Benton RSS Feed
MEDIA MERGERS ARE DAMAGING US DEMOCRACY
[SOURCE: Financial Times, AUTHOR: FCC Commissioner Michael Copps]
[Commentary] Americans have always been crazy for news. When Alexis de Tocqueville toured the nations back roads nearly two centuries ago, he marvelled at the astonishing circulation of letters and newspapers among these savage woods. De Tocqueville chalked this up to our uniquely local politics. Under a centralized government, a handful of national newspapers might have been enough. But America offered the utmost national freedom combined with local freedom of every kind. Today, the US is richer and more powerful than when de Tocqueville visited. But do we still have media capable of keeping democracy strong? Not by a long shot. Newspaper competition has died in most cities and towns. Radio, television and the Internet have replaced them but these are primarily national, not local, and geared towards selling products through entertainment. In the last off-year elections, more than half of local newscasts contained no campaign coverage at all. Why and how has this happened? A leading culprit is the staggering consolidation among communications companies in recent years. A handful of conglomerates now controls nearly all the mainstream media. An even smaller group of network providers controls Internet access. These two trends are not typically thought to be related. But both are attempts at stifling competition by seizing control of content and distribution. The fight against consolidation is not liberal versus conservative or red state versus blue. It is a grassroots, all-American campaign to preserve the very democracy that de Tocqueville saw in America. Every citizen is a stakeholder in the outcome and every citizen should be part of the decision-making.
http://www.freepress.net/news/16168
(via Free Press)
Media Mergers Are Damaging U.S. Democracy
BIG MEDIA CROSS TO BEAR
[SOURCE: The Street 6/22, AUTHOR: Sandy Brown]
Newspapers and local TV stations aren't necessarily a match made in heaven, big media companies are learning. A number of big newspaper outfits bought into the TV business in a bid to reap supposed advertising synergies. But while some operators have succeeded -- E.W. Scripps and Belo come to mind -- such cases are proving to be the exception, not the rule. Hard-won experience shows both the paper and the TV station must be market leaders for the owner to enjoy the benefits of cross-ownership. Newspaper companies that don't enjoy significant efficiencies from local TV assets might be smart to sell some stations.
http://www.thestreet.com/_tscfoc/stocks/media/10293067.html
Big Media's Cross to Bear
FCC DENIES CHALLENGE, RENEWS STATION LICENSE
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The FCC has dismissed a challenge to the license of Raycom's KWWL(TV) Waterloo, Iowa, and granted the station a new seven-year lease on life. The license had been challenged over two station editorials that the petitioner said were motivated by undisclosed financial interest in the issues, and in one case, was delivered without sufficient time for reply. The FCC concluded that it had little power to interfere with news decision-making, that private and public interests were not mutually exclusive, and that there was insufficient evidence that granting the license would, on its face, be inconsistent with the public interest. One editorial was called "The Digital Age of Television" and advocated maintaining the 2009 hard date for the digital switch. The other opposed a ballot initiative creating a local telecommunications utility commission. Raycom, said petitioner Richard C. Young, did not disclose that it had a financial interest in not extending the time during which it would have to simulcast analog and digital, and did not disclose that it had a financial relationship with a cable provider who would be directly affected by the creation of the utility commission. In addition, Young said, the editorial on the utility commission came the night before the election, not providing the other side sufficient time for rebuttal. The FCC pointed out that, since it had scrapped the fairness doctrine -- almost 20 years ago -- there was no guaranteed right of reply, so the station was not required to make any time available for rebuttal. The FCC also said that news was the core programming protected by the First Amendment and that the Commission "has very little authority to interfere with a licensee's selection and presentation of...editorial programming. Station KWWL(TV) exercised its good faith discretion in determining that the two editorials were relevant and important to the community it served."
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347209.html?display=Breaking...
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347209.html?display=Breaking%20News
MEDIA GENERAL GETS DUOPOLY WAIVER
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John Eggerton]
The FCC has granted a waiver of its duopoly rules to allow Media General to buy WVTM TV Birmingham, Ala., from NBC. It already owns WIAT(TV) there and both stations are ranked among the top four in the market. Media General is technically not allowed to own them both under current FCC ownership rules. The FCC does not allow duopolies among two of the top four stations. Media General has promised to sell WIAT within six months--the length of the waiver--and points out the FCC has issued similar waivers. That is, in part, because the FCC's rules have been up in the air since a court remanded them in 2003. Since then, broadcasters, including Media General and Tribune prominently, have had to seek waivers awaiting the outcome of a just-launched rule review to establish just how many stations the government will allow them to own, and where. The application for waiver was unopposed.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347223.html?display=Breaking...
** For more see:
Media General Closes Four-Station Sale
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347271.html?display=Breaking...
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347223.html?display=Breaking%20News
IN LATE TWIST, UNIVISION ACCEPTS BID
[SOURCE: New York Times, AUTHOR: Andrew Ross Sorkin]
The board of Univision Communications, the nation's largest Spanish-language broadcaster, agreed to sell the company last night for $11 billion to a private equity consortium, people involved in the negotiations said. Univision's directors approved the sale at a meeting in Los Angeles, and both sides were scrambling to sign the agreement so that it could be announced this morning. At $11.1 billion or $36.25 a share, the sale is less than the $40 a share that Univision had originally hoped to receive when it put itself up for auction in February. Though the price was less than anticipated, it remains one of the highest multiples paid for a media company in recent history. The sale of Univision, known for its telenovelas, or soap operas, and its coverage of the World Cup soccer tournament, is a surprise twist in a long-running auction that only last week appeared on the verge of collapse. The deal would put Univision in the hands of a group that includes the billionaire investor Haim Saban. The group also includes four private equity firms -- Madison Dearborn Partners, Providence Equity Partners, the Texas Pacific Group and Thomas H. Lee Partners -- with stakes in business like Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer and Warner Music. With the agreement, the consortium seems to have topped a rival group led by Grupo Televisa, the Mexican broadcast giant, which had been expected to win the auction. Univision is the ultimate media juggernaut in the rapidly growing Latino market in the United States, a segment worth some $480 billion in annual buying power. It is the fifth-largest television network in the country behind Fox, reaching some 98 percent of Spanish-speaking households through its 62 TV stations, more than 90 affiliate stations and more than 2,000 cable affiliates. In addition to the network, which dwarfs Telemundo, a unit of General Electric's NBC, Univision also owns the nation's largest Spanish language radio broadcaster, music company and online operations.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/27/business/media/27deal.html
(requires registration)
* Univision Weighs $11.1 Billion Bid, But Televisa Is Still in the Running
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115138134149391638.html?mod=todays_us_pa...
