|
Still
Radio Active
I was on Cliff Kelley's WVON radio show
this morning from 6:15am until nearly 7am. We talked about CMA, the media,
Aftermath, and September 11.
I would have made an announcement of
this on the blog, except that I got really short notice on this (I
found out late last night about the radio date early this morning).
I'm hoping to be able to get a tape or
CD of the broadcast so I can digitize it and put it on this website
(probably in MP3 format).
There's more. I was delighted to find
out that our 9/11 screening of Aftermath (one of 15 so far in North
America) also got a mention in yesterday's issue of the Chicago
Defender. :-)
Entry 87 first created by
Mitchell: 2003-09-10 10:27:41
Quick Notice: Stop the FCC one more
time!
MoveOn.org is trying to get a
campaign going to get 100,000 signatures on a petition by Wednesday in an
effort to undo the FCC's deregulation.
The networks are ramping up their
lobbying efforts, so we've got to be vigilant. The vote might be close,
but we've got a chance to win this thing.
Please take a moment if you would to sign the petition.
Entry 86 first created by
Mitchell: 2003-09-08 10:50:51
Lots of web work...
You'll notice lots of changes to the
left column: I've added links to our July 4 celebration "We,
the Media", as well as links to our
cosponsored series of films with Chicago Filmmakers.
I've also database-ized the protest
slogans database and the CMA list of
outside resources.
More web work to come...
Entry 85 first created by
Mitchell: 2003-09-07 16:00:43
More good news
Yesterday, September 4, CMA had its most
successful rally to date: there's a link to a 
As we held the rally, it was uncertain
whether or not the Senate Appropriations Committee would act in our favor
with regards to passing a spending bill amendment which would help bleed
the June 2 deregulations. It
turns out that the Senate did act in our favor.
Finally, CMA (kind of) makes two
appearances in this week's Chicago Reader: one on Aftermath,
another on Afghan
Massacre: The Convoy of Death .
But wait! There's
more!: Make that three appearances in
this week's Reader. The Reader's calendar also lists us as the *entire
entry* for September 11:
11 Thursday: What did the
Bush administration know and when? Why wasn't the military able to
intercept the hijacked planes? Were there plans for a war in central
Asia prior to September 11? What can we do? These are some of the 11
questions posed to nine experts and activists in the Guerrilla News
Network's 35-minute documentary Aftermath: Unanswered Questions From
9/11. Tonight's Chicago Media Action-sponsored screening of the short
will be hosted by WVON's Cliff Kelley and followed by a discussion. It
starts at 6 (doors open at 5:30) at the Chicago Temple, 77 W.
Washington; there's a suggested donation of $5. To reserve a seat call
866-260-7198 or e-mail cma@chicagomediaaction.org
More: Our September 4 rally made it into
Buzzflash. Look for the headline
"Chicago Activists Rally at Tribune Plaza Against FCC 9/6"
There might be more media on the way.
Stay tuned.
Entry 84 first created by
Mitchell: 2003-09-05 10:39:50
Take that!
This notice came across the wire:
Judges Temporarily Stay
New FCC Ownership Rules
Wed September 3, 2003 05:13 PM
ET
PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - A federal
judicial panel on Wednesday temporarily blocked the Federal
Communications Commission's new media ownership rules from taking effect
as scheduled on Thursday.
In a blow to the Republican-led FCC,
the three-judge panel of the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in
Philadelphia issued a stay order preventing the regulatory agency from
loosening ownership rules on local television and radio stations pending
further proceedings.
Read the full article here
Just so everyone knows: We're not
cancelling the rally on September 4, though we might turn this into a
celebration rather than a condemnation. Oh, yeah!
Entry 83 first created by
Mitchell: 2003-09-03 16:05:26
Almost Showtime!
To those of you who discovered this
website after reading about it in The News Dissector's Weblog:
Welcome!
