Even Paid Speech Isn't Free

This post is not about me, or complaining about what happened to me. I'm doing fine. This post is just another snapshot of life in this nutty country.

You may have noticed the ad here in the HuffPo for my new record of songs about Bush administration members. The title is "Songs of the Bushmen," the cover art is a smiling GW with a bone through his nose (this exposition is necessary for the story to come). Neither HuffPo nor TVNewser, a blog covering, what else, TV news, had a problem with the ad.

But we also bought some ads on digital billboards, the kind that change messages every few seconds, in Chicago, and on digital screens in coffee shops and other retail establishments in LA and SF. The goal was to make that cover image kind of ubiquitous, as ubiquitous as it could be on a small marketing budget. The billboards were owned by Clear Channel, the good people behind Rush Limbaugh and other forms of bad radio, and those folks were ultra-eager to take our money and suggest that we spend more with them in other cities -- until they saw the artwork. At which point, the tone changed from oleaginously friendly salesman to angry schoolmarm -- the art was "not acceptable," a curt email informed us. There was no explanation for the grounds of unacceptability -- wrong kind of bone? -- just the loud sound of the only provider of digital billboards in Chicago slamming the door.

Meanwhile, out west, this hip little startup in San Francisco, DaNoo, was equally happy to sell us space on their digital screens. They were happy with the first week, in which just the art appeared, with no explanation. They even wanted to use our campaign as some sort of success story for their outfit. But suddenly, when the name of the record (and my name) appeared on the art, they pulled the plug. Their "venues" -- i.e., store owners -- had said some patrons had complained.

Let's review: GW Bush has an approval rating lower than Richard Nixon on his worst day in office. If a normal risk-averse corporation looked at those numbers, it would intuit that now, if ever, would be an okay time to let such ads be shown. And, yes, Clear Channel can easily qualify as, in Donald Rumsfeld's felicitous phrase, "dead-enders." But this hip little company, with digital screens in hip little places in hip little SF and LA?

Maybe this is just another application of what I'm pleased to call Shearer's Law -- the more people you seek to talk to, the less you can say to them.

To read more about this on HuffPost, Click here.

Comments

[Waltb31]

Clear Channel owns most of the production companies that allow for live music concerts around the country. The major and not so major artists know this; if they want "too much money" or offend Clear Channel in any way, not only will they not be allowed on tour (or with great difficulty; most major and minor concert venues have agreements with Clear Channel), but their airplay will diminish massively.
Clear Channel, in addition to being corrupt morally, is an oppressive monopoly on the airwaves and the concert scene.

[MTiffany]

Clear Channel has a double standard regarding character assassination, defamation and out and out libel of the left by the right and satire and mockery and telling the truth about the right by the left. Shocking!

[/sarcasm off]

Folks, come on! You were expecting, what? A fair shake from Clear Channel. Clear Channel's one of the biggest beneficiaries of Bushco's "management" of the United States.

[Zentomato]

Do any of us think that the amount of hatred and negative speech and character assassinations that the right wing pols have generated over the past few years could ever possibly been countered or generated by the left? Take this thought in and let it simmer...reflect on it. And ask "Where lies the hate?"

[zizyphus]

There is plenty of hate on both sides. Hate is easy. Satire and biting humor are harder to do, and good humor, and creativity, is a bastion of the left. There is nothing creative and fresh coming from the right wing, when they try it is just a feeble, pathetic attempt, without effect, like that Faux show, "Red Eye", or Dennis Miller.

[saibotchilizm]

Clear Channel owns most of the radio spectrum. Monopolistic corporations like them control our TV and radio media, leading to a huge decline in any amount of good news coverage, from the local to the international.

There is a large service worker's strike going on in California right now-- participants at every University of California campus. Here in Santa Cruz, there isn't even a brief mention on any of the 3 "local" news stations. Even though the picketers at UC Santa Cruz deserve the news.

http://www.saibotchilizm.org

[3dtrix]

Clear Channel "owns" no tiny fraction of radio or digital bandwidth - its ownership (both conceptually and legally) resides in We The People - like the air we breathe, or any other resource held in common - such as land or mineral rights. Politics determines the distribution of these resources and their attenndant benefits - when responsible stewards regulate their distribution, the commonwealth experiences broad-based prosperity; when they are hoarded by an elite, the few benefit at the expense of the many.

At which end of this continuum does our society presently reside? Any hands?

Hint - Does Clear Channel and its ilk benefit the few or the many?

[hansens2]

Clear Channel's ethics are corrupt---in Russia their sidewalk billboards hawk tobacco everywhere---this in a nation dying of tobacco and vodka--the highest death rates. Now that is real obscenity!!

[Redrover666]

In what way are their "ethics corrupt"?

[milo9]

Good point Red! Clear Channel has no ethics.

