Despite 24-hour news channels and thousands of Web sites, most of us still turn to our local media outlets to find out what’s going on in our communities. We expect our hometown newspapers and TV stations to cover the events that affect our daily lives, and to aggressively compete to offer us a wide range of views. To make sure that happens, the government has generally required that media outlets in our communities remain independent of each other, with different owners.

But the Federal Communications Commission is considering changing the rules, which may leave consumers with far fewer independent media voices. The threat is real; in 2003 the FCC issued new rules allowing one company to own a daily paper, a TV station, and up to half the radio stations allowed in a market that has four to eight TV stations.

The public outcry against the change was deafening. A 2003 survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press showed that 50 percent of consumers said more consolidation in the news business would have a negative effect on the country. Millions of Americans expressed outrage at the change in rules.

The agency issued the rules anyway, opening the door to extraordinary consolidation among local news media. But the courts threw out those rules and told the agency to go back to the drawing board. Now, the FCC is at it again. This time, it should listen to public opinion.

Why is local media ownership important? Despite the vast amount of print news, Internet, and TV programs available, most of the information comes from a handful of companies. Even now, an article from a major newspaper often gets recycled for TV stations or Internet outlets. The story may look different, but the content and potential bias are the same.

At the local level, more consolidation would be particularly troubling. In a 2004 survey of consumers’ media habits by Consumers Union and the Consumer Federation of America, 61 percent of the Americans polled said newspapers were their most important source of local news in determining their opinions; local broadcast news was the second most important source.

Of the 200 markets in which the FCC previously would have allowed local newspaper-TV mergers, most have only one major daily newspaper. Letting the dominant local paper share ownership with one or two of the few local TV stations would mean that a story in your morning paper might simply be regurgitated on the evening news.

Diverse ownership of media should promote higher-quality journalism, as outlets compete for a larger share of the audience. That’s essential in a democracy, where the media act as critical checks on the government and watchdogs of industry. If competition declines, the amount of original local news is likely to fall and the diversity of editorial opinion will suffer.

Over the next few months, the FCC will be hearing from the public about how local media should be owned. Before federal regulators come to a decision, they should consider your views carefully. An independent media is essential for an informed public and a healthy democracy.

To learn more or to weigh in with the FCC, go to www.HearUsNow.org.