|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
 Posted - 02/17/2007 : 23:49:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
Joe:
The chairman of Cumulus does his job and protects his shareholders within the law by pulling the Chicks off the air because of the controversy. If his listeners get pissed off, his shareholders get pissed off. His job is to protect the shareholders.
Radio Radio
by Elvis Costello
I was tuning in the shine on the light night dial
Doing anything my radio advised
With every one of those late night stations
Playing songs bringing tears to my eyes
I was seriously thinking about hiding the receiver
When the switch broke 'cause it's old
They're saying things that I can hardly believe
They really think we're getting out of control
(CHORUS) Radio is a sound salvation
Radio is cleaning up the nation
They say you better listen to the voice of reason
But they don't give you any choice 'cause they think that it's treason
So you had better do as you are told
You better listen to the radio
I wanna bite the hand that feeds me
I wanna bite that hand so badly
I want to make them wish they'd never seen me
Some of my friends sit around every evening
And they worry about the times ahead
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference
And the promise of an early bed
You either shut up or get cut up, they don't wanna hear about it
It's only inches on the reel-to-reel
And the radio is in the hands of such a lot of fools
Tryin' to anaesthetise the way that you feel
(REPEAT CHORUS)
Wonderful radio
Marvelous radio
Wonderful radio
Radio, radio
Man, I haven't heard much of him since the early 90's.
Peace
Joe |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 02/17/2007 : 23:59:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Joe:
Man, I haven't heard much of him since the early 90's.
http://www.elviscostello.com/
That's one of the thing wrong with radio. He has been very active. You just have to know where to look. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 00:08:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
...
You left out a bit of your version, where free speach is only allowed if you agree with it. I guess you blame all the Seattle protestors, not just the few idiots? It's amazing how you read shit into stuff that isn't there, because you don't actually have an answer.
And you never read the thing, just saw something you disagreed with and started spewing a bunch of bullshit.
Did you entirely miss the point on them bitching at Cumulus for exercising the power given to them without actually doing something about the power they have given them? You see them bitching at them and say "Ya-hoo", but what did it accomplish? Has anything changed? Have large corporations divested themselves out of market share? Has Congress bit one of the hands that feed them? Hell no, business as usual.
If I didn't think Congress reacted poorly, I never probably even posted to this. I am pretty much with Cune.... They can win 18. Cruise can win an Oscar, Liza a Tony... Life goes on....
Joe
Oh come now, Joe. How is objecting to a media monopoly and death threats over a minor dissing of Bush equal to, "free speach is only allowed if [I] agree with it"?
I don't know, you were projecting your bullshit because I didn't say "Death threats are bad". I figured I return the favor. You didn't say "Everyones opinion is important." I thought we were in assumption mode.
quote:
You lost me on the thing I didn't read and the Seattle protesters comments. What didn't I read? I'll be happy to see what I missed.
".....the Government crtitisizes him for doing his job within the confines of the law that the government gave them? On top of that, there are worse problems with larger companies deciding what is news and what is not news then Cumulus and the Dixie Chicks. Did they drop it because one of the mega-providers pointed it out? Were they scared that if they pushed on this little issue, Murdoch might stop giving money and start taking shots?
quote:
As far as the testimony in Congress, I watched the video of it on Democracy Now!'s news broadcast. I posted the transcript. Mr Dickey just bald face lied in that hearing. "We are a confederation of 270 individual stations." He could hardly keep a straight face. It was as blatant as all the tobacco execs testifying one after the other that nicotine wasn't addictive. If this was just a corporate business decision, one, Dickey claims they aren't a corporation, and two, why would he need to lie about it then?
Got me why, didn't see it. If he was sworn in, they should nail him for perjury. Why would he lie about it? Cumulus is big. I am not sure how big they were at the time of the testimony, but they are the second largest, trailing far behind Clear Channel.
quote:
As to nothing has been done, that is correct. But there is a large ground swell against media consolidation. More than a few of us recognize what a danger to free speech and democracy it is for media monopolies to continue and it will be worse if they grow. The oversight hearings are a start. The Take Back the Media movement is growing every day. You should look into joining. They promote low power FM stations controlled by people the broadcasts reach rather than absentee owners. And that includes red states as well as blue. The idea is local control, not right or left control.
