HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
Why
The FCC's Rules Matter
by
Norman Solomon
May
16, 2003
Media
outlets are the lifeblood of the body politic. Extensive circulation of ideas,
information, analysis and debate must exist -- not just once in a while, but
all the time -- or the consequences are severe, even catastrophic.
You
can gauge our society's political and social health by checking some vital
media signs: Scrutinize the programming of stations that fall under the purview
of the Federal Communications Commission. Watch a few dozen TV channels. Listen
to all the radio stations on the AM and FM bands. If the dominant content
doesn't make you feel sick, then you're probably not paying close attention.
By
any measure, since the 1980s, media ownership in the United States has steadily
moved in only one direction -- toward greater concentration in fewer and fewer
corporate hands.
That
ominous trend is likely to get another powerful shove forward in early June,
when the FCC is scheduled to vote on a revision of media ownership rules.
Around the country, grassroots activists have been challenging the move to
further loosen regulations. But clearly the interests of huge media
conglomerates are getting a big boost from the FCC chair, Michael Powell, son
of the secretary of state.
For
a long time, the situation has been grim. Two decades ago, former Washington
Post assistant managing editor Ben Bagdikian sketched out the nation's terrain
of media ownership. In 1983, when his book "The Media Monopoly" first
appeared, "50 corporations dominated most of every mass medium." With
each new edition of the book, that number kept dropping -- to 29 media firms in
1987, 23 in 1990, 14 in 1992 and 10 in 1997.
Published
in 2000, the sixth edition of "The Media Monopoly" documented that
just a half-dozen corporations were supplying most of the USA's media fare.
"It is the overwhelming collective power of these firms, with their
corporate interlocks and unified cultural and political values, that raises
troubling questions about the individual's role in the American
democracy," Bagdikian wrote.
Overall,
the news coverage of the latest FCC proposal has been badly skewed, with radio
and TV networks opting to tread lightly on the matter. That's not surprising.
Billions of dollars in revenues are at stake for mega-media owners.
A
few prominent journalists, such as New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, have
raised an alarm this spring. And some newspaper stories have laid out basic
facts. But -- as part of a classic pattern -- news coverage of the FCC
controversy has been largely relegated to business sections, as though the FCC
decision were merely a financial matter.
"Most
people in this country have no idea what's about to happen to them," says
dissenting FCC commissioner Jonathan Adelstein, "even though their very
democracy is at stake."
One
of the impending rule changes would allow a single company to own TV stations
reaching 45 percent of the nationwide audience (instead of the current on-paper
limit of 35 percent). But that understates the impact, as Andrew Schwartzman of
the Media Access Project points out: "The 45 percent number that has been
floated is a fake number. It will realistically be much much higher."
Another
FCC change would end the ban on a single firm's cross-ownership of daily
newspapers and TV stations in four-fifths of the country's media markets. And
the limits on ownership of television stations in large metropolitan areas
would also be eased, so that one company could own three TV stations.
Appearing
on Bill Moyers' program "Now" on PBS in early May, FCC commissioner
Michael Copps warned: "This is not just some little mechanical thing about
numbers or a little decision about numbers of stations. This is something that
has very widespread and profound implications."
Said
Copps: "I understand they (broadcasters) live in a commercial culture and
a business culture. But this is a special industry with a special charge --
administering the public airwaves. Nobody owns these airwaves. There's no TV
company or radio company that owns the airwaves. The people of the United
States of America own the airwaves."
Yes,
in theory, the airwaves belong to you and me. But one political action after
another in Washington has been stealing those airwaves from us. And the
Republican majority on the FCC is about to pull off another massive heist.
All
the signs indicate that early June will bring another triumph for the corporate
forces that have hijacked the public airwaves for private gain. And they call
it democracy.
Norman Solomon is Executive
Director of the Institute for Public Accuracy (www.accuracy.org) and a
syndicated columnist. His latest book is Target Iraq: What the News Media
Didn’t Tell You (Context Books, 2003) with Reese Erlich. For an excerpt and
other information, go to: www.contextbooks.com/new.html#target.
Email: mediabeat@igc.org