Censorship on the Radio, in TV, and in Music by Media Conglomerates

In "It's Time to Stand Up for Howard Stern," writer Larry Womack, who writes for The Raw Story, an online news source, criticizes media conglomerates who censor their own affiliates in order to gain favor with the government. Womack believes that when media sources speak out against the government's political agenda, media conglomerates censor these sources, in hopes of receiving favorable legislation, such as FCC support of less regulation concerning how many media outlets the conglomerate can own.

A recent example is "The Howard Stern Show." This popular program was recently taken off the air by its owner, Clear Channel, who owns more than nine percent of all radio stations. When explaining why it was pulled, Womack writes, "Let us also suppose... that Clear Channel has made itself the lap dog of FCC Chairman Michael Powell in an effort to gain permission to buy every single radio outlet it can get its greedy little hands on... let us also suppose that Stern recently had become an outspoken critic of the current administration." When Bush announced his intentions to push a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, Howard Stern became "irate, calling the president (among other things,) a 'rat fink,' and ending one mini-rant with a resigned, 'The guy's gotta go.'" Not far after, Howard Stern was pulled from the air. Of course, these weren't the reasons for Stern's being pulled, according to Clear Channel. Womack writes, "So, how has it justified this sudden change of heart regarding Stern's content? According to [Clear Channel]... the corporation 'drew a line in the sand today with regard to protecting our listeners from indecent content.'" Womack continues expressing his cynicism: "Apparently, Howard Stern had many listeners who were physically unable to keep themselves from tuning in, constantly being harmed by the naughty things said on his show. Thank God a faceless, evil corporation has arrived to protect us from naughty words."
Womack goes on to explain how the same kind of thing is happening to other media sources. He explains how the Dixie Chicks were "boycotted" by media conglomerates when they spoke out against Bush. "While radio wasn't playing them, they had the most requested song on the Internet and the top-selling country album in Bush's America." Madonna found herself in a similar situation around the same time. Madonna's music video of her song "American Life" was an anti-war piece that ended with a grenade being thrown in the lap of a President Bush look-a-like. "After much controversy, she was unable to release the video," says Womack. He continues, "Radio responded by playing her music so little that she became the first artist in history to have a No. 1-selling single that never cracked the Billboard Hot 100, due to almost zero airplay. She equaled that feat with her next single."

I agree with Womack's conclusion that it is not a coincidence that a media conglomerate desiring government support for infinite expansion would censor its own media affiliates who speak out against the government. "So, I guess it was just big radio that, while simultaneously lobbying for more relaxed ownership restrictions, decided to go wild with the stars and stripes. Do I even need to point out that the philosophical hypocrisy of expressing American patriotism through repression of political dissent is too repugnant for words?" I believe the danger of this kind of censorship is that it is so covert that the general population may not be aware of it. This gives the government the opportunity to secretly shape media reports in order to support its own agenda. We need to protect free speech from censorship!

Works Cited:
Womack Larry. "It's time to stand up for Howard Stern." http://www.rawstory.com/exclusives/womack/womack3.html