(CAUTION: in the interest of national security, the following meandering rant includes many tired and true sophmoric blogging gimmicks, like bold fonts and ALL CAPS. Things you’ve come to know and love from me. You have been warmed.)XM radio announced a 30-day suspension of the Opie and Anthony show. (Read the official XM PR release here.) Cutting to the chase: XM and Sirius were supposed to be about uncensored, unfiltered and almost commercial free content. That’s the bait and switch they used to lure people in. XM even set up an XL designation for content such as the O&A show warning of adult/mature content. You didn’t want it, no prob. You didn’t have to listen. This was to be the beauty of satellite radio.
I can listen to whatever I want, when I want, as clear as I want.
Now, the only true part of that equation is the ‘clear’ part. I’d be pissed if I had signed up for XM to hear them, only to find out uncensored doesn’t really mean uncensored. Reading the XM PR release again, one line stands out that is scary:
“...our on-air talent must take seriously the responsibility that creative freedom requires of them.”
Bullshit. The only thing that creative freedom requires is that it be free. You don’t have to agree with it, you don’t have to like it, but you better make sure it’s allowed to be heard...
WHEN I PAY FOR IT.
It would be easy to throw out the issue of Imus out onto the table for discussion here. Allow me to throw it right back: Imus was broadcasting hate speech masked as schtick over public airwaves controlled by paying advertisers. XM/Sirius is radio paid for by we the consumer. Period. End of story. This is not a political issue. This is about getting ripped off. Because at the end of the day...
You do not get to tell me what I can do with my money.
Take away my choices–I take away my money. If you’re considering signing up for satellite radio now, you should have second thoughts about what this means. I’m not a lawyer, and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn last night, but anyone with a subscription appears to have been ripped off. Sure looks like XM violated the terms of its agreement by taking away content you paid for. At the very least, they’re guilty of false advertising. (I’m sure by next week, XM legal will have already worked a morality clause into future sign-up forms allowing them to get away with this.)
Now, is what they allowed a homeless guy to say about Condi Rice tasteful, funny, etc? Hey, I’m not debating that issue. I’m not into misogynistic shit anyway. Besides, that’s not the point. That’s like asking people to define what humor is, which we could do that all night. (And are you really going to take what a homeless guy rants about as truth anyway? As it is, it’s hard enough believing the stuff I write.) Did O&A play along with him? Ok, sure. They do that with all their guests. However, listening to it, they as much mocked him as anything, just as Stern does.
But how does someone work in a format with no limits when apparently, there are.
If this is on regular radio, it’s all bleeped and we aren’t having this discussion, if the bit even makes it to the air. And, XM wouldn’t even publish the additional comments the pair made so you could judge for yourself the context of what’s going too far and what isn’t. They sure had no problem referring to the original comments made by someone else though. Censoring PR releases too? Nice.
But I lay blame om something else: wardrobe malfunction.
To this day, how many people have lost their jobs, how many radio stations fined by the FCC because of the PC mindset that swept the nation since Janet and Justin’s MTV Super Bowl halftime stunt? Too many. And what happened to Ms. Nasty and Mr. Sexy Back? Nothing. Nada. Zip. No fines. No penalties. They are as much to blame as anyone though. Thanks guys. I owe you. I really do. What’s next, Google puts a filter on Blogger so I can’t write ‘fuck’ anymore?
Welcome back to the days of Lenny Bruce when authorities monitored your act from the audience. Only thing is, this isn’t the government. It’s a private company answering to consumers now so afraid of potential legal troubles that it overreacts. Don’t know what’s worse actually. I can just see their flack now: “You need to get out in front of this thing right away before it becomes a PR nightmare and distance yourselves from O&A.”
No, what you need to do is make a stand. This is no different than Pepsi telling me how I and when I can drink their soda that I buy. Once I make the decision to use the product, step out of the way and let me do the rest. XM needs to be what they said they were: a radio service that broadcasts uncensored content people pay for. Otherwise, this is more than just a bad move, this sets a really bad precedent for other brands to follow.
Tags: Sirius, XM, Opie and Anthony, O&A
5 comments:
Hate to disagree with y’all, but consider a few realities of the situation.
First, creative freedom is hardly free. For example, if the morons were to broadcast death threats to the President or record sex acts with a minor, they would certainly be in trouble. Granted, those are extreme examples, but you hopefully get the point. Sorry you bought the hype that uncensored meant uncensored. These morons have always enjoyed creative freedom—as approved and defined by their bosses. It has little to do with any perceived creative or constitutional rights.
This particular scenario seems more like an employee-employer spat. That is, the morons aired obscenities that their bosses didn’t like. The bosses complained, and the morons apologized. Then the morons appeared to openly show their apologies were insincere. So the bosses officially reprimanded them. It’s not about creative freedom. It’s about employee disrespect and insubordination.
The bosses are taking a risk of pissing off audiences. At the same time, ratings will probably spike upon the morons’ return to the airwaves. It could be a win-win situation for employees and employers alike. In the meantime, just as you bought the right to hear “uncensored” content, you now also have the right to dump the service. It’s unlikely you have any rights to insist that the bosses not censor their employees. After all, the bosses have to report to more than the morons’ listeners. XM answers to a larger audiences, including governmental and consumer groups. Additionally, it’s highly likely the contracts give ultimate authority to the bosses.
