Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Criticism of The FCC's Chairman Is Widely Aired
'Lone operator' is said to keep plans from colleagues and manage the agency ineffectively.
WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission's monthly meetings are scheduled to start at 9:30 a.m. Under Chairman Kevin J. Martin, the trains don't always run on time, and recently they've come close to veering off the rails.
On Nov. 27, for instance, the FCC was slated to consider controversial proposals dealing with potential new cable TV regulations and increasing women and minority ownership of broadcast stations. Journalists, lobbyists and spectators waited as the five commissioners on the fractious panel wrangled over the issues eight floors above. When they finally showed up for the public session -- nearly 12 hours late -- the few spectators remaining had front-row seats for the sniping and accusations that are threatening to become hallmarks of FCC meetings.
Critics usually blame Martin, a soft-spoken Republican known as a political tactician who has accomplished the rare feat of being criticized by all four of his fellow commissioners. He is also facing a congressional inquiry into the FCC's procedures and allegations of flawed research studies, suppressing data, ignoring public input and holding hearings with minimal notice.
"The FCC appears to be broken," Rep. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said during a hearing last week. Congressional Democrats' growing frustration with Martin could hinder his agenda. Last week, for example, a Senate committee passed legislation to delay Martin's planned vote this month on loosening media ownership rules.
In an interview, Martin said he was under fire for trying to force the FCC to deal with controversial topics. "It's not unusual for there to be tension in trying to work them out."
FCC employees and people who frequently deal with the agency said tensions were bogging down the panel. Reviews of corporate mergers and sales frequently stretch longer than the six months the agency aims for. Critics have complained that important issues -- such as the 2009 transition to digital television and reforming a fund that subsidizes phone and Internet service for low-income and rural residents -- are taking a back seat to bickering.
"There's budding upheaval here if some of these abuses don't get addressed," said an FCC official who requested anonymity to avoid irritating Martin.
The infighting does not bode well for the agency's effectiveness during what is likely to be Martin's last year as chairman with a new administration taking power in 2009.
Commission employees said that Martin, chairman since 2005, keeps his plans tightly wrapped, believing there's a tactical advantage in springing them on other commissioners with little notice. For example, last month commissioners learned the details of his proposal to ease restrictions on owning a newspaper and broadcast station in the same market when they read about it in an opinion article by Martin in the New York Times.
"He is a lone operator," said an FCC insider who did not want to publicly criticize Martin. "Sometimes even his own staff doesn't really know what he's thinking and what's he's going to do next."
Martin defended the release of his long-awaited cross-ownership plan, which had implications in Times parent Tribune Co.'s deal to go private, saying he was trying to allow everyone, including the public, to see it at the same time. It takes two to tangle, his supporters said, and his attempts to forge consensus on issues gives the other commissioners extra leverage.
Bureaucratic inefficiency is hardly unusual in Washington. But government agencies normally manage to start their meetings on time. The FCC's problem doing that -- three times this year, meetings have begun more than nine hours late -- was the butt of jokes at the Federal Communications Bar Assn.'s annual dinner last week.
"I just can't keep delaying these meetings so you can run up your billable hours," Martin told the lawyers at the event, where the FCC chairman traditionally pokes fun at himself.
To people with business before the agency, it's no laughing matter. Communications lawyers and lobbyists privately complain they have difficulty figuring out the status of their issues at the FCC. The meeting delays are emblematic of increasing infighting and highlight flaws in Martin's management style, they say.
Unlike past chairmen, Martin puts proposals on the FCC's agenda before he has lined up a majority to support him, said Harold Feld, senior vice president of the Media Access Project, a public interest media and telecommunications law firm in Washington. The tactic can help Martin push his agenda by forcing commissioners to take a position, but at a cost.
"You end up with a lot of last-minute wrangling, and it does generate a certain amount of resentment and distrust," Feld said.
That was evident Nov. 27.
