Behind the shadows of FCC's proposal

The Federal Communications Commission's historically weak enforcement of cross-ownership waivers is worrisome when laid over a proposal from the chairman's office to encourage media consolidation.

Chairman Kevin Martin's plan would allow a company to own a newspaper and a broadcast station in the same market. If the broadcast outlet is a television station, it cannot be one of the top four stations. The rule change would permit cross-ownership in the nation's 20 largest markets. That is, unless the FCC grants a waiver to a company that does not meet the criteria. The public should have no confidence that the FCC will fairly address the issues behind media consolidation. The commission has regularly ignored or buried studies that demonstrate the damage caused by consolidation.

A cross-ownership waiver outside the proposed rules could be awarded if the commissioners are satisfied with how four questions are answered:

• Would cross-ownership increase the amount of local news in the market?

• Would the newsrooms in the pairing act independently?

• How concentrated is the media market?

• What is the newspaper's financial state? How willing is the owner to pump money into the newsroom?

A willful ignorance of these issues was recently revealed by Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America and Free Press. The three groups jointly analyzed 10 FCC studies on media ownership. They found the FCC studies showed local news suffers in consolidated markets.

How can the commission honestly answer the first waiver question when an outside study is what it took for the public to know what the FCC should have already known?

Then there is the issue of enforcement. Martin's proposal does not seem to address how a company with a waiver will be held accountable.

This is a bad proposal set up to allow for media consolidation in all markets.