Disclosure important, but PIOs needed, too

On November 27, 2007, the Federal Communications Commission adopted new rules aimed at improving the information local television broadcasters provide to the communities they are licensed to serve. This commendable action is an important step for local communities to evaluate whether broadcasters are adhering to U.S. law and serving the "public interest, convenience and necessity."

"Broadcasters already disclose their financial statements to investors and their political contributions to voters," noted Benton Foundation Chairman Charles Benton. "They also should fully disclose their public interest programming to viewers. This reporting is as important as food labeling."

But, as has been reported widely, the FCC is also moving quickly to change media ownership rules -- perhaps as early as next month -- and allow local newspaper owners to purchase radio and TV stations in the same community. Critics of this move -- including Members of Congress, public interest groups, as well as a prominent media owners -- have asked the Commission to delay this decision. In part, they argue that the FCC should first complete a proceeding began in 1995 that would define what programming "in the public interest" means in the age of digital television, which officially begins in February 2009 -- less than 450 days away.

Benton responded today with a warning that the work on public interest obligations is now, at best, just half done.

Benton said, "FCC Chairman Kevin Martin's proposed change to media ownership rules is intended to offer opportunities for new owners of US television stations. Before unleashing a wave of television ownership deals, the Commission should first clearly define what will be expected of these new owners. But, more importantly, the American public deserves to know how television broadcasters will fulfill their role as public trustees of the airways in the digital age. I urged the FCC to issue clear guidelines to ensure that broadcasters adhere to the law and serve the local educational, informational, civic, minority, disability and security needs of the children and adults in the communities that TV stations are licensed to serve."

"The obligation of broadcasters," said Benton added, "to serve local educational, informational, civic, minority, disability and security needs of the public has been created by statute and upheld by the courts. Further guidance from the FCC is necessary to clarify how these public interest obligations apply to TV broadcasters and to answer outstanding questions raised by the increased technological capabilities of the digital medium. To move ahead on allowing new companies to become owners of TV stations without first defining their public interest responsibilities is a bad deal for local communities."