[opendtv] Peeing contest at the FCC
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 17:58:27 -0400
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-277152A2.pdf
Interesting read.
Probably deserves a more careful read. I gather that in 2003, two
researchers at the FCC wrote a report on their findings about localism
in TV news. The upshot appears to have been that local TV station
ownership results in 4 extra minutes of local news in TV newscasts. This
result is only mentioned in Page 6, and it seems fairly crucial to
understanding what all the rukus is about. I would have thought it
belonged somewhere in the introduction too?
Presumably, the two authors of the report favored such a trend. And the
FCC, which at the time was trying to raise the national ownership cap
from (IIRC) 33 to 45 percent, would have been opposed to these findings?
I say "presumably," because the fundamental disagreements underlying all
of this are never stated flat out. Maybe this is common knowledge at the
FCC.
The allegation made by the authors is that the report was suppressed by
the FCC, because (I suppose) it went counter to the effort to raise the
national cap? Apparently, from the authors' points of view, there were
all sorts of frivolous road blocks raised to keep the report from being
released.
So the FCC investigated. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, they found no evidence
of any "order" to destroy the report (as one of the authors alleged, who
is now a professor at Michigan State), or any concerted effort to
prevent it from being released. Just a lot of requests for revision. And
even though staff economists might have agreed with the revisions,
senior economists never did.
But there is evidence of a meeting between the two authors and their
supervisor, in which the supervisor states that the report did not say
what the front office wanted to hear (bottom of page 10). And Ken Ferree
is mentioned by name, as someone who did not like the results. (I think
Ken Ferree is also the one who proposed that cable and DBS subscribers
be counted among the 85 percent who no longer required OTA analog TV.)
However the FCC investigation concludes that just because the answers
weren't what the "front office" wanted to hear does not prove that the
report was deliberately suppressed. The investigators concluded instead
that there was a sincere desire for revisions to be incoporated.
There is a similar issue with the 2003 report about localism in radio.
The funny thing is, in that case, there is little doubt that the FCC
wanted to keep from telling the story of radio ownership consolidation.
But the investigation concludes that while it's true the radio report
was suppessed, as had happened in previous years, the intent of the FCC
was to see if a rewrite could put the matter in a more positive light.
All very intersting. My view continues to be that consolidation is very
simply "to be expected" in any maturing industry. Including radio and
TV. I don't know why the FCC should try to avoid just making that simple
point, when these findings emerge. Just tell it like it is, for heaven's
sake.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
