Our discussion board has been updated to a newer version. If you have a problem with viewing try clearing your browser's cache and refresh.

Clear Channel pushing for indecency regulations on satellite

In this forum you can discuss anything from sports, news, or what ever is on your mind.

Moderators: SMLCHNG, Saltx3

Post Reply
a1aara
Hoot!
Posts: 2778
Joined: April 27, 2004 1:04 pm
Number of Concerts: 75
Location: South of disorder

Clear Channel pushing for indecency regulations on satellite

Post by a1aara » July 12, 2005 10:36 pm

Mark Mays: Giving Clarity To Clear Channel
July 08, 2005
By Tamara Conniff



Mark Mays, president/CEO of Clear Channel Communications, is full of energy. He bounds into the Billboard Radio Monitor offices ready to talk about the spinoff of Clear Channel Entertainment, Jack radio, indecency legislation and a cause very close to his heart: City of Hope.



Earlier this year, Clear Channel Radio introduced a "Less Is More" campaign to reduce the commercial spotload. How is this strategy working?

As you look at radio, over the next five to 10 years, between satellite radio, iPods and cell phones, we're really competing for people's time. So what we have to do is make sure we're providing a compelling entertainment proposition for them. "Less Is More" is about creating a great environment. We're doing that today rather than waiting five years from now. We're trying to be pre-emptive in a lot of aspects.

Yes, it's a short-term revenue loss for us, but the listening environment is getting much better. When our stations sound better, people listen more. We're seeing it in our ratings.



As the audience increases, the price of ads and airtime goes up. Will you be able to make up the revenue you are losing?

Historically, advertisers have only bought 60-second advertisements. Well, we've gone to advertisers and said, "Listen, you can take your same advertising budget and get a better reach. You can reach more people if you use 30-second and 15-second advertisements. It can be just as effective, reach more people and get a better reach frequency at a lower cost."



Do you think 60-second ads are on their way out?

It has just been archaic. Radio has not changed in 25 years. Around the world, no one sells 60-second advertisements. It's a cultural challenge to change it. It is something we've been talking [about] and working on for a long time, but to actually get up and change it is a process.



Is it starting to happen?

Oh, yeah! Even the big national advertisers are starting to switch.



Do you see the iPod, satellite radio or podcasting as a competitive threat?

I don't think there is one particular competitor that's going to supplant radio. It's just going to be lots of different competition. Satellite radio is not going to replace radio in the near future . . . The great thing about radio is that it's local—it's focused on local content. Sirius and podcasting can't create local content. Podcasting is a great thing. Have you listened to any of these podcasts? It is painful.



What do you think of the Jack format?

Historically, the wide-variety formats that are big, brush off eventually.



Why is that?

At first you love the eclectic-ness of it, and you think, "Oh, wow, I haven't heard that song in a long time." However, then you think, "OK, now that I've heard it, I don't want to hear it for the fourth time."

We're trying Jack in different markets. I applaud the radio industry for doing things differently. I hope it sticks, because it'll be great.



Why is Clear Channel pushing for indecency regulations on satellite and cable?

We're pushing for a level playing field. If you're going to regulate us, you have to regulate them. If you're not going to regulate them, then don't regulate us.

It's not our course to determine indecency. We personally feel like people can regulate themselves. People can push the "off" button. Clearly, that's not what Congress thinks right now. If the theory is that we broadcast over the public spectrum, that's what satellite radio does too. You can't all of a sudden force all this content over to satellite radio.



Why are you spinning off Clear Channel Entertainment?

I feel like it's our job to create operating environments for people to grow their businesses as fast as they can. We're taking entertainment and putting it outside the Clear Channel umbrella. Underneath that umbrella we have regulatory hurdles. Taking it outside of that umbrella is an opportunity to grow; it allows [the entertainment operation] to get into businesses it wasn't in. It aligns the interest of management.



Is it a disappointment that the vision for all of Clear Channel's properties to work together and "synergize" didn't work? It sounds like the implementation of that was much more difficult than expected.

I think there is a lot of that in business. We think of it as getting the best of both worlds. By bringing entertainment into the organization, we've developed all these relationships. So all those synergies that did exist can now still exist.



When you bought the entertainment property, were you thinking at some point you would spin it off?

No. As soon as 9-11 happened, the world changed a lot. The live-entertainment business wasn't nearly as robust as it once was. As things change, you try to evolve your business. This realignment lets us evolve with the marketplace and with consumer preferences.



How do you feel about being honored by City of Hope?

City of Hope has been so involved in the music industry but never really brought in the radio and touring aspect of it. From our perspective, we kind of bring that to the table for them. So it's a great opportunity for them to expand their reach.

We're excited to be a part of it. Our goal is to raise money for them so they can do what they need to do—just go out there, get the cold hard cash and give it to them. These are people getting out there and solving diseases and actually curing them. It's fascinating. It's much harder than going out there and selling radio airtime. ••••



City of Hope annually honors an outstanding member of the music community with the Spirit of Life Award. This year, Mays will be feted during a star-studded gala Sept. 29 in Los Angeles. The event will raise funds for City of Hope's extensive research into the treatment of cancer, diabetes, HIV/AIDS and other diseases. Mays is ready to put his radio resources to work for the cause and plans to do spots and possibly a fund-raising drive.

User avatar
Emerson_Bigguns
I have found me a home
Posts: 132
Joined: February 21, 2005 7:55 pm
Number of Concerts: 0
Location: Seeking Gamehenge...

...

Post by Emerson_Bigguns » July 12, 2005 10:54 pm

Clear Channel is the devil incarnate.
"I know it seems like such a hard life, but there's goodtimes around the bend. The rollercoaster's gotta run to the bottom, before it climbs to the top again..." - Bill Nershi

User avatar
Elrod
Last Man Standing
Posts: 31235
Joined: September 24, 2001 8:00 pm
Number of Concerts: 36
Location: Castle Pines, CO

Post by Elrod » July 12, 2005 10:58 pm

I can't think of any entity that has done more to ruin radio than CC.

... and they haven't done much good for concert venues either.

ragtopW
Last Man Standing
Posts: 39102
Joined: December 18, 2001 7:00 pm
Number of Concerts: 0

Post by ragtopW » July 12, 2005 11:00 pm

Elrod wrote:I can't think of any entity that has done more to ruin radio than CC.

... and they haven't done much good for concert venues either.
If you can't compete just pay a Lawmaker or three :evil: :evil:

PHBeerman
Here We Are
Posts: 9377
Joined: October 5, 2002 4:39 am

Post by PHBeerman » July 13, 2005 8:34 am

Jahaar1a wrote:Blah Blah Blah Clear Channel sucks.
We know.

:roll: :roll:

Ilph
Inactive User
Posts: 10333
Joined: June 29, 2003 6:54 pm
Number of Concerts: 0
Location: Edwardsville, IL

Post by Ilph » July 13, 2005 10:24 am

God, I could write a term paper on how shitty CC is, but I'll save my time.

The bottom line with the decency issue is, that satellite radio is a pay medium where terrestial radio is in the public domain, thereby making it abide by decency laws. Sattelite is a subsctiption medium, so it shouldn't have to abide by decency laws. If this happens, it opens the doors for HBO, Cinemax, and all kinds of other subsciption mediums to be regulated too. We'll see how strong CC's political clout on this one is.

And did anyone else notice that he just singled out Sirius for decency in his interview and not XM? Interesting since they're working together now.

User avatar
aeroparrot
Last Man Standing
Posts: 72634
Joined: June 17, 2005 7:36 am
Number of Concerts: 42
Location: Just like living in Paradise
Contact:

Post by aeroparrot » July 13, 2005 10:28 am

CC is the Microsoft of the entertainment industry.
If you want an experience, go to a Jimmy Buffett concert.

Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it.

Life is short, live long!!

I'd rather be a wiseass than a dumbass.

Image

Jahfin
Inactive User
Posts: 8084
Joined: October 6, 2003 5:38 pm

Post by Jahfin » July 13, 2005 10:41 am

PHBeerman wrote:
Jahaar1a wrote:Blah Blah Blah Clear Channel sucks.
We know.

:roll: :roll:
As you can see by the other responses to this thread, I'm not the only one here that is anti-Clear Channel. It may be something you're unable to concieve of but there are way more people besides myself and a1aara that share the same thoughts on these issues, this very thread is evidence of that.

PHBeerman
Here We Are
Posts: 9377
Joined: October 5, 2002 4:39 am

Post by PHBeerman » July 13, 2005 10:46 am

Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahaar1a wrote:Blah Blah Blah Clear Channel sucks.
We know.

:roll: :roll:
As you can see by the other responses to this thread, I'm not the only one here that is anti-Clear Channel. It may be something you're unable to concieve of but there are way more people besides myself and a1aara that share the same thoughts on these issues, this very thread is evidence of that.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

You missed the point again didn't you Jah?

Jahfin
Inactive User
Posts: 8084
Joined: October 6, 2003 5:38 pm

Post by Jahfin » July 13, 2005 10:49 am

PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahaar1a wrote:Blah Blah Blah Clear Channel sucks.
We know.

:roll: :roll:
As you can see by the other responses to this thread, I'm not the only one here that is anti-Clear Channel. It may be something you're unable to concieve of but there are way more people besides myself and a1aara that share the same thoughts on these issues, this very thread is evidence of that.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

You missed the point again didn't you Jah?
I saw where you combined my screen name with a1aara's in attempt to suggest that apparently he and I are the only ones that share the same opinions. It was old the first time you (others) have done it but you've all beat that horse way into the ground by this point. Judging by that, you don't seem to understand that lots of others share that the same viewpoints and it's not a crime to do so.

