Clear Channel Strikes Back (Antiwar DJ lawsuit update)

[wyethwire]

In response to the wrongful termination lawsuit filed by Roxanne Walker, an anonymous source at Clear Channel is telling the press "she does not have the right to express those beliefs on our airwaves."

Whose airwaves!?!?!?

[RedSox02]

1. Thanks for clearing that up Clear Channel

Now we know you do have an agenda. Which would be fine except you practically hold a monopoly on "our airwaves" as well.

[cjbuchanan]

2. How will McCain and his committee respond?

Maybe Clear Channel will be reminded that it is the people who own the airwaves.

[jagguy]

4. yes, sort of

but we take large sums of money as lease payments for their use. It then becomes their airwaves in that sense.

[Augspies]

6. No, We do not lease

broadcast licenses. The licenses are awarded (supposedly) with the understanding that the Licensee will serve the intrest of the Licensor (that is us). They do have to pay regulatory fee's to the FCC every year, but that is not the same as ownership. At no time does the FCC (that is us) relinquish ownership rights the the Licensee.

So, no it does not, never will, and never is "their airwaves" in any sense.

http://www.fcc.gov/fees/regfees.html

[Gman]

3. I hope Clear Channel goes bankrupt

at some point.

Doubtful, but a nice thought.

[LeftHander]

5. Who listens to Clear Channel anyway besides boneheads and freeps

I can't stand commercial radio. The music sux, the commercials are annoying. It BLOWS!

As more peope stop listening to it they will go broke.

[wyethwire]

7. Just one more reason to oppose media consolidation

We need to support efforts to roll back the FCC regs

[wyethwire]

8. Clear Channel's new motto

Free speech for me but not for thee