May 29, 2003
OWNERSHIP OF AMERICAN MEDIA
With little to no public debate, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (FCC) is poised to approve a massive rewriting of the rules governing ownership of television stations and other media in the U.S. What's at stake? Should you be worried? A lot of people and orgfanizations, from the National Organization for Women to the National Rifle Association, think you should be concerned. Very concerned.
On June 2nd, the FCC plans to vote on whether to relax the rules for owning American news media. One of these rules ensures that all of the television stations owned by one large company cannot reach more than a certain percentage of the nationís television-viewing audience. This rule helps protect local television station owners, and ensures that a small handful of large corporations do not exert greater influence over what isóand is notóreported in the news.
Have you noticed that radio stations sound more and more alike these days? They seem to be operating from the same song lists. Well, that's because many of them are. Seven years ago the FCC loosened the restrictions on the number of radio stations that a corporation may own, and today there are 30% fewer radio station owners. One such owner, Clear Channel, grew from 43 stations to nearly 1,200 stations in that time. Fewer independently owned radio stations = more homogenous sounding radio.
So what? You can always buy CDs, right? Well, the problem is even more troubling to critics than just artistic censorship, which is troubling enough on its own. Diversity of opinions, competition, and a marketplace for competitive news coverage are elements of our democracy that we sometimes take for granted. Without such freedom of ideas, what will we lose? Its hard to say what will happen, but many people are worried, including some strange bedfellows, such as the National Rifle Association and the National Organization for Women.
The FCC is likely to approve changes next week for television that are similar to the ones it approved six years ago for radio. These changes would lift many of the restrictions on ownership of media, including local television stations, newspapers, cable and broadcast networks. A single corporate owner, currently limited in the number of media outlets it can own in a single market, will be freed to buy more. Supporters of these changes ó including the Disney Corporation, which owns ABC and ESPN ó are likely to argue that the looser regulations will benefit both stockholders of media companies, as well as their consumers. They're likely to go so far as to suggest that such measures will allow smaller media organizations to stay afloat during a harsh economic climate. Opponents, on the other hand, will argue that it would be remarkably easy for a mega company like Disney to control what you know and don't know about what's going on in your hometown, in your country and around the globe, and that as a result the free flow of information, the benefits of local competition, and the power of a diverse marketplace will virtually disappear.
What do you think? Share your comments below.
Posted by Mikal at May 29, 2003 5:25 AM
| TrackBack
