Slashdot Mirror


FCC Settles Censorship Claims with ClearChannel

The Importance of writes "Earlier this week Slashdot debated whether the FCC should be abolished. One of the reasons many think the FCC should go away is because of censorship. Well, yesterday, the FCC settled all existing censorship investigations with Clear Channel for $1.75M and a promise to be better in the future, such as by firing DJs for their first offense. Clear Channel also plead guilty to violating indecency standards, but no one is saying what, exactly they said that was wrong. On the other hand, the FCC seems to have forgotten that they decided a couple of months ago to regulate profanity in addition to indecency. In other FCC news, they've posted the internet section of the FCC History Project."

25 of 357 comments (clear)

  1. thats nice, but by Spanyrd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    what about the fact that they own the entire market in some areas?

    --
    one of these days I'm gonna patent the technology that lets Jason Vorhees catch up to cars by moving at a slow walk.
    1. Re:thats nice, but by rusty0101 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Unless they own over half of the "media" in the area, including TV, Cable, and local Print media, the FCC does not consider them to have a fraction to be concerned about.

      This is one of the reasons US West (before merger with Qwest) had to drop interest in some of the Cable companies they had purchased when they had partner ownership with both Time Warner, and Disney. As a result some of the markets they were in included all of the media outlets.

      -Rusty

      --
      You never know...
  2. Shakedown by SIGALRM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Federal Communications Commission had already proposed almost $800,000 in fines against the radio giant ... but the settlement wipes the slate clean.

    So the payoff wasn't for actual fines, it was for the threat of fines to come.

    Sounds like a shake-down to me.

    --
    Sigs cause cancer.
    1. Re:Shakedown by slashd'oh · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, in the Reuters article, not all of the Commissioners were in agreement about this, since it lumped all the claims together into one settlement:

      "FCC Commissioner Michael Copps voted against the settlement, arguing it failed to examine all the complaints against the company and the incidents could not be considered when deciding whether to renew the company's radio licenses."

    2. Re:Shakedown by zoobaby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That was no shakedown. It was ClearChannel BUYING OFF the FCC. The FCC had already proposed $800,000 in fines and there were more complaints that would have lead to even more fines, most likely totalling more than $1.7 million. ClearChannel now has a clean slate and can probably get away with a few fine-able offences.

  3. But what about the BOOB by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 4, Funny

    Surely the dark foes upon Janet Jackson's chest lurk in the shadows to catch us unawares. Where, pray tell, are the myrmidons of the FCC, who so bravely took on the task of defending us from this satanic spectacle of mammary menace?

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  4. Hmm.. by 7Ghent · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't know whether to boo or cheer, given that both the FCC and Clear Channel are BOTH EVIL.

    1. Re:Hmm.. by gad_zuki! · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll take monopolists over theocratic moralists any day of the week.

      At least I can appeal to people's better judgement by saying that ClearChannel is anti-free market, but try talking reason to the crazy religious people who think a nipple is evil.

      Religion is simply not rational, its emotional. No offense, but thats a fact. If it was rational it could be proven and there would be no need for faith.

      We really need to get remove censorship powers from the FCC and let the network censors take care of the job. I mean, we have TV ratings now and everything. The FCC's role of "moral policeman" is antiquated and not needed, and now its just being abused for what looks like purely political purposes.

  5. FedSpeak 101 by Giant+Ape+Skeleton · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's interesting that the FCC distinguishes between obscenity and mere profanity.

    Kind of gives you insight into the bureaucratic mindset in general, especially as applied to subjective matters like decency....

    --
    The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.
    1. Re:FedSpeak 101 by Jameth · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Sorry but it isn't up to government bodies to decide what's best for us. We're quite capable of doing that ourselves."

      No, I'm fairly certain people have shown that they're just as incapable of doing that as the government is.

  6. Suspicion is all it takes by Grrr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From Powell's statement...

    In addition, those accused of violating the Commission's rules will be suspended and if ultimately found to violate our rules, will be terminated.
    !
    ... and Ernest Miller made a great catch, there:

    "That's great. Accusations lead to suspension. And, one foul-up and you're fired. How many people could handle a situation where one accidental word that is commonly used could get you suspended and/or fired? That's something to be proud of."

