Media Ownership Update 11.18.07

MEDIA OWNERSHIP

• Tribune 'baffled' by twists at FCC
• Media General opposes FCC media ownership plan
• Dorgan on Cross-Ownership Proposal: ‘Smaller Step in Wrong Direction’
• The Perplexing Chairman
• Group Files FOIA Complaint Against FCC
• Martin’s Newspaper Clip Job: Q&A with NAA’s John Sturm
• A Reality Check For FCC Debate

TRIBUNE 'BAFFLED' BY TWISTS AT FCC
[SOURCE: Chicago Tribune, AUTHOR: Michael Oneal and Phil Rosenthal]
On November 13, the same day Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin martin released his media ownership proposal, he had breakfast will Sam Zell in Chicago. Zell pressed Martin for the temporary cross-ownership waivers he needs to get financing to purchase the Tribune Company -- it was clear Martin's agenda and Tribune's had diverged. Tribune sources were optimistic Friday that Martin would push through waivers of some sort, possibly as early as Monday, helping Zell and Tribune avoid a slew of costs that would make the deal more risky and complicated. Nevertheless, confusion was running high about Martin's motives. Zell needs the Tribune deal to close by December 31 so he can avoid fees and preserve the tax benefits at the center of the deal. And since financing terms require a 20-day period between approvals and the close, a planned Dec. 18 FCC vote doesn't do him much good, even if the rules pass. Martin is loath to extend Tribune's waivers, because he would rather see a permanent solution and is afraid new waivers would give ammunition to his opponents. In order to knock down the rules, even partially, he will need all the leverage he can get. By holding up the Tribune transaction, he has tried to put a clock on the process, reasoning that neither his commissioners nor Congress want to see the deal fail. "Politicians don't like to be responsible for companies losing money or jobs being lost," said one former FCC official who asked not to be named. "He thinks there's fundamental support for the transaction." Most observers said the cross-ownership proposal Martin issued Tuesday represented a middle ground between conservatives like FCC Commissioner McDowell, who want no rules, and Commissions Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein, who want more rules. Tying Tribune to the rulemaking might help ensure McDowell's support for a watered-down proposal. The most likely outcome, sources close to the situation said, is that Martin puts waivers with some sort of time limit up for a vote in the coming days. But time limits are tricky.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-sun_fcc_1118nov18,0,776073.st...

MEDIA GENERAL OPPOSES FCC MEDIA OWNERSHIP PLAN
[SOURCE: Reuters]
Media General said on Friday that it opposes a plan by a top U.S. regulator to relax media ownership laws because the easing would be limited to the top 20 U.S. cities. The proposal by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin "gets things backwards" by focusing on the largest media markets, Media General spokesman Ray Kozakewicz wrote in an e-mail. "The quality of 'localism' and local television news, which is the FCC's charge, is most at-risk in small and mid-sized markets, not the top 20 markets in the country," he wrote. In several small markets in the Southeastern United States, Media General, publisher of the Richmond Times-Dispatch and Tampa Tribune, owns newspapers and TV stations under waivers from current rules. It might have to divest some of those papers or stations under the plan, according an investors' note published by Stanford Group analyst Paul Gallant on Thursday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUKN1639410220071116?rpc=44

* Media General may have to sell properties -analyst
Stanford Group analyst Paul Gallant said Thursday that Media General may have to sell properties in some markets where it owns newspapers and television stations under new media ownership rules being considered by the FCC. The small markets cited by Gallant where Media General owns newspaper-TV combination are Bristol, Virginia; Johnson City, Tennessee; Myrtle Beach and Florence, South Carolina; Marianna and Panama City, Florida; Columbus, Georgia; and Opelika-Auburn, Alabama.
http://www.reuters.com/article/mediaNews/idUSN1530108520071115

* Newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership: Media General version
[SOURCE: Lasar's Letter on the FCC, AUTHOR: Matthew Lasar]
[Commentary] M. Ann Swanson of Media General met with Monica Desai, Chief of the FCC's Media Bureau Thursday to explain why "repeal of the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule is needed in small- and medium-sized markets" and to outline the southeastern media company's counter-proposal. The proposal would permit newspaper/TV station cross ownership, provided that: 1) the TV station provides "an average of five percent locally relevant and responsive programming" from five a.m. to midnight. The plan defines such programming as public affairs, news, cultural fare, "controversial issues of public importance," or minority oriented programming. But it also includes local sports and local weather as part of the definition; 2) the licensed station would decide what constitutes local relevance via conversations with community leaders and viewers to be held each fiscal quarter; 3) the broadcaster provides two extra hours a week of local programming in the four weeks heading up to a general election. This fare would include interviews, new, and debate shows for candidates and ballot measures; and 4) the licensee will broadcast an average of 100 public service announcements (PSAs) for which the station is not paid. These will address "matters of interest and concern to the local community, at least half of which are locally produced by licensee or its affiliate and do not promote station-sponsored events."
http://www.lasarletter.net/drupal/node/509

* Media General D.C. Bureau Shuffle Cuts Staff, Expands Web
A reorganization of Media General's Washington, D.C, bureau will shrink its reporting staff from six reporters to four, while also changing from a setup of regional and national correspondents to four "multimedia" journalists working through a new bureau Web site. Media General operates 25 daily papers and owns 23 television stations. It had staffed the D.C. bureau with a bureau chief, three national correspondents who covered different federal issues, as well as three regional reporters who covered Washington for the chain's largest dailies -- The Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch; The Tampa Tribune; and the Winston-Salem (N.C.) Journal.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_con...