In the end, consumers have few rights in this instance. Want to sue for false and misleading advertising? Yo, advertising is what most of us do for a living. Y’all should have known better.
:20 timeout HJ, ;-p
I totally understand there are limits both in a non-paid/paid format. There still are laws that every format has to follow, and yes, which all bosses must follow–within reason and depending on format though.
(I’d expect satellite would have far less restrictions than am morning drive. Also, FCC's seven words you can't say limit broadcast TV and radio and print, cable, well, not so much as more and more shows seems to be pushing back there.)
And of course, there's the standard “can't yell fire in a crowded movie” or say "Bomb” in an airport.
I also understand the ad game. Make something not so nice or mediocre appealing to the public. As Alec Baldwin said in Glengarry: “Get them to sign on the line which is dotted.” This isn't about that though.
The reason they got suspended is for post-apology comments on the air such as these:
“...Opie: “You do work for a company, they do pay you, so you have to obey their dumb regulations.” Anthony responded: “If people don't like it, you get poor ratings and you lose the show.”
Had they not said that, they’d likely be still on the air. Which would have made what the homeless guy said fly. But, because they show regret at having to apologize, then they’re fired?
(And if a boss can’t take that, well shit, that’s the type of stuff Howard Stern was saying in his last days on regular radio. In fact, he leveraged that kind of censorship to secure a record-breaking deal with Sirius.)
Makes no sense, unless as you say, it’s really about it’s about employee disrespect and insubordination. To that I’d still say, it shouldn't matter what goes on behind closed doors between employee-employer when I am paying for something.
To make a general example, that's almost like me caring about the spat a boss and the cashier had at Wendyt's when I order my #6 combo. SO what. Gimmee the damn combo I pordered and paid for, work your shit out on your time.
This is censorship to me, but moreso, it really is a consumer issue: especially because XM drove home the point when signing these guys that their brand of uncensored humor is what you'll get because you can’t get it on regular radio.
That was the only lure on the table at the time to try and get people to sign up. Did XM think they were going to talk about choosing the correct bridal gift?
As it is, sponsors are withdrawling in support of O&A, something I acually never expected.
Just a couple of semi-incoherent thoughts:
The morons took their gripes public, by making their comments on the air. So it’s not about any gripe behind closed doors. If a creative in my group wants to disagree with my decisions, they can and have come to me with gripes. If an employee is walking the halls announcing I’m an idiot, it’s a different story.
Shock jocks have a tradition of being anti-authority. Hell, even David Letterman has made a career of dissing his employers. It all depends on the perspective of the employer as to whether or not the gripes will be tolerated. In the case of the morons in question, the bosses decided they weren’t gonna tolerate it. Not saying they’re right or wrong—just recognizing the reality.
To me, it also goes to my original points about the bosses ultimately defining what is and isn’t “creative freedom.” It’s like the classic judge’s definition of pornography: “I’ll know it when I see it.” It’s totally subjective. And since the bosses hold the purse strings, they get to decide. If advertisers and subscribers want to disagree, that’s fine. You paid for the opportunity to hear what might not pass on public airwaves. You still have the right to dump the service. But until they invite you into the boardroom, you don’t have the right to dictate the content.
Again, it’s too bad XM convinced people they’d be offering totally uncensored material. XM has to live with the consequences of their decisions. It’s not much different than corporations like Sears and Kmart who can’t seem to make good decisions. Unfortunately, we can’t dictate how others run their businesses. All we can do is decide whether or not to buy it (unless we decide to stage some crusade—but honestly, who’s got the time?).
On a side note, the morons are demonstrating a certain ignorance in their actions. Given the climate in their business, they should consider their words and actions more carefully. Not saying they need to go politically correct, but they need to think about the direction the business is going. Otherwise, they’re just like dinosaur advertising agencies that aren’t in touch with the changes in society and business. Or rappers who think they can continue to peddle thug life for the long term.
Not saying it’s right or wrong. Just recognizing the reality.
Two more thoughts:
1. Should have qualified the statement to read: Just recognizing the reality per my biased perspective.
2. It’s always interesting to label certain work as adult/mature when it’s actually juvenile and immature.
It's all good. Funny, but there's never just one issue that arises out of shit like this.
1) The issue of employer-employee is there–agree, they shoulda stuck to their apology, or, say fuck it, we're not doing it which I thinmk would have garnered more respect from the audience.
2) Then you have the content thing. It'd as offensive as Imus even though what was said was not identical.
3)Followed by censorshop of that content.
Breaker, breaker, looks like we got us a Perfect Storm of controversey, ;-p
"Unfortunately, we can’t dictate how others run their businesses. All we can do is decide whether or not to buy it (unless we decide to stage some crusade—but honestly, who’s got the time?)."
I would agree, except that I'd say people were mislead in terms of what they were getting. If I'm listening to Stern on K-Rock on terrestial radio in the old days, I expect a certain amount of bleeps and stuff.
The FCC watches VERY closely in that case. In this relatively new format though, the board may run the company, but they answer to the people paying the subscriptions.
(To that point, no way Sirius pays Stern that A-Rod size deal if they can't count on him bringing along a sizable portion of his audience.)
Post a Comment