Shortly before 9:30 a.m., the FCC announced the meeting would not start until 11 a.m. and that the proposal to improve female and minority ownership of broadcast stations had been dropped from the agenda. The FCC's two Democrats, Michael J. Copps and Jonathan S. Adelstein, had accused Martin of trying to use the proposal to deflect concerns about his cross-ownership plan's effect on women and minorities.
Copps and Adelstein had ripped that plan as caving in to large media companies. They said FCC studies Martin used to justify his plan were flawed, and they had hammered him for holding the final public hearing on the issue in Seattle with just one week's notice.
There still was a controversial proposal on the November agenda, and this one had Martin's fellow Republicans upset.
The chairman had pushed the commission to approve a report concluding that cable TV penetration had passed a key 70% threshold nationwide, which would trigger new regulatory powers. Martin has complained that cable TV rates are too high and aggressively pushed cable companies to allow viewers to buy channels separately instead of in pricing tiers. The companies adamantly oppose the idea, known as a la carte, and said Martin wanted to use the new regulatory powers to enact it.
The industry disputed Martin's assertion that penetration had reached the threshold. And Republican Commissioners Deborah Taylor Tate and Robert S. McDowell took the unusual step of publicly questioning Martin's data, which were based on an outside study.
Lacking the votes to approve the report, Martin and the commissioners worked on a compromise to require all cable companies to submit information to the FCC so the agency could make its own calculation. The negotiations dragged into the evening. Staffers had pizza delivered for dinner and smooth jazz continued to play in the nearly empty meeting room.
The commissioners finally convened at 9:14 p.m. The carping started shortly afterward.
Adelstein and McDowell complained that Martin hadn't given them the FCC's existing cable data, which showed penetration well below the 70% threshold, until the previous night. McDowell called the development disturbing. Adelstein accused Martin of suppressing the information and trying to "cook the books." Martin shot back that the commissioners got the data just hours after they asked for it.
Commissioners continued their infighting at a congressional hearing Wednesday. Copps complained that Martin ignored the hundreds of people who turned out at public hearings to oppose easing the cross-ownership ban. And he said Martin's plan to allow newspaper and broadcast combinations in the top 20 markets and also consider special exemptions in other markets was actually a complete elimination of the rule.
"Given how the FCC has considered media regulations in recent years," Copps said, "I have about as much confidence that a proposed combination will be turned down as I do that the next commission meeting will start on time."
© 2007 The Los Angeles Times
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...



10 Comments so far
Show AllMore illumination is needed concerning the media megalith Tribune Company's pending purchase by billionaire Sam Zell: Martin's FCC has just given unprecedented permanent broadcast-newspaper cross-ownership waivers to the Tribune Company for Chicago's WGN-AM and WGN-TV, in addition to extensions of the "temporary" waivers it holds for such cross-ownerships in four other cities. Such cross-ownership has been deemed otherwise illegal for decades. Congress must now step in and fully block Grinch Martin's scheme.
And when any cross-owned TV and radio stations are to be sold off, congress should require they be sold to women and minority-owned concerns, as these groups' broadcast ownership statistics are pathetically small, unacceptable, and worsening under Martin.
It would only be fair.
Big Christmas gifts to big media from the FCC such as the Tribune waivers and its closely-related relaxation of national cross-ownership rules are prime examples of the fruit borne of the closed, antidemocratic process and bogus research at chairman Kevin Martin's broken-down FCC described in the article.
For a report on Chicago Media Action's singalong protest at Tribco's corporate hq last Friday, go here:
www.freepress.net/actionnetwork/blog/1061
Link to a video of the Chicago protest "The FCC's Twelve Days of Christmas" here:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iksr_GRKArE
Stop Big Media!
www.stopbigmedia.com
Can we all just agree.
The Republican's suck at govering. Absolutely suck.
With a good chance Martin will get the boot in 2009 it looks like he is trying to pocket all the silverware after feeding at the public trough before he leaves dinner.
