Headlines from the Oct. 12 Radioshow

These are the media news headlines as read on the Oct. 12 edition of the mediageek radioshow: Fake News Still Alive; FCC Relaxes Broadband Rules for AT&T; AT&T and Verizon Anti-Free-Speech;
Wall Street Bullish on XM-Sirius Merger, NAB Asks FCC for More Time

Fake News Still Alive
Even though the FCC recently fined Comcast cable for airing fake news
VNRs on its local cable news programs, the tide of fake news is still
rolling in. That’s according to a new report released by the Center
for Media and Democracy.

VNRs are sponsored news segments produced by PR agencies which are
designed to look and sound like genuine news reports. VNRs are
especially attractive to local TV news outlets because producing news
segments is expensive, and VNRs are provided for free.

In its October 11 report, the CMD says that Traverse City Michigan
station WGTU-TV 29 aired three VNRs over the past size weeks,
including an entire, pre-packaged VNR funded by the financial company
Capital One.

FCC’s rules require that a station identify the source of a VNR if it
is political, deals with important issues or dwells inordinately on a
brand. The VNR from Captial One that aired on WGTU certainly qualifies
as one that dwells on a particular brand.

This is the CMD’s third report on VNRs all of which also have been
filed with the FCC. CMD’s first two reports cited incidents of VNRs
airing at 111 stations, and contributed to the FCC’s fining Comcast
for its cable channel CN8 for airing multiple VNRs without disclosure.

In Aug. 2006 the FCC launched an investigation into 77 of the stations
named in CMD’s first report on VNRs. So far the commission has only
taken action against Comcast, and the status of the other
investigations is unknown.

CMD released this third report in order to remind the FCC that the
practice of airing unattributed fake news continues, despite the
negative publicity and fine against Comcast. CMD has joined the media
reform group Free Press in urging the FCC to strengthen and clarify
VNR requirements, including requiring a visual identification of a
VNRs source on display throughout the report, and requiring
broadcasters to keep a monthly report of their VNR usage in their
public file.

You can learn more about fake news VNRs and watch examples of them at
the CMD’s website at www.prwatch.org

FCC Relaxes Broadband Rules for AT&T
On Oct. 11 three out of five FCC Commissioners blew a wet kiss to AT&T
when they voted to lift some regulations on the company’s broadband
business. The commission partially granted AT&T’s request for a
relaxation on the rules that govern how much it can charge business
customers and competitors for access to some high-speed internet
lines.

In particular, the decision eliminates the requirement that AT&T file
a report of the rates it charges with the FCC, reducing the
Commission’s ability to have oversight over them.

The two Democratic Commissioners voted against the changes. In a joint
statement Commissioners Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps remark
that the commission did not have sufficient data to make this
decision. They furthermore criticize their fellow commissioners for
claiming that “potential competition is sufficient to protect
consumers,” and conclude that these changes “can make the problem
worse as potential competitors will have even less ability to
successfully compete and provide a check on any anti-competitive
behavior.”

AT&T and Verizon Anti-Free-Speech
But AT&T hasn’t just been busy getting anti-competitive gifts from the
FCC. The nation’s largest telephone company has also been revealed to
be taking aim at its customers speech rights online. The company joins
#2 Verizon in putting language into their broadband service contracts
stipulating that they can cut off internet service for any behavior
that AT&T or Verizon believe might harm their “name or reputation,” or
even the reputation of their business partners, like Yahoo.

These restrictive stipulations came to light after AT&T sent notices
to thousands of Bell South customers—who are now AT&T
customers—revising their service contracts.

A Verizon spokesman told the LA Times that the language is in the
agreement in order to stop people from setting up websites that look
like Verizon’s or for setting up phishing scams targeting Verizon
customers. However, such actions are already prohibited by other
provisions of Verizon’s service agreement. So it would seem that these
terms targeting “name or reputation” are overkill.

An AT&T spokesman also told the LA Times that the company had no plans
to censor customers.

However, many consumer and public interest groups, along with AT&T and
Verizon customers, are questioning the sincerity of the companies’
assurances.