Today's (September 3, 2003) entry in Danny Schechter's
weblog mentioned the Reclaim
The FCC efforts across the United States, and Danny quoted an email I
sent to him noting that it wasn't just San Francisco holding
actions.
Chicago Media Action will be joining
with the Chicago chapters of the Independent Press Association and the
National Organization for Women in a rally at the Tribune Plaza downtown,
home of the cross-ownership-prone Tribune company. The rally starts at
5pm, September 4; come one, come all. Photos of the event will be posted
to this website later that evening.
Entry 82 first created by
Mitchell: 2003-09-03 08:34:12
Some good news from the Wall Street
Journal--for a change
Don't fret. The headline and the article
have this peculiar spin to it, but do read the entire
article.
TV Networks Join Forces to
Fight Backlash Over Station Ownership
By MATTHEW ROSE
Staff Reporter of
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
The unexpected political backlash
against plans to ease media-ownership rules has prompted the nation's
major television networks to band together in a high-profile lobbying
campaign to defend the changes.
The networks' push, which comes as
Congress returns to work this week, represents the opening salvo in what
is likely to be one of the most bitter fights in Washington this fall.
Armed with fresh data provided by a top Republican pollster, lobbyists
for Viacom Inc.'s CBS, General Electric Co.'s NBC and News Corp.'s Fox
are seeking to convince lawmakers that voters don't care who owns their
local television station and also don't want the government regulating
who can.
Walt Disney Co.'s ABC supports the
other networks, but it wasn't clear how involved that network will be in
the lobbying effort. "America Says: Don't Get Between Me And My TV," is
the slogan the four networks are using in ads running this week in two
Washington political publications, The Hill and Roll Call.
The networks are seeking to drum up
support for a key part of the Federal Communications Commission's recent
changes to a series of decades-old media regulations. The new rules,
passed by the commission in a party-line vote in June, would allow the
nation's networks to acquire more of their local affiliates. The
changes, among other things, also would make it easier for companies to
own both newspapers and TV stations in the same markets.
The new FCC rules, which are due to
take effect this month or in October, were greeted with vociferous
opposition from Democratic presidential candidates, a raft of
special-interest groups from both ends of the political spectrum and a
significant number of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Opponents
fear the FCC move would leave a small number of companies with undue
influence over the media.
The next skirmish is scheduled for
Wednesday at a federal court building in Philadelphia, where the court
will hear a request for an emergency stay of the new rules filed by
consumer advocacy groups.
The counterattack by the TV networks
is focused on winning support for the new FCC rule that raises to 45%
from 35% the limit on how much of the national television audience one
company can reach through its ownership of local TV stations. Owning
more stations would give broadcasters greater leverage in negotiating
with advertisers and program suppliers. While the television industry is
already concentrated, the higher ownership limit is expected to prompt
mostly smaller transactions that would allow the major players to
further consolidate power in specific markets.
The networks face a steep
challenge, as Congressional opposition to
loosened media-ownership rules is especially broad and bipartisan. In
part, this is because what was once a backroom debate about arcane
regulatory details has become a popular political issue, fused with more
general and emotional complaints about the media industry.
The debate has moved beyond the
technicalities of regulatory reform, says Adam Thierer, director of
telecommunications studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian
Washington think tank. "A lot of people have an ax to grind against the
media, both on the right and the left: The left say, 'I hate Rush
Limbaugh and those guys on Fox,' and the right whine endlessly about the
liberal media," he says.
It's possible the networks' push has
come too late. Democratic presidential candidates have jumped on the
issue to argue that President Bush favors big business over the concerns
of ordinary Americans. In Congress, an unusually large number of
Republicans have bucked the FCC and the president -- who has threatened
to veto legislation that would scale back the loosened regulations --
and lent their support to various attempts to reverse the FCC's
proposals.
