Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How to Lose Your Job in Talk Radio: Clear Channel gags an antiwar conservative Charles Goyette
amconmag.com ^ | February 2, 2004 issue | Charles Goyette

Posted on 01/10/2004 4:49:11 PM PST by Destro

February 2, 2004 issue

Copyright © 2004 The American Conservative

How to Lose Your Job in Talk Radio

Clear Channel gags an antiwar conservative.

By Charles Goyette

“Imagine these startling headlines with the nation at war in the Pacific six months after Dec. 7, 1941: “No Signs of Japanese Involvement in Pearl Harbor Attack! Faulty Intelligence Cited; Wolfowitz: Mistakes Were Made.”

Or how about an equally disconcerting World War II headline from the European theater: “German Army Not Found in France, Poland, Admits President; Rumsfeld: ‘Oops!’, Powell Silent; ‘Bring ’Em On,’ Says Defiant FDR.”

It seems to me that when there is reason to go to war, it should be self-evident. The Secretary of State should not need to convince a skeptical world with satellite photos of a couple of Toyota pickups and a dumpster. And faced with a legitimate casus belli, it should not be hard to muster an actual constitutional declaration of war. Now in the absence of a meaningful Iraqi role in the 9/11 attack and the mysterious disappearance of those fearsome Weapons of Mass Destruction, there might be some psychic satisfaction to be had in saying, “I told you so!” But it sure isn’t doing my career as a talk-show host any good.

The criterion of self-evidence was only one of dozens of objections I raised before the elective war in Iraq on my afternoon drive-time talk show on KFYI in Phoenix. Many of the other arguments are familiar to readers of The American Conservative.

But the case for war was a shape-shifter, skillfully morphing into a new rationale as quickly as the old one failed to withstand scrutiny. For a year before the war, I scrambled to keep up with the latest incarnations of the neocon case. Most were pitifully transparent and readily exposed. (Besides the aluminum tubes and the trailers that had Bush saying, “Gotcha,” does anyone remember those death-dealing drones? Never have third-world, wind-up, rubber-band, balsa-wood airplanes instilled so much fear in so many people.) Still, my management didn’t like my being out of step with the president’s parade of national hysteria, and the war-fevered spectators didn’t care to be told they were suffering illusions. So after three years, I was replaced on my primetime talk show by the Frick and Frack of Bushophiles, two giggling guys who think everything our tongue-tied president does is “Most excellent, dude!” I have been relegated to the later 7–10 p.m. slot, when most people, even in a congested commuting market like Phoenix, are already home watching TV.

Why did this happen? Why only a couple of months after my company picked up the option on my contract for another year in the fifth-largest city in the United States, did it suddenly decide to relegate me to radio Outer Darkness? The answer lies hidden in the oil-and-water incompatibility of these two seemingly disconnected phrases: “Criticizing Bush” and “Clear Channel.”

Criticizing Bush? Well then, must I be some sort of rug-chewing liberal? Not even close. As a boy, I stood on the grass in a small Arizona town square when Barry Goldwater officially began his 1964 presidential run. And I was there for the last official event of the Goldwater campaign. My job was to recruit and manage my fellow junior-high and high-school conservatives in a phone bank operation, calling supporters to fill up as many buses as possible to help pack the stadium—a show of strength for the nation’s television viewers. Of course that’s an insignificant role to play in a presidential campaign, but it was pretty heady stuff for a 14-year-old kid from Flagstaff.

I broke with Goldwater in 1976 over his decision to back Gerald Ford instead of Ronald Reagan for the Republican presidential nomination. Ford was a perfectly decent, if ordinary, Republican (who could have taught the big-spending W. Bush a thing or two about the use of the veto!). But I took my conservatism seriously. Reagan was clearly the champion of the conservative cause.

Perhaps I’m just anti-military? No. I am proud of my honorable service and of the Army Commendation Medal I was awarded. I also spent a good deal of time in the 1980s as a member of the Speakers Bureau of High Frontier, promoting Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative, a defense policy unlike today’s in that it was actually designed to defend the American people.

