Broadcast journalist and news analyst Bill Moyers describes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as ?a citadel of power, swarming with media tycoons, high-priced lawyers, and well-placed lobbyists, finagling to make sure the rules and regulations are shaped and bent to allow big media to get even bigger.? Kevin J. Martin, who took over as chair of the Commission after Michael Powell?s controversial tenure, seems to be doing his share of finagling, carrying on Powell?s policy of being very friendly to big media at the expense of the public interest. In early October, Martin announced his intention to ease current restrictions on media ownership by the middle of December. He wants to remove the ban that prevents a single company from owning both the local newspaper and TV stations in the same community. At least part of the reason for the push to make changes quickly is to accommodate Samuel Zell, who has said that he wants to finish his takeover of the Chicago-based Tribune Company by the end of the year.

Loosening the restrictions also would accommodate Rupert Murdoch, the media baron who recently bought the Wall Street Journal, and who has been pushing the FCC to relax the ownership rules for years. The FCC has issued temporary waivers that allow Murdoch and Zell to operate both TV stations and newspapers in the same city - Murdoch the New York Post newspaper and a Fox TV station in New York City, and the Tribune Company newspapers and TV stations in five cities around the country, including Chicago. (The Tribune Company owns the local Fox and CW television affiliates; the Indianapolis Star is owned by the Gannett Company.)

In 2003, Powell, then chair of the Commission, committed to holding a series of public forums on media consolidation and its effects on the quality of local media. On November 2, current Chair Martin announced that the sixth and final forum would be held one week later in Seattle, Washington. This follows hard on the heels of the one-week notice the public received for an open commission meeting and localism hearing on Halloween at the Commission?s headquarters in Washington, D.C. The two Democratic members of the five-person commission, Commissioners Jonathan S. Adelstein and Michael Copps, issued a joint statement about the timing of the Seattle notice, stating, ?A hearing with only five days notice is no nirvana for Seattle and the Pacific Northwest. ? Clearly, the rush is on to push media consolidation to a quick and ill-considered vote. ??

Prometheus Radio Project Cheerleaders at the Stop Big Media Rally in front of the FCC headquarters in Washington, DC on October 31, 2007 (Photo courtesy of Rob McCausland)

The publication date of the Right-of-Way prevented us from covering the Seattle hearing, but media professionals and activists have testified to common issues and concerns at previous, recent hearings.

Localism and media consolidation
Allowing massive media conglomerates to own multiple media outlets in a community raises concerns about the responsiveness of national corporations to local issues and needs.

Though big media companies argue that ownership rules are out of date in light of modern technology, S. Derek Turner, research director of Free Press, a non-partisan media reform organization, used the FCC?s own data to show that local news coverage suffers when the same company owns a city?s major newspaper and local TV stations. Turner?s research shows that the overwhelming majority of people get their local news from TV and newspapers - the outlets that produce local news. And the people who do turn to the internet for their local news visit the websites of their local newspaper and broadcasters.

Silvia Rivera, General Manager of 90.1 Radio Art?, was one of 800 people who attended FCC hearings on media consolidation in Chicago in September. Her testimony highlighted widespread objections to further media consolidation: ?We do not own our own media. We will not be able to own our own media if further consolidation occurs?. If the FCC is here wanting to know if Chicago's residents are being well served, the answer is no; if local talent is being covered, the answer is no; if community issues are being covered sensitively, the answer is no; if minority groups are getting the coverage and the input that they need, the answer is no. The answer is no.?

Minorities and media ownership
The November 2 edition of Bill Moyers Journal, the weekly news and analysis program that WFYI airs Sunday evenings at 7 p.m., focused on minority media ownership. Much of the program centered on WVON, the only African-American owned and operated radio station in Chicago, a city where the Black and White populations are roughly equal.

Melody Spann-Cooper, who runs WVON, says that her mission isn?t to entertain - ?I'm trying to educate first.? She believes that the so-called mainstream media don?t cover stories of interest and relevance to minorities because ?It's not their story. It's not what they're passionate about.?

Racial and ethnic minorities own just over three percent of TV stations in the U.S., although they are 33 percent of the population. According to Lisa Fager Bediako, president of Industry Ears, a think-tank dedicated to promoting justice in media, the media treat people and women of color ?as if they are invisible, unimportant, a last thought.?

Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women and a panelist at the FCC localism hearing in October, points out, ?Despite the fact that together we represent two-thirds of the country, women and people of color are woefully under-represented in media ownership.? She testified that the FCC needs to ?ensure that both minorities and women are given meaningful opportunities to own broadcast radio and television stations.?

No matter the topic of the hearing, FCC Commissioners are repeatedly urged to address the minority-ownership issue before considering changes to the media-ownership rules.

Citizens and Senators pursuing the same course
The coalition of organizations and private citizens that was able to stave off loosening ownership rules in 2003 remains dedicated to holding the FCC to its mandated responsibility to serve the public interest. Congressional leaders have joined the fight as well. Senator Byron L. Dorgan vowed that if Commissioner Martin tries to change the ownership rules by the end of the year, ?there will be a firestorm of protest and I?m going to be carrying the wood.? And more than 40 members of the House signed a letter asking Martin to address the shortcomings of his plan. As Commissioner Adelstein noted, ?the law requires us to serve the public interest, not the interests of the media giants we oversee. And the public is not interested in further consolidation.?

Kathleen Dobie is paying attention and is outraged.