User avatar
LIPH
Last Man Standing
Posts: 60072
Joined: April 24, 2001 8:00 pm
Number of Concerts: 0

Post by LIPH » July 13, 2005 10:52 am

Ilph wrote:And did anyone else notice that he just singled out Sirius for decency in his interview and not XM? Interesting since they're working together now.
He didn't.
Why is Clear Channel pushing for indecency regulations on satellite and cable?

We're pushing for a level playing field. If you're going to regulate us, you have to regulate them. If you're not going to regulate them, then don't regulate us.

It's not our course to determine indecency. We personally feel like people can regulate themselves. People can push the "off" button. Clearly, that's not what Congress thinks right now. If the theory is that we broadcast over the public spectrum, that's what satellite radio does too. You can't all of a sudden force all this content over to satellite radio.

PHBeerman
Here We Are
Posts: 9377
Joined: October 5, 2002 4:39 am

Post by PHBeerman » July 13, 2005 10:59 am

Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahaar1a wrote:Blah Blah Blah Clear Channel sucks.
We know.

:roll: :roll:
As you can see by the other responses to this thread, I'm not the only one here that is anti-Clear Channel. It may be something you're unable to concieve of but there are way more people besides myself and a1aara that share the same thoughts on these issues, this very thread is evidence of that.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

You missed the point again didn't you Jah?
I saw where you combined my screen name with a1aara's in attempt to suggest that apparently he and I are the only ones that share the same opinions. It was old the first time you (others) have done it but you've all beat that horse way into the ground by this point. Judging by that, you don't seem to understand that lots of others share that the same viewpoints and it's not a crime to do so.
*Switching to captain obvious mode*
I don't know if there is anyone here who doesn't agree that Clear Channel sucks......However, there are only 2 who feel the need to post every article they find to prove this already known fact.

User avatar
rednekkPH
Party at the End of the World
Posts: 8882
Joined: June 25, 2003 2:29 pm
Number of Concerts: 0
Location: 22 miles from the nearest traffic light
Contact:

Post by rednekkPH » July 13, 2005 11:03 am

Image
Image

Jahfin
Inactive User
Posts: 8084
Joined: October 6, 2003 5:38 pm

Post by Jahfin » July 13, 2005 11:13 am

PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahaar1a wrote:Blah Blah Blah Clear Channel sucks.
We know.

:roll: :roll:
As you can see by the other responses to this thread, I'm not the only one here that is anti-Clear Channel. It may be something you're unable to concieve of but there are way more people besides myself and a1aara that share the same thoughts on these issues, this very thread is evidence of that.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

You missed the point again didn't you Jah?
I saw where you combined my screen name with a1aara's in attempt to suggest that apparently he and I are the only ones that share the same opinions. It was old the first time you (others) have done it but you've all beat that horse way into the ground by this point. Judging by that, you don't seem to understand that lots of others share that the same viewpoints and it's not a crime to do so.
*Switching to captain obvious mode*
I don't know if there is anyone here who doesn't agree that Clear Channel sucks......However, there are only 2 who feel the need to post every article they find to prove this already known fact.
As I've already pointed out, you're (and others) merging of my and alaara's screen names doesn't just apply to posting articles about Clear Channel but to anytime we express an interest in the same bands so your comments carry no weight with me. Plus, what does it matter to you if we've both posted articles about Clear Channel? You obviously care enough to find your way to these posts so you can whine about them when you could just keep your trap shut but that's your choice. If you care that much why don't you tally up the number of posts each of us have made about Clear Channel. I bet neither amount to very much and I'm extremely doubtful either of the tallies comes close to the number of times you've gone out of your way to find the posts that supposedly bother you so much so you can cry about them some more.

PHBeerman
Here We Are
Posts: 9377
Joined: October 5, 2002 4:39 am

Post by PHBeerman » July 13, 2005 11:15 am

Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote: We know.

:roll: :roll:
As you can see by the other responses to this thread, I'm not the only one here that is anti-Clear Channel. It may be something you're unable to concieve of but there are way more people besides myself and a1aara that share the same thoughts on these issues, this very thread is evidence of that.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