I have been a Republican precinct committeeman; my county Republican Party elected me its “Man of the Year” in 1988; I have written speeches for conservative candidates and office holders; and I have been employed by statewide and national political organizations and campaigns, including the National Conservative Political Action Committee. Despite my disappointment in Goldwater for not supporting Reagan, I was there when a small band of the faithful—no more than four or five of us—gathered for a potluck dinner to support the creation of a brand-new public-policy think tank named after “Mr. Conservative.” The enterprise blossomed, and I was honored several months ago to serve as Master of Ceremonies for the Goldwater Institute’s 15th Anniversary Gala.

I can assure you then that my criticism of Bush has been on the basis of long-held conservative principles. It begins with respect for the wisdom of the Founders and the Constitution’s division of power and delegation of authority, and extends to an adherence to the principles of governmental restraint and fiscal prudence. It proved to be a message that was more than a little inconvenient for my employer.

Clear Channel Communications, the 800-pound gorilla of the radio business, owns an astonishing 1,200 stations in 50 states, including Newstalk 550 KFYI in Phoenix, where I do the afternoon program … or did until last summer. The principals of Clear Channel, a Texas-based company, have been substantial contributors to George W. Bush’s fortunes since before he became president. In fact, Texas billionaire Tom Hicks can be said to be the man who made Bush a millionaire when he purchased the future president’s baseball team, the Texas Rangers. Tom Hicks is now vice chairman of Clear Channel. Clear Channel stations were unusually visible during the war with what corporate flacks now call “pro-troop rallies.” In tone and substance, they were virtually indistinguishable from pro-Bush rallies. I’m sure the administration, which faced a host of regulatory issues affecting Clear Channel, was not displeased.

Criticism of Bush and his ever-shifting pretext for a first-strike war (what exactly was it we were pre-empting anyway?) has proved so serious a violation of Clear Channel’s cultural taboo that only a good contract has kept me from being fired outright. Roxanne Cordonier, a radio personality at Clear Channel’s WMYI 102.5 in Greenville, S.C., didn’t have it as good. Cordonier, who worked under the name Roxanne Walker, was the South Carolina Broadcasters Association’s 2002 Radio Personality of the Year. That apparently wasn’t enough for Clear Channel. Her lawsuit against the company alleges that she was belittled on the air and reprimanded by her station for opposing the invasion of Iraq. Then she was fired.

They couldn’t really fire me, at least without paying me a substantial sum of money, but I was certainly belittled on the air for opposing the war. The other KFYI talk-show hosts—so bloodthirsty that they made Bush apologists and superhawks Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity sound moderate—vilified me almost daily. As a former radio-station owner myself, it was a little hard to believe management would allow one of their key hosts to be trashed day in and day out on their own airwaves. After all, we sell radio time on the basis of its ability to influence people’s behavior. A wiser programming approach would have been to showcase me as an object of curiosity, with a challenge to listeners to see if they could discover where I had gone wrong or how I was missing the imminent threat Iraq posed to the American people. No doubt the constant vilification I received and my heterodoxy on the war cost me audience during the interlude. It was certainly enough to get pictures of me morphing into those of the French president posted on the Free Republic Web site during the “freedom fries” silliness. A banner there read, “Boycott Charles Chirac Goyette at KFYI radio Phoenix, AZ! Protest against the Charles Goyette Show from 4-7pm at KFYI for his leftist subervsive [sic] Bush-bashing rants. Turn off KFYI radio for the Charles Goyette Show! No liberal scum talk shows on KFYI!” Radio does provoke people, doesn’t it?

One Clear Channel executive had me take an unexpected day off for the sin of reporting the breaking news on March 27, 2003, that neocon hawk Richard Perle, of the Defense Policy Board, had relinquished his chairmanship under scrutiny of his business dealings and for blaspheming that Donald Rumsfeld was the worst Secretary of Defense since Robert McNamara. So great were these transgressions that the radio gods themselves must have been aghast at my impiety. I explained in conference-room confrontations that both positions were completely respectable points of view. The comparison with McNamara had been made repeatedly in subsequent days in the mainstream media. I specifically cited “The McLaughlin Group” the following Friday and the New York Times the following Monday, and in describing the Perle resignation, I relied upon details from both Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker and from syndicated columnist Arianna Huffington. “Well, then,” they explained, the problem was “the emotionalism” of my remarks. Imagine that, emotionalism in talk radio? I reminded them that for years we had run promotions identifying KFYI as “the Place with More Passion,” where the Charles Goyette Show was positioned as “Fearless Talk Radio!”

