Senate Votes to Reverse FCC Decision Allowing Media Consolidation

Thursday night, the Senate cast a near-unanimous vote to reverse the Federal Communication Commission's December 2007 decision to let media companies own both a major TV or radio station and a major daily newspaper in the same city.

Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), who introduced the rarely used "resolution of disapproval," said last night that "the FCC is supposed to be a referee for the media industry, but instead they've been cheerleaders in favor of more consolidation. ... We already have too much concentration in the media."

Senator Barack Obama added his support to the resolution saying, "I urge my colleagues in the House of Representatives to expeditiously pass the legislation."

The Senate vote is good news for everyone who is fed up with a media system, that, in the words of Jon Stewart, is "hurting America" with propaganda pundits, embedded journalists, horse-race election coverage, and celebrity gossip posing as news. It reflects growing awareness -- in Congress and with average Americans -- of the perils of concentrated media ownership. Namely, insatiable profit pressures that gut newsrooms, replace labor-intensive investigative news with salacious, cheap-to-cover stories, and encourage the dumbing-down of the most pressing issues into 30-second sound bites and partisan shout-fests.

Media concentration is also central to the rise of extremists like Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, who overwhelm the dial on conglomerates owned and run by businessmen with far-right politics.

Back in 2003, Senator Dorgan and then-Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) passed a similar resolution of disapproval to overturn the last effort by the Bush FCC to loosen ownership limits after 3 million Americans - both liberal and conservative - decried the FCC's handout to the largest media companies. That resolution languished in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives, and the proposed rules were later rejected by a federal court.

The "newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership ban" that the FCC is trying to get rid of has been in place since 1975. It keeps media outlets from merging already stripped-down local newsrooms in the name of "synergy" and protects diversity of viewpoints in the local press, something the Supreme Court has recognized is critical to the health of our democracy. Thursday's vote sends a clear message to media executives and the FCC that further media consolidation will not be tolerated.

The resolution of disapproval now moves to the House, where it already has bipartisan support. Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) is ready to push his companion bill in the House, or alternately simply adopt the Senate resolution if it will speed it to a floor vote and passage. Rep. Inslee says he will likely talk with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other House leadership next week about the fastest way to get the bill passed

President Bush has threatened to veto the measure. A statement from the White House yesterday called the FCC's new rules the product of "extensive public comment and consultation" but failed to mention that only 1 percent of the public that testified at public hearings or sent letters to the FCC supported the administration's position.

Typical of most Bush appointees, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin disregarded the will of the American people and granted another handout to the largest companies. A veto-proof majority in Congress supporting the resolution would stop Bush from doing the same.

The fight is far from over. But last night's vote is a historic victory for the public interest over one of Washington's most powerful lobbies.

Comments

[loki]

But can it stop the signing statement. Sure they are not really legal to begin with, but that has never stopped Bush before and to date, that I know of, no one has legally challenged Bush's signing statements, thus allowing him to do what he does.

[Tommygun264]

Has anyone bothered to notify Rupert Murdoch? If I understand things correctly, he has already proceeded as if his puppets in the FCC had been successful and violated existing regulations in anticipation of these new regulations on media consolidation passing. But I have yet to hear of Mr. Murdoch being brought to account for his actions.

[mellene]

For once the Senate did the right thing and stopped these insane merchants of greed and power from wiping out yet others like Murdoch did with WSJ.

[gcallaghan]

The intent behind the Senate's move is both laudable and glaringly obvious. Media consolidation benefits only those corporations who have shown they'll use their considerable powers to shape public perception for their own ends. The GOP enabled this and championed their cause in return for their graces.

The same propaganda machine that refused to publicize this administration's crimes will do an abrupt u-turn in policy the minute the Dems take over. Expect to see sudden and around-the-clock coverage of Iraq, the economy and every other festering problem Bush leaves behind if further consolidation is allowed.

The Dems will break up those media markets in which consolidation occurred, not simply for fairness but also as a way to wrest control of public opinion from Rupert Murdoch's hands.