You missed the point again didn't you Jah?
I saw where you combined my screen name with a1aara's in attempt to suggest that apparently he and I are the only ones that share the same opinions. It was old the first time you (others) have done it but you've all beat that horse way into the ground by this point. Judging by that, you don't seem to understand that lots of others share that the same viewpoints and it's not a crime to do so.
*Switching to captain obvious mode*
I don't know if there is anyone here who doesn't agree that Clear Channel sucks......However, there are only 2 who feel the need to post every article they find to prove this already known fact.
As I've already pointed out, you're (and others) merging of my and alaara's screen names doesn't just apply to posting articles about Clear Channel but to anytime we express an interest in the same bands so your comments carry no weight with me. Plus, what does it matter to you if we've both posted articles about Clear Channel? You obviously care enough to find your way to these posts so you can whine about them when you could just keep your trap shut but that's your choice. If you care that much why don't you tally up the number of posts each of us have made about Clear Channel. I bet neither amount to very much and I'm extremely doubtful either of the tallies comes close to the number of times you've gone out of your way to find the posts that supposedly bother you so much so you can cry about them some more.
It just gets easier everyday. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Jahfin
Inactive User
Posts: 8084
Joined: October 6, 2003 5:38 pm

Post by Jahfin » July 13, 2005 11:19 am

PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:
Jahfin wrote: As you can see by the other responses to this thread, I'm not the only one here that is anti-Clear Channel. It may be something you're unable to concieve of but there are way more people besides myself and a1aara that share the same thoughts on these issues, this very thread is evidence of that.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

You missed the point again didn't you Jah?
I saw where you combined my screen name with a1aara's in attempt to suggest that apparently he and I are the only ones that share the same opinions. It was old the first time you (others) have done it but you've all beat that horse way into the ground by this point. Judging by that, you don't seem to understand that lots of others share that the same viewpoints and it's not a crime to do so.
*Switching to captain obvious mode*
I don't know if there is anyone here who doesn't agree that Clear Channel sucks......However, there are only 2 who feel the need to post every article they find to prove this already known fact.
As I've already pointed out, you're (and others) merging of my and alaara's screen names doesn't just apply to posting articles about Clear Channel but to anytime we express an interest in the same bands so your comments carry no weight with me. Plus, what does it matter to you if we've both posted articles about Clear Channel? You obviously care enough to find your way to these posts so you can whine about them when you could just keep your trap shut but that's your choice. If you care that much why don't you tally up the number of posts each of us have made about Clear Channel. I bet neither amount to very much and I'm extremely doubtful either of the tallies comes close to the number of times you've gone out of your way to find the posts that supposedly bother you so much so you can cry about them some more.
It just gets easier everyday. :lol: :lol: :lol:
I see your self righteousness got in the way of you answering any of my questions.

User avatar
LIPH
Last Man Standing
Posts: 60072
Joined: April 24, 2001 8:00 pm
Number of Concerts: 0

Post by LIPH » July 13, 2005 11:20 am

Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:*Switching to captain obvious mode*
I don't know if there is anyone here who doesn't agree that Clear Channel sucks......However, there are only 2 who feel the need to post every article they find to prove this already known fact.
your comments carry no weight with me
Then why respond to them? :roll:
Last edited by LIPH on July 13, 2005 11:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

Parrot Monkey
I Love the Now!
Posts: 1849
Joined: September 6, 2003 5:12 pm
Number of Concerts: 0
Location: I'm livin' Floridays
Contact:

Post by Parrot Monkey » July 13, 2005 11:20 am

I agree with Jahfin. Also, how about the people who’ve lately have been deciding to antagonize me with the album art/reissue/remaster topic in threads that have nothing to do with it? I myself haven’t brought it up on my own in a long time, it’s all due to people saying something like “Oh, I sound like Parrot Monkey” or asking if Teddy Ruxpin (which really had nothing to do with the reissue topic) includes liner notes, in a thread I started no less. So many here say they hate when talk about it is brought up, but what’s so strange it it’s the same ones who decide to go and change the topics.

So many of you say you hate me bringing up the remaster topic but you do it yourselves when you decide to drop intimidation on me. Kind of hypocritical, eh?
:-?

Jahfin
Inactive User
Posts: 8084
Joined: October 6, 2003 5:38 pm

Post by Jahfin » July 13, 2005 11:22 am

LIPH wrote:
Jahfin wrote:
PHBeerman wrote:*Switching to captain obvious mode*
I don't know if there is anyone here who doesn't agree that Clear Channel sucks......However, there are only 2 who feel the need to post every article they find to prove this already known fact.
your comments carry no weight with me
Then why respond to them? :roll:
Just because his comments don't carry any weight with me doesn't mean I have no right to question them. I will continue to do so until this nonsense stops but I doubt that will happen because there's far too many of you around here that apparently get your rocks off indulging in such juvenile behavior.

User avatar
rednekkPH
Party at the End of the World
Posts: 8882
Joined: June 25, 2003 2:29 pm
Number of Concerts: 0
Location: 22 miles from the nearest traffic light
Contact:

Post by rednekkPH » July 13, 2005 11:23 am

Parrot Monkey wrote:So many of you say you hate me bringing up the remaster topic but you do it yourselves when you decide to drop intimidation on me. Kind of hypocritical, eh?
:-?
Intimidation??? Do you own a dictionary?
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 13 guests