DORGAN ON CROSS-OWNERSHIP PROPOSAL: 'SMALLER STEP IN WRONG DIRECTION'
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
During an interview on C-Span, Sen Byron Dorgan (D-ND) said Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin's media ownership rules proposal was a small step in the wrong direction. Sen Dorgan has introduced the Media Ownership Act of 2007, a blunt instrument "[t]hat's just trying to block what [Chairman Martin] is doing at the moment by saying, ‘You can't decide you are going to announce a new rule in November and drive it to a conclusion Dec. 18. That’s not fair.’" Sen Dorgan added that he would try other ways in addition to his bill to block Chairman Martin, which could include a resolution to disapprove the rule if it is passed -- a procedural rule that would essentially invalidate the rule if it passes -- although Sen Dorgan is hoping it doesn’t get that far. Hearings in the House and Senate are planned for early December and, if the drumbeat for delay is loud enough, Chairman Martin might feel pressured to scrap the Dec. 18 vote.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6501968.html?rssid=193

* FCC Update
[SOURCE: Bill Moyers Journal]
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/11162007/profile2.html

THE PERPLEXING CHAIRMAN
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Editorial staff]
[Commentary] FCC Chairman Martin's deregulatory proposal on newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership hardly merited the smackdown he got from Democrats on the commission and Capitol Hill. Frankly, it was too insignificant for our tastes. We're not sure why the anti-consolidation activists weren't declaring victory rather than rending their garments over a compromise in which Martin agreed to drop all the other proposed deregulatory changes from 2003, and to settle for just a watered-down change to the ownership rule. For those who think the media is already too big, any more deregulation apparently is a non-starter, even if it could save struggling newspapers. We advise the FCC to proceed with the media ownership vote, but hold off on any 70/70 finding until it gets better data. And we would encourage cable operators, broadcasters and publishers to redouble their efforts to convince this FCC chairman to adjust his aim more toward helping all media rather than stifling them.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6503801.html

GROUP FILES FOIA COMPLAINT AGAINST FCC
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The Institute for Public Representation filed a Freedom of Information Act complaint against the Federal Communications Commission, saying that it failed to respond to its challenge of the FCC's withholding of some 1,400 documents from an FOIA request IPR filed for information on the commission's media-ownership and localism proceedings, including on studies and analysis. The IPR wants a finding that the FCC violated FOIA, access to the missing pages, court costs and other litigation costs.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6503763.html?rssid=193

MARTIN'S NEWSPAPER CLIP JOB
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Paige Albiniak]
A Q&A with Newspaper Association of America President John Sturm who would do away with the newspaper-broadcast crossownership ban. He says, "This rule doesn’t prevent anything bad, it only prevents something good: more news and public affairs for local audiences." He believes FCC Chairman Martin's proposal will pass muster with the federal court in Philadelphia which overturned the FCC's last attempt to change media ownership rules. Sturm predicts that someone will ask for a waiver of the new rules and the FCC's decision on the waiver will be appealed -- not in the Philadelphia court, but the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals "and experts say that is friendlier venue" for Sturm's point of view. Sturm says, "I view the whole rule as an unfortunate barrier to ownership of radio and television stations by minority owners of newspapers. There probably aren’t very many of those, but we have seen pretty serious growth, especially in the Hispanic press. Some of that is not necessarily all in Spanish. Owners of those properties would be precluded from owning radio and TV stations in markets below the top 20."
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6503820.html?rssid=193

A REALITY CHECK FOR FCC DEBATE
[SOURCE: Columbia Journalism Review, AUTHOR: Gal Beckerman]
[Commentary] Every time the FCC proposes new media ownership rules (as it did four years ago, and seven years before that) it’s an opportunity to witness the power of spin. Those who favor deregulation, and those who oppose it, describe the media landscape in ways that favor their position. In the swirl of these competing visions, it’s not really clear what is even being discussed. So many of the different sounds and images we take in every day can arguably be construed as “media,” that it’s easy to lose track of what the FCC actually has jurisdiction over. It would be nice to see this ownership debate take place in language that corresponds to reality. The sky will not fall if this rule is changed, but neither should we ignore what’s actually at stake when the FCC decides the limits of media ownership.
http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/a_reality_check_for_fcc_debate.php