Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
Why doesn't Clear Channel have the right to decide what programming it sends out over its stations? I liked Playmakers, but I'm not accusing ESPN of being part of some foul conspiracy for canceling it. Certainly it had more artistic merit than Stern.
agree if CC wants to cancel a show then thats their right
Clear Channel is in business to make money. It is family owned, so unlike an ESPN, the people making the decisions are eating their own cooking. If Stern remains so popular, they will suffer. Somehow I doubt that will be the case.
There has been a lot of anguish over censorship, etc. Even Rush Limbaugh voiced concern over Stern being canned. His point, which is a valid one, is nothing is there to stop Hillary Clinton's FCC from declaring conservative talk radio "hate speech" or "indecent" and banning it.
The other side of the argument is that the government has the right to control what goes out over the airways in the public interest. It doesn't take a genius to see that the government shouldn't allow raw sewage to be dumped into a public river. Ditto for the public airwaves.
like not allowing caskets or wounded returning from iraq to be seen
no thats not in the publics interest
but publishing saddams sons blown up bodies
raw sewage - lmao then you havent been swimming in a river lately - funny how the government is willing to jump all over the possibility to control the 'publics interests' but not the publics health
It's not like there is a shortage of indecent or pornographic material available these days. Why not at least attempt to keep the public airwaves somewhat decent? Who is hurt by that?
who is hurt by Sterns show being on the air? ive yet to see some scientific study showing a link between children becoming pornstars or having promiscuous sex because of the Stern show.