- In this report
- Our mission
- Overview
- Have you heard?
- Viewpoint
- Our history
- ConsumerReports.org staff
- Senior Leadership Team
- Board members
- Our annual report
- How we test
- How we survey
- Lab tour
- Vintage test photos
- Where to find us
- Career opportunities
March 2008
| have | you heard? |
| This monthly letter to subscribers from Consumers Union President Jim Guest highlights the critical consumer issues behind our current reports. See archived letters. | |
Fewer voices, fewer choices
In 1914 Henry Ford promised Model T buyers "any color so long as it is black." It might soon be that we can get our local
news from any source as long as it's the Tribune Co. In December, the Federal Communications Commission voted along party
lines to loosen three decades of restrictions barring a single company from owning a TV station and a newspaper in the same
community.
Why does it matter who owns those two news sources in your city? After all, the old rules were written before the Internet, podcasts, and streaming broadcasts channeled information from so many places. Still, the two main sources for local news in almost every town are the local paper and the local TV station. If they're owned by a single company, odds are they'll present the same stories and opinions, limiting our knowledge and understanding of what's happening in our communities.
The new rule allows TV stations and newspapers in the country's 20 biggest markets to merge, with certain restrictions. In developing it, the FCC dismissed pleas and threats from Congress and ignored widespread public opposition. The FCC says there are sufficient "high hurdles" to protect the public. It will presume that a proposed merger will not be in the public interest unless there is clear and convincing evidence that "the merged entity will increase the diversity of independent news outlets" and increase competition.
we're skeptical
If the commission sticks to those benchmarks, or if Congress, advocacy groups, and consumers have the resources to hold the FCC to its word, the policy can prevent the worst of problems. But the FCC's weak enforcement of other rules leaves us highly skeptical. There's a greater likelihood that a media conglomerate will buy your local TV station or newspaper, consolidate and reduce staffs, and deny you diverse points of view. (For more information, check out our Web site at www.HearUsNow.org.)
In 1983, more than 50 companies brought the bulk of national TV, radio, and print news to Americans. Today it's fewer than 10. Local news was the last independent source. Perhaps no longer. The new rules seem to block mergers of the largest newspapers and TV stations in most markets, but vague exceptions, if carelessly enforced, would reduce competition and consumer choice.
Further, the plan does nothing to promote ownership diversity. Women and members of minority groups own a paltry percentage of media outlets, way out of line with their presence in the general population. The new rules will probably drive up the price of admission for those underrepresented groups.
Consumers Union will continue to be outspoken in representing consumer interests on media issues and in working to convince Congress and the courts that the FCC's new plan, unless carefully carried out, could muffle the voices necessary to sustain an informed, curious, and democratic society.
BAD MOVE A new rule for local news could mean we'll hear fewer perspectives.
Why does it matter who owns those two news sources in your city? After all, the old rules were written before the Internet, podcasts, and streaming broadcasts channeled information from so many places. Still, the two main sources for local news in almost every town are the local paper and the local TV station. If they're owned by a single company, odds are they'll present the same stories and opinions, limiting our knowledge and understanding of what's happening in our communities.
The new rule allows TV stations and newspapers in the country's 20 biggest markets to merge, with certain restrictions. In developing it, the FCC dismissed pleas and threats from Congress and ignored widespread public opposition. The FCC says there are sufficient "high hurdles" to protect the public. It will presume that a proposed merger will not be in the public interest unless there is clear and convincing evidence that "the merged entity will increase the diversity of independent news outlets" and increase competition.
we're skeptical
If the commission sticks to those benchmarks, or if Congress, advocacy groups, and consumers have the resources to hold the FCC to its word, the policy can prevent the worst of problems. But the FCC's weak enforcement of other rules leaves us highly skeptical. There's a greater likelihood that a media conglomerate will buy your local TV station or newspaper, consolidate and reduce staffs, and deny you diverse points of view. (For more information, check out our Web site at www.HearUsNow.org.)
In 1983, more than 50 companies brought the bulk of national TV, radio, and print news to Americans. Today it's fewer than 10. Local news was the last independent source. Perhaps no longer. The new rules seem to block mergers of the largest newspapers and TV stations in most markets, but vague exceptions, if carelessly enforced, would reduce competition and consumer choice.
Further, the plan does nothing to promote ownership diversity. Women and members of minority groups own a paltry percentage of media outlets, way out of line with their presence in the general population. The new rules will probably drive up the price of admission for those underrepresented groups.
Consumers Union will continue to be outspoken in representing consumer interests on media issues and in working to convince Congress and the courts that the FCC's new plan, unless carefully carried out, could muffle the voices necessary to sustain an informed, curious, and democratic society.
Jim Guest
President
