Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiA Kick in the Eye from the FCC
A kick in the eye. That is what a proposed change to media-ownership rules feels like.
Contrary to statements from Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin that couch the proposal as a compromise, it is bad policy that helps only media conglomerates. The only compromise will be from corporations figuring out how to add more news outlets in an attempt to meet the bottom-line journalism demanded by Wall Street.
Media reformers, consumer groups and parts of the press oppose the plan because it allows for cross-ownership of a newspaper and broadcast station in the nation's 20 largest media markets. The plan is made more dangerous because the commission could grant waivers outside the proposed criteria.
The Newspaper Association of America, which has been advocating cross-ownership for years, is displeased because Martin did not go far enough.
The public's interest was obviously not considered. Had it been, Martin would have taken time to digest the six media-ownership hearings, which wrapped up in Seattle - four days before Martin announced his plan with an op-ed in The New York Times.
That leaves the politicians. Martin seems to be trying to position his plan as a compromise for Congress. Expect Martin to favorably compare his rule changes to what the FCC passed in 2003, which were swatted aside by a federal appellate court.
Martin knows how Washington, D.C., works. He has offered up the cable industry to soften Congress on cross-ownership. He wants to force cable companies to adopt such practices as a la carte programming, and limit the percentage of a market one company can reach.
Martin's cable stance is good public policy. Martin's cross-ownership plan is not good public policy. The two issues are not related. Congress is smart enough to see through this horse trade.
The cross-ownership rule changes will undermine independent journalism, blinding news outlets in all markets. Congress must protect the public and America's independent press if the FCC will not.
Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company
12 Comments so far
Show All"If we want any kind of citizen control over media, we will need lots and lots of Democrats in Congress and The White House to get it."
If my senator weren't Feinstein I could accept this notion. Sadly, I don't see a chorus of Dems opposing Martin's giveaway.
new media is at lovolutionvillage.org
give peace a hand
the following rephrasing of a comment above would also be true ...
"Democrats don't believe in corporate limitation, especially concerning corporations that affect the outcome of their fundraising, their policies and their re-election."
Don't have to turn off the whole TV, even though sometimes that not a bad idea. But years ago I used the parental blocking features to block all the US corporate media\propaganda channels.
So I still get my Free Speech TV and Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! every day, but I don't ever get my mind polluted by the crap on CNN, Faux, MSNBC, etc.
Ha, its the Democrats that started this mess. It was the Telecom bill from back in '96, pushed by Bill Clinton and supported by the Democrat leadership in Congress that started this whole media conglomeration trend.
The Democrats have consistently shown that they'll gladly support any corporate cause as long as the bribes .. uh, contributions, flow to the Democrats. Voting Democrat to stop or reverse this is very likely useless. The Dem candidates might lie to you during the elections campaigns to pretend they'll oppose this, but they'll vote for whoever writes them a big check.
If you want to make sure you stop this sort of stuff, send back in 2009 a Congress with a Green Party majority.
For God sakes - turn off your damn televisions already. Stop going to the movies. No rentals. No DVD purchases. No cable. No satellite.
It's called a strike. The only thing "they" want is money, period. And, if y'all stop giving them money, they will go away. No one watches TV Show X, TV Show X disappears; no one sees Torture Movie Part 8, there is no Part 9.
Or, keep complaining and keep rewarding them and then keep wondering why they won't stop their bad behavior.
When are we going to understand that no one in D.C. is listening to "WE THE PEOPLE?" The Masters of War have produced a new pair IRON HEELS that Bush can legally wear once he gets the Constitution rewritten to allow the wearing of IRON HEELS domestically. Until then don't expect anyone in D.C. to keep on rockin' in the free world.
Hoa binh
Looks like its time to ditch the FCC and try to come up with something else that works to further the interests of the public instead of a revolving door for political operators like Martin. I admit I haven't a clue what that would be except to enact major legislation to prevent FCC commissioners from working for media companies.
If we want any kind of citizen control over media, we will need lots and lots of Democrats in Congress and The White House to get it. Republicans don't believe in corporate limitation, especially concerning corporations that affect the outcome of their fundraising, their policies and their re-election.
I wrote a response letter to my local newspaper, suggesting that our (almost completed) brand new 50% black high school should not be named after Warren G Harding, because WGH was a racist, and they refused to print it. They told me it was too controversial.
However, the conservative editorial staff regulalrly runs racist editorials by conservatives who blame all minority problems on the minorities, yet offers no more hope to them than "pull yourselves up by your bootstraps".
The big media problem is becoming ridiculous. America is no longer a democracy. America's newspapers can say whatever they want to about the evils of Islam, but when a citizen writes letters criticizing Bush, they edit out the most damning parts.
If they take away our freedom on the internet, I am moving to a free land ASAP!
TEN DETAILS OF MEDIA OWNERSHIP CONCENTRATION IGNORED BY MSM
For the full article, see
http://www.freepress.net/press/release.php?id=303
FACT #1: Martin's "modest" proposal is corporate welfare for Big Media. Martin's plan would unleash a buying spree in the top 20 markets, making it easier for companies like Belo, News Corp. and Tribune Co. to push out independent, local owners.
FACT #2: Loopholes open the door to cross-ownership in any market. Under Martin's loose standards, cross-ownership waivers could be approved in hundreds of smaller cities and towns.
FACT #3: Loopholes allow newspapers to own TV stations of any size. The same technicalities could permit top-rated stations in any market to combine with major newspapers.
FACT #4: FCC history shows weak standards won't protect the public. The current rules forbid cross-ownership, but the FCC hasn't denied any temporary waiver request in years.
FACT #5: Cross-ownership doesn't create more local news. The latest studies — using the FCC's own data — show that markets with cross-ownership produce less total local news, as one dominant company crowds out the competition.
FACT #6: Cross-ownership won't solve newspapers' financial woes. Claims that the newspaper industry is about to "wither and die" are greatly exaggerated, and no evidence shows that cross-ownership would make things better.
FACT # 7: The Internet is an opportunity, not a death sentence. Mergers and consolidation are not the answer to the financial problems of the traditional media.
FACT #8: Martin's plan would harm minority media owners. Nearly half of the nation's minority-owned TV stations are lower-rated outlets in the top 20 markets, making them a target for Big Media takeovers.
FACT # 9: A broken and corrupt process creates bad policies. The FCC's lack of transparency, flawed research and secret timetable have tossed aside basic fairness and accountability in the rush to change media ownership rules.
FACT # 10: The public doesn't want more media consolidation. Martin's actions ignore the millions of Americans — and 99 percent of the comments in the FCC docket — who oppose letting a few media giants swallow up more local media.
The Big Red Lie must be true because everyone is saying it? That's how Big Brother's Ministry of Truth works. So far I have maintained my unbiased sanity by unpluging the boob tube and ignoring the Neo-Corporate rags. I suppose that soon enough we will all be required to watch Ten Minutes of Hate for national security reasons. Note: National Security really means Corporate Domination of humanity.