I'll have more to say on this later but it is time to start spreading the word that Columbus will host an FCC hearing on Media Ownership on March 7th.
You may recall the tremendous public backlash in 2003 against proposed rules to weaken ownership rules. Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein led the way by holding informal hearings around the country to get public input. Well, the FCC is at it again.
On June 21, current FCC chairman Kevin Martin issued a draft proposal -- called a Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, or FNPRM -- that kick-started Big Media's latest effort to weaken the rules protecting local voices, vibrant competition and diverse viewpoints. The rule would eliminate two key protections:
- The rule on "newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership," which prevents companies from owning a television or radio station and the major daily newspaper in the same area.
- The local ownership caps that limit a company from owning more than one television station in most markets. (They can own two in larger markets as long as there are at least eight other competitors.)
"having McDowell attend the hearing is a very big deal, as he is appears to be the possible swing vote on the issue of broadcast ownership at the FCC. There are 5 commissioners at the FCC, three republicans (the majority) and two democrats (Copps and Adelstein). Copps and Adelstein have been outspoken on these issues, pressing the FCC not to allow further consolidation. McDowell appears to be undecided. This forum will be an excellent opportunity to impress McDowell."Below is text from a promotional flier that you can download here.
RAISE YOUR VOICE NOW — OR LOSE IT!
Do you want the media to do a better job of covering issues you care about? Do you want more quality journalism? Are you wondering whether a few giant media conglomerates will provide the diverse and independent viewpoints you need? The Federal Communications Commission and media industry lobbyists want to change the rules so one company can own more newspapers, radio stations and TV stations in places like Columbus. Now is your chance to weigh in.
For more information, visit freepress.net/future or contact Amanda
Ballantyne, aballantyne@freepress.net, 612-849-0195
Technorati Tags: FCC, Media Ownership Hearings, Columbus, Media Reform
4 comments:
Hi there,
I do some work for the National Association of Broadcasters and the media ownership rules need to be updated for the sake of democracy.
Your local broadcasters continue to provide free, local news, entertainment and emergency information to communities yet in today's world, consumers have an abundance of choices when it comes to getting information.
Local TV and radio stations are asking the FCC to modernize the outdated rules so they have the opportunity to compete in the modern marketplace. This will ultimately lead to even more local news and entertainment programming.
Cities like Columbus will reap the benefits from modernized rules.
Thanks!
Gee Sam, you're right. How could I be so dumb.
Now really, you need to do better than say the rules need to change so so-called "local" broadcasters can make more money "to compete."
The obligation to serve the public interest has become a joke. Local TV "news" is an absurd comedy. Radio is bland syndication and playlists. Some of that "entertainment" (which is not mandated in the Communications Act) used to be local but now rarely is. And we have already seen how robo-radio has failed to deliver emergency information.
Most of these media companies already have large online holdings and are trying to narrow the marketplace even more to increase their profits and not be bothered with any accountability for the use of public airwaves. It is easier and cheaper to run VNRs, cover fires, and follow corporate playlists than actually practice journalism.
Is that what the NAB stands for? NAB: No Accountability Broadcasting.
At no point in our history have we had an unprecedented selection of media choices(ipods, internet, satellite, cable, etc.) at our fingertips. The thing to remember is that people don't tune in if its not what they want.
The digital age has created a surge in demand for all types of content. The reality is, the rusty chains of government restrictions have burdened broadcasters in the marketplace and, in fact, prevent stations from providing the most diverse programming possible.
I fear that if rules stay the same, the days of the local broadcast and newspaper, will be things of the past.
Sam, so by allowing one company to dominate a market and/or a medium, that will improve programming how?
We used to have better programming with local content before media rules were loosened in 1996.
Things have just gone downhill from there.
To say "make it looser and the opposite will happen" makes absolutely no sense at all.
Post a Comment