Clear Channel made it clear—“With you, I feel like I’m managing the Dixie Chicks,” said my program director—that they would have liked to fire me anyway. While a well-drafted contract made that difficult, it did not prevent them from tucking me away outside prime time.

So I’m a talk-show war casualty. My contract expires in a few more months and—my iconoclasm being noted—it is not likely it will be renewed. Among the survivors at my station: one host who wanted to nuke Afghanistan (he bills himself as “your voice of reason and moderation”) and another who upon learning that 23-year-old Mideast peace activist Rachel Corrie had been run over by an Israeli bulldozer shouted, “Back up and run over her again!” As he doesn’t quite get some of the important distinctions in these debates, such as that Iranians should not be called Arabs, we would hope that he’s not taken too seriously. Likewise my replacements in the afternoon drive slot, brought in for glamorizing the war and billed as “The Comedy Channel meets Talk Radio.” If you remember the “Saturday Night Live” skit “Superfans” with Mike Myers and Chris Farley—“Who’s stronger, God or da Bulls?” “Da Bulls!”—then you get the idea. Only instead of “da Bulls,” it’s three hours every afternoon of “da Bush!” Expect to hear more insightful topics like “So Who’s Tougher: Michael Jordan or Donald Rumsfeld?”

I’ve seen how war fever infects a people. And I was in a no-win situation, with an audience pre-screened by virtue of 11 hours a day of screaming war frenzy—unlistenable for the uninfected—that surrounded my time slot. So I knew there would be a personal price for opposing the war, and I was prepared to pay it. But as a lover of the rough and tumble of public debate and the contest of ideas, I am disappointed at what is happening in my industry. At least at Clear Channel, there’s only one word for the belief that talk radio is still a fair and fearless search for the truth: “Un-Bull-ieveable!”

____________________________________

Charles Goyette was named “Best Talk Show Host of 2003” by the Phoenix New Times.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: antiwarright; clearchannel; sourgrapes; talkradio
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-207 next last
To: Destro
These anti-war conservatives are not the "same "anti-war" idiots" you describe. Shame on you for thinking that.

IF they believe that the United States of America is on an "Empire Building" crusade, then they are idiots. It is contrary to modern history and contrary to the ideals of this nation.

Believing something to be true despite overwhelming evidence it is false is also a form of insanity.

61 posted on 01/10/2004 5:53:18 PM PST by Swordmaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Destro
The examples proved your ignorance on the subject-examples that perfectly provedmy point that democracy building in Japan and Germany worked becuase democracy once flourished in those nations just a generation before the rise of Hitler or Tojo.

On the contrary, your assertions prove your ignorance, unless "flourished" means "taking some tentative steps" on your planet.

A culture where leader worship causes men to smash themselves suicidally upside warships isn't what I would call ripe for democracy.

62 posted on 01/10/2004 5:54:00 PM PST by prion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: marajade
I am the same way. I like Jacobs because he is kind of a goofball. I used to like Barry Young a lot but he is kind of like Rush. I find that after someone has been doing talk radio for too many years, they start to loose their patience with callers too easily and I find them kind of like stickly old farts. I actually enjoy Goyette because he does do some investigative stuff and actually tries to be thoughtful. He can get repetitive, but for the most part he puts on a decent show. Rush has turned into a Republican mouthpiece and in the last few years his show is just an audio edition of the Drudge Report that I read the night before. Hannity is a nice enough guy, but again a little too much of a bushbot. Liddy and Hill are an affront to the airwaves - lord knows how their show has lasted this long.
63 posted on 01/10/2004 5:54:36 PM PST by Nanodik (Libertarian, Ex-Canadian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

Comment #64 Removed by Moderator

To: marajade
I really can't see how Goyette even considers himself a conservative... I think he's more Libertarian...

He is definitely more libertarian leaning that most talk show hosts.

65 posted on 01/10/2004 5:56:36 PM PST by Nanodik (Libertarian, Ex-Canadian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Nanodik
He most certainly does compare the two. Otherwise, why did he bring up Pearl Harbor in an article about his views on the Iraq War getting him fired? Why even mention Pearl Harbor?

