Clear Channel gives Tate Talking Points Against XM-Sirius merger

CLEAR CHANNEL GIVES TATE TALKING POINTS AGAINST XM-SIRIUS MERGER
[SOURCE: Center for Public Integrity, AUTHOR: Brendan McGarry and Ben Welsh]
Federal Communications Commissioner Deborah Tate has received talking points against the proposed satellite radio XM-Sirius merger from Clear Channel Radio, one of the country's biggest radio broadcasters and an ardent opponent of the deal. Clear Channel Vice President Thomas English gave Tate three possible responses – each written in the first-person – in an attempt to help the commissioner reconcile her previous statements in favor of relaxing media ownership limits with the broadcasters' position against the satellite radio merger. "The responses below were composed by our Government Affairs folks so they might be a little skewed toward our specific goals (imagine that) but I hope you find them helpful," English wrote Tate in an enclosure to an ex parte notice dated April 12 and posted electronically Friday morning. By law, anyone who wishes to communicate with the FCC in a formal proceeding must file what is called an ex parte presentation, which documents outside parties' communication with the agency. In his letter to Tate, English poses the question: "How do you reconcile your past recognition of all the entertainment options like iPods, Internet radio, satellite radio, etc. available to consumers as one of the reasons for relaxing local radio ownership rules with your present concerns with a merger of XM and Sirius being a monopoly?" Then, like a speechwriter, he writes three answers in paragraph form in the first-person: "My position opposing the XM-Sirius merger and supporting a significant relaxation of local radio ownership rules is completely consistent with my primary guiding principal: avoid government action that seriously distorts the marketplace," states the opening line of the first answer. The second answer begins, "My main concern is how can free radio survive when a combined XM-Sirius would control more spectrum in every market in the country than the entire AM/FM band combined?" Spectrum refers to the radio frequencies held by a satellite radio company, or a broadcaster or cellular carrier. The third answer reads, "It is really quite simple -- I consistently oppose a regulatory system that would disadvantage free, terrestrial broadcasting -- the only platform that is free to listeners and operates in the public interest."
http://www.publicintegrity.org/telecom/telecomwatch.aspx?eid=2816