Clear Channel Communications, in case you have been living in cave, is a massive corporation dedicated to buying up all the radio stations it can and making them the same. It used to be we had to worry about dictators conquering the world in the quest for world domination. Now it's corporations. And trust me, it will be harder to compel corporate CEOs to blow their brains out in a bunker.

But the reason I am discussing Clear Channel is because I inadvertently listened to one of their local affiliate stations this afternoon. Out of the 10 or so radio stations in my town, Clear Channel owns 6 of them, I think, at last count. So it is easy to mistakenly tune one in. This one was an "oldies" station. The reason I stopped was because as I channel surfed up the dial I caught it right at the beginning of "Lyin' Eyes" by the Eagles.

"Lyin' Eyes" is probably my third favorite Eagles song, after "Desperado" and "Hotel California." It is such a sad and bittersweet love ballad. I know the words, so naturally I was singing along. That's how I know.

Clear Channel edited out the middle verse. There are three verses to the song. The first verse talks about how this woman is trapped in a loveless marriage (probably because she married for money and not love and now she is regretting not having any love although she probably is not regretting not having the money). The second verse talks about the fleeting happiness she feels when she clandestinely meets with her lover, even though she has no real inclination to leave her husband for him. The last verse talks about her feelings of regret and guilt and sadness. So the song--being a BALLAD--tells a story.

This is apparently a concept alien to the geniuses at Clear Channel. Wait, let me start by saying WHO THE HELL do these people think they are that they can just edit songs willy-nilly to suit their optimal play length criteria or whatever? The unmitigated gall. I guess those who are talented create art and those who are not desecrate the art of others. So they have the temerity to cut and paste togther songs to suit their own needs.

What about their listeners, who might actually want to hear the WHOLE FRICKIN' SONG? They don't count for much.

And if I was a paranoid personality I might just wonder about the way it was cut. First verse talks about how the woman sold her happiness for a loveless marriage. Serves her right. The last verse talks about her feelings of guilt and remorse for cheating, which also serves her right. The second verse actually touches on the fleeting happiness she feels, even though it is a flawed happiness. But we can't have that. She must be shown to be bad, and then she must be shown to be tormented by her guilt. To show that she feels any happiness or satisfaction would be, well let's just say it: UNCHRISTIAN. She must be miserable and pay for her wicked deeds. To show that she feels anything positive at all would be contrary to the laws of Jerry Falwell, Pat Roberston and James Dobson.

Maybe I'm over thinking this. But it just pisses me off to no end that some bean counter corporate whore determined that it is more efficient to program songs and playlists if the songs are all of the same length and instead of just not playing songs that don't fit that criterion the company butchers songs to make them fit. It is wrong. Artists should lay off suing people for downloading songs and instead sue companies that butcher their work. But of course the commincations companies PAY them to butcher their work, so I guess that's all right. Philistines.

I can't go on. But you can bet I won't be listening to THAT radio station again, or any of the other cookie cutter corporate standardized stations owned, operated and propagandized by Clear Channel Communications.