joint and read on ... picture this .... "CRISTOPHER CROSS... KRISS KROSS... And KRIS KRISTOPHERSON on the "GET DOWN OFF THAT CROSS TOUR !" and the best part is ... we would only need to print one poster and then have jesus turn it into many .... same with the tickets , same with the beer... THINK OF THE MONEY WE COULD SAVE FOR OURSELVES ! I know what you are thinking... HOLY SHIT ! THIS KID IS BRILLIANT! WE SHOULD DO THIS WITHOUT HIM... but i warn you that if you cut me out of this ... i will kick you in ther fucking nuts ! so... send me a suitcase full of cash and lets get started!
sincerely, tenderpants.
# posted by david : 2/6/2004 03:08:13 PM
hahaha...those guys. (you have my permission to take out the swear werds if you want.)
Posted by: Dustin at April 2, 2004 02:20 AMYeah Dustin, this has everything to do with Conor Oberst...what a retard.
I suppose I only touched on the radio side of Clear Channel in this post, but I suppose I could say a few things about 'censorship' and concert promotion as well.
First of all: I don't know anything about the concert promotion industry. All I know is that new venues around DC are blooming everywhere. Baltimore's got more clubs, Arlington is booking decent bands, the Black Cat's back stage is housing more sold out shows. Alls I'm saying is that when it comes to the availability of independent music, on CD or in person, things are constantly improving. At least they are around here.
A lot of people have beef with Clear Channel's censoring behavior. Check out what I heard on the internet: "All televised media, and radio media in the United States is owned by fewer than ten people. These people are among the rarest of the global elite and show you what they think you need to see." Once again, a conspiracy theory involving the "rarest of the global elite." Meanwhile, I just heard about "the anthrax file that the government doesn't want you to see" on the TV news this morning. How'd that slip through the cracks, don't you think the conspirators would keep me from doubting the all powerful government that's trying to keep me down? Oh, it could just be a fake story to make me believe that the news is evenhanded. Still, I don't know why I should trust a random blogger instead of 'the news.' I can use news.google.com to check up on the world using thousands of different perspectives. I'm really not concerned about propaganda because I read everything skeptically anyway. My problem with people who claim that Clear Channel is spoon feeding their own agenda to the world is that these people assume that individuals are incapable of thinking critically or deciding what they want to believe. I don't know if most people are unable to think critically, but I don't think it's safe to assume so.
Back to work. I love TV on the Radio.
Posted by: Jed Sundwall at April 2, 2004 10:23 AMGreat post. My favorite recent example of this is the peer-to-peer software Acquisition's plea for donations, "Support people, not corporations." Bill Moyers used the publicly funded corporation, PBS, to rail against Clear Channel a few months ago. It was a popular whipping boy b/c of some of its DJs railed against the Dixie Chicks (whose overwhelmingly poplular tour was sponsored by - - Clear Channel, they are everywhere, even in politics!)
Anyhow, I am tired as well of attacking corporations who may not be perfect but do very well in making our society prosper and giving us employment as well as the needs and nicieties of life. Wal-Mart, and pharmaceutical companies also come to mind. Unbridled capitalism needs morailty to temper it but let's not start targeting success just for its own sake.
Posted by: David Sundwall at April 5, 2004 05:51 PMJust to beat the point into the ground, corporations - just like those "evil" special interest groups - represent a group of people. Disagree with them as you please, but hurting a company or a group actually affects individuals, destroys jobs, and collective voice is lost, etc.
Posted by: David Sundwall at April 5, 2004 06:00 PMFirst of all I take offense to the implication that Godsmack isn't awesome.
Second I agree with a lot of your thoughts, especially your critique of the idea that the american public is too docile or uneducated to know what it wants; an elitist implication that I find runs under a lot of anti-elitist arguments.
One issue that I have with Clear Channel, which one could argue is also a problem I have with certain forms of capitalism, is the issue of homogenation. An unbridled market economy (which we definately do not have) is very much a majority rule organization; if the majority doesn't like it the market kills it. Although not inherently "bad", majority rule tends to bring about the conformity of the minority to the majority viewpoint. One could make the argument that this is good and helps contribute to the "melting pot" but I think there is some inherent value in difference, a value that is often lost when a true market economy operates.
Having said that I doubt that Clear Channel has as much affect on listening preferences as people assume. Although I bemoan the lack of local control, I still think people would clamor for the Eagles, Ted Nugent and Five for Fighting even without a big international conglomeration zipping it to their home and car stereos.
Posted by: Georgio at April 6, 2004 06:55 PMFirst of all: props to my bro for pointing out the real reason CC is a target: success.
Second of all, but not least of all: Yeah! Finally Georgio agrees with me on something. I share the homogenization concern, but I'm still not too concerned. Check out this snippet an excellent Harper's article about CC. It's the ruminations of CC's Denver VP:
"...he was a staunch believer in Giving the People What They Want. "This whole society," he said, "is based on majority rules." There is no such thing, he said, as "lowest common denominator"; there is only democracy, and in the music world Clear Channel is its biggest purveyor. The best thing about democracy, which he likened to a pizza, is that there is so much of it. "If I take one slice of the audience, and it's the biggest slice, and it's the 'lowest common denominator' slice, whatever you want to call it, guess what? There's lots of slices for the other guy." As evidence of this bounty, he gestured over his shoulder. At first I thought he wanted me to look at the view of the Rockies behind him, but it turned out he was thinking of the franchise-lined highways I'd driven to get there. "Who'd have thought there could be so many different fast-food restaurants as there are?""
The rest of the article can be found here: http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m1111/1843_307/111695432/p1/article.jhtml?term=
The fact is that CC has increased its formats and a greater variety of music is being broadcast...but I'll reiterate that the internet is the medium that will best allow everyone to best tailor their listening diets.
Oh, and Georgio's email address is messed up for some reason. If you're interested in contacting him you can reach him at: jerome_j@nambla.org
Posted by: Jed at April 7, 2004 01:08 AM