FCC Taking Look At Future Of Local News

The commission launches a public notice and website to study the future of media. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski says the goal is to get an "understanding the fundamental changes underway in the media marketplace and examining what impact such changes may have for commission policies, while vigorously protecting the First Amendment."
TVNewsCheck,

The FCC said today it is launching an inquiry into the future of media and the information needs of communities with an eye toward making policy recommendations to the FCC and other governmental agencies.

For now, the inquiry comprises an 11-page public notice asking scores of questions and a related website. It will expand to include interviews, review of existing studies and hearing records and it may hold public workshops.

Story continues after the ad

The effort is being led by former journalist and Internet entrepreneur Steven Waldman, who recently joined the FCC as senior adviser to Chairman Julius Genachowski.

"We are at a critical juncture in the evolution of American media," Genachowski said. "Rapid technological change in the media marketplace has created opportunities for tremendous innovation.

"It has also caused financial turmoil for traditional media, calling into question whether these media outlets will continue to play their historic role in providing local communities with essential news and civic information.

"With this crucial initiative, the FCC commits to fully understanding the fundamental changes underway in the media marketplace and examining what impact such changes may have for commission policies, while vigorously protecting the First Amendment."

Josh Silver, executive director of Free Press, which opposes further media consolidation, called the inquiry "an important endeavor."

"The government has a critical role to play ensuring that communities have a vibrant Fourth Estate to hold government and corporate leaders accountable. And this FCC initiative is an opportunity to engage journalists, educators and everyday citizens in crafting the policies we need to support quality journalism.

"It is vital that policymakers recognize the connection between years of media consolidation and threats to local news production. Unfortunately, when media companies merge in order to supersize their profits, they tend to downsize their employees -- including the journalists responsible for telling citizens what's happening in their communities.

Initial topics under consideration in the inquiry include the state of TV, radio, newspaper and Internet news and information services; the effectiveness and nature of public interest obligations in a digital era; the role of public media and private sector foundations; and many others.

The initiative will not include any effort to control the editorial content of any type of media, the FCC said.

The website includes a forum for citizens and experts to weigh in on key questions, and an area for consumers to contribute their thoughts on the media in their communities.

Edit Article

Comments (18) -

Credo12 Nickname posted over 2 years ago
Hmmm, so we can't take spectrum, so lets do something draconian with requirements so people turn over their spectrum. Wasn't that the gameplan exposed last month? Seems its still there in spite of what the FCC has recently said.
PSIPthing Nickname posted over 2 years ago
the fcc shouldn't be looking into this, as it's content, and even were they to do so, Steven Waldman is the last person on the planet who should be heading it. NO SUBSIDIES FOR MEDIA! They need to live on what they can catch.
PSIPthing Nickname posted over 2 years ago
oops, my bad. There is nothing wrong with Steven Waldman; he's rational, but the FCC should be avoiding content issues; they are largely out of their jurisdiction.
PhillyPhlash Nickname posted over 2 years ago

As someone who's worked in major market TV news, I would recommend that the FCC prohibit joint operating agreements and duopolies, which reduce the diversity of editorial voices in the marketplace of ideas.

Aside from that, I would recommend that bureaucrats leave the news business to the news business, and avoid the temptation to meddle in what should be a solely private enterprise.

Among the words this journalist fears the most are these: "We're from the government, and we're here to help."

