Victory For The Public Interest: Court Rejects FCC Rules
According
to MoveOn.org, following an unprecedented public outcry, a federal
appeals court rejected the Federal Communications Commission's rules
last Thursday. The decision gives priority to the public interest over
corporate bottom lines.
Media
policy is usually considered too obscure for ordinary people to care
about. Last year, however, Congressional offices reported receiving
comments about media ownership from millions of Americans — more than
any topic except the war in Iraq.
As a
result, the Senate twice voted to roll back the FCC rules. There was
enough support in the House to do the same, but the Republican
leadership prevented a vote, saving pseudo-pResident Bush from a
politically unpopular veto.
However, according to FreePress.net, the rules aren't dead — they've been sent back to the FCC for revision.
Let's make sure the FCC listens to the people before they rewrite the rules.
Sign This Petition
Sign this petition demanding a public hearing in Iowa.
The following is the text of the petition:
I call on you to hold an official public hearing in my state.
Before
the disastrous 2003 decision to weaken media ownership rules (which a
federal court has now overturned), you held only one official public
hearing. Further, FCC officials met behind closed doors 71 times with
major broadcasters — but only five times with public interest groups.
And to justify your actions, you used deceptive, industry-sponsored
research data.
The will
of Big Media had been heeded at the expense of American citizens and
democracy itself. This has to end. Before you rewrite the ownership
rules, I demand an official public FCC hearing in my state, impartial
and verifiable research, and transparent debates.
It is
time to put the needs of democracy – a diverse, skeptical, independent
and competitive media system – ahead of profit-hungry media giants.
The FCC Media Ownership Rules Battle
FreePress.net
On June
2, 2003, the Federal Communications Commission — charged with
regulating media in the public interest — voted 3-2 to change several
of its remaining media ownership rules, such as those limiting the
number of TV stations one corporation can own and banning the
cross-ownership of a TV station and newspaper in the same market. The
loosening of these rules would lead to a massive wave of media
consolidation.
The largest firms
would be able to swallow up other media firms they set their eyes upon,
and industry observers all expect a flurry of large deals. At the local
level, we should expect a single firm, or perhaps two or three firms,
to own the vast majority of the media — daily newspaper, TV stations,
radio stations, cable TV systems — in a single community. There is
enormous profit to be made by having such monopolistic power, and firms
are scrambling to get the rules changed so they can dominate markets
and crush competition.
Such media concentration not only violates the premises of a competitive marketplace, but it makes a mockery of the notion of a free press
enshrined in the Constitution. The implications are clear: huge media
conglomerates would rule journalism, culture and to a large extent,
public opinion. They have the power to put their footprint on our
political system in a manner that has never been seen before. As they
say, “You control the news, you control the views.”
Blog For Iowa 