_
| Why is Media Ownership Important? |
The media industry is big business (click here to see just how big). That means that media companies,
like any other big business, affect our lives in important ways.
The handful of media companies that control nearly all of the
media we see, have millions of customers, tens of thousands of
employees and the access and money to affect politics at the local,
state and national levels.
For these reasons alone, we should care about who controls and
owns these corporations. But there's another reason as well. The
products that these companies produce are not sneakers you put
on your feet, or gasoline that you fill your car up with, or even
soda that you guzzle down. The products that media companies produce
are made for you to consume with your mind; the newspapers, TV
shows, movies, websites, magazines and video games that these
companies own, shape our perception of the world. These companies
decide what's cool, what's news and what matters.
The fact that just a few corporations have such a big say in shaping
our culture, political systems and our perceptions of ourselves
and our world is troubling. Media consolidation affects every
one of us. It threatens democracy by limiting the voices we hear
and undermines our best efforts to create a just media system.
To learn more about media ownership, and to find out what you
can do to fight consolidation, please read through these materials
and send the link to a friend. For any feedback, please email
info@mediatank.org. |
back to top
_
| The FCC and Media Ownership |
On June 21, 2006, the Federal Communications
Commission announced that it would once again be reviewing the
rules that determine how large media conglomerates are allowed
to grow. If these rules are further relaxed, media giants like
News Corp., Clear Channel, General Electric and CBS Corporation
(formerly Viacom) will be allowed to buy up more media outlets
and grow even bigger. This poses a major threat to our media system
and our democracy.
This is the first time the FCC has revisited these rules since
2003, when the commission voted to loosen a number of the remaining
media ownership limits. However, the FCC’s attempt to relax
the rules was thwarted when a federal judge ruled that they had
not adequately justified their decision to loosen the rules.
The FCC’s announcement means that we are at risk of losing
these important public safeguards yet again. We must act now to
ensure that this won’t happen! |
| |
| FCC Background |
|
The Federal Communications
Commission was established with the passage of the 1934 Communications
Act. The FCC has five commissioners, who are appointed by the
President and confirmed by Congress. They are appointed for
five year terms, except when replacing a commissioner departing
before their term is over.
By law, only three commissioners can belong to the same party.
In practice this means that the sitting President's party has
three commissioners, including the Chairman, and the opposing
party has a minority of two seats. The President selects which
commissioner is designated Chairman.
The current FCC commissioners are:
|
| |
| Telecommunications Act of 1996 |
The 1996 Telecom Act was a landmark piece
of legislation that drastically altered U.S. media and communications
policy. The Act, signed into law by Bill Clinton on February 8,
1996, deregulated the media and communications sectors, leading
to increased consolidation in both industries. In the years that
followed, radio companies like Clear Channel ballooned in size
(Clear Channel now owns over 1,200 radio stations) because radio
ownership limits had been removed. The new policies also led to
a number of mega-mergers among telephone companies and other media
businesses.
The 1996 Act also mandated that the FCC review it's media ownership
limits every two years (now every four). In this way, the 1996
Telecom Act made the fight to maintain media ownership limits
an ongoing battle. |
| |
| 2002-2003 Ownership Review |
| On September 13, 2001
the FCC launched the review of several rules that limit the
size of media companies. A year later, they opened up that review
to include all of the remaining broadcast ownership rules.
The FCC, led by former Chairman Michael Powell, only held one
official public forum on the issue in the months leading up
to their June 2, 2003 vote on the rule changes. Still, through
the efforts of media activists and concerned citizens accross
the country (including Media Tank), over 2 million public comments
were filed with the FCC over the proposed rule changes. In lieu
of official hearings, groups held public hearings accross the
country. Media Tank hosted a very well-attended hearing in Philadelphia
featuring FCC Commissioner Michael Copps (click
here for more information).
Despite the public outcry against further media consolidation,
the Republican-majority approved significant rule changes in
a 3-2 vote. However, the new, significantly relaxed rules were
challenged in both Congress and the courts. The new rules raised
the National TV Ownership Limit from 35% to 45% of the national
population. There were major efforts in Congress to reverse
this rule change, and eventually a law was passed that limited
it to 39% (which allowed companies like News Corp. and Viacom
to not have to relinquish any of their holdings since they were
already over the 35% mark).
The battle over the rules raged on in the courts and on June
24, 2004 a Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rejected the
remaining rule changes in the case Prometheus Radio Project
vs. Federal Communications Commission. The court’s
ruling meant that the FCC had to redraft the ownership rules
once more. The legal decision to reject the rules rested on
the court's opinion that the FCC had not fully justified the
proposed rule changes. For more on the case, visit Prometheus
or the Media
Access Project. |
back to top
_
| What are the FCC's Media Ownership Rules? |
| Here are the media ownership rules that
are currently on the books. Many of these rules have already been
relaxed from their original levels of restriction. Now, with the
FCC's review, they are all at risk of being relaxed or eliminated
entirely. |
| |
| Local Television Ownership
Limit |
| This rule limits how many
television stations a single company can own in a local market.