Was he comparing Pearl Harbor to Clear Channel? Hmmmm...?
66 posted on 01/10/2004 5:56:37 PM PST by Az Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Destro
...Wolfowitz: Mistakes Were Made.”
...Poland, Admits President; Rumsfeld: ‘Oops!’, Powell Silent; ‘Bring ’Em On,’ Says Defiant FDR.”

I would be really be startled considering most the people mentioned here weren't even born or were really young at the time.

67 posted on 01/10/2004 5:56:50 PM PST by Hillarys Gate Cult (Proud member of the right wing extremist Neanderthals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Destro
To me, he comes off as pompous, arrogant and condescending. Everyone around him is a mental midget in comparison, unworthy to even share the air he breathes. He doesn't bother to extend President Bush the accepted courtesy of calling him President Bush at first mention, and then in subsequent mentions referring to him as simply Bush - even the New York Times extends the man that much consideration. And there's no way that's accidental.

Reading this, I can just picture his show as three hours of screaming at and belittling the callers, telling them they're nothing more than stupid pom-pom wavers and George Bush kneepadders, broken up every now and then with updated Iraqi casualty counts, delivered with a barely concealed "I told you so" attitude, just as they are at CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS. If anyone who's listened to him has a different take, please share it - this is my impression based on nothing more than having read this piece.

68 posted on 01/10/2004 5:57:01 PM PST by CFC__VRWC (AIDS, abortion, euthanasia - don't liberals just kill ya?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker
and what is your defenition of Empire? Empires come in all forms. This Empire can be argued to resemble the Athenian Empire. Athens allowed home rule, but overthrew hostile regimes, went on preemptive stikes (Syracuse), controled the foreign policy direction of other city states.

Or is your version of empire the Hollywood one where you need occupations and rule by legions and proconsuls and the like? With the banners of the Emperor over the temple, etc.

69 posted on 01/10/2004 5:57:02 PM PST by Destro (Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Sink, I've been listen to Charles since his first day in Phoenix, he is a solid conservative and, unlike most talkshow hosts, an educated guy who believes what he says and doesn't just spout whatever gets him ratings. Now, the two guys that replaced him, Liddy and Hill are absolute jokes, the most brainless twaddle on local radio. I disagree with Goyette's stance on the war, but he is a compelling speaker. I enjoy hearing different opinions on talk radio, its a healthy thing.

All the freepers can blindly trash this guy, but none actually listen to him. Clear Channel is a joke, they have done more to ruin great radio stations than to help them. Goyette is the only show I still listen to on KFYI anymore, thankfully we have 2 or 3 other stations that have a wide range of good programming.

As for the New Times, yeah, its fairly liberal, but they have named many other conservatives as best talkshow host in the past, and they are the only print media in AZ that has the balls to take on the stories that the other newspapers shy away from.

70 posted on 01/10/2004 5:58:08 PM PST by Central Scrutiniser (Never, ever, ever trust a Tax Freedom grifter that wants your money...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nanodik
Maybe because people like me just love them. I think Liddy and Hill are the perfect show for drive time. Especially after a hard day, the last thing you want on that half hour drive is someone who kicks your bloodpressure right off the charts.
71 posted on 01/10/2004 6:03:40 PM PST by McGavin999 (Don't be a Freeploader-Have you donated yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: prion
But democracy already existed. Men remembered and were probably members of Japanese political parties and movements before the Generals took power in Japan. The great depression almost cost the USA her democracy. Huey Long anyone? When Americans said we will hold free elections and that mionority views can be expressed Germans and Japanese knew exactly what that meant even though they spent a generation under totalitarian rule.

The USA did not teach any of that-it just reinserteted those already understood and accepted concepts into those nations.

Nice attempt to over up your ignorance.

Once again, democracy can not be imposed from outside. In all cases where democracy flourishes a pre-existing condition for its truimph existed (as in the case of Japan and Germany). The USA has never been able to impose a democracy on a nation that did not have the foundations for a democracy and the USA has never been able to create anywhere-anytime the foundations that would allow for a democracy to evolve. - Name me one nation where the foundations for democracy did not exist (never held elections on their own) that the USA has been able to transform it to a democracy via nation building or any such method? Dare ya. Double dare ya.