I am not a big enough media person at this time. I listen to NPR usually on the way to and from work, and catch 24, ER, and My Name is Earl. Anything else is either DVD's, "THis Old House" type shows, Eugene Weber's history when I can. I really like DWTV. I get a hoot out of watching the show in German when they intervie an Englishmen. It's funny hearing them translate in German over the English......... Plus, it's just plain pretty good. Mass Media bites.......
Sadly, my days are numbered as my child gets older.....
quote:
How would you feel if the Moonies who own the WA Times and currently print out right fabrications, were to buy all of the East Coast papers? Would you want them to own one of these media monopolies? You know if you believe it's OK because you like the monopoly owners, you run the risk monopolies will be held by the other side one day.
About the same way I feel about GE owning NBC, and other arangements.
Peace
Joe
|
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 00:19:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by marfknox
OI wrote: quote:
They are entertainers and should know their main audience.
This is a half-truth. It is plainly clear from their music that the Dixie Chicks are not and never have been merely entertainers. They are also artists. And just so we are on the same page, I am using this definition of "art" from Wikipedia: quote:
Art is that which is made with the primary intention of stimulating the human senses as well as the human mind or spirit.
An artwork is normally assessed by means of the amount of stimulation it brings about. The impact it has on people, the amount of people that can relate, the degree of their appreciation, and the effect or influence it has or has had in the past, all accumulate to the 'degree of art'. Timeless masterpieces in art all possess these aspects to a great extent.
Something is not considered 'art' when it stimulates only the senses, or only the mind, or when it has a different primary purpose than doing so.
The fact that their music is entertaining does not mean that entertainment is the primary purpose, and thus, to call them "entertainers" in the context that you have (which implies that that is all they are as musicians) is to liken them to Britney Spears, whose music's primary purpose is pure entertainment. That is not a totally accurate or useful comparison.
Artists encounter this problem all the time, and usually not with so happy and successful outcomes. For example, visual artists will create a body of work that gets them a commercial gallery contract which results in high sales. Then they are pressured to keep creating similar work, and when their work changes, sales drop and the gallery dumps them.
Art is one of those things that doesn't fare well in a purely capitalist-based economy. This is why the arts and individual artists are publicly funded (most poorly in the United States as far as the first world goes.) Not that that is a perfect solution either because it sets up another type of institution which can also inhibit the honesty of artists. The only good solution really is a society which provides basic food, shelter, and health care for everyone, regardless of their socially-valued labor - a sort of gentile poverty for those who are disabled or otherwise do not or cannot produce or do something of market value.
I humbly (and sincerely) apologize to all artists for lumping them together with Brittany.....
Peace
Joe
|
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 00:20:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
quote:
Joe:
Man, I haven't heard much of him since the early 90's.
http://www.elviscostello.com/
That's one of the thing wrong with radio. He has been very active. You just have to know where to look.
I don'y listen to much radio. NPR on the way to and from work is mostly it.....
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 01:00:06 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
...
Please let me know how you guage popularity. ...
Joe
Sold out concerts in the red, country music states.
Check for yourself. The DCs were on a world tour when they made their infamous comment. They had already sold out the next venue in the South. A few measly protesters showed up outside, the concert fans completely drowned out any boos that Natalie Maines actually called on the crowd to go ahead with.
It's in the documentary. I saw the preview. |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 01:29:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
..I don't know, you were projecting your bullshit because I didn't say "Death threats are bad".
Bullshit! You didn't mention the death threats when you said the reactions to Mianes' comment were just free speech. I had specifically pointed the threats out. What other assumption is there except you think a shotgun free for all is just peachy keen if someone insults the President?
So here's your chance. Is it OK or not to include death threats in your free speech parade? Last time I read anything about death threats they were illegal under most circumstances.
