The Caucus Journal for Television , Writers, Producers and Directors

"Did the FCC Sell Out-Again?"

In January 2000 I wrote an op-ed piece for the Los Angeles Times. About a week later, AOL acquired Time-Warner. Since then the FCC has paved the way for other consolidations including giving CBS the right to own and operate the UPN. The FCC stated that this merger would create efficiencies and DO NOTHING TO HARM THE GOAL OF DIVERSITY AND COMPETITION. Once again, the FCC has followed the political tide and made a ruling not in the public interest, and has given incredible reasons to validate their decision. News Corp. (Rupert Murdoch) has announced its intention to buy DirecTV having already acquired the station operator Chris-Craft Industries. This gives them, among other properties, two stations and a newspaper in New York City.

Seventy-five years ago, when the FCC was established, the airwaves were to be licensed to those who would use them for the public benefit. Does it benefit the public when the FCC permits widespread ownership of media outlets by just a few companies?

These media giants are not satisfied that they have "eaten" the vast majority of the information and entertainment delivery systems in our country. They have even gone to a federal appeals court to overturn the FCC ruling that limits these "poor" media companies from owning TV stations that cover more than 35% of U.S. television households. They have had the temerity to state, "preventing existing entities from expanding the national ownership cap hinders competition and diversity to the detriment of the public at large and deprives certain localities of the kinds of superior programs that only a national broadcaster is able to provide."

Devouring the independent media outlets would give them complete power over broadcasting in this country. While this would serve to increase their profitability it would serve as well to increase their political power. Isn't it safe to say that those who control the broadcast media will control the process that elects mayors, governors, congressmen, senators and of course, presidents? If these companies have their way, the voices that America hears will be the voices of Sumner Redstone, Michael Eisner, Steve Case and Rupert Murdoch.

If the networks have their way in removing the ownership cap (which they say violates their constitutional right to free speech), they will be successful in eliminating cross-ownership rules so they can own all the newspapers they choose to own and all the radio stations they choose to own. Mel Karmizan has announced that CBS would be interested in buying NBC, and AOL has announced that it would like to buy AT&T Broadband. Under the circumstances"Why not?"

With the help of cable and television companies, they will ultimately find a way to control Broadband delivery on the Internet and probably at this moment are trying to find a way to control the delivery of information by smoke signals and tom-toms-all that would be left for the majority of America.

I think of a quote from Paddy Chayefsky's Network written in 1976 about America and democracy: "There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T and Dupont, Dow, Union Carbide and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today."

In 2001, it seems that nothing has changed except the names of the players.

Back to Articles