    Further down, same page, he also came up with the pithy "Apparently, self-censorship forced upon us by government is better than direct censorship."

    Now, if only we could find out exactly what CC admitted to doing wrong, why, we'd all have a better chance of not committing the same horrible acts ourselves.

    <grrr>

  7. Re:How long before... by WormholeFiend · · Score: 4, Insightful

    are there any children who listen to the radio anymore? (on purpose, as opposed to collaterally when having to ride in their parents' car, for example)

  8. Um, because by truthsearch · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...but no one is saying what, exactly they said that was wrong...

    Um, that's cause it's indecent and therefore censored... duh! ;)

  9. Violating indecency standards by paulproteus · · Score: 4, Funny

    I agree with the FCC's ruling today that Clear Channel Communications has long ignored the standard in indecency. Hopefully the FCC ruling with give Clear Channel the strength to be indecent in the future.

    (Or did the writer of the submission mean "decency standards"?)

    --
    |/usr/games/fortune
  10. This kind of stuff just pisses me off by Mz6 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    As a fan of Howard Stern's show from years ago I now live in an area where I cannot hear his show anymore unless I watch it on TV. Anyways, I now live in an area where we have another great morning show team "Todd and Tyler". Since the shake down from Clear Channel and the FCC they have had to lighten most of their content up. They still have found creative ways to bring the subject across to the listener in other ways, but sometimes I just wish they could say it.

    What I don't seem to get is why this is happening. I mean.. I know that some of it is not meant for kids, but PARENTS need to learn to turn those programs off in front of their kids. No one is forcing you, or your kids, to watch it.

    --
    Hmmm.
  11. We've gotta get over this. by slusich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These puritanical attitudes make us the laughing stock of the entire world. I can't see us being taken seriously until we stop acting like 12 year olds every time a breast pops out on TV, or some shock jock says something naughty.

  12. could anybody explain... by User+956 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Could someone explain to me why Howard Stern can say something, and it's "indecent", but if Oprah uses the same language, in the same setting, in the same way, it's magically *not* indecent?

    ...yeah, that's what I thought. Somehow the current administration seems to have forgotten about "equal protection under the law". Maybe it was that big Constitution-burning party they had right after stealing office.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:could anybody explain... by Rytr23 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I believe one of the FCC employees stated in print that they "could not fine Oprah, because she is so beloved, whereas Howard Stern is a lightning rod" or something very much to that effect. Kind of scary if you ask me...

      --
      So many injustices..so little time..
  13. Kissing butt in Texas by RobertB-DC · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here in Dallas, we've lost our last Hard Rock station, Clear Channel's 97.1 The Eagle. They turned it into Sunny 97.1, playing a fully automated mix of 70s and 80s. My 13-year-old daughter and all her friends were devastated, but I told her it's really pretty simple.

    It's George W's fault.

    Clear Channel vice-head-honcho Tom Hicks made Dubya a rich man indeed when he bought the Texas Rangers from Bush's ownership group. That freed up Bush to run for Governor, and the rest, as they say, is history (though he was a decent governor, as they go). Short story: Hicks and Bush are buds.

    Now, you have Janet Jackson's Right Breast suddenly stirring up the bible-thumpers (the ones that give us Christians a bad image). Fired up, they went after an easy target -- the shock jocks that Clear Channel and others put on the air to cover up the fact that their corporate music sucks.

    Bush calls Hicks with a proposal: act like they're sorry, pay a little fine, shut down some jocks and stations, so that the bible thumpers will feel like they've won. Bush gets his base energized, and Hicks gets buddy Bush re-elected.

    And for the icing on the cake, Clear Channel turns off the last rock station in conservative Dallas.

    They'd been letting it rot in the ratings for years (details here), so they had an excuse. So maybe my tinfoil hat is on too tight. But if they'd supported the music, KEGL would have *had* ratings... and top 15 in the Dallas market still isn't anything to sneeze at.

