Senate Opposes Media Ownership Rule
FCC would allow newspapers in big cities to own broadcast outlets
With a White House veto threat looming, the Senate voted Thursday night to throw out a new Federal Communications Commission rule allowing a newspaper in any of the nation's top 20 media markets to own a TV or radio station in the same market. The measure, introduced by North Dakota Democrat Byron Dorgan, passed on a voice vote.
Earlier in the day, the Bush administration defended the FCC rule, saying it "modestly and judiciously modernizes decades-old media ownership regulations that highly restrict cross-ownership of newspapers and broadcast stations."
Officials said President Bush's advisers would urge him to veto the measure should it pass the House, where a companion resolution has been introduced.
The Senate measure drew 27 cosponsors, including Democrats Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois. Republican John McCain of Arizona, another presidential hopeful, was not a cosponsor.
Dorgan saluted Senate passage, saying the new rule not only would allow consolidation in the biggest markets but would "open a gaping loophole for more mergers of newspapers and television stations across the country." He added: "We already have too much concentration in the media. Diverse, independent, and local media sources are essential to ensuring that the public has access to a variety of information."
Earlier, Dorgan had said that if Bush vetoes the measure, "he can answer to the American people where he stands on increased concentration of broadcasting."
—Katherine Skiba
Reader Comments
Sadly, too many Americans are ignorant of these new FCC proposals and subsequently fail to understand that diversity of opinion in news coverage is already severely limited. Media ownershiip is already too concentrated, and further relaxation of these regulations can only spell disaster for the public, who it seems, no longer owns the airwaves.
Since Ronald Reagan eviscerated the Fairness Doctrine--the equal opportunity rule that mandated opposing points of view be heard on matters of public concern--
little, if nothing, is aired about most major concerns except what big media institutions want to be heard. How do people think we got into this whole Iraq and economic mess in the first place?? By silencing differing, responsible, and often, more carefully thought out positions on such matters, that's how.
It's no surprise that King George would veto such level-headed and fairminded legislation.
It would be refreshing if in one of these farcical 'debates' a candidate would raise this issue as one that is equally as important to voters as the war and the economy.
Drogan Bill
It's about time for this change.
advertisement