[Annette]

Not so much corrupt as non existant

[shockmagog]

I'd say their ethics are more rightward leaning than corrupt (although to many of us, those two terms have become synonymous). Clear Channel knows that Republicans tend to favor telecom deregulation (their FCC appointments have shown this to be true, for instance), and this serves the media conglomerate all too well in its efforts to become a true radio monopoly. In this instance, political bias need not trump bottom line pragmatism.

Clear Channel's conservative bias is undeniable to all but the most dissilusioned among us. Not only for the evidence of their nutured and promoted right wing radio personalities, but their Glenn Beck-led 2003 Iraq invasion run-up "Patriotic Rallies" (read: if your not in support of Clear Channel's Patriotic Rallies, then...). If that isn't enough empirical data to support my conclusion that Clear Channel is pro B*sh and pro-Republican, then you may have to recalibrate your fairness and accuracy meter.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/mar/26/usa.iraq

Or simply google "Clear Channel pro-war rallies."

[AzRealProgressive]

The Russians love their vodka and tobacco. You may think that is obscene but in Russia, no problem.

You need to accept some cultural diversity.

[YuryGetsin]

Everyone loves alcohol and tobacco, not just Russians. The problem with billboards is that young kids see them.

[3dtrix]

You have no standing to instruct anyone what they need to accept.

[backhandpath]

Harry,
What with all this going on...
thank you for still finding the time to Stand With the people of New Orleans for Safe Levees!
Indeed, tomorrow (Friday/18th) you will stand right on top of the new levee at the Industrial Canal Breach Repair in New Orleans with Levees.org.
Takes guts to trust Any of the Exquixotic Corps' levees--(even enough to stand on them!:)
My hat is off to you. Thank you for all the work you have done for our levees in New Orleans and particularly your support of levees.org!
Yea Harrry! You Editillero!

Thank you again,
Editilla~New Orleans News Ladder

[AzRealProgressive]

You are right about the levees. They only lasted over a hundred years. Pretty poor design.

[Wilburrr]

....maybe they should have been better maintained....???

[DasBoot]

Not funny. Levees need constant improvement, otherwise they don't last a decade. That wasn't done. Bush's fault, case closed.

[111]

The Army Corp of Engineers released its own report, six thousand pages long, admitting,
“The hurricane protection system in New Orleans and southeast Louisiana was a system in name only.”

but you know better than the Army Corp of Engineers?

BTW - the levees were built in the 1960s, were never maintained and never updated as new information and technology became available.

Would you like some toilet paper for that stuff coming out of your mouth?

[OmegaZ]

Remind me to send you my latest track: "Fascism Comes to the United States"

[Canaris]

What do you expect from a company that banned the Dixie Chicks from all their stations after the Chicks excercised their free speech rights, and sent out a list of banned songs after 9/11 as well (I know they denied it, but they did it, as did Cumulus, who I was working for at the time). That ban probably cost Saliva a hit with their song "Click Click Boom", and the ban on the Dixie Chicks certainly harmed their career.

The bottom line is, support the government, get favorable decisions form the FCC, allowing you to buy even more radio stations, allowing you to make even more money, never mind that it cost jobs and turns the public airwaves into nothing more than a mouthpiece for a few corporate CEO's.

Clear Channel is, for all intents and purposes, a monopoly. Make no mistake, though, the deregulation of broadcasting that made Clear Channel possible was signed into law by Bill Clinton, so we can't blame that one on Republicans.

This is coming from a 20 year radio broadcaster, and current radio programmer, who thankfully, does NOT work for Clear Channel (there are less of us that can say that every day).

[Rantman]

China, Clear Channel - I will try not spend any of my dollars with either one of them. Oops! China owns all our mortgages, and Clear Channel owns all the airwaves. That's OK I don't have any dollars to spend on either one now anyway.

[AzRealProgressive]

I agree, I try not to spend money for China. Major reason why I do not shop WalMart.

[Wilburrr]

but but but.... Wal Mart stuff is all made in the USA! Remember their ads? I guess that didn't last too long...

[3fingerbrown]

As I was reading Harry's post, I was reminded of how mercilessly Lincoln was depicted in the pop culture of his day. The bone-in-the-nose art is a love letter compared to what old Abe had to endure.

A brief but good essay on the subject: http://www.historynet.com/abraham-lincoln-takes-the-heat.htm

[doug108]

Maybe this is just another application of what I'm pleased to call Shearer's Law -- the more people you seek to talk to, the less you can say to them.

Nice law. Seems like it fits the current uproar over the New Yorker cover, too.

[Wilburrr]

I agree. It's a corallary to "The bigger market share your word processor has, the fewer alternative file formats it reads/opens."

[johnwinner]

America is a fascist state and Clear Channel part of its corporate elite -what were you expecting?

[WoodyGMJones]

America is a corporatocracy (a more cumbersome term for a plutocracy). It doesn't need to be Fascist; its elite - that is, the corporations and their shareholders - have a stranglehold on this nation's government via the money they pour into the coffers of the whores in Congress who then do their bidding when favorable legislation is needed. Doesn't anyone pay attention to what's been going on for the last two decades? Do you think that the current housing meltdown had nothing to do with ex-congresspeople? Does the name Phil Grahamm mean anything? Do you think NAFTA was just another attempt at softening the effects of globalization?
Good grief, we're in thrall to the military/industrial complex Eisenhower warned us about, and Bushco and the neocons are running the show and have been since Reagan's presidency.

