Fuck you Telecommunications Act of 1996! Before you came about, we had the 7-7-7 rule! Now Clear Channel EXISTS. Fuck. You.
I have no idea what these words mean, but I would every much like to find out. Could you perhaps tell me more?
Clear channel bought out many good local radio stations across the country to make a computer be its DJs and stripping out all of the local content to make it a bland boring option.
"Psy arrived Korea early this morning after 15hour flight, he did huge press conference in the afternoon, and he goes to 2 different university festivals and performs more than 5 songs each. And he performs it like it's his last concert of life with enormous passion as always. True professional."
Fuck you Telecommunications Act of 1996! Before you came about, we had the 7-7-7 rule! Now Clear Channel EXISTS. Fuck. You.
I have no idea what these words mean, but I would every much like to find out. Could you perhaps tell me more?
Here's a 60 second lesson on broadcast history: Prior to the Telco act of '96, the broadcast industry was more regulated. One of those regulations was that no one can own more than seven television stations, seven AM stations, and seven FM stations. What this meant was that there were lots of small, local stations.
Through the '70s and '80s, there was lots of push from all directions, not just big business, to get rid of the 7/7/7 rule. The FCC thought it might not be a bad idea either saying that "it hoped that lifting the regulation would diversify the industry by allowing formation of regional networks" and that "antitrust provisions of the Justice Department would still prevent monopolistic concentration of station ownership".
So, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed, amending the Communications Act of 1934, destroying the 7/7/7 rule, and largely deregulating the industry. However, rather than fostering a new paradigm of interconnected stations working together to serve larger local markets and the expansion of new networks to different markets, what actually happened was a concentration of media ownership with fewer broadcasters competing in regional markets and the elimination of many local, independent and alternative media outlets. This resulted in Clear Channel (as well as Disney, Viacom, Time Warner, and News Corp) becoming what they are today.
Fuck you Telecommunications Act of 1996! Before you came about, we had the 7-7-7 rule! Now Clear Channel EXISTS. Fuck. You.
I have no idea what these words mean, but I would every much like to find out. Could you perhaps tell me more?
Old anti-trust laws prevented a single company from owning more than seven TV stations, seven AM radio stations, or seven FM radio stations congruently. The idea was that the public does not benefit when information is channeled through fewer sources.
There was, at that time at least, an argument that TV and radio domination by mega-corporations allowed some (Ted Turner) to unfairly manipulate information (Rupert Murdoch) in a way that was harmful for the population. Congress decided to lessen restrictions in 1996.
I'm torn on whether the 7-7-7 rule was good or bad. On one hand, it can hardly be argued that it was a questionable restriction on the First Amendment. News groups fought some court battles to have 7-7-7 overturned, citing newspaper mergers as precedent. And the growing influence of the Internet in the late 90s bolstered the argument that information was still free of corporate control.
On the other hand, Clear Channel now owns pretty much the entire radio market and has driven it to shit.
The only problem I have with the 7-7-7 rule is that 7 is sort of an arbitrary number. Having 10-10-10 is probably not so bad. Neither is 11-11-11. Where is the line?
Really there should be no arbitrary set limit. What we do need is the DOJ to actually go all anti-trust. How come those guys went so hard after Microsoft back in the day, but aren't doing shit about the ISPs, both wired and wireless, or the media companies? The FTC specifically permitted NBC/Comcast! If you are aggressive in enforcing anti-trust, then you don't need an arbitrary number.
But I guess as stupid as an arbitrary number is, if that is what it takes to draw a line in the sand to make the government bust you up, then draw that line.
What we do need is the DOJ to actually go all anti-trust. How come those guys went so hard after Microsoft back in the day, but aren't doing shit about the ISPs, both wired and wireless, or the media companies?
Comments
This is how we do it~~!! from KOREA
YouTube commenter Jay Lee says:
"Psy arrived Korea early this morning after 15hour flight, he did huge press conference in the afternoon, and he goes to 2 different university festivals and performs more than 5 songs each.
And he performs it like it's his last concert of life with enormous passion as always.
True professional."
Prior to the Telco act of '96, the broadcast industry was more regulated. One of those regulations was that no one can own more than seven television stations, seven AM stations, and seven FM stations. What this meant was that there were lots of small, local stations.
Through the '70s and '80s, there was lots of push from all directions, not just big business, to get rid of the 7/7/7 rule. The FCC thought it might not be a bad idea either saying that "it hoped that lifting the regulation would diversify the industry by allowing formation of regional networks" and that "antitrust provisions of the Justice Department would still prevent monopolistic concentration of station ownership".
So, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed, amending the Communications Act of 1934, destroying the 7/7/7 rule, and largely deregulating the industry. However, rather than fostering a new paradigm of interconnected stations working together to serve larger local markets and the expansion of new networks to different markets, what actually happened was a concentration of media ownership with fewer broadcasters competing in regional markets and the elimination of many local, independent and alternative media outlets. This resulted in Clear Channel (as well as Disney, Viacom, Time Warner, and News Corp) becoming what they are today.
There was, at that time at least, an argument that TV and radio domination by mega-corporations allowed some (Ted Turner) to unfairly manipulate information (Rupert Murdoch) in a way that was harmful for the population. Congress decided to lessen restrictions in 1996.
I'm torn on whether the 7-7-7 rule was good or bad. On one hand, it can hardly be argued that it was a questionable restriction on the First Amendment. News groups fought some court battles to have 7-7-7 overturned, citing newspaper mergers as precedent. And the growing influence of the Internet in the late 90s bolstered the argument that information was still free of corporate control.
On the other hand, Clear Channel now owns pretty much the entire radio market and has driven it to shit.
Really there should be no arbitrary set limit. What we do need is the DOJ to actually go all anti-trust. How come those guys went so hard after Microsoft back in the day, but aren't doing shit about the ISPs, both wired and wireless, or the media companies? The FTC specifically permitted NBC/Comcast! If you are aggressive in enforcing anti-trust, then you don't need an arbitrary number.
But I guess as stupid as an arbitrary number is, if that is what it takes to draw a line in the sand to make the government bust you up, then draw that line.
That said, yeah pretty much.