At the end of September Verizon was caught blocking text messages from
the National Abortion Rights Action League. And in August AT&T
censored a live webcast of Pearl Jam just as lead singer Eddie Vedder
starting speaking critically of President Bush. Although Verizon made
a quick about-face and let the NARAL text messages go, and AT&T
quickly apologized for censoring Pearl Jam, both incidents serve as a
reminder of the tremendous power the nation’s two largest telecomm
companies have over our daily ability to communicate freely.

Wall Street Bullish on XM-Sirius Merger, NAB Asks FCC for More Time
Finally, I’ve been keeping tabs on the proposed merger of XM and
Sirius satellite radio , and it seems like Wall Street is feeling
pretty bullish on the deal. A financial analyst from Bear Sterns told
a Satellite Investment Symposium that he believes the merger will be
approved by both the FCC and the Justice department within 30 – 45
days.

Analysts think the deal will go through because they agree with XM and
Sirius position that satellite radio is different than satellite TV,
and that there is much more competition in the form of terrestrial
radio, iPods and internet radio.

Opinions on the merger are mixed in the public interest community,
mostly because XM and Sirius don’t have large audiences, and there is
some hope that there can be stipulations put on the merger to offer
public access channels to satellite radio.

The biggest opponent to the merger is the National Association of
Broadcasters which on Oct. 9 asked the FCC to call time-out on its
180 shot clock for deciding on the XM-Sirius deal. The NAB says it
needs more time to go through documents that its receiving as a result
of a Freedom of Information Act request it filed in March. The NAB
also says that it still hasn’t received some documents from the FCC
related to the FM radio transmitters used in satellite radio
receivers.

John Anderson from DIYmedia.net discussed this issue with me on the
July 20 edition of the radioshow. John pointed out that along with
the Sirius and XM receivers having hot-rodded pirate FM transmitters,
the NAB’s FOIA request has also turned up documentation of the
companies running hundreds of unlicensed transmitters all over the
country.

News Headlines from the Feb. 9 Mediageek Radioshow

Next FCC Public Hearing In Harrisburg, PA
As the FCC’s media ownership rules revision process rolls on, the Commission has announced that it will hold its third official public hearing on February 23 in Harrisburg, PA. The first two were in Los Angeles and Nashvile. The entire commission should be in tow for this one, where the general public is invited to comment on media ownership issues, especially ones that related to their local market.

The Commission also has its monthly open meeting scheduled for the same day, so it’s unclear whether the five commissioners plan to scoot up from DC to Harrisburg the same day, or if they’ll cancel the open meeting.

Net Neutrality Threatened in Canada

I know that there are a number of Canadian listeners to the podcast and to our late night broadcast on CKDU in Halifax. It appears that the debate over Network Neutrality is heating up north of the border, too. The Canadian Press reports that it has obtained documents showing that advisers to Minister of Industry Maxime Bernier are leaning towards supporting the telecommunications arguments against network neutrality regulation.

Michael Geist, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, told the CP that the documents show a very one-sided industry view of the subject, saying that they would “not be out of place in a lobbying document crafted by the telecommunications companies.”

The Minister’s net neutrality documents apparently advocate a position similar to what we’ve heard from the big telcos in the US, calling for having market forces shape the evolution internet infrastructure, while providing some degree consumer choice and protection. Yet there is very little about the arguments in favor of network neutrality, which is a much bigger issue than so-called consumer choice.

Meanwhile, south of the border, network neutrality has gotten a bit of a boost with the failure of last year’s Republican-sponsored telecom bill to pass the Senate, and now with the democratic-controlled congress. The Dorgan-Snowe Internet Freedom Preservation Act has been introduced, again, and is awaiting action by the Senate Commerce Committee.

Bush Attacks CPB Budget, Again

In his new budget, President Bush has not missed an opportunity to take a swipe at public broadcasting, asking for an approximately 25% cut in the Corporation for Public Broadcasting budget — at least $114 million of the $460 budget. . The Association of Public Television Stations said the total impact could be as high as $145 million when cuts in related programs are added, including a program to upgrade radio station satellite facilities. In addition to the cuts, the traditional advance funding for future years’ programs would disappear, potentially making it harder for public stations to commit to future TV programming.