72 posted on 01/10/2004 6:04:19 PM PST by Destro (Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: marajade
There is a rumor about Mohan possibly coming back. 1100 KFNX just was bought and they are gonna become a real talk station. They are bringing in a "20 year veteran" to do their morning shift in about 2 weeks, no word on who it is yet. I loved Mohan's show, best show on the radio. He got screwed over by KFYI, they cut him back, relegated him and changed his time slot all the time. The final insult was replacing him with a sports jock who confessed that he doesn't even read the paper and had no opinion other than what would make the audience hate him less.
73 posted on 01/10/2004 6:04:35 PM PST by Central Scrutiniser (Never, ever, ever trust a Tax Freedom grifter that wants your money...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: prion
PS: Japan and Germany did not take tentative steps towards democracy pre Hitler-Tojo. They were FULL BLOWN functioning democracies. Gemrany was in fact more democratic and gave more rights to its people under the Kaisers than the British did their own people.
74 posted on 01/10/2004 6:06:19 PM PST by Destro (Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Central Scrutiniser
Well, I don't know the guy and have never heard him.

Sounds like sour grapes, to me, from somebody who's likely been canned before.

Clear Channel cares about ratings; obviously his ratings were tanking, or advertisers were griping about him.

Hey, he wants to go against the grain, he needs to suck it up and suffer the consequences.

75 posted on 01/10/2004 6:06:33 PM PST by sinkspur (Adopt a shelter dog or cat! You'll save one life, and maybe two!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Destro
That's funny. Everything I have ever read shows that democracy can not be imposed from outside. In all cases where democracy flourishes a pre-existing condition for its truimph existed. The USA has never been able to impose a democracy on a nation that did not have the foundations for a democracy......

Except for feudalism until the mid 19th Century, Imperial despotism until the early 20th Century and military despotism until August, 1945, what foundation did the Empire of Japan have for a democracy in August 1945?

Except for the disaster of the Weimar Republic, what foundation did the Third Reich have for a democracy in April 1945?

Winning a war and then immediately going home allows the defeated enemy to simply re-group and re-arm so that you can have the fun of fighting the sequel to the same war all over again 10 or 20 years down the road.

The fact that, after millenia of warfare and bloodshed, both Japan and Western Europe are currently holier-than-thou pacifists is due to the fact that the U.S. stayed around after 1945 to establish the Pax Americana.

Such was not the case after 1918.

As a result, 40 million Europeans and over 400,000 Americans died between 1939 and 1945.

Even in cases where the population of the defeated country is as unsuited to democracy as gasoline is to an open flame, it behooves you to stay until the autocratic regime that emerges is in your camp and not in the camp of your mortal enemies.

Unless a nation is fighting wars merely for practice or for martial glory, it unwise to "bug out" and immediately abadon the fruits of your victory to the very enemy you have just defeated.

76 posted on 01/10/2004 6:06:37 PM PST by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Destro
re:I am sympathic to some antiwar conservatives becuase I feel they are anti-war because the war implies an occupation and nation building world empire agenda.
 
Cool. I'm glad at least someone gets it.
77 posted on 01/10/2004 6:07:39 PM PST by tomakaze ( Todays "useful idiot" is tomorrows "useless eater")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marajade
Amen. I noticed he did not mention his ratings at any point in the article posted. Radio folks, particularly in those rated more than once a year, live and die by this stuff...and it looks like he died by them.
78 posted on 01/10/2004 6:08:42 PM PST by perez24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: marajade
I used to love to listen to Bill Strauss, and he is as liberal as can be. He had a good show though, and while I never agreed with him, I liked him, a good intelligent guy. There is no one on local radio I agree with 100%, in any day though I listen to Liebowitz, Ernie Hancock, Ted whatshisname, Sydney Hay, the ultra liberal Dr. Mike Newcomb as well as all the syndicated guys. Choice is good, the only one I can't stand is Michael Savage and Mike Gallagher, those guys would say or believe anything for ratings, they are cartoons.
79 posted on 01/10/2004 6:09:04 PM PST by Central Scrutiniser (Never, ever, ever trust a Tax Freedom grifter that wants your money...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Destro
Once he referred to David Dinkins as looking like a men's room attendant, I could never look at Dinkins again without thinking about that! But I think he did go a *little* too far with the Ron Brown thing...
80 posted on 01/10/2004 6:11:50 PM PST by NYC GOP Chick (Kaddafi is such a whack job that he never promoted himself past Colonel!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-207 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson