Slashdot Mirror


FCC Commissioner Stumps For Media Diversity

maynard writes, "Speaking at a New York City town hall meeting on corporate media consolidation and its deleterious impact on the expression of minority viewpoints, FCC Commissioner Michael Copps stumped against greater media concentration and instead argued for greater diversity of media outlets and voices. In 2003 the FCC, under Chairman Michael Powell, changed media ownership rules to favor greater corporate media consolidation at the expense of local owners. In an attempt to reverse totally the prior FCC policy, Mr. Copps argued strongly in favor of independent media owners. Read on for what he had to say. Michael Copps: "The FCC is in the midst of a hugely important proceeding right now to decide what the future of our media, our TV, our radio, our newspapers, our cable, even our internet, are going to look like for a long, long time to come.

A little history, just to set the stage for our discussion. Three years ago, under then FCC Chairman Michael Powell and over the objections of my good friend Commissioner Adelstein and myself, the FCC severely cut back — really "eviscerated" is a better word — the rules that were meant to check big media's seemingly endless appetite for more consolidation. It passed new rules, which have allowed a single media giant to own in a single market up to three television stations, eight radio stations, the cable system, the cable channels, even the internet portal, and the local newspaper, which in most cities in the United States of America is already a monopoly. And the agency did all of that behind closed doors and without seeking meaningful input from the American people. Can you imagine that? Authorizing a sea change in how news and entertainment are produced and presented over the people's airwaves, without even involving the people who own those airwaves and who depend so heavily upon them. It was a near disaster for America.

Thankfully, citizens rose up across the land. They sent nearly 3 million protests to the Federal Communications Commission. Congress rose up, too, and then a federal court sent those rules back to the FCC saying they were badly flawed and they needed to be reworked. That was good, and anybody that doesn't believe that citizen action can have an effect should just revisit what happened there. We checked those rules. You checked those rules from going into effect. It was concerned citizens at work, and it was a citizen consumer victory.

But, here's a reality check now. We're right back at square one, and it's all up for grabs again. And if we're going to have a better result this time around, doing something positive for media democracy, it's going to be because of more citizen action and more input from folks like you. So, this time we need to make it an open public process, instead of hiding in our office in Washington like the majority did in 2003. This time, let all the commissioners come to New York City — I wish they were all here tonight — and let all the commissioners get out across America and find out what's happening in the real world, beyond that Beltway that they bemoan so much but seem to love staying behind so much.

So, as we begin our discussion, then begin with that simple reminder: it's all of us who own the airwaves. There is not a broadcaster, a business, a special interest, and any industry that owns one airwave in the United States of America. They belong to you, and they belong to me. And, my friends, now is the time to assert our ownership rights."

6 of 159 comments (clear)

  1. Bolshevization of North America by P(0)(!P(k)+P(k+1)) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From TFS:

    So, as we begin our discussion, then begin with that simple reminder: it's all of us who own the airwaves.

    A quaint sentiment, indeed, that the private citizen is still sovereign; I'm afraid, however, that the Bolshevization of North America is well underway, and that more violent notions will be required to reverse it.

    The Bolshevization of North America consists above all in:

    1. the centralization of media, agitation and propaganda;
    2. ubiquitous surveillance;
    3. the nanny state.

    Eminent domain, if anything, should prove how highly our gubernatores esteem “ownership.*”

    _____________
    * Quod autem vide: DRM and fair use.

    1. Re:Bolshevization of North America by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The Bolshevization of North America consists above all in:

            1. the centralization of media, agitation and propaganda;
            2. ubiquitous surveillance;
            3. the nanny state.


      Nice troll, but you've forgotten that;

      1. ... is due to increased monopolosation by private companies. This is classical "Kapitalism" in action.
      2. ... is a phenomenon in no way unique to, or in itself indicative of, Bolshevism. Plenty of tyrannanies of all parts of the spectrum have empolyed such methods.
      3. ... is laughable. The USA doesn't even have a modern public health service, and your education system is in disarray. Security is being increasingly privatised and even essential public services like water and electricity have been sold off to private monopolies.

      Blaming your countries problems on the long since dead communist bogeyman is less than derisable. No sir, your problems are entirely as a result of unrestricted market forces acting upon your society. Enjoy!
      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    2. Re:Bolshevization of North America by kthejoker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's a fundamental difference between our countries.

      Britain is dominated by state power. America is dominated by corporate power.

      State power is at least somewhat grounded in the people, so varied opinions have their value, because the chief parties can acquire actual power through persuasion and viewpoints.

      Corporate power is entirely guided by money. Acquiring more money means no varied opinions - it means one central opinion.

      Because of this fundamentally different end goals (and thus the different means needed to acquire them) American news is simply incomparable to British news. They aren't even the same creature.

      The flip side to this is that America as a whole is the more economically successful of our two countries. That's cold comfort for most Americans, but that's the guiding spirit of pretty much all of America.

  2. Copps is not the Chairman! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Michael Copps is not the Chairman of the FCC. He is "minority" Democrat member.

    1. Re:Copps is not the Chairman! by maynard · · Score: 4, Informative

      (rolls eyes) sonofabitch!!!

      You are absolutely right! Here is Commissioner Copps' biography page.

      Well, I got that writeup very wrong. Slashdot editors: _please_ fix the title and text so as to remove FCC Chairman, and instead shift it to FCC commissioner. Or, conversely, since the premise of this story is factually inaccurate, just go ahead and wipe it.

  3. THIS STORY IS WRONG by maynard · · Score: 5, Informative

    I submitted this article. I made a mistake and confused Michael Copps, FCC commissioner, for the Chairman Kevin Martin. Thus, the entire premise of the submission that the FCC is shifting policy away from what had been set in place by former Chairman Michael Powell is WRONG.

    I should have fact checked it better before submission, and for that I apologize.