FCC:Public Be Damned ... (one step closer to GENOM)

This forum is for actual topics of discussion that do not fit the above categories.
Locked
User avatar
rubyeye
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 1:45 pm
Org Profile

FCC:Public Be Damned ... (one step closer to GENOM)

Post by rubyeye » Thu May 15, 2003 9:20 pm

FCC: Public Be Damned
by John Nichols & Robert W. McChesney


Cheered on by the Bush Administration and powerful media conglomerates, Federal Communications Commission chair Michael Powell is pushing ahead with a June 2 vote to gut longstanding rules designed to prevent the growth of media monopolies. If successful, Powell's push could, in the words of dissident commissioner Michael Copps, "dramatically [alter] our nation's media landscape without the kind of debate and analysis that these issues clearly merit." Copps and the other Democratic commissioner, Jonathan Adelstein, have asked for a thirty-day delay in the vote, but Powell has the upper hand--he and two other Republican commissioners form a majority on the five-member FCC. The chairman will not win without a fight, however, as his decision to force a vote on rule changes that have not been broadly debated or analyzed has provoked a fierce response from the widest coalition of critics ever to weigh in on an FCC rule-making decision.

Powell's contempt for public opinion, evidenced by his scheduling of only one official hearing on the proposed rule changes, is so great that he refused invitations to nine semiofficial hearings at which other commissioners were present. The hearings drew thousands of citizens and close to universal condemnation of the rule changes. Likewise, an examination of roughly half the 18,000 public statements filed electronically with the FCC show that 97 percent of them oppose permitting more media concentration. Even media moguls Barry Diller and Ted Turner have raised objections, with Turner complaining, "There's really five companies that control 90 percent of what we read, see and hear. It's not healthy."

Outraged by Powell's antidemocratic approach, Common Cause has launched a national petition drive demanding a delay in the vote, while web activists at MoveOn.org are highlighting the issue in bulletins and calling on the "media corps" they organized to monitor media bias during the Iraq war to turn its energies toward stopping the FCC vote. Consumers Union and Free Press, a national media-reform network, have launched a letter-writing campaign to Congress and the FCC from www.mediareform.net. Local governments are also getting involved; the Chicago City Council urged rejection of the proposed changes in a resolution that declared: "Unchecked media consolidation benefits a small number of corporate interests at the expense of the public interest."

Noting that the consolidation of radio ownership that followed passage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act has proven disastrous for pop music, journalism and local communities, Bonnie Raitt, Billy Joel, Don Henley, Patti Smith, Pearl Jam and other musicians signed a letter telling Powell they were "extremely concerned as American citizens that increased concentration of media ownership will have a negative impact on access to diverse viewpoints and will impede the functioning of our democracy." Nearly 300 academics signed a letter to the FCC protesting Powell's refusal to allow an evaluation of the "research" he has talked of using to justify relaxing the media ownership rules. The national associations of Hispanic and black journalists called on the FCC to delay action until more study of threats to diversity could be completed. Leaders of the AFL-CIO, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the Consumer Federation of America and many other groups argued that Powell had not allowed enough time to analyze the potential damage to democracy.

On Capitol Hill, nearly 100 House Democrats signed a letter by Representatives Bernie Sanders, Maurice Hinchey and Sherrod Brown calling on Powell to delay the June 2 vote on the rules, open the process to public comment and demonstrate how his proposed changes in ownership limits will serve the public interest by promoting diversity, competition and localism. Fifteen senators, led by Maine Republican Olympia Snowe, declared in a letter to the FCC: "We believe it is virtually impossible to serve the public interest in this extremely important and highly complex proceeding without letting the public know about and comment on the changes you intend to make to these critical rules."

The stirrings in Congress prodded the Bush Administration and its allies. Commerce Secretary Don Evans urged Powell to proceed with the June 2 vote regardless of the opposition, and business-friendly members of the House echoed that call. But the political climate surrounding media ownership has become so electric that nothing should be taken for granted. Twelve of the fifteen senators who signed the Snowe letter to Powell are members of the Commerce Committee, and committee chair John McCain--though he did not sign the letter--has overseen three recent hearings at which sharp criticisms of FCC moves promoting media consolidation were raised both by Democratic and Republican senators. McCain says he will call the FCC commissioners to a hearing after June 2, and he may yet join efforts to have Congress renew at least some of the rules. In addition, Senate Appropriations Committee chair Ted Stevens and David Obey, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, are making noises about having Congress step in to defend controls against monopoly. Even if Powell prevails on June 2, the tempest will continue to grow. He may ultimately be remembered not for loosening the rules but for pushing so hard he woke America up, forcing public-interest concerns back into the debate over media ownership.