GuyFawkes Nickname posted over 2 years ago
Philly, I'm always prepared to give you the benefit of a doubt (maybe I should be more aggressive in praising you when you get it right... which has happened on occasion...) but on this one you're wrong again. (Sigh!) It is through those very duopoly and cross-ownership restrictions that certain Washingtonians have an opportunity to attempt to manipulate editorial coverage, or at the very least enact punishment against journalistic organizations. I really urge you to take the time to study this issue; you may be surprised. For starters, have you ever pondered the "coincidence" that the newspaper-TV cross-ownership ban was installed by the FCC in 1975, not long after Nixon vowed revenge against the Washington Post Company...?
PSIPthing Nickname posted over 2 years ago
yes, (smile) it's much better to have a station stop presenting news (or never present news) than to have them obtain news productions from others. All that is lost is "public convenience."
PSIPthing Nickname posted over 2 years ago
abstract concepts like "diversity of editorial voices" are much more important than public convenience. Perhpas PhillyPhlash missed, in his tour of major market tv news, that news is optional; no station is required to transmit it. So, if the choice is joint operating agreements (which is, funnily enough, a now discredited newspaper term/practice) over dropping news, how can dropping news coverage "add to the diversity of editorial voices?" By extension, this argument can be used to justify state owned media -- call it the "public option."
PhillyPhlash Nickname posted over 2 years ago
I'm with you on the anathema of state-owned media. But allowing stations to share camera crews and reporters only furthers the creation of a news monopoly. Either do it right, and independently, or don't bother. Much as I don't like the concept of "one-man bands," I'd rather see that than see the same pictures and hear the same scripts on two different stations.
Andrew Wyatt posted over 2 years ago
I think I fully understand this now. In a world without broadcast TV it will be difficult for TV stations to remain profitable enough to produce local news. So, many news programs will vanish in small markets especially. So, in order ensure there is good communication to the people, the government will subsidize the former broadcast TV Stations to keep them giving important local news programing to the people of these communities. The good news is, there will be no pressure from the government, who's paying for the production of the program, to control what the content of that program is. So, unlike communist countries with state run news agencies, the US system will only have state paid for news agencies, but they'll be run by regular old citizens. Thank goodness, I was thinking the government would be going after these new news organizations like they did FOX News. But, it's all good.
Shawn Barland posted over 2 years ago
A healthy and functioning democracy requires a well informed and educated public. Does anybody think we have that anymore? Over the last 25 years I have watched (and sometimes participated in) local television news devolving into such useless ratings based crap that I almost never even watch it anymore. During that same period I have also watched our political system slide downhill to the point where most of our major elections are decided by 30 second attack ads. We sell and air these spots that we know are outrageously separated from reality because we make money doing it. Okay, fine. But don't we also have the responsibility in our newscasts to set the record straight without mixing in ideology the way some stations and cable networks currently do? I am sick of the dumbing down of America and I welcome any attempt to fix it. I doubt the FCC can do it but I am glad somebody wants to at least look at where we are.
3TVguy Nickname posted over 2 years ago
I've worked in big markets and small markets and there is a huge difference in the capability of a smaller market station to cover the relevant news adequately and remain profitable. In many cases the only coverage of local news is coming from one station in the very small markets. Joint operating agreements may be the only viable way for a competitor to emerge and offer a potentially different vantage point. Must different scenario in larger markets where there are enough market dollars to support many news organizations.
Sammy Nickname posted over 2 years ago
Its pretty simple, if the ownership rules aren't relaxed the TV business is a one way street to no where. If we lossen them this is a nice business to be in and will continue to produce a nice product.
BBBoater Nickname posted over 2 years ago
I don't have a problem with sharing vieographers to shoot the press conference/accident/fire that everybody is going to want video of, but I would like multiple, independent reporters gathering the information for and reporting the story. Pool feeds have been the norm on major events for years.
Paul Maxwell posted over 2 years ago
no news is good news
PSIPthing Nickname posted over 2 years ago
well, then the off switch or changing of the dial will work quite well for you.
Anthony Belle posted over 2 years ago
Feds should stay out of local news. With news at in the morning, 5, 6, 10 or 11pm, is dictated by events in that area. However with most stations owned by some large corporation across the country, the local news becomes a theme since that theme may work in one market, so it must work in all of thier markets. It is about the bottom line not the News. If the feds want to had out money then give the money as low interest loans so Local people can own Local TV and even radio stations. Then it will up to the local owner to set standards for their news and other local programming. Just Like back in the 1960's
watchman Nickname posted over 2 years ago
A couple of the comments are just off base. First how did the government go after Fox News? They don't even regulate them. Fox News is a misnomer itself since a large portion of what "seems" to be news comes from "Fox News Contributors", not experts, but Fox employees masquerading as independent expert voices. Mr. Silver's of The Free Press comments "supersize their profits" shows his bias and lack of knowledge. Has he looked at any of the P&L statements of any media companies these days. Sadly he does not know the realities of today's media companies let alone small market television and radio. And the media has not dumbed down America. We have done it to ourselves. The biggest single fix to some of that would be to do away with the bundling practices of the satellite and cable industries which subsidize TV/Media outlets whether people consume it or not. It would be interesting to see if one of the champions of the good old days and the free market Glen Beck would make it if he had to live off only the subscribers fees from those people who are gulible enough consume and pay for his hate speech. The other reality is that there are more media voices than ever, and the marketplace as it has done in the past will thin the herd as needed and reward those getting the job done.
Bailusout Nickname posted over 2 years ago
What flavor of Kool Aid are drinking today?

