Court Blocks FCC Media Ownership Rules

Dr. Mu writes "According to this story in today's Seattle Times, 'The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia blocked implementation of FCC regulations that would have allowed companies to own more radio and television stations in the same market, and directed the agency to rewrite the rules.' In the interim, the FCC has already granted waivers to the old (1975) rules. It's unclear whether these waivers will now be revoked. Nonetheless, this ruling spells relief for smaller media interests and the diversity they provide."

Comments

Hard to tell what to think.

[Mr. Gorsky]

I don't know whether I should be happy that judges seem to be tapping the brakes on the kleptocracy, or sad that the judiciary is interfering with regulatory bodies appointed by (nominally) elected officials.

Re:Hard to tell what to think.

[rking]

I don't know whether I should be happy that judges seem to be tapping the brakes on the kleptocracy, or sad that the judiciary is interfering with regulatory bodies appointed by (nominally) elected officials.

The judges are also appointed by (nominally) elected officials and their job is to interpret the laws. In this case they found that the FCC had not fully complied with the laws created by the (nominally) elected officials and as such that their actions were invalid. The (nominally) elected officials can go and change the laws if they so desire, or the FCC can try again. The judges seem to be doing their job.

Re:Hard to tell what to think.

[DarkFencer]

That is the WHOLE point. They are not beholden to the political powers, they do not have to campaign, fundraise, watch polls, etc.

They do (almost universally) what they believe is right, not what will make them popular. You may not agree with a federal/supreme judge's interpretations of course, but that is our right.

Re:Hard to tell what to think.

[Anonymous Coward]

They sure do seem to show a lot of loyalty to the parties who appointed them, though--look at the 5-4 ruling against the Fourth amendment the other day.

Finally..

[Maxite]

The FCC is finally getting told what it's limits are.

appeal?

[maxbang]

This is great an all, but is it possible for a higher court to reverse this ruling? I'm assuming the current broadcast oligopoly will not take this sitting down.

Still will be difficult to compete!

[f1ipf10p]

As good as this news is, I still do not expect my local access guy to be able to compete with the likes of Rupert Murdoch or Ted Turner. Free press is getting tougher and tougher. At least there is the internet...

Re:Still will be difficult to compete!

[maxbang]

At least there is the internet.

There was hope that anyone could compete with the big boys at the beginning of the internet age, but thanks to lobbied legislation we've seen those options become marginalized. Sure, it's pretty hard to control the net, but they're trying, man. And that is very disquieting.

I hope it sticks.

[BCW2]

It seems that any industry that is allowed to "consolidate" from many to a few owners or companies has the same results: Higher Prices, Worse Service. Doesn't matter what group you are talking about the same thing happens.

Re:I hope it sticks.

[Entropius]

Your radio bill *is* rising, although not directly.

They're playing more ads and worse music, thus the amount of time you have to expend and the number of inane ads you have to listen to in order to get the same entertainment value value has gone up.

It's all a matter of marginal costs. And, you're right--eventually when those costs (crappy radio) outweigh the value gained from radio, people will start listening to their own recordings in their cars. (Many already have, obviously.)

Not a total reversal

[MooseByte]

While still good, it's worth noting that this is not a complete rejection of the FCC's new rulemaking. Specifically it still gives them plenty of leeway in radio consolidation and cross-ownership of radio and TV stations in the same market, provided the FCC "can provide better justification" for doing so.

But still, many a good reason to be doing the Happy Dance today! Hooray! Nice to see the courts still have some sanity in them.

Re:It's about damn time!

[RobotRunAmok]

I know it'll be impossible to go back to MY glory dys of radio

Glory Days? You want Glory Days?

Mid-Seventies, NY Metro Area. Top 40 on AM with people like Dan Ingram and Cousin Brucie. Totally free-form jock-plays-whatever-suits-him with people like Scott Muni, Vin Scelsa, and Alison Steele. WPIX!!! ("From Elvis to Elvis") WQIV broadcasting in quadrophonic! Jazz up the yin-yang, from non-commercial through commercial stations, from Basie through Miles and up through Euro-Synth and Su Ra. All-Disco stations. All-Punk overnights. Live remotes nightly (or so it seemed) from CBGB's, the Bottom Line, Max's, uptown dinner-clubs and Irish pubs.

It was amazing. Intoxicating. And we didn't know it could ever be any other way.

Of course, in those medieval times, we actually bought records, with real money, in a record store. Music on the radio was diverse and good, and it was free, and if we wanted to own some of it we paid for it. Now, music on the radio is all the same crap, and the RIAA complains that nobody is paying for what they own.

There's a chicken-and-egg scenario here someplace, but I leave that to clearer heads to dope out...

Waivers

[firstadopter.com]

Aren't rules meant to be followed until new rules come, instead of one agency just waiving them?

Nothing...

[ifwm]

This ruling means nothing. It will of course end up in the Supreme Court, where the real decision will be made.

Regulatory Paralysis

[Detritus]

The problem is that every time the FCC issues new rules that affect large corporate interests, whether they're good or bad rules, the corporations immediately go to the federal courts in an attempt to stall or overturn the rules that they don't like. This can take years, even if the FCC prevails.

How would you like to live in a world where everyone had a staff of lawyers on retainer, and insisted on litigating every little problem in their life?

Re:I must be missing something here...

[Paragon of Indolence]

I think that "assuming the frequencies are available" is the crux of the issue. The court must be worried that the conglamorates will buy the best frequencies immediately. Also, I think (I don't actually know) that big advertisers are liable to spend their money with known corporations; small stations would have to develop quite a niche before they're going to see any serious advertising dollars.

FCC Not Serious About Anything

[PingXao]

If they really wanted to get serious they go as far as actually taking the airwaves away from the big corporations and giving them back to the people. We want something in return for the use of those airwaves and it ain't a one-time bargain sale.

We used to get Real News. Now we get attractive people spewing corporate and government propaganda ant us all day. Why doesn't the FCC do anything about that? (thanks to Juan Cole for some of this stuff)