Salon: Stern Fired for Criticizing Bush

[Jack_Dawson]

http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/03/04/stern/index_np.html

[Ksec]

1. I thought so too

Hes been saying this stuff for thirty years. All of a sudden he starts dissing bush and a week later hes fired. Pretty damn obvious.

[maxsolomon]

2. he's still on viacom!

clear channel DROPPED him.

that's their right. right?

[liberalhistorian]

3. Yeah, and it's OUR right to tell

Clear Channel exactly what we think of it by pulling the economic rug right out from under it. I don't think they have any idea of the shit that's going to be coming their way for this, Stern has his own "army" who will not hesitate to express their displeasure, to say the least, and who will wreak economic havoc on Clear Channel. And that's just fine with me, lol!

[TahitiNut]

4. Corporations don't have "rights" ....

... they have privileges and powers, but not 'rights.' They exist solely by public license (incorporation and business permits).

[Ksec]

5. wrong! Corporations are considered people in the eyes of law.

[Stephanie]

6. Isn't any of this actionable? Check it out:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/03/04/stern/index1.html

FCC chairman Michael Powell, appointed by the current president, has been pushing a strong pro-big-business, deregulation agenda, which makes Mays happy. But Texas investment banker Hicks may have an even closer relationship to Bush. Hicks, a major Bush donor, sits on the Clear Channel board. The two men helped make each other very wealthy during the 1990s. When Bush was governor of Texas he privatized the financial assets of the University of Texas, all $13 billion worth, rolled them into a single entity, and placed it under the control of Hicks, who, behind closed doors, doled out investment deals to longtime Bush family political contributors. In 1998, Hicks turned around and bought the Texas Rangers from a group of investors that included Bush; Bush pocketed $15 million off his initial investment of $605,000, most of which was borrowed.

During the 2000 campaign, Hicks announced on a conference call among Clear Channel's senior radio executives that the company was supporting Bush's presidential run, that everyone was encouraged to make donations, and that the legal department would be in contact with donors in order to maintain a proper roster. "Some people took out their checkbooks, but lots of people felt it was staged like a shakedown," Salon was told last year by one knowledgeable source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "To be fair, Hicks told everyone they were free to vote for whoever they wanted. But some senior people felt there was an implied pressure there, especially with the mention of the law department maintaining a roster of donors."

Clear Channel is also the corporate home of rabid Bush booster Rush Limbaugh, who spoke to company managers during a Clear Channel conference on the eve of the 2000 presidential election. According to one person who attended, Mays also addressed assembled executives, telling them a Bush administration would be good for the radio industry and good for America.

Just before the war, Clear Channel made news when its syndicated talk show host Glenn Beck began promoting "Rallies for America." Clear Channel insisted the events were put together at the local level and not sponsored by San Antonio headquarters. Yet at a time when antiwar rallies were dominating the news, Clear Channel played a key role in giving war supporters a voice by providing a turnkey service: staging the events, acquiring any necessary permits, taking care of security, assembling speakers, and of course relentlessly publicizing the events on Clear Channel radio stations.

[Jack_Dawson]

7. Nauseating

[Stephanie]

9. Seriously, there's so many quid pro quos there, and not ONE investigation?

Someone should be looking into that.

[CalebHayes]

8. I wrote about it in my blog...

http://anti-bush.blogspot.com

[JHB]

10. Stern is a tool...

...in more than his usual way :evilgrin:

Stern can be a tool for opening up peoples' eyes that it's not just market forces that determine who's on the radio and in the media. For 20 years now they've dismissed any complaint about conservative domination of talk radio as simply the free market at work.

The only counterexamples have tended to be people who weren't nationally known, or were up and coming, and there was just enough fudge room to leave some doubt. But Stern's too big and draws too much attention. And the timing makes it obvious he's being "Dixie Chick"ed.

It aint't just the market and never was. And now, it's obvious enough for a lot more people to "get it".