FCC Plan Will Result in Freedom Of or From the Press?

macduffman writes "Kevin Martin, Chairman of the FCC, has fired a volley in the war against media moguls ... or is it in the war against freedom of the press? An article in the Editor and Publisher describes the plan to ban cross-ownership in the same market (i.e., owning a newspaper and a broadcast station in the same city). Several waivers exist for some current ownerships, but would not be passed on to new owners. The plan calls for public comment beginning in mid-November, and the FCC would vote on it a month later." This follows an unpopular 2003 decision by the FCC that was eventually invalidated by the courts. At issue is the speed at which this complex decision is being carried out: "Media consolidation opponents said Wednesday that the chairman may be moving too fast. Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., said that one month for the public to consider the rule is not enough time. 'If that's his intention, it's going to subvert the public interest,' he said. 'The FCC needs to learn a lesson here from what happened previously.'" Update: 10/19 17:58 GMT by Z :Rewritten for clarity.

Comments

Way to read the article

[StealthyRoid]

The lede doesn't match the article at all. What's actually going on is this:

Currently, there's an FCC rule preventing multiple media channel ownership by teh same company in the same city/region. You can get waivers for this, but it's kind of a pain in the ass. What the current FCC chair wants to do is abolish that rule, allowing companies to own as many media channels (ie, a newspaper, a TV, and a radio station) as they'd like. In general, the Republican appointees support this plan, the Democrat appointees oppose it. Regardless, however, the post states the exact OPPOSITE of what's really happening.

Re:Way to read the article

[geeknado]

Right-- and the real concern here is what was stated by the Consumers Union representative...That a few companies could rapidly gain total ownership of all media outlets in a given area, driving out both competition and differing opinions in the local press. Your region might have a single 'voice' in the media, which is not a positive thing.

All that said, the relevance of radio and newspapers has diminished greatly over time. There're few truly independent radio stations in most cities, and most independent newspapers are struggling financially...This is not necessarily due to monopolistic practices, but rather the viability of their business models since so much of their potential consumer base is absorbed by television and internet media sources. While I am not in favor of abolishing the rule on general principle, I am not sure if this would be the same sort of catastrophe that it would have been 25 years ago.

Not quite, guys

[jtroutman]

FTFP:

An article in the Editor and Publisher describes the plan to ban cross-ownership in the same market

FTFA:
Among the rules that are potentially on the chopping block is a ban on one company owning a newspaper and broadcast station in the same market.

So the post should have read:

An article in the Editor and Publisher describes the plan to no longer ban cross-ownership in the same market

Once again government prepares to muck up...

[PortHaven]

Haven't we ever learned that whenever the government gets involved they almost always seem to muck things up?

Really, I don't see this as a problem. And I think it's stupid, so what you're saying is you can own a TV station but not a newspaper or radio station. That's just dumb.

Why doesn't the government do something really useful to us? Like put an end to the forced purchasing of packaged content. And enact legislation that allows consumers to purchase ala cart specific channels from Sat/Cable companies.

This way, if all I want to watch is the Sci-Fi Channel, Discovery Channel, & The History Channel. I should be able to just buy those channels. I should not have to buy another 50 channels.

- Saj

Re:That is freedom OF

[dgatwood]

Most larger markets have pretty much clogged spectrum. You have 101 FM radio slots (20 MHz band, one station every .2 MHz, plus one for the other endpoint of the range), so divide by three. Actually, though, that's off by a factor of about 1.5 because you can't realistically use first adjacents for higher power commercial stations, so it's probably more on the order of twenty. In any case, it would be way more than two.

Bear in mind that I'm talking about per market. Markets are generally pretty big geographically. A market is generally defined as being a metro area plus the surrounding areas up to a geographical barrier or up to the typical range of an average station, though there are exceptions (San Jose, CA and San Francisco, CA are two separate markets, for example, and probably should not be, since they are so heavily overlapping). The next ones over are, I believe, Monterey-Salinas-Santa Cruz (geographically separated by mountains to a large degree) and Sacramento (separated by a pretty good distance).