The FCC Plays Media Monopoly

Image: Picasa user jedimoe

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The FCC is in the midst of its quadrennial review of media ownership rules, the AP reported yesterday. Some media companies are lobbying the FCC to lift the “cross-ownership” ban, enacted in 1975, that prohibits ownership of both a broadcast station and a newspaper in the same market. Companies like Tribune Co. and Media General argue that with newspaper, radio, and television industries struggling to weather audiences’ migration to the internet, they have to consolidate to survive.

But that could mean losing diversity and key local coverage. Back in 2002, under Republican chairman Michael Powell, the FCC voted to ease cross-ownership restrictions, but was challenged in the Third Court of Appeals by Prometheus Radio Project and other public interest groups. The court told the FCC to rewrite the rules, and in 2008 Powell’s successor, Kevin Martin, tried again to relax the ban. In March 2009, after attempts by public interest groups to stall the decision, the court green-lighted a revamped Newspaper-Broadcast Cross-Ownership rule—described by the FCC as “modest”—which opened the door to “certain newspaper-broadcast station combinations in the largest 20 markets.” Last month, the Media Access Project filed an appeal challenging the rule’s legality.

Meanwhile, today several organizations including Bloomberg News wrote to the FCC chairman protesting the proposed merger of Comcast and NBC Universal. ” . . . [T]he merged entity,” they wrote, “will exert a degree of market power unrivaled in our nation’s media history.” Concerns over media monopolies on content extend beyond the news: last year, the Future of Music Coalition published “Same Old Song: An Analysis of Radio Playlists in a Post-FCC Content Decree World.” The study found “almost no measurable change in station playlist composition over the past four years,” and suggested the radio industry refocus on localism and expand the number of broadcasters nationwide.

Lifting the ban would undoubtedly help elbow independent voices out of play—nightmare scenes of News Corp.-like monopolies come to mind. But whither content, in any case? That, perhaps, is beyond the aegis of the FCC.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate