Jump to content
Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

FCC Deregulation Deadline January 18!


Recommended Posts

Posted
The deadline for debate on further deregulation of the airwaves is January 18. The current plan is to overturn the rule that now makes it illegal for any one company to own a TV station, a Radio station, and Newspaper in the same market. The reason this has been illegal in the past is that one company controlling all of the media in a given market, in effect, controls the news. This is a huge freedom of speech issue. If more deregulation occurs we will be getting even less of the truth on the news than we are now. If this alarms you, contact your representative and let them know that you think this issue needs more discussion. [quote]Of particular concern is the NAB's campaign for further deregulation of the telecommunications industry. Having successfully lobbied to eliminate rules that prohibited a network from owning two stations in the same city, broadcasters are now pushing the FCC for an end to cross-ownership rules, which are all that prevent newspapers from being absorbed by the broadcast industry. The industry is also lobbying against regulations that would guarantee open access to the Internet over broadband cable lines, raising concerns that the Internet may grow to resemble cable television, where content is controlled by a handful of interconnected firms. [/quote]Here is the link to the rest of this letter: http://www.fair.org/activism/nab-letter.html

Jotown:)

 

"It's all good: Except when it's Great"

  • Replies 16
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted
[quote]Originally posted by DC: [b]Scary/interesting. Thanks Jotown![/b][/quote]The scarriest thing about it is that I have heard nothing about it on any of the networks, only PBS and NPR. It's almost a non-story. I wonder why that is? :rolleyes:

Jotown:)

 

"It's all good: Except when it's Great"

Posted
[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]The deadline for debate on further deregulation of the airwaves is January 18. The current plan is to overturn the rule that now makes it illegal for any one company to own a TV station, a Radio station, and Newspaper in the same market. The reason this has been illegal in the past is that one company controlling all of the media in a given market, in effect, controls the news. This is a huge freedom of speech issue. If more deregulation occurs we will be getting even less of the truth on the news than we are now. If this alarms you, contact your representative and let them know that you think this issue needs more discussion. [quote]Of particular concern is the NAB's campaign for further deregulation of the telecommunications industry. Having successfully lobbied to eliminate rules that prohibited a network from owning two stations in the same city, broadcasters are now pushing the FCC for an end to cross-ownership rules, which are all that prevent newspapers from being absorbed by the broadcast industry. The industry is also lobbying against regulations that would guarantee open access to the Internet over broadband cable lines, raising concerns that the Internet may grow to resemble cable television, where content is controlled by a handful of interconnected firms. [/quote]Here is the link to the rest of this letter: http://www.fair.org/activism/nab-letter.html [/b][/quote]Sorry no go on this one Jotown! :eek: There is already too much government in our lives as it is and there are plenty of other sources one can cull their news from. Internet, local library, local university, schools, you name it; I will fight ANY kind of government regulation of ANY ASPECT of our lives!
This way, no, wait, that way!
Posted
[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]The deadline for debate on further deregulation of the airwaves is January 18. [/b][/quote]"Further" deregulation????? Total bs, the U.S. is totally run by the corporations. In my town it's all Clear Channel already, what more could they want? What a crock. All hail the Homeland! [b]The reason this has been illegal in the past is that one company controlling all of the media in a given market, in effect, controls the news.[/b] It is not in the interest of the Homeland to allow unsupervised dispersion of information. [b]This is a huge freedom of speech issue.[/b] Too bad we have no power over it at all. [b]If this alarms you, contact your representative and let them know that you think [/b] Waste of time, unless you happen to have pockets of the likes of Clear Channel/AOL Time Warner, etc...

Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com

Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/

 

/ "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien

Posted
What you say is true, Chip, and I, of all people, deeply appreciate your appropriately directed cynicism; however, I feel that, if there [i]are[/i] any battles worth fighting, this happens to be one of them. We live in a republic, and aside from voting, the only real way to have a voice, whether or not you [i]perceive[/i] any actual value in that voice, is to express your political opinions coherently in writing to your representatives in Congress. I encourage everybody to read the thread I linked to above. Craig has a particularly important post in that thread. I'll get off the soapbox, now. I promise.
Posted
Mikegrijak wrote: [quote]Sorry no go on this one Jotown! There is already too much government in our lives as it is and there are plenty of other sources one can cull their news from. Internet, local library, local university, schools, you name it; I will fight ANY kind of government regulation of ANY ASPECT of our lives! [/quote]For starters, this is not about "more government. It has been illegal for anyone to own multiple media outlets,(Newspaper, Radio, TV) for many years. This is an existing law that a republican communications committee, (six republicans one democrat) is about to overturn. Maybe you don't understand why this matters. A free and open press is the cornerstone of our democracy. Our founding fathers in their infinite wisdom, knew that democracy would only survive if there was a free and open flow of information, unlike the press in Europe where they came from. They knew that whoever controlled the press, controlled the flow of information, and thus controlled the people. In 1996 the Clinton administration did the first layer of deregulating the airwaves. The company Clear Channel, (who now owns 1800 radio stations) and others like them, have pretty much monopolized the radio industry since then. If you wonder why music is so bad these days, the ability to make anything a hit because you own the airwaves is a major reason. Now when you further deregulate the communications industry, and allow any one company to own the Newspaper, Radio, and TV stations in a given market, and then multiply that by a couple of thousand markets, it becomes a freedom of speech issue that is much more dangerous than boy bands taking over the music industry. The major news agencies and networks are now in the hands of a few huge corporations. Allowing them to further consolidate an already corrupt media is bad for music, bad for news and just plain bad for America. The reason you haven't heard about this before is because the people who own those handful of networks, do not want you to. That should be a cause for your concern.

Jotown:)

 

"It's all good: Except when it's Great"

Posted
I would also add that one of the main reasons president Bush has been so successful in shoving this war down our throats is the lack of a dissenting view in the major media. People just aren't hearing the other side of the story. And it is a truism worth knowing; that most people forge their opinion from what they hear on the news. The so-called "Free Press" has already been consolidated in dangerous ways. Further consolidation of the media is not a healthy thing for our ailing democracy. Therefore, it is a dangerous thing for all of us.

Jotown:)

 

"It's all good: Except when it's Great"

Posted
Actually, Jotown, maybe if I'm a conservative, I don't give a damn what you think, and if ONE conservative company owns ALL the media, SO WHAT!!! That just means that everyone will be forced to agree with MY opinion! Why should I worry about something like that? HUH??? Why should I give a damn about your "liberal dogma"? :freak: :confused: :eek:
Posted
Hey Dbunny, I am gonna assume that you just had too much crack on your cracklin' bran this morning. :D

Jotown:)

 

"It's all good: Except when it's Great"

Posted
[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b] The scariest thing about it is that I have heard nothing about it on any of the networks, only PBS and NPR. It's almost a non-story. I wonder why that is? :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]As you already suspect, "they" don't want "us" getting in the way....not that there's much an ordinary citizen, busy trying to make a living, etc., can do to keep up with (let alone respond to) all the stuff zippin' by every day. Oh, well, [b][i]time to turn on the TV & relax[/i][/b].
Posted
[quote]Originally posted by dBunny: [b]I feel that, if there [i]are[/i] any battles worth fighting, this happens to be one of them. We live in a republic, and aside from voting, the only real way to have a voice, [/b][/quote]The problem is this: we both *know* we're not going to be able to change it. That's not the "real" world. It's the *thought* that we "could" change it that keeps the machine running. People on the sidelines think "well, the ship is doing ok because look - it's still functioning the way it was designed to" [i]but that's an illusion[/i]. The sooner *everyone* becomes completely cynical the better, because then maybe the atmosphere for real change can happen. That has to happen really, really soon because right now I'm telling you, the government is not our own anymore and there's nothing we can do about it unless *everyone* gets mad about it. Not mad about taxes, not mad about "liberals", not mad about Hussein or Harry Potter. Mad about losing the country to corporate and foreign interests. Otherwise it's just a charade.

Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com

Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/

 

/ "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien

Posted
[quote]The problem is this: we both *know* we're not going to be able to change it. That's not the "real" world. It's the *thought* that we "could" change it that keeps the machine running. People on the sidelines think "well, the ship is doing ok because look - it's still functioning the way it was designed to" but that's an illusion. The sooner *everyone* becomes completely cynical the better, because then maybe the atmosphere for real change can happen. That has to happen really, really soon because right now I'm telling you, the government is not our own anymore and there's nothing we can do about it unless *everyone* gets mad about it.[/quote]Chip, your post confuses me. :confused: You seem to be saying two different things. The opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference. Cynicism without action is indifference. Besides money, and influence, and cheating, why is George Bush President? The answer is that the conservatives are organized, and passionate about their agenda. That's how you win an election even when the majority voted for the other guy. If just 5% of the population who currently do not vote got involved they would be a force for change. That's all it would take to change things. You have to believe that change is possible for it to happen. The democrats and the republicans are one indistiguishable corporate owned clot. Somewhere out there is someone who can inspire, break from the pack, and lead. Don't get so cynical that you can't get excited about that person when you see them. That would make you jaded, not merely cynical.

Jotown:)

 

"It's all good: Except when it's Great"

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...