Have you heard? The Federal Communications Commission is considering changing media-ownership rules as we know them. A majority of Americans have heard “nothing at all” about the debate over possible changes to the rules governing broadcast-newspaper cross-ownership, according to a survey released Thursday. But the buzz has gotten louder as critics argue that the media have left the public largely unaware of the changes that could threaten diversity, local coverage and competition in the industry.
The FCC is considering loosening six ownership rules, but the debate over the broadcast-newspaper cross-ownership prohibition should be of particular interest in Connecticut because The Tribune Co. brought the issue to the state when it took over Times Mirror Co., The Courant’s owner until 2000. The merger created the nation’s third-largest newspaper company and a synergy between The Courant and WTIC-TV, Channel 61. Tribune also owns the Stamford Advocate; The Greenwich Time; the weekly Advocates; the Fairfield County weeklies; WTXX-TV, Channel 20; and a number of newspaper and television stations across the country.
Last Wednesday, the day before the FCC’s only public hearing on the proposed changes, Elizabeth Ellis, publisher of the Journal Inquirer in Manchester, asked her readers to write to the FCC to urge the commission “not to give Connecticut away to Tribune Co.” She also reported that Tribune’s Connecticut properties were “withholding news about it even as Tribune is lobbying furiously” to get the 1975 cross-ownership rules appealed.
She’s right. Tribune wants the rules changed. But it’s simply not true that The Courant is withholding news about the issue. Stories and opinion pieces have appeared routinely on the business and editorial pages since the FCC began its review in 2001.
The Project for Excellence in Journalism collaborated with the Pew Research Center for the People and The Press, to ask 1,254 Americans, “How much have you heard?” Four percent said “a lot”; 23 percent said “a little”; 72 percent said “nothing at all”; 2 percent responded “don’t know/refused.”
At the FCC’s public hearing on the issue, which took place in Richmond, Va., on Thursday, there was criticism of the proposed changes. Michael K. Powell, FCC chairman, says the agency has received nearly 15,000 comments from the public, primarily through e-mail. The FCC is expected to make a decision on the rules in May.
Critics say changing the ownership rules would threaten a diverse and independent press. In urging the public to take notice, Bill Kovach of the Committee of Concerned Journalists and Tom Rosentiel of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, wrote in The New York Times last month: “This shift could reduce the independence of the news media and the ability of Americans to take part in public debate.”
Powell argues, however, that the current rules simply haven’t withstood court challenges. “Courts have become far more skeptical of FCC rationales for imposing limits on broadcast ownership. Five times in the past two years we have defended our ownership rules in court. Five times we have lost.”
In the Jan. 22 USA Today, Powell went on to say, “Even in small towns, the number of media outlets – including cable, satellite, radio, TV stations and newspapers – has increased more than 250 percent during the past 40 years. Independent ownership of those outlets is far more diverse, with approximately 139 percent more independent owners than there were 40 years ago. This abundance means more programming, more choice and more control in the hands of citizens.”
The National Association of Hispanic Journalists is just one organization speaking out about the changes. NAHJ has appealed to the FCC to postpone its decision on the rules until it holds a series of public hearings in different parts of the country. “The news and information needs of the nation’s 35 million Hispanic residents are already poorly served under the current media ownership system, and insufficient research has been done on the potential impact on Hispanics of any changes,” the organization has said.
Its “call on media companies to provide adequate news coverage of the commission’s broadcast ownership review” certainly should be heeded. And the public needs to pay attention; more information is available at www.fcc.gov.