Without a doubt this is bad news to public TV and radio stations that rely heavily on CPB funding. However, I can’t help but reflect on what we heard from Fairness and Accuracy In Rerporting’s Peter Hart on last week show, and how this conservative Republican attack on public broadcasting is just a repeat of the same old cycle that forces friends of public broadcasting to fight for crumbs, and be happy when the cuts are as bad as initially suggested, even though broadcasters get their crumbs by sucking up to the right-wing.

Predictably , MoveOn.org has launched an online petition to oppose Bush’s proposed cuts. Taking rhetorical advantage of the new Democratic Congress. The petition calls on lawmakers to “save NPR and PBS once and for all,” by guaranteeing “permanent funding and independence from partisan meddling.”

Interestingly enough, this does sound quite a bit like what FAIR advocates for public broadcasting – to make it truly independent and not subject to annual budgetary attacks.

Indeed, true political independence and freedom from the yearly budget cycle would do a lot to save public broadcasting in the US, especially public TV. But that still doesn’t address public broadcasting’s increasingly commercial nature as seen in its reliance on corporate underwriting and grants, which also influence broadcasters away from controversial public service programming.

To reduce the influence of corporate financing, the current funding for public broadcasting would have to be greatly increased, not just maintained at current levels.

Somewhat luckily, threats to the CPB budget have less impact on community media, which tends to rely much less on CPB grants. The mediageek radioshow home station, WEFT, receives a small annual grant for program acquisition, which helps allow the station carry many very good syndicated programs. However the grant does not contribute significantly to basic operation. This is true even for larger community stations and the Pacifica network. A cut in CPB funding would probably hurt all of community radio, but not constitute the same kind of threat that it does to public broadcasting.

Generally speaking, the media reform movement has pinned a lot of hopes on the new Democratic Congress, even if past Democratic Congresses haven’t always been quite such protectors of the public interest in media. It will be interesting to see how many of these priorities, like protecting public broadcasting, will actually make it onto the larger Congressional agenda.

Headlines from the Feb. 2 radioshow: Journalists Beaten in Oaxaca, a Pro-Fair-Use Bill, The House’s Telecomm Agenda

Community Radio Journalists Beaten in Oaxaca
Two community radio journalists were beaten by state-supported militants in the Mexican state of Oaxaca on the night of January 24.

One was arrested. According to a report from the World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters, known as AMARC, the incident occurred during a confrontation between militants of the Institutional Revolutionary Party, PRI, and the grassroots community council of San Antonio de Velasco in Oxaca. Both journalists report for community radio station Radio Calenda.

These acts of violence are part of an ongoing struggle between the former national ruling party PRI which is still in power in Oaxaca, and the popular movement that believes the state’s governor is illegally holding power.

AMARC says that this incident is one in a series of violence perpetuated by the Mexican state, which has used excessive force to attack freedom of expression, association and assembly, all of which have been widely documented by human rights organizations.

The state-sponsored beating of these two community journalists comes after a bad year in general for journalists in Mexico, where nine were killed in 2006, according to Reporters Without Borders. A significant portion of the violence against reporters happened in Oaxaca.

New Book Covers Oaxaca’s Popular Assembly

The ongoing popular resistance in that Mexican state is the subject of a new book by Nancy Davies, who appeared twice last year on this program. The book is titled “The People Decide: Oaxaca’s Popular Assembly,” and is being released by the publishing arm of NarcoNews.com.

The book brings together none months of Davies’ regular reports from Oaxaca, where she lives, and is compiled by George Salzman, who appeared with Davies on mediageek, and radical social philosopher James Herod, a member of the Lucy Parsons Center collective. The book includes an extensive introduction by Salzman, based on his own eyewitness experience in Oaxaca, along wit a special update from Davies appearing for the first time in print.