Millions of people voiced opposition to further media consolidation in 2003 and we haven't changed our minds one bit. The media is already more consolidated than it should be creating a rising threat to democracy. See link to current media ownership:
http://www.natvan.com/who-rules-america/wra.pdf
Dictatorial intent always includes control of communications. See especially item #6 at this link:
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
Send him back to daycare!
LIGHTS, CAMERA, ACTION - NO, WAIT ...
HOLD IT ... THE FIX IS NOT IN ...
"To people with business before the agency, it's no laughing matter. Communications lawyers and lobbyists privately complain they HAVE DIFFICULTY FIGURING OUT THE STATUS OF THEIR ISSUES at the FCC. The meeting delays are emblematic of increasing infighting and highlight flaws in Martin's management style, they say."
On my, speaking of the media, you mean that media that rubber-necks its way into the slightest bump off the beaten path to make a mountain of it? That media?
The media so desparate for news that it looks for paint drying faster on some places on the wall than other places?
The he-said she-said brain-dead media that couldn't provide an inkling of investigative reporting if it's 24-hour news cycle depended on it?
So when the Commissioners show up at the usual, bland fixed meeting and it's not fixed, wow, all hell breaks loose doesn't it? I mean, those Commissioners were DISAGREEING IN PUBLIC on a PERSONAL LEVEL for godsake.
Oh, the impromptu spontaneity of it all ... the UNSCRIPTED GIVE AND TAKE ... wasn't this all settled beforehand in the 1,341 private ex parte meetings with the lobbyists? How DARE they break rank from protocol and suprise us with an UNEXPECTED DECISION.
Better double up on the cameras and microphones next time. Word's out that the Commission Staff is going to order CHINESE next time as they watch the Commissioners eat CROW while the Staff plays INDIE ROCK real loud.
"He is also facing a congressional inquiry into the FCC's procedures and allegations of flawed research studies, suppressing data, ignoring public input and holding hearings with minimal notice."
Yeah, so what else is new? Everything about this Amdinistration has been flawed from the "moment of inception".
Another "congressional inquiry" will achieve nothing and hold no one responsible if indeed they're conducting "business as usual".
I always wondered how the criminal subset of the Boomers were going to pass the torch to the X-Gen. This guy will have lots of opportunities: televangelist, maybe a senatorial slot, S&L manager, etc.
They pick only those with similar character traits for the top management decisions. I've got a theory that devolution is at work. Managers typically pick people less intelligent than themselves for positions, since they are not a risk to their own power base. These people get promoted, and eventually take the torch themselves. After just a few passes at this, utter numskulls are in charge.
When your philosophy for government is that it can't work and you have the reigns of government in your demented little hands, why is anybody surprised when you make sure that government is absent, as you pass favors to your fellow corporatists that you will soon be working for.
To hell with the commons spelled out by the founders.
To hell with "We the people".
To hell with your fellow citizens.
To hell with the republic, Martin has favors that need to be done.
He is just SO clever and mysterious.
It is important to be clever and mysterious as you undermine laws for your power grabbing friends.
It is a serious mistake to think these people are just bumbling idiots when in actuality, they are truly demented.
Martin is an ideologue with the clear agenda of handing media to corporations. All his representations are meant to misinform the public and to insure that the only message the American people receive is the corporate message. I'm sure Copps and Adelstein know this full well. How long those guys will survive on the FCC nobody knows, but their crucial task in the final analysis is to stop Kevin Martin and the other Republican hacks on the board from giving us their version of the Ministry of Truth or a privatized versions of Dr. Goebbel's Ministry of Propaganda minus the brown uniforms. Do I exaggerate? Not really.
They use incompetence as cover for things much more nefarious.
"The fool" is a common motif (see Parabola Magazine 26:3), but usually to demonstrate a positive moral lesson in a way that is politically acceptable for the time, allows the powers-that-be to avoid losing face, etc. The Fool in this case accomplishes the reverse. The evil fool.