Right now, companies are allowed to own two stations in only the
biggest cities, and can own only one in all other communities. |
| |
| Local Radio Ownership Limit |
| This rule limits how many radio stations
a single company can own in a local market. Currently, a single
company can own up to eight stations in the biggest markets, and
up to five stations in smaller markets. |
| |
| Newspaper/Broadcast Cross-ownership
Ban |
| This rule prohibits a single
company from owning a broadcast television or radio station and
a major daily newspaper in the same city. |
| |
| Dual Network Ban |
| This rule prohibits any single
company from owning more than one of the four major television
networks (ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC). |
| |
| Radio Television Cross-ownership
Limit |
| This rule limits the ownership
of both TV and radio stations by one company in a local market.
The current limit permits a company to own up to two TV stations
and six radio stations (or one TV station and seven radio stations)
in a single community, as long as there are at least 20 independent
outlets (including TV, radio, newspapers, etc.) in the market. |
| |
| UHF discount on the National
Television Ownership Limit |
UHF stands for Ultra High
Frequency (as opposed to Very High Frequency, or VHF). When this
rule was established in the 1970s, UHF stations were not able
to reach as many households as their VHF counterparts because
of weaker signal strength. Because of that, this rule gives station
owners an automatic 50% discount for measuring the viewership
reach of UHF stations. Because of technological advances like
cable, satellite and digital broadcasting, weaker signal strength
no longer keeps UHF stations from reaching their entire market
area.
A single company is currently not allowed to own television stations
that together reach over 39% of the national population. Because
this rule was passed in legislation (following the 2002-2003 ownership
rule review), the FCC will not address it during this review of
the ownership rules. However, the UHF discount is up for review. |
back to top
_
| Why do we Need Ownership Limits? |
| Diversity of Views |
| Media consolidation threatens democracy
by limiting the number of viewpoints on important issues that
we see and hear in the media. If nothing limits the size of these
media giants, we may only get one version of the news. Issues
that matter can be buried or distorted, and differing and dissenting
views can be silenced. |
| |
| Erosion of Journalism |
| Media consolidation means fewer foreign
news bureaus, investigative reporters and resources for journalists.
Giant media companies have only one goal: profit. This undermines
any sense of public or civic duty, and means we get more info-tainment
and less real news. |
| |
| Minority Ownership |
| As our media system has become more consolidated,
media ownership by women and people of color has sharply decreased.
If these media giants are allowed to get even bigger, these numbers
will continue to fall. |
| |
| Localism and Community |
| Without local owners and local newsrooms,
media are disconnected from communities. Huge media corporations
are less likely to cover local issues and feature local artists.
Even worse, radio and television giants often try to disguise
news stories and other programs as locally-produced when they
are not. |
| |
| Workers Rights |
| When media companies merge,
not only do consumers suffer, but so do workers. Fewer media companies
means fewer jobs for communications workers, thousands of whom
have already been laid off. |
| |
| Independent Voices |
| We don’t need censorship
to combat violent, sexist, racist and commercialized media—we
need access to independent producers and artists. Media consolidation
makes it harder for independent voices to be heard. We need real
choices—not more channels from the same owners. |
| |
| Corporate Accountability |
| With the recent wave of corporate
malfeasance and corruption scandals, we need watchdogs more than
ever. Media outlets owned by giant corporations are less likely
to bring these scandals to light, and the public invariably ends
up paying the price. |
back to top
_
Watch the Jan. 18th Public
Forum on Media Ownership in Philadelphia
|
Media Tank hosted a Public Forum on Media Ownership
on January 18th, 2007 with FCC Commissioners Michael J. Copps
and Jonathan S. Adelstein and additional panelists to discuss
media diversity, ownership, and consolidation.
Click
to Watch the Forum Archive
|
| |
| File a comment with the FCC |
The FCC has extended the
period for people to file comments on these ownership rules. Tell
the FCC to protect the public interest and keep media ownership
limits.
To file comments online, please use
Media Tank's new FCC comment form.
To send paper comments, write to the FCC at:
FCC Docket 06-93
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW
Washington, DC 20554. |
| |
| Write or call Congress |
Let your elected officials
know you are concerned about media consolidation and urge them
to stand up to big media. They hear from industry lobbyists on
these issues all the time—now it’s time they hear
from you!
To contact your U.S. Representative click
here.
To contact your Senator click
here. |
| |
| Request Public Hearings in Your Home Town |
When you correspond with the FCC and
Congress, tell them we need more public hearings to solicit the
widest public input possible. We are the ones most affected by
their decisions and we deserve to have our voices heard!