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
".....the Government crtitisizes him for doing his job within the confines of the law that the government gave them? On top of that, there are worse problems with larger companies deciding what is news and what is not news then Cumulus and the Dixie Chicks. Did they drop it because one of the mega-providers pointed it out? Were they scared that if they pushed on this little issue, Murdoch might stop giving money and start taking shots?
The situation here is this is a government oversight hearing. The deregulation of media ownership is under review. Either these guys come to the government and claim, let us own monopolies, really, you'll see, nothing bad will come of it, it will be all business. Then it isn't all business. It's the corporate world not living up to their end of the bargain. Or, it's the Democrats calling BS on the deregulation the Republicans claimed would be just fine. It isn't just fine. It hampers free speech. Only actually, Clinton let some of this deregulation happen on his watch.
That is no reason we can't support the oversight committee, and a roll back of the deregulation of media restrictions on monopoly ownership.
Regarding "this guy was just acting legally"...? Why was he trying to cover up his control over the 270 stations then? Where in this questioning, if Dickey was just acting legally, did he need to pretend the top management didn't really have control over the stations? Your interpretation of events doesn't make any sense.
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
Got me why, didn't see it. If he was sworn in, they should nail him for perjury. Why would he lie about it? Cumulus is big. I am not sure how big they were at the time of the testimony, but they are the second largest, trailing far behind Clear Channel.
If he had nothing to hide, his testimony was incredulous. The only conclusion is he was uncomfortable because he knew monopoly censorship is one reason to regulate monopoly ownership of the media.
In the end, what do we have? You said tough luck the DC's were snubbed. I said it was more than that. Media consolidation increased with legislation in the last decade. I have a right to speak out against that and expect if enough of us speak out legislation will be enacted to re-regulate those monopolies and require they sell off holdings. It's been done before, it really needs to happen here.
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 01:34:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
I humbly (and sincerely) apologize to all artists for lumping them together with Brittany.....
Peace
Joe
Even though you didn't see fit to say this to me, I accept you apology anyway. Brittany may have had her 15 minutes of fame, but as true talent she falls short. You don't have to like the Dixie Chicks' music, (I happen to like it), but you cannot say they are not artists.
|
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 02/18/2007 01:34:53 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 01:37:42 [Permalink]
|
BTW, I suppose a bit of the reactions here are to my putting, "Haha" in the thread title. For those who missed it in the Grammy ceremony or in my post, Natalie Maines said, quoting the Simpson's, "Haha", when they accepted their second Grammy.
|
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 07:49:33 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
...
Please let me know how you guage popularity. ...
Joe
Sold out concerts in the red, country music states.
Check for yourself. The DCs were on a world tour when they made their infamous comment. They had already sold out the next venue in the South. A few measly protesters showed up outside, the concert fans completely drowned out any boos that Natalie Maines actually called on the crowd to go ahead with.
It's in the documentary. I saw the preview.
The ascertation made was that they are more popular now then before.
Currently, their ticket sales are flat, and shows are being cancelled.
Album sales are good for this album, ut will they be for the next? If what we have is popularity through activism, it will be urprising if any follow-up to this does as well.
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 08:40:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
..I don't know, you were projecting your bullshit because I didn't say "Death threats are bad".
Bullshit! You didn't mention the death threats when you said the reactions to Mianes' comment were just free speech. I had specifically pointed the threats out. What other assumption is there except you think a shotgun free for all is just peachy keen if someone insults the President?
So here's your chance. Is it OK or not to include death threats in your free speech parade? Last time I read anything about death threats they were illegal under most circumstances.
Yes bullshit. But here you go... "Death threats are bad". Now please kindly post that everyone elses opinion is important, even if it dosen't fit into your paradigm.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
".....the Government crtitisizes him for doing his job within the confines of the law that the government gave them? On top of that, there are worse problems with larger companies deciding what is news and what is not news then Cumulus and the Dixie Chicks. Did they drop it because one of the mega-providers pointed it out? Were they scared that if they pushed on this little issue, Murdoch might stop giving money and start taking shots?