Classifieds

The Market

Symbol Last Change (%)
Nasdaq 2814.43 +35.64 (+1.28%)
NYSE 7507.36 +79.62 (+1.07%)
S&P 500 1307.91 +12.69 (+0.98%)
Updated 05/21 11:12a ET Quotes delayed at least 20 mins.
Source: Financial Content

Ratings

Overnights, adults 18-49 for May 17, 2012
  • 1.
    3.0/9
  • 2.
    2.5/7
  • 3.
    2.4/7
  • 4.
    1.5/4
  • 5.
    1.1/3
  • 6.
    0.3/1
Source: Nielsen
Reviews
Opinions
Features
  • David Wiegand

    Fans of Sex and the City have finally gotten their wish: Their beloved sex-focused sitcom is back on the air ... sort of. The four women have become four men, of course, and the writing isn't as good. Oh, and the laugh track so annoying, it's offensive. And did I mention that the costumes would be considered fashionable if you were holding a yard sale? Men at Work on TBS is almost quaint, it's so old fashioned. If it had any meat on its bones, you'd be tempted to say it's the sadly ignoble epitome of TV's long-festering emasculated-men syndrome. But it's so much of a big, forgettable, innocuous shrug, it's not even worth any actual vitriol.

  • Mike Hale

    The USA Network's motto is "Characters Welcome." Apparently they're especially welcome if they resemble Oscar Madison and Felix Unger. Already stocked with Odd Couple knockoffs in Psych and White Collar, USA adds to its inventory Common Law, another comic crime-fighting show about mismatched partners. But this latest entry exhibits very little of that kind of spark as it tries to wring laughs from the juxtaposition of counseling and police work. It looks too flat and schematically plotted to succeed as the type of lightweight summer fun we’ve come to expect from USA.

  • Joanne Ostrow

    Johnny Carson: Fantastic entertainer, miserable human being. That's the lasting message of Johnny Carson: King of Late Night, the new PBS American Masters film, a rich history of a rare product of television who dominated the small screen for decades. Unprecedented access to personal archives plus all existing episodes of The Tonight Show (1962-92), distinguishes this film by Peter Jones. Telling interviews with family and colleagues, including second wife Joanne Carson, former Tonight Show executive producer Peter Lassally and a number of biographers sharpen the picture. The clips are carefully selected to illustrate specific personality traits, the performance highlights are given context and meaning beyond funny lines and memorable moments.

  • Hank Stuever

    AMC's The Pitch is a sharply-made if slightly off-putting reality series that follows different advertising agencies each week as they compete for new accounts. The inspiration for the show — made clear by its own ad campaign — is to harness some of the verve generated by the network's acclaimed Mad Men. The Pitch has a way of making the ad world seem like a real downer — a repugnant exercise in egotism laced with depressing bouts of creative compromise.

  • Tim Goodman

    HBO's Veep stars Julia Louis-Dreyfus as former Sen. Selina Meyer, who accepts the vice presidential duty and regrets it almost immediately: She has no real power and gets muscled by the Senate, Congress and the (so-far-unseen) president, who delegates all the truly crappy jobs to her. Louis-Dreyfus has found perhaps her best post-Seinfeld role and takes to it with such fervor — the constant swearing, the barely veiled desire to become president, the unhappy give-and-take with other politicians and a delightful disdain for average citizens — that you can't help but applaud what is clearly an Emmy-worthy effort. Her work alone makes Veep a gem, but there's even more to like.

This advertisement will close automatically in  second(s). You will see this ad no more than once a day. Skip ad