[donaldw6]

Pinch me, I must be dreaming! It's almost as if we had a democracy. We let FISA expire, we elected Democrats in the Republican South, and now this. What happened to the America I used to know?

[Honza]

If the republicans try to stall this vote so we dont get a veto overturned, and this goes down the tube again, those republicans should be voted out of office. We the people want the airwaves back, and the fairness doctrain to be once again in the media and in the news print.

[ThomH]

One thing obvious to all is that the big media have a vested interest in....the big media.

So how come they were allowed to take over the primary presidential debates? Why were paid employees of big media companies charged with asking the questions?

Isn't this like having an electric chair manufacturer "moderate" a debate on capital punishment?

GE is a media conglomerate (GE/NBC) and in the health insurance business, among other businesses that would be unfavorably affected by positions held by Dennis Kucinich. Is it surprising that GE employee Tim Russert asked him no substantive questions, instead one whose obvious purpose was ridicule?

No questions on media consolidation were EVER asked in any of the debates, as far as I know. And there were many other questions burning to be asked that never were.

And is this what we have to look forward to in the general election---media conglomerate employees "moderating" the debates of the candidates?

[verhaftik]

"And is this what we have to look forward to in the general election---media conglomerate employees 'moderating' the debates of the candidates?"

I agree, ThomH. A nauseating and frivolous prospect such "moderating" will be. Laughable, really.

The majority of MSM doesn't even realize they have become a source of entertainment and mockery among viewers. (Excep for types like Keith Olbermann, IMO.)

Nevermind, MSM will go the way of the dinosaur if they don't wake up soon. The internet generation is cynical and smart. And they've shown their parents and grandparents site's like the HuffPo. MSM should face it. The audience has evolved, and their growing disdain for MSM will be reflected in MSMs profits if the media continues such insults on basic intelligence and logic.

[chronic5]

I think the damage done is so severe it will take a decade to repair. I am still mourning for this once country.

[BigRube]

Damn this is really really good news. Do you think that a big Change is coming early? I hope so.

[robbor]

Finally!!! the experiment is over. now it's time to break up the monopolies. that's what they used to do in the old days, break up corporations that got too big for their britches, like Rupert Murdoch.

[mamacat]

If both the Congressional Democrats and Republicans are and have been in favor of this measure, then why has the White House been fighting against it for so long?

[plainsman]

Ahem. For a reason akin to the need for "message force multipliers." They needed to get their mess...propaganda out.

[castlerider]

I've noticed CNN has been taking a lot more clips and pieces from Huffingtonpost, where in the past that was the last piece of information they would want to bother with. Looks like they might be starting to wake up, but man, they have a long way to go.

[Pippilin]

Oh, they're waking up, all right. Waking up to the handwriting on the wall that says it's time to start kissing the bottoms of the Democrats in preparation for the November elections. No noble enlightenment on the part of the MSM here-- just a new roadmap to pursue for self-interest. Still, it doe feel good to be partially acknowledged by the networks.

[Irons]

This is the best frickin' news I've read in long time!

[continental]

Great article. This is such good news. Now, hopefully, we'll get some real news and analysis from the MSM.

[DRaymond]

Industry has often cited that this consolidation was somehow necessary for efficiency and competitiveness, but speaking to folks who were on the inside of both KTLA and the LATimes both being owned by the Tribune company that there was zero synergy in the newsroom because thier whole approach to stories was different. (That is not meant as a knock on TV news. It isn't evil that TV news is interested in stories with visual punch that can be told quickly and print journalism isn't)

[kallopolis]

Thank goodness. This should be a bigger story.

[ddharder]

Yes, this is huge. Hopefully they will take it a step further and break up the consolidation that has already occured. The consolidation of the press has led to near dictatorship-like conditions in the US over the past decade. Without an independent 4th estate the government has gotten off scott free as they have led the country into an ill thought out war, as they have allowed the CEOs of oil and gas companies to set energy policy, as the SEC has been overseen by self interested bankers allowing for the sub prime crisis, etc... etc...

