[maryz]

IIRC, Clear Channel owns about half the major radio stations in the US. And there's probably layers of contractual arrangements. I don't know the terms or what they could do or if they'd be willing to cut off their nose to spite their face so to speak, but I do know Rush has been really strange in coverage of the primaries, especially lately.

Didn't it happen occasionally in the "golden age" of Hollywood that a major studio went into a snit about a star, and refused to put him (or her) in a movie and refused to release him from the contract or allow him to work for another studio?

[Windflier]

I don't know the terms or what they could do or if they'd be willing to cut off their nose to spite their face so to speak, but I do know Rush has been really strange in coverage of the primaries, especially lately.

Rush has a level of star power that puts him on equal footing with Clear Channel. He can't be pushed around by them. You see the same thing with entertainers who've risen to superstar status. They're powerful enough to have a 'seat at the table', and can even call the shots on major projects.

They need him a lot more than he needs them. He could even walk away if he wanted, and build a new network. His audience, the advertisers, and the investment dollars would follow him.

I don't think anyone's pressuring him one way or the other about his editorial content.