* $11.3-Billion Univision Bid Is Accepted
http://www.latimes.com/business/printedition/la-fi-univision27jun27,1,60...
In Late Twist, Univision Accepts Bid
AN INTERNET FOR THE FEW OR THE MANY?
[SOURCE: C-Net|News.com, AUTHOR: Stefanie Olsen and Anne Broache]
An interview with FCC Commissioner Michael Copps. He'd like the technology industry to become more engaged in the Net neutrality debate. "I'm a believer that we have to preserve the openness of the Internet. What this boils down to is Internet freedom. Are we going to keep this platform open and dynamic and--small "d"--a democratic technology platform that we have gotten accustomed to with dial-up Internet? Or in this age of high-speed broadband, are we going to turn it over to others to operate? Are we just going to transform the whole nature of the Internet from where the pipe in the middle was dumb and the intelligence was on the ends--are we going to reverse that and give all the control and intelligence to the pipe and network operators and relegate ourselves to less of a role on the edges?"
http://news.com.com/An+Internet+for+the+few+or+the+many/2008-1028_3-6088...
An Internet for the few or the many?
DON'T LET SERVICE PROVIDERS DISCRIMINATE ON THE INTERNET
[SOURCE: San Jose Mercury News 6/25, AUTHOR:John Doerr (Kleiner Perkins Caufield ) and Reed Hastings Netflix)]
[Commentary] A debate about the future of the Internet is taking place now in our nation's capital, and American innovation as we know it is at stake. The debate is over "net neutrality," an obscure term that refers to control of Internet content: What Web sites can be shown; what products can be displayed; what costs Internet consumers will pay. The term may be arcane, but it is net neutrality that has ensured the Internet's growth as a vibrant, open and non-discriminatory marketplace since its inception. This longstanding principle of net neutrality is now under threat, and the implications for the Internet and for American innovation are profound. This is not a debate about imposing new regulations on the Internet. This is a debate about preserving a fundamental principle of openness and non-discrimination that has always been a foundation of the Internet's growth and vitality. At its core, this is a debate about competition, consumer choice and above all, the innovation that has been a hallmark of the Internet
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/14899507.htm
Don't let the service providers discriminate on the Internet
NET NEUTRALITY -- SPRING SWEEPS OR LAST SEASON'S RERUN?
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: Deborah Lathen, former chief of FCC's Cable Services Bureau ]
[Commentary] Is the "Net Neutrality" debate really a rerun from the “open access†debate of the 1990s? Not long ago, “open access†was the rallying cry of consumer advocate groups, independent Internet service providers (“ISPsâ€), noted academics and, yes, even some of the major telephone companies.They argued that ISPs would wither away unless cable companies were required to share their proprietary facilities with them. Their predictions that cable companies would discriminate by providing better quality of service for their content, block access to their competitors' and raise prices, did not happen. Fortunately the leaders of the day decided to “do no harm†and said “no†to open access.Subsequently, the telephone companies were deregulated and competition and investment in new high speed networks exploded. So, why would anyone want to go backward? Is network neutrality legislation really necessary? No.Net-neutrality seeks to reverse a regulatory policy that has proved effective.The metamorphosis of the Internet occurred in an unregulated environment. Its continued evolution is contingent upon maintaining its freedom from those who ironically think they can protect it by regulating it.Undue regulation is perhaps the biggest threat to the openness of the Internet. Net neutrality is a remedy looking for a problem; instead of living through the summer re-runs of the seasons’ best and worst, we should look to the future and the future’s “must see TV.â€
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347085?display=Breaking+News
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6347085?display=Breaking%20News
Senate Commerce Committee chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) said Thursday that he did not intervene at the Federal Communications Commission to block the agency's planned June 21 vote to impose new digital-TV mandates on cable operators. Communications lobbyists told Multichannel News Stevens or his staff persuaded Republican FCC member Robert McDowell to block the vote because Stevens wanted to deal with the carriage issue in his pending telecommunications bill (S. 2686). "That's not true," Stevens told reporters, adding that his only comments on the subject came two weeks ago when he made it clear that he would support FCC adoption of the new cable-carriage rules.
http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6346428.html?display=Breaking+News
Stevens Denies Must-Carry Intervention at FCC
John Kneuer, Acting assistant secretary of Commerce for Communications & information for the National Telecommunications & Information Agency, stressed Thursday that the transition to digital television would be arguably the biggest communications sea change ever, bigger than the switch to color TV "with more immediate impact" than anything he had ever experienced in his communications career. He pointed out, in his speech to the Media Institute in Washington, that Congress has only given NTIA $5 million for a public-education campaign. He told the crowd they knew better than anyone how far that would go, which isn't far, and said the industries whose viewers will be affected have to pitch in big time. He said he welcomes all the help he can get.
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6346321?display=Breaking+News
NTIA Seeks DTV Partners