NarcoNews is a very grassroots organization that has been able to find the funds for an initial press run of 1000 copies. In order to fund a larger printing, NarcoNews is asking interested readers to reserve their copies in advance. You can find out more at NarcoNews.com

A Pro-Fair Use Bill

A bill that would undo some of the more odious portions of the Digital Milennium Copyright Act is due to be introduced before the end of the month by Virginia Rep. Rick Boucher. This bill, which failed in previous sessions of Congress, is supported by the Consumer Electronics Association, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge.

If passed Boucher’s bill would end the ban against using circumventing anti-piracy technologies for purposes that don’t otherwise break copyright law.

At the present time it is illegal to break anti-piracy tech, like the encoding on commercial DVD movies, in order to make a backup copy of the movie, or to extract a clip for use in a way that is legal under Fair Use provisions.

Boucher’s bill, which is not quite finished, aims to restore to people the ability and right to circumvent such encryption to make such legal uses of copyrighted material.

Predictably, both the movie and recording industry lobbies oppose the bill, and given that Hollywood is represented by many Democrats in Congress, there may be some bipartisan opposition in Congress too.

Laying out the House’s Telecomm Agenda
A little bit more of what the new Democratic Congress is going to do about the internet has become clearer. On Feb. 2, Massachussetts Rep. Edward Markey, the new chairman of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, delivered the keynote address at Consumer Federation of America’s Consumer Assembly in Washington, D.C. In it Markey outlined his committee’s telecommunications agenda for this session of Congress. He emphasized making broadband internet service ubiquitous and affordable, and ensuring Network Neutrality with what he called “an open architechture that supports internet freedom.”

Fellow Democrat Rep. Rick Boucher delivered a similar, but perhaps more industry-friendly message earlier the same week, speaking at the Third Annual State of the Internet Conference. He told the conference, “The Internet must remain open and accessible to all, but we don’t want to hobble innovation within the network.”

News Headlines from the Jan. 19, 2007 Radioshow: Community Radio Reports WSF 2007; Bills Introduced to Use Fallow Spectrum

Community Radio Reports WSF 2007
From January 20 through the 25th the 7th annual World Social Forum will be meeting in Nairobi, Kenya, bringing together activists, social movements, networks, coalitions and other progressive forces for five days of cultural resistance and celebration.

Community radio broadcasters from around the world will be stepping up to bring coverage of this important event to radio stations and the internet in English,
French, Spanish, Italian, German and other languages.

This collaborative broadcast is coordinated by the World Association of Community Broadcasters, AMARC.

Beginning in 2001 in Porto Alegre, the World Social Forum rallies around the clarion call of Another World Is Possible, placing social justice, international solidarity, gender equality, peace and defence of the environment on the agenda of the world’s peoples.

The theme for the 2007 forum is “People’s Struggles, People’s Alternatives”

Live internet broadcasts and downloadable podcasts of AMARC coverage of the World Social Forum will be available at wsf.amarc.org. The World Social Forum website is www.wsf2007.org.

Bills Introduced to Use Fallow Spectrum
Listeners to mediageek are probably familiar with the fact that typically licenses from the FCC are necessary to make use of the electronic spectrum, whether is broadcast radio and TV, two-way radio, or satellite communications. But there’s still an awful lot of pieces of the spectrum that aren’t yet allocated to any particular use.

Sen. John Sununu of New Hampshire just introduced what he calls the “White Spaces Act of 2007″ which would provide access to unassigned or unused portions of the broadcast spectrum between 53 and 698 MHz. The bill would allow unlicensed use of empty channels within 90 days of when the bill is enacted, or by Oct. 1 of this year, whichever comes first.

A week beforehand Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts introduced a similar bill, the Wireless Innovation Act, which specifies a 180 day window from enactment. The Sununu bill differs slightly in that it would also permit the FCC to make some licensed use of this spectrum, whereas the Kerry bill only has provisions for unlicensed use.

Examples of uses for empty spectrum include wireless internet, audio and video communication.

Or maybe even a new band for legal unlicensed radio? I guy can dream, can’t he?

radioshow headline: DISH AND DIRECTV GANGING UP TO BUY SPECTRUM

From the Aug. 4 edition of the mediageek radioshow:

Speaking of big media, satellite TV rivals Dish Network and DirecTV are ganging together to buy up as much spectrum as they can in the FCC’s Aug. 9 auction. Teaming up under the name Wireless DBS LLC the companies are looking to win the right to use Advanced Wireless Services spectrum which they could use to enhance their ability to offer broadband audio and video content to consumers.