The situation here is this is a government oversight hearing. The deregulation of media ownership is under review. Either these guys come to the government and claim, let us own monopolies, really, you'll see, nothing bad will come of it, it will be all business. Then it isn't all business. It's the corporate world not living up to their end of the bargain. Or, it's the Democrats calling BS on the deregulation the Republicans claimed would be just fine. It isn't just fine. It hampers free speech. Only actually, Clinton let some of this deregulation happen on his watch.
That is no reason we can't support the oversight committee, and a roll back of the deregulation of media restrictions on monopoly ownership.
Actually it is silly twits in government all the way around, and has bit us all in the foot. They don't have the stomach to take them on. Imagine pissing off Clear Channel, and having 1,200 radio stations ripping into you when you want to get elected. Imagine pissing off GE, and having NBC giving you the shaft in every market.
The Democrats and some Republicans will cry "Bullshit", but I will be more the surprised if any of them actually take it on seriously. Please don't tell me you think they were being nieve in this.
quote:
Regarding "this guy was just acting legally"...? Why was he trying to cover up his control over the 270 stations then? Where in this questioning, if Dickey was just acting legally, did he need to pretend the top management didn't really have control over the stations? Your interpretation of events doesn't make any sense.
For interpretation... It makes perfect sense. He controls a large corporation with shareholders. His job is to protect the market value of his corporation. He did the smart thing in this regards. Nothing illegal about it. He could say "You will play nothing but the Star Spangled Banned 24/7 if he wanted. He could also tell them the format is nothing but reading from The Communist Manifesto. Neither will do him any good, and will only end up in his firing, especailly the COmmunist Manifessto, which would garner them death threats in that area they are.(The above statement was in no way a threat of future death threats, or should in any way be construed or interpreted as to think the author condones death threats.)
Unless the BOard has given him specific direction, it is up to him to protect the shareholders and follow the law. I skimmed through the 300 page+ Telecommunication Act of 1996. If you have law to cite where what he did (his action at the time, not the possible perjury) was illegal, please share.
The focus shouldn't be on this guy, or the Dixie Chicks, but on the act itself.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
Got me why, didn't see it. If he was sworn in, they should nail him for perjury. Why would he lie about it? Cumulus is big. I am not sure how big they were at the time of the testimony, but they are the second largest, trailing far behind Clear Channel.
If he had nothing to hide, his testimony was incredulous. The only conclusion is he was uncomfortable because he knew monopoly censorship is one reason to regulate monopoly ownership of the media.
In the end, what do we have? You said tough luck the DC's were snubbed. I said it was more than that. Media consolidation increased with legislation in the last decade. I have a right to speak out against that and expect if enough of us speak out legislation will be enacted to re-regulate those monopolies and require they sell off holdings. It's been done before, it really needs to happen here.
Yep, tough luck. Lesson number one for musicians, if you have a fan base, do not alienate them. Its a tough lesson. Free Speach dosen't mean there are not consequences.
There have got to be far better better cases to put forth. I remmeber something with NBC and GE, as well as Disney and the network they own. Maybe I am wrong, and everyone else is acting decently, but I doubt it. If the Dixie Chicks are the focus, it is going to be a losing battle.
You have the right to speak out, and are always encouraged to do so. However, your arguement should not against Cumulus and their CEO, but a general indictment of the process.
Peace
Joe |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 08:46:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
I humbly (and sincerely) apologize to all artists for lumping them together with Brittany.....
Peace
Joe
Even though you didn't see fit to say this to me, I accept you apology anyway. Brittany may have had her 15 minutes of fame, but as true talent she falls short. You don't have to like the Dixie Chicks' music, (I happen to like it), but you cannot say they are not artists.
Where did you say anything remotely close to what marf posted?
Peace
Joe
Edited to remove some snot. |
| Edited by - Original_Intent on 02/18/2007 08:49:40 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 11:16:04 [Permalink]
|
Okay, here is the deal as I see it.
