Senators Move To Block New Media Ownership Rules

from the didn't-last-long dept

The public outcry over the new FCC media ownership rules has been quite loud. So loud, that politicians are taking notice. A group of 35 Senators have banded together to use a little known law to overturn the FCC decision without getting it bogged down in committees. Meanwhile, a group of broadcasters are going to lobby Congress that this is a mistake, and they should accept the FCC’s ruling. To be honest, I still think much of this (on both sides) is being overhyped. I haven’t seen any clear explanation for why either set of ownership rules (35% or 45%) would do any serious harm (or benefit).

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Senators Move To Block New Media Ownership Rules”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Kronks says:

Media Ownership

Your comment that you can not see an argument on either side of this issue frankly floored me. Corporate consolidation, in any industry, concentrates power in the hands of the few and influential. In the case of the media the US has a statutory tradition that use of the airwaves is at the pleasure of and to the benefit of the people. This ruling is the next step in selling the airwaves off from the public to business. To do so fundementally degrades the fabric of our society and opens the door for more easily perpetrated media manipulation and fraud.

Anonymous Wimp says:

Re: Media Ownership

An example would be the recent Iraq war where the media reporting was completely one sided on the issue. Many independant news sites complained about lack of coverage with ongoing protests and lack of opposing views to the war. Every public media outlet (except online) seemed to downplay the protest and sell the war to the American public.

In radio, many people complain about the lack of selection and how every radio station sounds the same. Techdirt (and or slashdot) even had articles complaining about the selection of music on the radio forcing people to flock online for a radio station they enjoy.

With more media consolidation, I believe we will be seeing people complaining about lack of diversity.

Bob Dole says:

No Subject Given

It’s not 1960 anymore. If you don’t like the US coverage, you can get Al Jazeera on satellite. Sometimes broadcast PBS stations run BBC, too. Doesn’t get more anti-war than that.

And, for that matter, just watch PBS. All the left-wing bias you want. If you want the other side, watch Fox. In other words, there are plenty of choices — not to mention the Internet.

Zonker (user link) says:

Ownership rules

The big problem isn’t the change from 35% to 45% — it’s allowing newspapers to also own television stations and radio stations in the same town, thereby setting the stage for a monopoly on local news in many areas…
As for the poster who thinks that the Internet is sufficient — hardly. Most people still get their news from a dead tree source and/or broadcast media. Yes, a number of people get news from the Internet, but it’s not that common.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Ownership rules

– Network viewership has been in freefall for several years
– Newspaper subscriptions have been in freefall for several years
– Internet access has been steadily increasing for several years
– Satellite access has been steadily increasing for several years

A lot of comments here are thinking about the (hate to use the term) “old economy” way of disseminating information. The internet and other technologies are giving media consumers new ways of getting info (like this blog)

If you want left wing conspiracy theories – there are plenty of web sites and blogs. Don’t have internet? Listen to Pacifica Radio. Read Mother Jones. There are plenty of choices out there, ’cause we live in a free-market economy where someone will produce goods if there is demand for it, including media goods (there are newspapers ranging from Spanish to Russian all available to those who want them).

> Most people still get their news from a dead
> tree source and/or broadcast media

Your main concern is that your particular point of view isn’t getting out there. I haven’t watched network, local or CNN in years and particularly despise Time Warner, but changing the ownership rules won’t make them spew out my point of view. You need to find another solution to your problem, and new technologies have a way of getting around corporate structures and government mandates.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...