Convergence and "Cross-Ownership" - Danger to our Democracy

It's not the Internet that's killing real Journalism. It's the equity-chasing investors and their friends at the FCC who have put profit before a free press.

Recently, there's been a renewed push toward media convergence - to consolidate even more of the nation's newsprint and airwaves as the media are in profound transition. The world is experiencing a fundamental change in the way people communicate -- a metamorphis primarily fueled by technological advances and the metoric growth and popularity of the Internet.

Although we are bombarded with a seemingly endless supply of media options--from cable television to blogs to satellite radio to BoomerBikerOnline -- more and more of the actual news and information we consume comes from but a handful of giant media companies. Locally owned outlets are being squeezed out of business or absorbed at an ever faster clip. In the past three decades, two-thirds of newspaper owners and one-third of television owners have shut down.

In this era of instant gratification, complements of the Internet, newspapers are particularly feeling the pinch: Fewer than 300 of the nation's 1,500 daily papers are still independently owned, and more than half of all markets are dominated by a single paper. The number of newspaper employees has dropped nearly 20 percent since 1990. Hardly a week goes by without someone, like me, lamenting the demise of the American newspaper.

But, believe me, after working 40 years as a Journalist, I know what I'm talking about!

You see, back in 1999, I was employed by one of those large media conglomerates that we're discussing now. You know, the ones who touted themselves as being at the forefront of the new media "Convergence" movement. At the time, my newspapers' owners and their investors were working overtime -- lobbying the Federal Communications Commission to repeal the cross-ownership ban, a 31-year-old FCC rule that prohibits a single company from owning a newspaper and a TV station in the same regional market. The ban was enacted to prevent menopolies and to provide the American public with a diversity of opinion.

The honchos in the boardroom, where I worked, viewed relaxed FCC ownership rules as a HUGE money-making opportunity, so, in 1999 they decided to mount a full-court press and lobby the FCC to repeal their old ownership rules. At the time, my employer were in the unique position of owning both a newspaper and a television station in their local market. Their cross-ownership arrangement, although contrary to the FCC's own rules, had been grandfathered in under the current regulations.

And, Big Media thought they had finally succeeded when then FCC Chairman Michael Powell (Colin's son), repealed the rule, amid public outcry in 2003 only to have a federal court reinstate it the following year.

But times have changed since then and so has the Chairman of the FCC.

Last April, Kevin Martin , Powell's replacement, told the members of the Newspaper Association of America that he would renew the effort to end this regulatory relic from "the days of disco and leisure suits." Lifting the ban, he said, "may help to forestall the erosion in local news coverage." But now, the FCC's own internal findings confirmed what its critics had been saying for years--that letting one company dominate a city's news business actually undermines the quality of the local media that most Americans rely on for their news.

Here's a good one for you!

Senate reconfirmation hearings tend to be predictable affairs, marked by polite give-and-take and senatorial grandstanding, but generally free of surprise plot twists. And so it was supposed to go last September 12, when Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chairman Kevin Martin appeared before the Commerce Committee. In March 2005, following the departure of Michael Powell (Colin's son), President Bush had named the young Republican lawyer to head the extraordinarily powerful five-person panel that oversees the nation's media and telecommunications policies. Martin, a boyish-looking 40-year-old who'd been on the FCC since 2001, planned to carry on much of his predecessor's unfinished business, particularly stiffening penalties for on-air indecency and the sweeping deregulation of media ownership rules. But unlike Powell, who was confrontational and contemptuous of his critics, the bland and soft-spoken Martin seemed unlikely to attract controversy.

But controversy caught up with him when Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) strayed from the script at his reconfirmation hearing. Boxer began by asking Martin about an FCC study, commissioned by his predissor Powell, on the impact of media ownership on local news.

Unsuspecting, Martin said that it had never been completed. Then, as he watched glumly, Boxer brandished a draft of the study, which had, in fact, been written more than two years earlier, only to be buried by the FCC. The report found that locally owned television stations, on average, presented 5 1/2 minutes more local news per broadcast than stations owned by out-of-town conglomerates. The findings squarely contradicted the claims made by Martin, Powell, and big media companies, who have argued that lifting limits on ownership would improve local news coverage.

"Now, this isn't national security, for God's sakes," Boxer continued, unable to resist making Martin squirm. "I mean, this is important information. (but, indeed, I think it is!) So I don't understand who deep-sixed this thing." Martin meekly said he had no idea, and promised he'd look into it.

Within a week, a former FCC lawyer claimed that "every last piece" of the report had been ordered destroyed before it was leaked, and a second unreleased study came to light, prompting Boxer to refer the matter to the FCC's inspector general. Please see:

http://www.benton.org/node/7655 http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/convergence/archives/123833.asp http://public.cq.com/docs/cqt/news110-000002599119.html

What we're really talking about here is a saga of corrupt politics, corporate greed and acquiescent Amnericans.

You see, my Journalism Career, which began in 1968, has encompassed the span of time that included events like the Kent State Riots and the Viet Nam War, watergate, space launches, the invention of the Internet etc through 2007 when I retired from the newspaper business.

And if there is one single observation that I could make that sums up all of what I have observed in in those years, it would be that in general, most Americans have become increasingly acquiescent to almost everything that is happening around them.

Complacency breeds Corruption - and the result begets an increase in corrupt politics and corporate greed.

The real beneficiaries of the repeal of the FCC's Cross-Ownership policy are politicians and big media corporations. I have always been of the opinion that the business of journalism is basically incompatable with the protection of our First Ammendment Rights. That is to say, practicing good journalism is not necessarily a money-making opportunity.

Just look around. As more and more media consolidate, we are witnessing the eventual extinction of:

· the family-owned newspaper, TV and radio station. · News bureaus · Foreign correspondents · Investigative journalism

Today's editorial department is looked upon as an expense. Big Media sees Convergence as their opportunity to trim their operating costs. Convergence to them equates to fewer employees wearing more hats, repackaged content delivered across a variety of platforms and a captive advertising audience.

But what Convergence means to our Democracy is far more disturbing.

A well-informed citizenry backed by a free and aggressive press are much more capable of holding elected officials and corporate CEO's accountable for their actions. We all need to demand nothing less than the truth from our politicians - at every level of government.

We have the right to expect that our Attorney General know the definition of "Waterboarding"

We should insist on the proper response to domestic national disasters.

And we should insist on nothing less than a president who possesses the highest ethical and standards and displays the leadership ability to set clear national goals as our Democracy moves forward in the 21st Century.

So, here's my tip to you:

We Americans all need to start paying attention -- we need to get up off our collective a--es and do something -- anything - to rectify the mess in which this country currently finds itself.

I think that the first order of our agenda should be to ensure a free and aggressive press. And one way to guarantee this is to maks sure that the FCC keeps their Cross-Ownership rules in place.

Respectfully,
Bruce Hosking and the rest of the "Gang" @ BoomerBikerOnline.com
2174 Nursery Road, Suite 110
Clearwater, Fl. 33764
USA
727-729-4270

To unsubscribe or change subscriber options visit: http://www.aweber.com/z/r/?ThisIsATestEmail