Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
Top Banner, Site wide
Apr 21, 2014

 Choose a size
Text Size

Top Leaderboard, Site wide

The Divide

Truthdig Bazaar more items

Ear to the Ground

Romney’s Firm to Buy Clear Channel

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Dec 13, 2007
Clear Channel

It’s a big week for big media:  First, Dow Jones & Co. officially approved Rupert Murdoch’s takeover of The Wall Street Journal, and now Lew Rockwell is reporting that Mitt Romney’s private equity firm is buying radio behemoth Clear Channel.

What would it cost to buy the support of just about every nationally-syndicated neocon talk show host in America? About $19.5 Billion, which is what Mitt Romney’s private equity firm, Bain Capital, and Thomas H. Lee Partners have agreed to pay in a leveraged buyout agreement with Clear Channel Communications, the largest radio station owner in the country.

Clear Channel owns over 1,100 full-power AM, FM, and shortwave radio stations, twelve radio channels on XM Satellite Radio, and more than 30 television stations in the United States. Premiere Radio Networks, which is the largest syndication company in the United States, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Clear Channel and is home to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and many others. Sean Hannity recently signed a large multi-market contract with Clear Channel, as well.

Read more

More Below the Ad


Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By MassPimpDaddy, December 29, 2007 at 5:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bain Capital may be buying Clear Channel but the truth is Mitt Romney divested himself of Bain Capital back in 2002 before his run for governor of Massachusetts. It was a rather lucrative payout, somewhere in the $200 million dollar range.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, December 18, 2007 at 4:48 pm Link to this comment

Isn’t the word “liberal” derived from the word liberty?

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 18, 2007 at 6:30 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

120785 by Gomerspile on 12/17 at 12:38 pm

“Your wealthiest Pol’s are liberal,mmm wonder why. I guess the people’s party wants it that way…..”

With all due respect to your opinion, there are very few “liberals” in public life…

A true “liberal” would not support “restrictive” gun laws. A true liberal would not impose “seat-belt” regulations, and a true liberal would not be part of a system which allowed folks to fight and die for their country, but not have a beer with their father in Maine.

Liberalism is as dead as true conservativeness.

Report this

By Q is Against Stupidity and Racism In Comments, December 17, 2007 at 2:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

i for one am tired of hearing the bull$#!t conspiracy theories about Zionists and Mormons and Masons and Neocons and Liberals and Gays taking over media and undermining the moral and cultural fabric of our nation. The bottom line IS the bottom line, and the few companies who are left owning the media outlets are merely trying to do what industrialists have been doing since Adam Smith’s time. They are trying to maximize their own market while eliminating competition. If they think that a certain market wants to listen to the hardly credible monkey noise of Limaugh and the like, then that’s what they put on the airwaves. If another market wants to hug trees and hold hands with homosexuals, then they put that on for them. What’s the connecting factor? Advertising sales.

When a handful of corporations have a vested interest in selling you the products that they or their partner corporation produce (often for pennies on the dollar utilizing foreign labor) through the networks that they also own, it is in their interest to keep the government beholden to them by facilitating the very election of representatives who will decline to take action which would threaten their market dominance, one hand washing the other. In this way they minimize the chance that the government will do what it was designed to do and be a voice for the people, giving power to all the people, not just the powerful.

As an electorate and as an audience, you are complacent and lazy and growing more stupid by the day and this is reflected by the info-news-a-tainment shwag that CNN, FOXNEWS, MSNBC, Clear Channel, Time Magazine, Newsweek and the like have become. You get what you pay for but you can have what you demand. It’s just that no one seems to give a damn about demanding quality of substance, demanding that our elected representatives take a stand for the electorate and smash these media monopolies and compel news agencies to be not-for-profit organizations. There is a time and a place for commercialism, and there’s a time and a place for honest, independent news coverage. It is clear that we are giving our country away to corrupt voices who cash in on the slogan of “America is the greatest country in the world,” while picking our pockets and force feeding us idiocy. And you fail to do the thing which actually HAS made America great: TAKE ACTION!