You can only blame the voters for so much ignorance when the press paints them a picture of reality that is steeped in propaganda without challenge or dissent or debate.

[socks1]

This is only a begining. What needs futher major attention is who owns the conventional media.

One of the answers is unacceptable. Our privatized military industry complex has major tentacles and cross company board memberships that are still in control of major swaths of our media, TV and print.

So the suggestion that far more attention must be given to breaking up monopolies that have strangle holds on the major parts of our economy.

Since Nixon these handcuffs have been slowly put into place, so that the American people are now at the mercy of these mega conglomerates. It is only because these conglomerates have over played their hand, under reich manipulator Bush I and Bush the lesser, that has brought the foul play into full view of the American people.

This has been what 'ownership society" ment, it had nothing to do with average Americans.

[naschkatze]

i think this is a big story, but it's not getting much coverage even on the blogs. It appears that the Senate can easily overturn a veto, and let's hope the numbers are favorable in the House too.

[petecook5]

Finally, our government does something that seems to make the slightest bit of sense.

[littlepuffycloud]

Please email Congressman Jay Inslee and Sen. Byron Dorgan and let them know we're watching, and we care and appreciate their action.

[kae]

Cool - Kevin Martin must go next - if he was truely doing his job we wouldn't be in this mess.

[verhaftik]

Thank God. This is the best news I've heard in a very long time. Congress is waking up to the responsibility the media has to educating the public and emphasizing debate in a balanced manner.

IMO, MSM is directly responsible for the indescribable ignorance of the American public, whom they supposedly serve to enlighten. This is a crucial step and one that moves the US into competition with the populous in other 1st world countries. Compare Fox, CNN, et al websites to that of BBC News. The difference speaks for itself.

Finally, as a native Australian, let me assure you, Murdoch was considered a joke. As for his Australian "newspapers" -- let's just say the front page always sported a large picture of a scantily clad a woman in a bikini, everyday. Go ahead, look for some old digital files of Australian newspapers front pages from the 1970s and 1980s. That is the same Murdoch that is now attempting to take over the WSJ and other MSM. I couldn't decide whether to laugh (scoff) or cry when I heard that.

Thank God Congress has now woken up to what people need and demand. Real, intelligent, well rounded news.

[burnt]

Yes! This is a major, MAJOR step in the right direction. This legislation must repeatedly be pushed through Congress until it passes with veto protection. We need this victory for all America. ...made my day as you can imagine.

Does anybody have a read on whether or not the rollback with force dissolution of monopolized markets... or only protect more from becoming dominated?

hopeful in Seattle

[bluesnot]

Is Congress waking up? This is great news.

[geobushono]

NOW can we start discussing impeachment?......the bogeyman isn't there.

[CitizenLegislatorCC]

"The Senate vote is good news for everyone who is fed up with a media system...that...is 'hurting America' with propaganda pundits, [etc.]..."

Yes, but...

Harry Reid's spokesman said last week that exempting said media system's owners from the need to require their employees/reporters to testify to federal grand juries pursuing violations of the law "is on our to-do list, and we hope to get to it as soon as we can."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/10/washington/10shield.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

A federal-level shield law (unlike state-level shield laws) would shield and facilitate CLASSIFIED information sharing between anonymous government insiders and the media - mostly NOT from whistleblowers (who need and deserve better protection from Congress), but rather from political partisans with an agenda that manipulating and selectively leaking classified information helps promote. Yet we are coming to the end of the most politicized and corrupted DOJ since its inception WITHOUT seeing any legitimate threat to exposures of government wrong-doing by investigative reporters, contrary to the spin of the self-interested media's full-court press for such an unearned and undeserved shield law for their employers.

"The fact that they shut their mouths tight and run the other way suggests that the image of reporter-as-watchdog does not reflect the current place of journalism in society, whatever may have been true in the past." - Hatfill Attorney Mark Grannis

http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120553984106238259.html