In late July, the House inserted an
amendment into a spending bill that would effectively scuttle the higher
TV-ownership limit. In the Senate, lawmakers are considering a parallel
spending bill, with a similar amendment on TV ownership. Some Senators
also are considering use of the Congressional Review Act, a rarely used
tool, to strike down the FCC rules.
In another move, the Senate Commerce
Committee in June passed a measure that would reinstate the previous FCC
rules. But the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee has
refused to bring a similar measure to a vote.
If Congress does restore the older
media-ownership rules, the matter could very likely end up in court.
Last year, a federal appeals court in Washington ruled that the 35%
TV-ownership limit was arbitrary and remanded it back to the FCC for
reconsideration. That move was one in a series of court decisions that
went against the FCC in challenges to various media-ownership
rules.
Some network lobbyists privately
concede they should have ramped up their offensive earlier. They say
they worried that a concerted public effort would give ammunition to
opponents to argue that the networks do indeed have too much power to
get their point of view across.
Bob Okun, NBC's Washington lobbyist,
says there's still time to influence the outcome of the debate because
most lawmakers have been distracted by other issues and don't have firm
opinions on the matter. "I think members, without exception, are willing
to hear both sides of the issue and make a decision," he says. "It's not
really too late."
In addition to the ads, the networks
are planning to trumpet their public-opinion research as the House and
Senate leaderships start planning their agendas this week. Frank Luntz,
the pollster who was commissioned to prepare data, will be publicizing a
survey suggesting that, for example, 87% of those polled think they have
an adequate number of choices for receiving news. The survey also shows
that only 11% believe network ownership of their local station is a bad
thing and 68% think the market should decide whether that should happen
or not. One argument the networks are pushing: Loosened regulations
would help preserve free TV for the 15% to 20% of households who rely on
it by bolstering the networks' financial health.
"I have never seen a situation where
politicians have a greater disconnect from the people they represent,"
Mr. Luntz says.
Opponents of the new FCC rules scoff
at the notion that the brouhaha is a Beltway phenomenon, noting that
voters, many spurred by special-interest groups, deluged the FCC with
more than two million letters, e-mails and faxes this spring. Groups
opposing the loosened ownership rules, ranging from the National Rifle
Association to the liberal National Organization for Women, fear that
media dominance by a small number of companies would deprive special
interests of air time for their points of view. Christian groups raise
the point that further concentration of ownership could lead to more sex
and violence on network TV.
Another reason the issue has gained
widespread attention is that the industry itself is split, with locally
owned TV-station groups opposing moves that could give the networks more
control. As a result, the four networks have abandoned the National
Association of Broadcasters, one of Washington's most influential
lobbying groups, over the organization's opposition to raising the
ownership cap.
"While everyone was caught asleep
thinking this is an esoteric issue no one would pay attention to, what
we all missed was this visceral reaction to people's local newspapers
and local TV stations that is very negative," says Gene Kimmelman,
senior director of public policy at Consumers Union, an advocacy group.
Mr. Kimmelman says it doesn't matter whether viewers know who owns the
channels they watch; they don't want a few players to dominate.
The networks' lobbying drive comes as
the FCC's embattled chairman, Michael Powell, announced steps last month
intended to increase the amount of localized television and radio
programming, a move aimed at quelling some of the criticism of the new
media ownership rules. However, Mr. Powell has not backed down on the
planned rule changes.
Reinstating the old media-ownership
rules would be a significant blow to Fox, NBC and CBS, which had lobbied
aggressively behind the scenes to get the 35% ownership cap relaxed.
Both Viacom, CBS's parent, and News Corp., which owns Fox, are already
over the 35% limit thanks to FCC waivers granted in advance of the new
rules taking effect.
Entry 81 first created by
Mitchell: 2003-09-02 11:05:03
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed
on this blog are those of the individual members of Chicago Media Action
who post them, and not necessarily those of the entire membership of
Chicago Media Action, nor of Chicago Media Action as an
organization.
- (top) -
| 