[philinmedford]

I'm glad someone else is seeing it. Of course you have to be old enough to actually recognize that things have changed.

The only thing I'd question in your assessment is: I think 4 decades is more like it.

[PhantomAviator]

..

TWO decades?

Right. Try 220 years.

.

[AzRealProgressive]

Fascist state, really? I wasn't aware of that. Fascist states have a bill of rights for every citizen? And I thought fascist states owned all of the media, and you only heard whay they wanted you to hear. State propaganda is the only voice. unless this media is owned by Bush&co it appears otherwise,

A fascist state has absolute gun control and registration. We are not there yet. Fascist states have internal secret police and no citizen has legal rights unless the state grants them.

Another part of the fascist state is that they are under the absolute rule of one party with no opposition, Fascists do not tolerate criticism of their party and their company line.

[razajac]

Well, you know, it's the old figurative fascism meme; old as...well, I guess post-War.

But even if johnwinner is engaging in a speck of word abuse, there's a pretty big log in the eye of American social and political awareness. Part of that is a longstanding and ongoing degradation of our media.

But that's really just part of the equation. Some (like Chomsky/Herman) put the emphasis there--and the argument's pretty compelling--but I think the locus of the real problem is elsewhere.

[FredBrighton]

I think you're confusing Nazi Germany with "fascist state" What the German fascists did was appropriate for that time and those people, but the essential qualities of fascism are explained by an essay by Mussolini. Google it, it reads like the RNC platform: big business working hand in hand with big government, emphasis on religion in schools, encouraging neighbor to spy on neighbor, and so on.

They don't need to ban guns when guns are keeping people on the streets scared, and frightened people look to a strong militant government to keep the streets safe. Frightened people don't object when their rights are taken away. According to our Leader Habeas Corpus is no longer a part of our national legal system, except at the whim of the Imperial President. It seems you have never heard of Homeland Security. The internal secret police you mentioned.

Fascists don't need to control ALL the media. Don't be so naive and linear. They have to influence the culture by example and that changes the media and that controls the access to the news. Do you really give a rat's behind about the cover of the New Yorker? And yet all the media is worrying it like a rat terrier on a bone. They all feel they have to do it because the polls show we care. The Polls show what we think. The elections show who we want for President. Now go back to your cubicle and plug in your iPod.

[libertyanne]

We have a bill of rights NOW but it is slowly being eroded so the
average "low-information" voter doesn't notice. The GOP has so destroyed the middle
class in this country that nobody has time to decent against any of the damage being done to our constutuion. If we don't get on the stick this country will be a shell of its former self in a generation. There will be just enough "freedom" to make people think we still have rights but the boom will be lowered on anyone with ANY chance of reversing the ravages being imposed on us.
Jingoism is destroying this country.

[TimeGhost]

Sounds like a good description of the Repugnants to me.

[americanwhocares]

Sir: I just purchased your entire album on i-tunes. I never listen to unClear Channel radio, just like I never watch Fixed Noise and their unfair and unbalanced news reports and reporters. January 20, 2009 cannot come too soon.

[Redrover666]

So what do you suppose will happen then?
Just curious.

[wvinvent]

Fox News will become the "Obama Exposé Channel".

Every tiny mistake bit of dirt, real or imagined, will be the subject of hourly "Breaking News." There will be every louder screeching from Billy K., Karl R. and the other dead-end minions as they try to turn Obama into a 1-term President. This will start even before he is inaugurated. Stories will be made up (you think the Madrassa or "Terrorist Fist Bump" stories were bad...). Every losing Republican NeoCON will become a Fox "Commentator". Much fun will be had by all (Neorepublicons).

[rfshunt]

What we know for sure is that on Jan 20, 2009 the arguably worst administration in the history of the United States will have mercifully come to an end.

What's your prediction?

[darthmaul]

Clear Channel's equation is: support for the administration = more decisions that favor it's monopoly status. It's just business. Cooperating with the government means big perks. Telecoms that break the law and hand over data are rewarded, while those that follow the law are punished. It's a brave new world!

[Redrover666]

Clear channel has the right to support whomever they chose, not support whom they chose and decide what they think is crap or not. They operate in a free country. I'm sure NPR would be happy to accommodate Shearer.

[jefegeoffe]

Wow! You not only fail to read between the lines, you apparently skipped over the headline as well! The point is that this is no longer a free country, but rather one in which only money has a say, and the more money, the more say. The concentration of media markets in too-few hands effectively muzzles free speech, which suits the government's (whether Dem or Rep) wish to do its business in secrecy all too well. The Fourth Estate is one of the pillars of a free America, and is in decline on all fronts.

[nancytheragingliberal]

Clear Channel is the great Satan.