Karmazin: NAB anti-merger ad is "deliberately misleading"
Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 9:43 AM
Tags:
In response to the NAB's latest anti-XM/Sirius merger ad, a Sirius Satellite Radio spokesperson called it "deliberately misleading and hypocritical" and that one of the two quotations in the ad was "taken totally out of context."
"The NAB ad is deliberately misleading and hypocritical coming from people who say one thing to the Congress when they oppose our merger and the opposite in radio consolidation proceedings before the FCC and in SEC filings by their member companies," Sirius said in response to a query made by Radio & Records.
In question is the second quote in the ad, which supposedly came from Advertising Age. Sirius says the quote was taken out of context, and to prove it, they've provided a transcript of the Q&A:
Ad Age: There are questions about whether this market can sustain two players. What happens there?
Mel Karmazin: I certainly wouldn't rule out anything that is in the American public's best interest. You are dealing with two companies -- it would be great if there was a monopoly, but the second best thing is a duopoly. If the market is as big as we think it is, you're going to get two very profitable companies. There is nothing inherent that would preclude the companies from having interoperable radio or shared content. It's not the current business plan, but nothing would stop that.
Two questions later in the “Advertising Age” interview, Karmazin is asked if he is opposed to the notion of a merger with XM:
Ad Age: You're not opposed to it?
Mel Karmazin: The business model we are following is that we are an independent company. We don't need to combine with anybody.
Digg It!
Featured Entries
From the Forums...
Search Orbitcast:
Latest Poll
Satellite Radio Websites
Sponsored Links
Comments
This Mel guy is a total ass.
Posted by: man_rob ? | March 21, 2007 10:03 AM
The more NAB fights the more it proves they compete. As a person in favor of the merger I am hoping NAB fights it like crazy.
Posted by: MUSCLE | March 21, 2007 10:40 AM
Typo;
Should read: Karmazin is deliberately misleading.
Posted by: History Guy ? | March 21, 2007 12:48 PM
If Mel is making misleading and vague comments to business publications and congress, what makes anyone think that anything he's said to us, the customers, about content and pricing is in any way true?
Posted by: PFreak ? | March 21, 2007 2:44 PM
Here is Mel facing tough questions and giving answers that are frightening. When asked whether Sat Radio should be under the same restrictions as terrestrial he said some scary shit. Now I'm sure he's going to say whatever he has to too get the merger approved but either he's lying, in which case why should I, as a customer, believe anything he has to say, or he's telling the truth which means cencorship will be part of the new company.
http://www.adweek.com/aw/national/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003560696
Posted by: Anonymous Coward | March 21, 2007 4:50 PM
Coward, He didn't say anything about censorship.
"We do believe that we are entitled to air content adults want to hear," Karmazin said. If they object so some shows, "they can restrict it and not pay for that service."
He said they would have channel blocking which is available now. Dummy.
Posted by: Frank | March 21, 2007 11:46 PM
"Reading off a litany of racy programming that features pornographic film stars and sponsors such as Playboy, Brownback asked Karmazin if he would submit to the same regulations that broadcasters face."
"It's an easy yes for me, but I don't know what the standard would be so the answer is no," Karmazin said. "I can't give you that commitment."
He didn't say anything about cencorship? When asked if he would submit to the same regulations he said "that's an easy yes". He then added some qualifying language so he can backpedal if what he said is not what the senators want to hear. The fact that he didn't take a stand and say "absolutely not" speaks volumes.
Posted by: Anonymous Coward | March 22, 2007 4:27 PM
Cable has channel blocking and that didn't stop the V-chip or the regulation of content by the FCC did it?
Posted by: PFreak ? | March 22, 2007 4:29 PM