We interrupt this mind control for more mind control

May 31, 2005 10:35 AM

Clear Channel launches pirate radio station. Though the DJ braodcast his desire to see the defeat of corporate radio, WOXY, whose signal was bled into by this two-faced entity, discovered that the IP for the station's domain pointed to Clear Channel Communications.

Clear Channel even went so far as to ask for donations.
posted by Pinwheel (40 comments total)

CC is just following the old adage "if you can't beat them, do whatever you can to f*ck them over".
posted by clevershark at 10:47 AM on May 31, 2005

so CC owns a domain. bfd. basically has zip to do with anything heard on the air. causing "signal bled into" is highly illegal and not likely something a corporate entity would have risked. how is it that an unidentified voice on a pirate broadcast has anything whatsoever to do with a website? i think this is all shit, promulgated by morons. (this makes you a moron.)
posted by quonsar at 10:48 AM on May 31, 2005

Can somebody explain this to me in English?

k thx.
posted by grouse at 10:54 AM on May 31, 2005

WOXY is internet only now. If an Akron station can bleed into an internet-only station located a few hours away in Oxford, then I'm impressed. You need to get the facts straight, Pinwheel. More info here.

Ahh, how I miss the days of listening to 97x. The only bright spot in my misbegotten backwoods youth.
posted by sciurus at 11:14 AM on May 31, 2005

quonsar: "signal bled into" is highly illegal and not likely something a corporate entity would have risked

Uhm unless they're "blending" on their own frequencies.. which isn't illegal I guess ? Where's the wrongdoing and are they going to sue themselves ?

That makes you a moron..... calling others morons for the very same reason Clear Channel is probably doing the fake pirate station : attracting other morons attention and outraged pirates attention as well.

Welcome to the club, you're 0WN3D
posted by elpapacito at 11:19 AM on May 31, 2005

Actually it *is* pretty weird, or at least poignant in a weird, captialism-eating-itself kinda way. As near as I can tell, from here and boingboing, Clear Channel set up a "pirate" radio station attacking existing Clear Channel stations - both with invective and apparently by actually bleeding onto their frequencies. It's almost surely a publicity stunt for the upcoming launch of some kind of Clear Channel "alternative" station.

But quonsar says it's all shit, so I guess it's not the fascinating spectacle of a media colossus attempting to surreptitiously co-opt the forms of alternative media that I thought it was. Though Clear Channel has now acknowledged the stunt.
posted by freebird at 11:20 AM on May 31, 2005

You are all morans.
posted by basicchannel at 11:23 AM on May 31, 2005

People still listen to radio?
posted by jsavimbi at 11:25 AM on May 31, 2005

Yes.
posted by gurple at 11:28 AM on May 31, 2005

Why?
posted by wah at 11:47 AM on May 31, 2005

Because they can't afford an iPod?
posted by sciurus at 11:48 AM on May 31, 2005

Where else am I going to hear new music that they want me to hear, wah?
posted by shawnj at 11:51 AM on May 31, 2005

This just in: Advertisers attempt to sway your opinion through sleight of hand and smoke and mirrors.

More at 11.
posted by cavalier at 11:59 AM on May 31, 2005

prison?
posted by wah at 11:59 AM on May 31, 2005

which isn't illegal I guess ?

aha! moron!
posted by quonsar at 12:10 PM on May 31, 2005

Radio - including web radio - is important because if you just listen to your own playlists and favorites you're not really exposed to much new stuff. I guess if you're convinced there's nothing good you haven't heard that's fine, but for the rest of us it's nice to hear something fresh sometimes.

Granted, corporate radio has very truly fresh content, but that ignores the myriad of really good independent and public stations out there.

So what's your replacement for radio?
posted by freebird at 12:15 PM on May 31, 2005

ahem - "very little truly fresh content"
posted by freebird at 12:17 PM on May 31, 2005

music blogs.
posted by jmgorman at 12:30 PM on May 31, 2005

The Radio Free Ohio website now says it's "talk radio for the rest of us," apparently meaning pregressive/liberal and non-religious judging by their commentary about the local radio scene. 1350-AM used o be WTOU, owned by Clear Channel. If you click on that link, you see the same splash page for Radio Free Ohio.

The interesting story here is that Clear Channel is getting into "progressive talk." Wonder whether this will end up biting them in the ass with some of their advertisers and listeners? Also, do they own a conservative talk station in Cleveland/Akron?
posted by me3dia at 12:32 PM on May 31, 2005

The electric mind is one that can achieve universal high quality in self medication. Science doesn't acknowledge the existence of some of these transient phenomena. Predetermined patterns affect the subject's behavior, sometimes even after the radio is turned off. Science must basically say it doesn't even work and yet I've found it to be greatly satisfying and pleasing to my alpha rhythms. Not only that, the vibrations that get processed when the brain is in motion is one that can only be reflected back upon oneself with the proper polarity and reversal transmission migration of mutated magnetic resonances.

Magnetic mutants getting you down? I like pancakes.
posted by ZachsMind at 12:37 PM on May 31, 2005

Rather then "bleed" into other frequencies, they probably just rebroadcast on those frequencies. I wonder if it's against FCC regulations to try to hide the ownership of a radiostation.

Oh well, whatever.
posted by delmoi at 12:39 PM on May 31, 2005

I too like pancakes.
posted by Catfry at 12:45 PM on May 31, 2005

Fake billboard improvements

Oh that pisses me off. We've dealt with their kind before.
Plymouth thought they could put their Neon ad in low-rent part of Oakland and then "deface" it weeks later for the cool factor, spray paint a Mohawk on it, stupid crap like that. Well we finished what they started and they learned their lesson.
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 2:18 PM on May 31, 2005

freebird writes "So what's your replacement for radio?"

Live music festivals, friends, family, web, audioscrobbler, etc, etc.
posted by terrapin at 2:21 PM on May 31, 2005

Radio is still needed in cars without music playing devices. Web doesn't work there. Of course satellite radio...
posted by destro at 2:36 PM on May 31, 2005

Yah, I guess I just don't see those things are real replacements for radio. Radio is wonderful because it can be passive; nowadays of course, that's bad - everything is supposed to be active, interactive, hyperactive. But I can listen to radio while I do other things, like drive, or program, and I love that moment of surprise when I hear something really cool and unexpected. Of course I can and do discover neat things from friends, festivals, and websites - but only when I actively seek it out. Sometimes it's great to hand over the controls to a really good DJ and see what they'll turn me on to.

And like a good performer, a good radio DJ can build a show with pacing and tempo and creative segues in a way you will never get from a music blog or audioscrobbler. A good DJ can make you hear new things in old songs and listen to songs you'd never seek out for yourself.

So, no, I think you're totally wrong that these new mediums, great as they are, make radio obsolete. Think about all the idiots who claimed hypertext and the web would make old-fashioned books obsolete, with their linear, non-interactive format. Maybe I'm just old, but while I embrace all these new forms, I still like good books and good radio.
posted by freebird at 2:37 PM on May 31, 2005

I grew up on radio and I miss it more than I'll ever miss a television show or even television if it went down the tubes. Day time radio usually more or less stuck to a list or a format though the list was much longer and deeper than what I've seen now, even on the same old stations I listened to as a teenager. The night time shows kicked ass though, they'd play deeper cuts off albums or bands they wouldn't even touch during the daytime hours.
posted by substrate at 2:52 PM on May 31, 2005

destro writes "Radio is still needed in cars without music playing devices."

There are still some of those? I thought even the cheapest of the entry-point Korean cars came with a CD player by now.
posted by clevershark at 3:08 PM on May 31, 2005

At least we've still got NPR.
posted by The White Hat at 3:10 PM on May 31, 2005

Radio is good. NPR tells me things I want to know. Good local radio stations (in Seattle, KEXP and KBCS) showcase local bands, inform me of upcoming events, and entertain with interestingly chosen music. Right-wing political and religious AM radio shows provide hilarity and a little dose of horror on road trips.

It's all very cute to pretend not to understand what kind of Luddite would still be listening to AM or FM simply because radio's an old technology. Me, I'll stop listening to radio when other forms of live audio entertainment are as convenient and more interesting.
posted by gurple at 3:14 PM on May 31, 2005

"talk radio for the rest of us"

is the tag line of "the quake," the San Francisco affiliate of Air America that operates on a clear channel station. Unclear to me whether that means its an Air America tag line or just one that Clear Channel uses when it hosts a lefty station.
posted by mabelstreet at 3:45 PM on May 31, 2005

Another reason why commercial radio sucks so badly. The only decent radio here in UK is run by the BBC, god bless their little cotton socks.
posted by renesisx at 5:11 PM on May 31, 2005

www.bbc.co.uk/radio
posted by Pretty_Generic at 5:18 PM on May 31, 2005

Comment of the thread. Close second.