On the other hand, it IS much easier to sit in your living room and blame the Jews. Hell, it worked out great for Hitler.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, December 17, 2007 at 11:45 am Link to this comment

RE: #120745 by Gomerspile on 12/17 at 9:11 am
(85 comments total)

It’s typical & a tactic of Zionists to label anyone who disagrees with the Zionist agenda as anti-Semitic. If you are so illinformed or delusional to believe the MSM is not owned & under Jewish control you might want to study this link:

The problem is not with the sublime member of the Jewish faith, but with the ignoble Zionists who have exhibited a lack of faith except toward power, control, & money, using tactics that display no concept of scruples, morals, honesty, or decency.

To have our media controlled by such a small minority (there are only about 13-14 million Jews in the ENTIRE world) bodes ill for diversity in our crucial communications systems (as well as in our halls of government). The same can be said for the Mormon world population (12-14 million), but the majority of Mormons don’t live in the US, so the single minded lack of diversity here is even more pronounced (Over 40% of the world’s Jews live in the US).

I don’t believe we benefit as Americans by having very small minorities in control of all we see, hear, & read in the MSM, since it is easily determined a threat to our basic Constitutional concepts of freedom of speech & press.

Mormon & Jewish attempts to control & consolidate media providers also encroaches upon the separation of church & state, since (especially) recently the media have been taking sides politically, even if this has been done so subtly most Americans are unaware.

The MSM has been more than willing to disseminate the lies & propaganda of current administration policies, but this is to be expected since (as mentioned) there are many Zionist elements (agents) working on the agenda within both factions.

I’m sure, because I speak out against the Zionists, someone will post that I am racist, or especially (since Zionists use a guilt Americans have been trained to feel about the Holocaust) someone who is anti-Semitic. This is a lie. Jewish (religious term) and Zionist (secular & political term) should not be confused. An explanation can be found here:

All Jews are not Zionists, and all Zionists are not Jewish, is something very important to remember. In the same light Zionist who only seek a homeland for Jewish people should not be confused with the other Zionists’ intent for world domination. The problem with Jewish control of our MSM is it is difficult to determine who is in which camp.

While I have no problems with Mitt Romney personally, there are numerous policy & political issues he stands for that I don’t agree with (as do the majority of Americans). Religion is not an issue, since it really shouldn’t be part of the politics at all. Since Romney is an avowed Republican, and possibly a neo-CON/Zionist, and very likely receiving funding from AIPAC, I have grave concerns about his ‘group’ controlling so many sources of information dispersal in America.

I am also vehemently opposed to further media consolidation, and this seems like one more leap in that direction. Americans stood in staunch opposition to it in 2003, and are even more opposed to it at this crucial time in our history.

Wake up America! We’ve had a number of our rights taken from us, and they will be much more difficult to get back without an unbiased free press.

Consolidation is a step in the wrong direction when dealing with ‘our’ airwaves.

Report this

By mary, December 17, 2007 at 11:03 am Link to this comment

Now is a good time to stop watching, listening,and purchasing anything presented as “news”.  It’s the only way to defeat these pigs.  Americans better stop buying things before we lose our consumer economy to China and India.  Once we’re replaced, just like our jobs, Corp World will not care if we consume anything.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 17, 2007 at 6:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Nixon and Hoover were solidly middle-class. while The Two Roosevelt’s were millionaires.

Money in the bank isn’t a qualifier, nor is it a dis qualifier.

If we’re ever to get our country back, we must STOP with all these class, race, and gender “splittings”  we must find (in this pile of trash) someone who can rise above where they are, or where they have been. 

As Teddy Roosevelt proved a qualified someone can emerge from the top of the economic heap.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, December 16, 2007 at 7:24 pm Link to this comment

Frankly, I would rather see some street bum (any intelligent street person) in the Whitehouse than just one more damned million/billion/gazillion-aire. These financial winners are really a bunch of moral losers. I would ask them ‘have you no shame’, but of course it’s just wasted breath because they don’t even undertand the question.

Report this

By Thomas Billis, December 16, 2007 at 5:38 am Link to this comment

I hear that Europe is getting ready to do a Radio Free Europe broadcasts to America.I am already setting my radio reciever in the attic and lining the walls with lead so I will be able to listen.I reccommend if another Republican is elected to the White House that you all get started soon on your own well hidden radio transmitters and lead outercases soon.Next we will have to come up with secret handshakes so we will know who is who.Vive le resistance.I have to go now someone is at the door.

Report this

By Louise, December 15, 2007 at 5:32 pm Link to this comment

Now that’s something Romney does understand.
Making money smile

Report this

By gus, December 15, 2007 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Be happy. Clear channel, like citigroup is now out of the hands of Jews.

Clear channel was the mouthpiece for neocon insanity… be glad it’s in the hands of Mormons.

Ditto for Citygroup…. heartburn for treasonous Jews for israel though….. har har har har

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, December 15, 2007 at 9:21 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Traditional radio stations are scrap anyway.  Within ten years we’ll be getting all our news from India or China as they will be the only entities with enough “greenbacks” to buy, or own anything.

My advise// for those who want it \\ is sell everything now for cheap bucks, put ‘em in your mattress and wait for the currency manipulators to force the value of the dollar back to 1992 levels.

That (if it happens, and that’s the rub) would give you a 50% return on your investment!

Report this

By mpgarr, December 15, 2007 at 1:36 am Link to this comment

This cannot hardly be coincidental—-the FCC—in spite of Senators asking Chairman Martin to hold off on action has on its agenda for Tuesday—the vote on relaxing cross ownership——this in spite of pending Senate legislation that if passed would require the FCC to have the full 90-day public comment and review period—-

There must be a slew of media deals in the works for them to be in such a rush on this—they’ve got to get the deal done well before Election Day 2008—-

They must be gonna try to manipulate it—-I think that our democracy is a dead duck—RIP American Democracy!!! you will soon be in “the dustbin of history.”

Report this

By Ga, December 14, 2007 at 7:20 pm Link to this comment

So, as the FCC debates relaxing ownership rules—again—we can now see how, unbeknownst to an uninformed and perhaps captitulating public, the United States of America can eventually end up with, essentially, a…


Report this

By Margaret Currey, December 14, 2007 at 3:36 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

There will come a time that even hotmail will not be free, the televisions are changing and you have to buy something to receive that also, soon the air will not be free to breathe,of course the water will not be free to drink, now religion will be put upon you, will come a time when women will have to cover their hair, don’t want to excite men who seem to have trouble controlling their thoughts, I mean if women cover up, those who don’t will be asking to be raped just by showing hair, seems as though men should be taught to have respect, after all women don’t go yaya if they see a man with a bare chest, or at least most.

Religion should be out of government, when I was young religion was in the public school, the Methodists got their religious training during school hours, those of us who were Catholic had to stay in class and do things like draw picures, were not allowed to go home just wait until the mass of children got back from their training, seems as though there will always be some to break the rules, but what Bush did was mean spirited, because religious places do put their politics on the help that they give out.

Example Loaves and Fishes rents space from churches, this particular church asked me to fill out a form, and one of the questions was my sexual preferences, I am not different but the question bothered me because why was your reason to know.  If I said I was for the same sex would I have been disqualified, of course I declined and when the woman asked for the form, I just declared that I lost the paper, end of that but some people would just do as told I am too old to be the do as you are told.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, December 14, 2007 at 2:35 pm Link to this comment

Maybe Mitt will get better press.

Report this

By NYT9237723, December 14, 2007 at 8:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ah, the company that Mitt the **it keeps.

Report this

By weather, December 14, 2007 at 4:33 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Given the FCC just flipped the bird to Congress, this is in keeping w/the corporate buying spree of the 4th estate, where all the choreography is fit to print, brodcast and present as news.

Pull the plug and flourish. I thank Truthdig and other venues for as long as their able to still present on this internet, as its up for grabs too.

Report this

sign up to get updates

Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.