Challenging nothing and no one

This wasn't supposed to happen here

[Reprinted from Issues & Views February 24, 2003]

The New York Times' Brent Staples, in "The Trouble With Corporate Radio: The Day the Protest Music Died" (2/20/03), describes the power of corporate monopolies, that have just about eliminated the public playing of particular forms of popular music--most notably "protest" songs. Citing the 1960s, when radio stations across the country played "blatantly political songs," that became mainstream hits, Staples tells of a song, "Ohio," whose author was influenced by the deaths of four antiwar demonstrators at Kent State University. The lyrics of the song described the horror of the event and even criticized President Nixon by name. It went on to become a sort of antiwar anthem, and no one considered censoring or banning it from the airwaves. Fast forward to year 2003, and we find there is little chance for the blossoming of a troubadour like Bob Dylan.

Staples writes:

A comparable song about George W. Bush's rush to war in Iraq would have no chance at all today. There are plenty of angry people, many with prime music-buying demographics. But independent radio stations that once would have played edgy, political music have been gobbled up by corporations that control hundreds of stations and have no wish to rock the boat. Corporate ownership has changed what gets played--and who plays it. With a few exceptions, the disc jockeys who once existed to discover provocative new music have long since been put out to pasture. The new generation operates from play lists dictated by Corporate Central--lists that some D.J.'s describe as "wallpaper music." . . .

What my rock 'n' roll colleague William Safire describes as the "ruination of independent radio" started with corporatizing in the 1980's but took off dramatically when the Telecommunications Act of 1996 increased the number of stations that one entity could own in a single market and permitted companies to buy up as many stations nationally as their deep pockets would allow.

The new rules were billed as an effort to increase radio diversity, but they appear to have had the opposite effect. Under the old rules, the top two owners had 115 stations between them. Today, the top two own more than 1,400 stations. In many major markets, a few corporations control 80 percent of the listenership or more.

Liberal Democrats are horrified by the legion of conservative talk show hosts who dominate the airwaves. But the problem stretches across party lines. National Journal reported last month that Representative Mark Foley, Republican of Florida, was finding it difficult to reach his constituents over the air since national radio companies moved into his district, reducing the number of local stations from five to one. . . .

The perils of consolidation can be seen clearly in the music world. Different stations play formats labeled "adult contemporary," "active rock," "contemporary hit radio" and so on. But studies show that the formats are often different in name only--and that as many as 50 percent of the songs played in one format can be found in other formats as well. The point of these sterile play lists is to continually repeat songs that challenge nothing and no one, blending in large blocks of commercials.

Senator Russell Feingold of Wisconsin has introduced a bill that would require close scrutiny of mergers that could potentially put the majority of the country's radio stations in a single corporation's hands.

Copyright © 2010 Issues & Views