-------
Please visit this site to learn more about this impending disaster and voice your concern to the FCC and local Congressmen.
http://www.mediareform.net/


Another detailed article can be found here
http://www.progressive.org/april03/mcc0403.html

User avatar
SS5_Majin_Bebi
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
Org Profile

Post by SS5_Majin_Bebi » Thu May 15, 2003 9:28 pm

Can you put in in simple English (no not Engrish, though that would be interesting) please? What exactly is this about?

User avatar
rubyeye
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 1:45 pm
Org Profile

Post by rubyeye » Thu May 15, 2003 10:33 pm

One company will have the potential to own all... Only one viewpoint is told.....It means the crap you watch and hear will always be crap because they don't want you to know anything else. You will know what they want you to know ... and damn democracy because it doesn't exit!

If they don't want some foreign cartoon (anime) poisoning their children, they won't air it because they (will) control all the media outlets.

Clear enough for you.

User avatar
SS5_Majin_Bebi
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
Org Profile

Post by SS5_Majin_Bebi » Thu May 15, 2003 10:39 pm

Crystal.

I know democracy doesnt exist, its just a dolled-up version of a dictatorship. If it really were a democratic society, censorship wouldnt exist/

User avatar
Veldrin
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2002 1:01 pm
Location: Waffles :O
Org Profile

Post by Veldrin » Thu May 15, 2003 10:41 pm

SS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:If it really were a democratic society, censorship wouldnt exist/
Good point.
Image

User avatar
chaoticstormbringer
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2003 1:21 am
Org Profile

Post by chaoticstormbringer » Thu May 15, 2003 11:12 pm

That kind of bites. But if they don't air it isn't that a good thing/ considering that most aired series are in the range of pokemon, dragonball cardcaptors or something?
I'm not american no, but in the two countries i've been to the dubbing for those type of shows is quite bad and the anime butchering oh the humanity! anyway...

Would this mean that they wouldn't sell the dvds anymore? because then that would mean that the games would not be sold because of the media content and everything. That would suck royally.

MistyCaldwell
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 10:04 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by MistyCaldwell » Thu May 15, 2003 11:24 pm

I doubt it would affect direct to video sales. There are plenty of large markets for media that doesn't air primarily on television....pornagraphy is quite a successful example.

Assuming that anime would would become a target (doubtful because of the recent commercial interest) it would just go back to the way it was. Still there, not in the limelight.

It does make it harder to advertise such things though.

The FCC was put into place originally to keep HAM radio operators from taking over the waves in their neighborhoods...frequencies which they made you license and pay for...

Now, it's just seems like a middle man between the huge media conglomerates and the government.

I know that a coupel days ago they wouldn't even tell what exactly was on the line or the exact wording....this isn't like something we can vote on....and petition... :roll: people are too lazy or clueless. This stuff has been going on for years. They are just making it legal and in the open.
Image

User avatar
shadow-the-hedgehog
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 12:25 am
Location: [Insert Funny Location Here]
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by shadow-the-hedgehog » Thu May 15, 2003 11:47 pm

Veldrin wrote:
SS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:If it really were a democratic society, censorship wouldnt exist/
Good point.
Wrong. IT would, but each side WOULD be able to express themselves on how and when.
**K.O.G3 MIX**
My Online Journal
'Unopened Letter to the World' by [i]the Ataris[/i] wrote:Am I destined only to die the same way I lived, in seclusion?

User avatar
SS5_Majin_Bebi
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 8:07 pm
Location: Why? So you can pretend you care? (Brisbane, Australia)
Org Profile

Post by SS5_Majin_Bebi » Thu May 15, 2003 11:50 pm

shadow-the-hedgehog wrote:
Veldrin wrote:
SS5_Majin_Bebi wrote:If it really were a democratic society, censorship wouldnt exist/
Good point.
Wrong. IT would, but each side WOULD be able to express themselves on how and when.
No, its not wrong, because that way, nobody else would decide what you watch. Censorship is a direct result of Dictatorship. The only way out of it is to move to a Communist country, or one with no working government. So its from bad to worse.

MistyCaldwell
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2002 10:04 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:
Org Profile

Post by MistyCaldwell » Thu May 15, 2003 11:55 pm

no censorship in a communist country?

O_O

A former teacher of mine went to China and described the experience of when the news came on. Everybody stopped doing what they were doing and watched the tv. He laughed about it, but they are supposed to be informed...and know what the communist government there wants them to know.

I am not sure where he was in particular, but the man was a world traveler. He was also one of my teachers for Video Pro and classes about the FCC in college. Believe, they have censorship.
Image

Locked

Return to “General Off Topic”