Too many media outlets are owned and operated by too few people. This is a glaring problem with radio. The law needs to be changed with regard to monopolies on the airwaves. There should be a limited number of stations any one entity can own, or there should be laws limiting corporate interference on stations that serve different markets and localities. If this affects profitability, they can sell off the stations that are not performing up to corporate snuff. There are plenty of people at the local level who would love to step in and buy those stations.
Capitalism is fine right up to the point that it stifles free speech and creative play-lists. One size does not fit all. Regulations that were relaxed starting with the Reagan administration need to be put back into place. Anyone who listens to commercial radio knows how much better it was before the regulations were lifted on ownership. Radio pretty much sucks now. The only good stations are either public stations or those that are broadcast from universities and collages.
Arguing about the Dixie Chicks popularity is irrelevant. Frankly, I think what they did and the reaction to what they did has made them a more thoughtful group as evidenced by the writing on their latest album. It is impressively mature and much more personal. I wouldn't fear for their future. Like them or not, it is their talent that will carry the day for them. If they start making albums that suck, their sales will suffer. If not, they will have their fans. If they only care about how big their fan base is, again, the quality will suffer. The ball is in their court.
John Lennon once said that the [Beatles] were bigger than Jesus. Even though the statement was widely misconstrued, there were wide spread album burnings and protests. Some stations wouldn't play them. That was a blip on the screen for them. Nothing could stop The Beatles because they really were the greatest rock band ever. In the end, it was their talent that mattered the most…
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/18/2007 : 15:43:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Original_Intent
...
Where did you say anything remotely close to what marf posted?
Peace
Joe
Edited to remove some snot.
"Quote:Originally posted by marfknox" at the top of the quote in the post you made the statement in reply to.
And I repeat that the fan base wasn't alienated. And the claim the boycott on the radio stations was an economic decision is not supported by the economic facts nor is it supported by the concert attendance.
|
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 02/18/2007 15:46:12 |
|
|
|
Original_Intent
SFN Regular
USA
609 Posts |
Posted - 02/20/2007 : 05:48:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
Okay, here is the deal as I see it.
Too many media outlets are owned and operated by too few people. This is a glaring problem with radio. The law needs to be changed with regard to monopolies on the airwaves. There should be a limited number of stations any one entity can own, or there should be laws limiting corporate interference on stations that serve different markets and localities. If this affects profitability, they can sell off the stations that are not performing up to corporate snuff. There are plenty of people at the local level who would love to step in and buy those stations.
Capitalism is fine right up to the point that it stifles free speech and creative play-lists. One size does not fit all. Regulations that were relaxed during the Reagan administration need to be put back into place. Anyone who listens to commercial radio knows how much better it was before the regulations were lifted on ownership. Radio pretty much sucks now. The only good stations are either public stations or those that are broadcast from universities and collages.
Arguing about the Dixie Chicks popularity is irrelevant. Frankly, I think what they did and the reaction to what they did has made them a more thoughtful group as evidenced by the writing on their latest album. It is impressively mature and much more personal. I wouldn't fear for their future. Like them or not, it is their talent that will carry the day for them. If they start making albums that suck, their sales will suffer. If not, they will have their fans. If they only care about how big their fan base is, again, the quality will suffer. The ball is in their court.
John Lennon once said that the [Beatles] were bigger than Jesus. Even though the statement was widely misconstrued, there were wide spread album burnings and protests. Some stations wouldn't play them. That was a blip on the screen for them. Nothing could stop The Beatles because they really were the greatest rock band ever. In the end, it was their talent that mattered the most…
I agree that a small number of groups owning a large majority of the media is not the best way to disseminate information, but that problem is secondary to the laziness of the listeners/viewers/readers, and even that is secondary to the education of such matters by the parents.
It's all the ability to think on one's own, which unfortunately is not taught. If that was taught, then this entire thread would be whether the DIxie Chicks shot themseves in the foot.
Any kid who has learned about the "Discovery of America" or any other eurocentric history in school, and questioned it ges down one path or the other.... buy it or not..... If you can't trust your teacher and your school... who do you trust....
ALso, the regulations for the amount of ownership were lifted in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 CLinton Administration, although led by Republicans....
Peace
Joe
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
