EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Democracy and Media
An important government meeting was once called but closed to the media. The assembled leaders produced a 5,000-word document, finalized early enough to be manually typeset by the close of the proceedings.
Within weeks, it was reproduced by newspapers in every state. It came to preoccupy the nation's signed and unsigned editorialists, as well as its political reporters. It prompted conventions across the nation - which we know far more about because they were all open to the media.
The document was ultimately endorsed with some additions, most notably language addressing the role of journalism in a free society.
The document is of course the U.S. Constitution, the string of anonymous op-eds is now known as the Federalist Papers, and the little-debated addition is the First Amendment.
James Madison's original draft in the House of Representatives spoke of the press as one of the "great bulwarks of liberty," echoing language first put forth by the Virginia ratifying convention. But Congress adopted the more economical formulation we know today.
It is enormously revealing that our nation's popular press literally predates our foundational political document, and played a key role in its formation. After all, in Europe, where the power of government remained solidly in the grasp of elites at the end of the 18th century, there was no obvious need or demand for a popular press covering - let alone criticizing - the acts of government. But in a democracy - where every citizen is allowed and expected to vote - a professional, independent, objective media is fundamental.
Today, the U.S. is vastly more powerful and richer than in the heady days of Madison and the Constitutional Convention. But do we currently have a media system that would make our Founding Fathers proud?
I fear not. We have a system that has been buffeted by an endless cycle of consolidation, budget-cutting, and bureau-closing. We have witnessed the number of statehouse and city hall reporters declining decade after decade, despite an explosion in state and local lobbying. As the number of channels has multiplied, there is far less total local programming and reporting being produced. These days, if it bleeds, it leads.
Interested in learning about local politics from the evening news? About 8 percent of such broadcasts contain any local political coverage at all, including races for the House of Representatives, and that was during the 30 days before the last presidential election.
Interested in how TV reinforces stereotypes? Consider that the local news is four times more likely to show a mug shot during a crime story if the suspect is black rather than white.
What has caused this appalling degeneration of our media? One factor, I am ashamed to say, is the abdication of responsibility by regulators at the Federal Communications Commission. We allow the nation's broadcasters to use spectrum worth billions of dollars, supposedly for programming that serves the public interest.
Once upon a time, the FCC actually enforced this bargain by requiring a thorough review of a licensee's performance every three years before renewing the license. But during the market absolutism of the Reagan years, we pared that down to "postcard renewal," a rubber stamp every eight years with no substantive review.
It is time to do better. The FCC needs to reinvigorate the license-renewal process. We need to look at a station's record every three or four years. And let's actually look at this record. No more rubber stamps. Did the station show original programs on local civic affairs? Did it broadcast political conventions? In an era where too many owners live thousands of miles away from the communities they allegedly serve, have these owners met with local leaders and the public to receive feedback?
Another factor is the FCC's woeful record of stepping aside to allow wave after wave of consolidation in the broadcast and print business. Though there are rules on the books designed to prevent too much cross-ownership of TV, radio and print properties in a single market, we have not enforced them with the rigor they deserve.
Far more troubling was what the FCC tried in 2003 - over my strong objection - to relax the cross-ownership rules. The agency actually voted 3-2 to allow a single company to own up to three TV stations, eight radio stations, the daily newspaper (a monopoly in most towns), the cable system and the Internet service provider.
Thank heavens Congress and the courts stepped in to overturn that terrifyingly bad decision. But now the agency is considering changes to these very same rules.
I say this is hardly the time to rush headlong into more of what we know has not worked given the wreckage caused by our decades-long flirtation with the notion that Wall Street always knows best when it comes to journalism.
As the FCC and America move forward into the brave new world of media in the 21st century, I hope we can agree the public interest is not just another way of saying "corporate profit maximization."
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, my personal hero, once said in a letter to newspaper publisher Joseph Pulitzer, "I have always been firmly persuaded that our newspapers cannot be edited in the interests of the general public from the counting room."
The same is true of broadcast journalism. Consider the fact that the existence of local news in Spanish in a market can boost election turnout among Spanish-speakers by more than 10 percent. No dollars-and-cents calculation is going to take account of that extraordinary boost to our nation's democracy.
If technology and changes in the economics of the news business have made the old ways impossible, we need to find new ways to develop a media system that can serve democracy. That is not a luxury, it is a necessity.
I take great comfort from the conclusion of another critic of the current media system, Walter Cronkite, who said, "America is a powerful and prosperous nation. We certainly should insist upon, and can afford to sustain, a media system of which we can be proud."
Let's work together to show that it can be done. Our democracy demands it.
Michael J. Copps is a commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission.
Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
16 Comments so far
Show AllIt all starts with getting rid of the concept of "Corporate Rights". When a CEO's number one priority is to make a profit, above all else, then that is exactly what they will do, at the expense of any/and everything around it. It's way past time for Corporations to be held accountable for their actions; not as the individual Corporation, (because they are not a person/human), but as a Board of Directors. Once they get held accountable, they will change the way their CEOs work.
forget the fcc.
especially when they are pissing on about restoring that which cannot be restored.
they should however stop and reverse their decision to give the internet to private corporations.
we, the public, have shown that we do not need katie couric, cnn, or the times to learn about the world. we can sift through the bullshit on our own, but we need a neutral net to do so. we need to get behind the idea of net neutrality.
readers; ignore this insincere tripe from the fcc commissioner - it is without value but do get involved in the net neutrality dialog, that is important.
here is a primer on the topic, please read it:
http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality.html
jpbreeze -
I agree wholeheartedly.