    Bottom line: Republican politics killed Rock in Dallas. The Eagle joins Q102 and The Zoo in radio oblivion.

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    1. Re:Kissing butt in Texas by Mz6 · · Score: 4, Informative
      You can blame Bush all you want.. but Kerry feels the same way about it. Pulled from Drudgereport.com (Jun 4)

      "In an interview set for broadcast Sunday on C-SPAN, presidential hopeful John Kerry says he supports the current FCC crackdown on television indecency, but comes out against the greater scrutiny of pay cable channels like HBO and Showtime.

      "I think there is a distinction between public broadcast and the notions we've had historically about family time, family hour -- and what you buy privately and personally."

      "I am not in favor of government interference and censorship and restriction of what an individual privately can decide to do in their home, in their own space, so to speak," Kerry said, but he did seem to be OK with indecency regulation "where you have children involved, where you have a broader cross-section of the public, where there is sort of a sense of family time or hour."

      On media concentration:

      "I wasn't there for the vote, but I was 100% in favor of overturning this rule.

      "I think that too much media in the hands of one powerful entity or one individual is a mistake. I think it runs counter to the foundation of our country. I think it runs counter to the need for Americans to know what they are getting news and information from multiple sources that are not singularly controlled."

      On the Janet Jackson Super Bowl 'nipple' incident:

      "I thought that was in poor taste and wrong -- wrong venue, wrong timing, wrong place, wrong audience. So, there are some standards and pretty generally people should know what they are."

      Think what you will.

      --
      Hmmm.
  14. More insulting by sielwolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    was the Clear Channel CEO saying that all content, including pay cable and satelite radio, should be held to the same standard as public broadcast. His rationale: for the kids.

    *pfff* Sorry but there's a reason why there is "public" standards on "public" channels. This wasn't about any sort of moral or ethical standard. This guy was just pissy because all adults were voting with their $$$ and going off to adult-level content on HBO or XM radio that he, as bound by public broadcast, could never provide.

    So his whole thing is to level the playing field by screwing everybody else. What a nimrod.

    --
    What is music when you despise all sound?
  15. Uncensored, uncut... by cuzality · · Score: 5, Funny

    For those needing a reminder of this event, here is an ASCII pic: (*)(/) You'll always get the straight skinny on /.

    1. Re:Uncensored, uncut... by Obsequious · · Score: 5, Funny
      I dunno, man; that looks a bit too perky. What I saw looked more like this:
      | |(/)
      (.)
  16. Re:The FCC? by Rei · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I find it funny that of all companies, Clear Channel is fighting the FCC. This is the company that sent the memo telling its stations not to play anti-war songs after Sept. 11th, organized the pro-war rallies in the runup to the Iraq war, and whose owner, Tom Hicks, was involved in several of Bush's major scandals from his early life and is a big contributor.

    Specifically, Hicks first heavily funded both of Bush's gubernatorial campaigns. Then, Bush appointed Hicks chair of UTIMCO, which manages UT's financial money. Bush also got regulations so that Hicks wouldn't have to disclose where he was putting the University's money. It was later revealed that he had put 525 million dollars into assets owned by himself and major GOP donors (Carlyle Group, Maverick Capital, Bass Brothers Enterprises, etc). In 1998, he made Bush a multimillionaire by buying the Texas Rangers for far more than it was estimated to be valued at (and which Bush had been given twice as many shares as he put money in). Hicks resigned under pressure in 1999, but has been a huge donor still.

    I'm not surprised that they got a nice settlement from the FCC. Not surprised at all. I'm not even sure why the FCC bothered to start anything to begin with. 1.75 million dollars for a company the size of Clear Channel? Why didn't they just make them say "My Bad!" in public and call that enough?

    --
    "99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."
  17. Big Trouble by awhelan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Either way, my next door neighbors are in big touble. I use their wi-fi to get all my pr0n, so technically they've publicly broadcasted things far worse than the Howard Stern show.