« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
AP: FCC Hid Data on Media Ownership
At the Federal Communications Commission reports were altered, and studies were blocked from release that showed local ownership was beneficial for local news coverage. The panel is still withholding hundreds of pages on media ownership research from release to the public. So says the Associated Press:
When the government decided to take a hard look at how well broadcasters were serving their communities, two economists at the Federal Communications Commission got a research idea: They would look at whether locally owned TV stations produced more local news than stations owned by companies based outside the area.They found that local ownership resulted in more local news coverage. They also realized they had turned up what one of the researchers, economist Keith Brown, called "inconvenient facts." The findings were at odds with what their agency, under heavy lobbying from the broadcast industry, had endorsed.
The months-long study was spiked by the agency with "no plausible explanation," Brown says. He suspects it was because the conclusions were at odds with the shared position of the FCC and the broadcast industry: that media ownership rules were too restrictive and should be loosened.
Comments (12)
OCPatriot wrote on January 25, 2007 10:13 PM:Big surprise? Nah. So what are they gonna do about it?
3reddogs wrote on January 26, 2007 8:46 AM:Yet another in a LONG list of examples of the Bush administration covering up and/or suppressing anything that stands in the way of them turning this country over to corporate interests.
Bearpaw wrote on January 26, 2007 10:09 AM:Like father like son?
Steve wrote on January 26, 2007 11:15 AM:The head of the FCC is Kevin Martin, husband of Cathie Martin, who handled communications for Dick Cheney and now George Bush. The issue is about who controls the information we receive, and this administration wants ultimate control.
ohiomeister wrote on January 26, 2007 12:27 PM:Shocking. Did I hear someone say Congressional hearings?
These are the little things that they can no longer get away with.
Anonymous wrote on January 26, 2007 1:06 PM:Note it appears that Martin has also ordered staff to stop doing any research, _unless_ he directs it. In short, the FCC has become a complete and total propaganda mill. This is shameful behavior for a democratic government. Is there any point in having the FCC at all?
Robin wrote on January 26, 2007 4:17 PM:There are 2 Commissioners on the FCC who are more than sympathetic to restoring the traditional non-political role (as oversight, etc)... Copps & Adelstein. The important thing now is to make it clear to our Democratic controlled Congress that we the people want oversight hearings. The key officials to contact so far would be Reps. Edward Markey(D-MA) (will be chair of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Sens. Russ Feingold (D-WI), Bernie Sanders (I - VT) as well as Commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps @ FCC. This is a start! You can see alot of these officials' speeches at the Media Reform Conference in Memphis a couple of weeks ago here:http://www.freepress.net/.
Jim Swanson wrote on January 27, 2007 9:03 PM:There's also a workshop (audio available in same place) on "How to Challenge a Broadcast License" and other valuable workshops.
This is one of the biggest reasons why I left radio. Out of area corporate ownership. Incredibly ridiculous conflicts of interest with some owners and consultants owning competing stations in the same market. There is no community involvement and "serving of the community" AT ALL at the last station I worked. It was incredibly frustrating and brought my 27 year career to an end. Radio used to be fun and a service to the comunity. Now it only services the corporate ownership.
Garfield wrote on February 1, 2007 3:49 PM:Jim, I understand your frustration with distant ownership, but would your station survive if it were not part of a larger corporate franchise? While it sounds illogical, we actually need media consolidation if our public broadcasting stations are going to be able to compete with cable, dish, satellite radio, and the Internet for the advertising dollars on which they rely. And for what it's worth, I do some consulting work with the NAB, a group that is traditionally not a supporter of media consolidation.
michael@gmail.com wrote on April 29, 2007 1:42 PM:Generic Viagra. Buy Generic Viagra
catarina@gmail.com wrote on April 30, 2007 3:16 AM:Generic Cialis. Buy Generic Cialis
willy@gmail.com wrote on May 1, 2007 6:11 AM:hello