I agree with Roxana. Now, which of our 13 council members are against the deal, which undecided, and which for?
Being for this city sell-out to Clear Channel should be more than sufficient grounds to KICK THEM OUT in the November 2005 election. --David Shove Roseville On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Sorry, there's no misunderstanding. Accuracy counts, and thanks for the > technical correction, but there's one thing that's clear - > > Clear Channel would be running our theaters. Running vs. owning is not > a distinction that matters here. Clear Channel is among the worst > neo-con corporate media, and it should not welcome to exist in this town > much less manage the artistic treasures of our city. It doesn't matter > who they're parterning with. Those organizations should be deeply > ashamed of having made the proposal. > > 1) Clear Channel is practically a media monopoly in certain areas - a > problem in itself. > > 2) Clear Channel are kings of censorship. Its radio program directors > issue lists of "objectionable songs" to avoid playing, which not only > are biased toward the neo- con agenda but which include such classics as > John Lennon's "Imagine" and Peter, Paul, & Mary's "Leaving on a Jet > Plane." Clear Channel also issued a directive to pull the Dixie Chicks' > music off the air when the band dared to <gasp> criticize the grinning > chimp in the white house. > > 3) Clear Channel organized PRO-WAR rallies under the name "Rally for > America," to support the administration at the beginning of the Iraq > war. Do we really need spin doctors for the current administration > controlling who and what is played at our theaters? > > 4) Clear Channel has a long record of violating the law, including > deceptive advertising and on broadcasting conversations without > obtaining permission of the second party to the conversation. > > 5) Clear Channel's chair and vice chair have a long history of shady > dealings with George Bush, the republican party machine, and friends. > Tom Mays (chair) used his position at UMITCO to heavily invest in > companies with Bush family and republican party ties. Tom Hicks (vice > chair) Hicks steered a scheme to use the University of Texas' $13 > billion endowment for private investment. Beneficiaries included the > Carlyle Group (arms investment firm tied to Daddy Bush & the bin Ladins) > and Baby Bush's failed Harkin Oil project. > > > Could Enron do a "pretty good job" of running some of Minneapolis' > projects? Probably, but you wouldn't want them sleazing their way > across the city limits. Could Faux News do a "pretty good job" of > running the Star Trib? Probably, but nothing in the paper would ever > actually pass for news again. Same for Clear Channel. > > Hasn't our local corporate media sold-out sufficiently, or do we really > need to import more neo-con toadies to censor our arts? > > Just say no to Clear Channel. > > Roxana Orrell > Central REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
