These FCC rules allow new merger possibilities without any public-interest review. The details are complicated, but basically, one company now can own UHF TV stations in 199 of the nation's 210 TV markets, which is pretty much the equivalent of owning stations in every TV market in every state except California.There's a good point he makes there. Be sure to check out his whole column at the New York Daily News website.
That means a single company could influence the elections of 98 U.S. senators, 382 members of the House, 49 governors, 49 state legislatures and countless local races.
From NY Daily News website:
Media-merger ruling
by Mort Zuckerman
imperils democracy
Three anonymous political appointees to the Federal Communications Commission have delivered a body blow to American democracy. Large media companies are to be allowed to buy up more TV stations and newspapers, becoming more powerful and reaping a financial bonanza.
Astonishingly, the FCC has done this without public review, without analyzing the consequences and without the American people getting a dime in return for their public airwaves.
Under the FCC deal, big media companies must make no commitment to provide better news, or even unbiased news. Ditto local news coverage and children's programming. In fact, the new rules dramatically worsen opportunities for local news coverage, for diversity of views and for competition. "The public be damned!" was a robber barons' slogan from the Gilded Age. Seems to be just what the FCC is saying.
Consider the enormity of the changes. The commissioners removed the ban on broadcasting and newspaper cross-ownership. They raised the national cap on audience reach by station-group owners to 45%. They allowed ownership of two stations in more markets, and even three in a handful of markets. There's more, but you get the idea.
These FCC rules allow new merger possibilities without any public-interest review. The details are complicated, but basically, one company now can own UHF TV stations in 199 of the nation's 210 TV markets, which is pretty much the equivalent of owning stations in every TV market in every state except California.
That means a single company could influence the elections of 98 U.S. senators, 382 members of the House, 49 governors, 49 state legislatures and countless local races.
Employing another strategy now allowed by the FCC, that same company could own VHF stations in every TV market in 38 states, with the power to influence elections in 76 U.S. Senate races, 182 House races, 38 gubernatorial races and 38 state legislative races, along with countless local races. There are other scenarios. But again, you get the idea.
Easing the rules on cross-ownership means that in many local markets, one company could own its leading daily newspaper - often, its only newspaper - its top-rated TV station, the local cable company and five to eight radio stations. Previously, no TV and newspaper mergers were allowed in the same market, except when a firm was failing.
Now, the merger of the dominant newspaper and TV station could create local news monopolies in 200 markets serving 98% of Americans.
One defense of this outrage offered by the big media companies is the diversity provided by the Web. Well, yes. But does anyone really think the Internet is anything like an organized political or media power, much less a counterweight to a claque of billion-dollar media behemoths?
The good news is that the nation, finally, is waking up. The FCC has received hundreds of thousands of protests. Congressmen, both Democrats and Republicans, are alarmed. So are groups as diverse as Common Cause, the National Rifle Association and the Screen Actors Guild.
Conservative columnist William Safire of The New York Times writes, "the concentration of power - political, corporate, media, cultural - should be anathema to conservatives." John Roberts in the Chicago Tribune deplores the "blatantly disingenuous, if not dishonest, explanations being given by FCC Chairman Michael Powell and his supporters for their actions."
No prizes for guessing who supports the commission: the major media conglomerates that have coincidentally spent more than $80 million on lobbying, plus more than $25 million in political contributions, in the past three years and stand to gain enormously from this.
Regardless of their political ideology, we cannot risk nonelected media bosses having inappropriate local, regional or national power. The FCC was created to ensure that the public interest is served by the media companies that use our airwaves.
Everyone is entitled to a mistake sometimes, but the FCC is abusing the privilege. Congress must act now and reverse the FCC's irresponsible new rules.
Originally published on July 2, 2003
No comments:
Post a Comment