Media Tank will be hosting a hearing in Philadelphia at 6pm on January 18th, 2007 with FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps. We will have a panel discussion on media issues and will be taking official FCC testimony on the media ownership issue. Please RSVP and we will keep you informed about the event.
|
| |
| Donate |
| Groups working on these issues urgently
need your support. To become a Media Tank member today, click
here. |
| |
| Spread the Word |
| These issues are crucial
to our democracy, but the corporate-owned media is unlikely to
give them adequate coverage. Talk to your friends and colleagues,
write Op-Eds and Letters to the Editor, and tell reporters they
need to cover this issue! |
back to top
_
| Internet news supplements papers, TV |
| By Peter Johnson, USA Today,
7/31/2006 |
| Mainstream media may be able to breathe
a sigh of relief, at least for now: A study finds that although
the Internet has grown significantly in the past decade, it is
supplementing traditional outlets such as newspapers and television,
not replacing them. |
| Click
here for full article. |
| Click
here for the Pew study referenced in the article. |
| |
| Advocates want public to weigh in on the
future of the media |
| By Erika Engle, The Honolulu Star-Bulletin,
7/27/2006 |
| Here we go again. The Federal Communications
Commission has opened a 120-day public comment period on complex
issues surrounding media ownership. Last time, in 2003, more than
2 million Americans weighed in on the commission's move to relax
ownership rules. Honolulu media watchdogs are hoping consumers
who read newspapers and get local news from television and radio
will respond again. |
| Click
here for full article. |
| |
| Grassroots Gears Up as FCC Revisits Ownership
Rules |
| By Catherine Komp, New Standard News,
7/21/2006 |
| Having forced government media regulators
to rethink the relaxation of owner-concentration rules pushed
through in 2003, reformers are wasting no time heading off another
FCC attempt to facilitate media consolidation. |
| Click
here for full article. |
| |
| Mega-merger Mania |
| By Eric Klinenberg, The Nation,
7/3/2006 |
| Since 1996 an unprecedented
spate of media mega-mergers has made it difficult for anyone to
know which conglomerate owns what outlet, even in our own cities
and towns. Unfortunately, most Americans no longer need a map
to know that consolidation has degraded the media ecosystem on
which the nation's democratic and cultural life depends. |
| Click
here for full article. |
| |
| FCC Says “Play It Again, Sam”
on Media Consolidation? |
| By Jean Coughlin, The Right of Way,
7/2006 |
| On June 21, 2006, the FCC issued a Further
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) on media ownership limits.
Curiously, the FCC does not offer a new version of regulations,
but only requests comments on the attempted 2003 rules and promises
to spend $200,000 on studies, some of which address the same topics
they studied before. |
| Click
here for full article. |
| |
| Ownership Rule Review Launched |
| By John Eggerton, Broadcasting &
Cable, 6/21/2006 |
| Veteran media policy watchers could be
forgiven a cry of "here we go again" as the FCC Wednesday
officially launched its review of media ownership rules with some
of the same fireworks and contentious talk that characterized
its first attempt to deregulate media ownership in 2003. |
| Click
here for full article. |
back to top
_
| Federal Communications Commission |
| The FCC is a federal
agency in charge of regulating on many media and communications
issues, including the broadcast ownership rules.
Click here
for the FCC's official site.
Click
here for the FCC's 2006 ownership review page.
|
| |
| Stop Big Media |
The StopBigMedia.com Coalition
is an alliance of consumer, public interest, media reform, organized
labor and other groups that have joined together to fight runaway
media consolidation and urge the FCC to put public service before
the self-interest of large media corporations. Click
here for a list of coalition members.
Click
here to help Stop Big Media. |
| |
| Media Access Project |
MAP is a public interest law firm, based
in Washington D.C., that focuses on media issues. They represented
a number of public interest groups in the successful challenge
of the FCC’s media ownership rule changes in 2003.
Click here
to visit MAP.
Click
here for MAP's media ownership resources. |
| |
| PennPIRG |
| The Pennsylvania Public
Interest Research Group is part of a national network of state
PIRGs. They act as a consumer advocate and watchdog for the
state of Pennsylvania.
Click here
for PennPIRG's homepage.
Click
here for PennPIRG's media ownership site. |
| |
| Prometheus Radio Project |
Prometheus is a nonprofit
organization that works towards a more democratic media. Their
focus is building LPFM radio stations for various communities.
They were the lead group in the court case, Prometheus Radio
Project v. FCC, which overturned the FCC's media ownership
rule changes.
Click
here for Prometheus' homepage.
Click
here for Prometheus' media ownership resources. |
| |
| Benton Foundation |
The Benton Foundation is
a private foundation which bridges the worlds of philanthropy,
public policy and community action. Benton works to represent
the public interest in a range of communcations and media issues.
Click here
for Benton's website.
Click
here for Benton's media ownership page. |
back to top
|
|
More Media Tank Ownership Resources
Click
here to download our 2006 FCC Media Ownership Rules
fact sheet in Word format. |
Click
here to learn more about who owns Philly's media.
|
|
|