I find that whenever I argue with repugs over corporate rights the idea of "what about the right to make a profit?" arises. I like to point out that if the right to make a profit exists (gee, doesn't seem to appear in that constitution thingy) then the federal minimum wage should be set at about 18-20 dollars an hour, after all, I have a right to make a profit and not just a mere living wage right? No unions? Okay let's bust up those unions representing investors called corporations. If corporations have rights becuase they are "people" then surely we have those same rights as well.
milesofmusic -
Good point - without net neutrality we have no hope of curtailing or bypassing a corporate press that refuses to disseminate real news. This is perhaps the most important issue of our times because without net neutrality we are unlikely to have a real shot at fixing any other issues or even being aware of them.
I have no interest in a media to be 'proud of'- I'll take a media that 'dignifies' through digging onto the issues knowing that the next report has to be just as good or better. Is it some sort of accident that 'pride'is cited as a sin? get ego out of it.
The problem, I think, is none of the above, but a very nasty idol that has taken the place of all other public considerations, such as resposible journalism and freedom of the press. The idol is MSV. Maximizing Shareholder Value.
All things, unbiased reporting, workers salaries, collective bargaining, quality of product, governmental regulation, etc. are sacrificed to that idol.
I personally prefer the carefully crafted, edited, and censored propaganda of the Chinese evening news, to the racist, bigoted, and mostly sensational rubbish popular on the American boob tube. Atleast we know who is doing the editing/sensationalizing and it isn't for money, so generally if you know how to read between the lines you can get a good idea of the problems China is facing. However, with the corporate big brother, unless we are well-informed, net-capable citizens the wool is all too easily pulled over the proverbial eye.
also there is the issue of direct CIA involvement in the media as we see in Operation Mockingbird.
Please note that I am NOT SAYING this happens all the time or even very much anymore. The parrots have been trained so most of the time CIA stuff is probably not necessary/but the history is richly footnoted as the variety of excerpts from different sources at the bottom of this EXCELLENT THREAD FROM SPARTACUS/ EDUCATION FORUM SHOW
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmockingbird.htm
Unfortunately, the bottom line, $$$, is what drives ALL businesses, regardless of their function. There are some REAL journalists out there, but they tend to fight the "machine" and wind up jobless. I know this, because that journalist is my Son. He earned a Master's degree from the No. 1 school of journalism, U of Missouri. He also has a BS in Modern American History, graduated magna cum laude, is gifted, but THINKS for himself. It is so sad that media, particularly broadcast, rejects cerebral thinking. An anchorwoman once told him to write at the 7th grade level. When he told me that, I told him he had not written at that level since he was in 3rd grade. He just told her no; refused to do it. This same woman probably made 5 times as much money as he did, yet she thinks she should talk AT the audience at a seventh grade level. Again, our priorities are completely screwed up. The person who does the research and writes the stories for the local morons to read is the one who should be highly paid. Most anyone can read, but it takes true genius to write well and carry a story for the audience to follow closely and stay tuned. Like education, we HAVE to learn who to value: the message or the messenger? The message is what I value, not necessarily who delivers it. If we continue down the same road of money and power grubbing, we will cease to be the country I knew and loved.
thank you milesofmusic for sharing the website on net neutrality. i'm adding this as a favorite with the intent to sign the petition. when are they going to vote on this? i hope it's not before the election. if so, we need to target the dems in congress and hold them accountable. we need to also question the presidential candidates about their positions on this important issue. why hasn't this been discussed previously? (note: this question is rhetorical--i know too damn well why it hasn't. just thought i'd put it out there...)
too late paula. our love is unrequited...
"What has caused this appalling degeneration of our media?"
How about . . . uhm . . . the medium IS the message?
"It is so sad that media, particularly broadcast, rejects cerebral thinking. An anchorwoman once told him to write at the 7th grade level. When he told me that, I told him he had not written at that level since he was in 3rd grade."
Anti-intellectualism in America has a long pedigree. The primary qualification most voters for the Smirk had was that he didn't sound intelligent, and he therefore must be both moral AND STRONG. Which, apart from all more sophisticated descriptions of fascism, is it's true essence: Ignorance Is Strength.
Just a clarification. The problem is not with "corporate rights" per se. The problem is that corporations enjoy "rights of personhood" which allows them the same rights as any citizen such as the right to privacy, the right to MAKE POLITICAL DONATIONS, etc, etc.
This is what needs to change. There are several towns and cities which have passed legislation denying rights of personhood to corporations doing business within their municipality. All cities, towns and states should pass similar regulations. Only then will we be able to demand accountability from corporations. And as an added bonus, we'd be able to remove corporate money from our political process.
Michael Copps appeared on Bill Moyers Journal a couple weeks ago. He's an FCC commissioner who has the public interest at heart.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08242007/watch.html
It`s really this simple that this crazy.
If the government guarantees corporate charters then it can also revoke them.
It`s just a matter of them realizing that corporations are an actual threat to their legitimate power. It`s a matter of government taking back the power it has been given. And it won`t happen until those elected to run it are intersted in doing so. And that won`t happen until millionaires with no interst in perpetuating the status quo and for some strange reason want to lose a couple million to be one of some 435 representatives or 104 senators. `Ain`t gonna happen`
Hmmm... Thank god for Michael Copps.
Too bad he keeps on getting outvoted.
Too bad he`ll probably be replaced with some Republican toady in a year or two.
I`m plainly stunned that he hasn`t already been.
The media often does an awful job but it is not only the corporate bosses or the FCC that is at fault but the media. They worship those in power and are willing to believe any nonsense put out by them. Iraq is a glaring example, but science is even more glaring with the media willing to accept the most absurd nonsense. For details on these see
Science blog
impunv.wordpress.com
or
impunv.blogspot.com
Political blog
randomabsurdities.wordpress.com