Seriously, people who "don't see the point" of radio are living sheltered, obsessively technophilic little lives. I'm constantly in a fury because there's so much good stuff on the radio that I can't listen to it all at the same time. And, fellas, I'm talking AM too. On good public and community radio stations you get real people, anywhere, anytime, not bound by the presence of internet access availability, not biased by the slim pathetic selection you or some mp3blog writer has at their disposal.

Seriously.

And I do enjoy mp3blogs. But I still discover 20x more artists listening to the radio than I do through mp3blogs, or Audioscrobbler, or Soulseek. You would be surprised how limited and pathetic these mediums really are for exposing you to and informing you about music that is truly amazing. They get you caught in a trap. You like this certain type of music. Therefore, Audioscrobbler shows you artists similar to what you already like. Soulseek users you browse have similar music to what you already like. The mp3 blogs you visit have music similar to what you already like. How the fuck are you ever supposed to discover your unkindled love of Latvian folk music, or brain-eating satanic black metal, or deep psychadelic dub? When are you ever going to bother to listen to Chopin on the drive home from work? When are you ever going to have Frank Zappa's "Dumb all Over" drift into your ears by accident?

Maybe I'm lucky, where I live, but that's what I get from radio.
posted by Jimbob at 6:43 PM on May 31, 2005

I work for the sixth largest radio corporation in America.

We all hate ClearChannel alot.

For very different reasons.
However - I can tell you this. The guys who run ClearChannel are sleazebags. They are dirt, they are trash. They don't care about their product, they don't care about their listeners. They care about the almighty god of radio. It is a biased, lame system that is responsible for the terribly narrow (200-song) playlists that are on the air today.
One of the stations that I represent (and am very proud of) prides itself on possessing the only listener-rated, listener-determined playlist on the air in Grand Rapids. If you want to hear it bad enough, you can hear it on our station. It works because it generates loyal fans. Instead of 150,000 "listeners" we have 40,000 rabid, slavering fans who will go anywhere we tell them to. They are violently supportive of the station (it is a hard rock format) to the point where they are "...rude, aggressive and disrespectful..." to on-air staff from ClearChannel stations who show up at concert venues.
ClearChannel hates it with a vengeance and are trying to do anything they can to emulate it, without losing their glorious, shiny arbitron numbers.
The music we play is "corporate" music. System of a Down, Ozzy and Clutch are at the top of the playlist. It is not an "indy" format - we try to answer listener requests and (damn it all) people just aren't calling their radio stations and requesting Bright Eyes and GSYBE.
So to see the big blue monster lashing out for a grip on "middle market" station listenership is not surprising at all. I'll tell you one thing (and this is really only for the marketing people) they aren't going to turn local revenue with the "pirate" format. It's a number-dump to boost their network cume, that way they can say the "total" number of listeners they're average throughout that market is higher, if only because people are filling out their damned arbitron diaries with "Ub3r 1337 haxX0R P1r4t3 r4d10 stationzorxxxxx dawg."
posted by Baby_Balrog at 6:54 PM on May 31, 2005

It's a number-dump to boost their network cume, that way they can say the "total" number of listeners they're average throughout that market is higher

Could you explain that a bit, Baby_Balrog? I got the rest of your post just fine, and think the Grand Rapids station sounds great, if also locked into the profitable mainstream, but that last bit lost me. Thanks.
posted by mediareport at 8:14 PM on May 31, 2005

...Clear Channel uses when it hosts a lefty station.

That's another thing that can't really be leftist: anything Clear Channel does.
posted by davy at 9:20 PM on May 31, 2005

This is one more thing that makes me wish I'd died long ago. I still miss WAYE AM and WKTK FM in Baltimore; they died in the late 70s and early 80s, respectively. Since then radio's been bad -- but lately it's gotten Clearly Channellingly horrendous. Now I'm even glad for ShoutCast.
posted by davy at 9:30 PM on May 31, 2005

Jimbob writes "Seriously, people who 'don't see the point' of radio are living sheltered, obsessively technophilic little lives."

You're the one both checking MP3blogs AND obsessing about the amount of radio you can take in, but we're the obsessive technophilics? Interesting; please do send me some brochures.
posted by clevershark at 11:14 PM on May 31, 2005

"talk radio for the rest of us"

Is also the tag line of the Thom Hartmann Show. Hartmann describes himself as being from the "radical middle". I wonder if Thom can sue the bastids?
posted by Goofyy at 1:22 AM on June 1, 2005