It looks like the two satellite TV providers are worried about the threat of broadband video service that are being rolled out by telephone and cable companies. The telcos and cable operators are looking to offer a bundle of three services–video, telephone and internet-in one package, while satellite can only offer one.

But this venture to cooperate on buying up spectrum could be an indicator of something bigger looming in the satellite TV market: a possible merger between DirecTV and Dish Network. Together the two companies have 27 million subscribers.

On a recent edition of the Charlie Rose show, media baron Rupert Murdoch, whose News Corp owns a controlling stake in DirecTV, said that he believes such a merger would not be a threat to competition because consumers have much more access to video programming than before.

It’s a familiar argument being made by big media players across different telecommunications sectors, and by the FCC itself. But the rates for telephone, cable and internet service keep going up, despite the supposed increase in choice for consumers.

While neither Dish nor DirecTV are commenting on merger rumors, public interest groups are not likely to take such a move lying down, especially since satellite TV services represent the only competition to cable television in most cities and towns.

Of course, after Aug. 9, we’ll probably know more about what the satellite giants are planning.

News Headlines from the June 2, 2006 Radioshow: New FCC Commissioner Opens Floodgates for Chairman’s Agenda; Senators Urge FCC to Address the Public Interest; FCC Investigates TV Stations Airing Fake News

These are the news headlines as read on the June 2 edition of the mediageek radioshow: New FCC Commissioner Opens Floodgates for Chairman’s Agenda; Senators Urge FCC to Address the Public Interest; FCC Investigates TV Stations Airing Fake News; Ebay Joins Coalition to Save the Internet (this one actually didn’t make it onto the show).
Read more »

mediageek radioshow headlines: Indecency at the Senate; Google Won’t Pay Telcos; Stern Back on FM… Pirate FM

These are the media news headlines as read on the mediageek radioshow on Jan. 20, 2006: Indecency Day at the Senate Commerce Committee; Consumer Groups Prefer A La Carte; Google Says It Won’t Pay Telcos for Consumer Bandwidth; Stern Gets Pirated.

Indecency Day at the Senate Commerce Committee
Decency, and indecency was the big topic at the Senate Commerce Committee on the morning of January 19. The hearing was the kick-off to an ambitious schedule of 16 telecommunications-related hearings the Committee will hold from now until March.

At the Decency hearing, several representatives of the broadcast, cable and satellite TV industry were joined by indecency-crusader Brent Bozell of the FCC complaint-leading Parents Television Council and a representative from the American Psychological Association to give testimony on the issue.

Chairman Ted Stevens, a Republican from Alaska, lead off the hearing on a somewhat moderate note, lauding some satellite and cable providers announcement that they are about to offer so-called family tiers for households who don’t want more adult content like Comedy Central mixed in with the Disney Channel.

Stevens also seemed cautious with regard to drafting new indecency legislation, recognizing that the road won’t be easy.

Stevens is likely making reference to the fact that many legal experts, including the Congressional Research Service, believe the imposition of indecency regulations on cable and satellite TV would not pass constitutional scrutiny.

One satellite provider that has promised a new family-tier is Dish Network. CEO Charles Ergen announced the new tier during his testimony. He also took the opportunity to swipe at the four largest broadcast networks for their hardball tactics in negotiating for the carriage of their channels. Ergen said the difficulties of striking deals with the networks were part of the roadblock for establishing family-tiers. Here’s Dish Network CEO Charles Ergen.

Dish Network is currently embroiled in a dispute with Hearst-Argyle over the carriage of the Lifetime cable channel. Hearst-Argyle’s controlling company is also a large owner of TV stations. You can read more about that situation at the mediageek blog at mediageek.net

The Parents Television Council leads all other groups combined in the number of indecency complaints it has filed or helped file with the FCC in the last two years. At the Senate Hearing on Decency, the PTC’s Brent Bozell ticked off a laundry list of cable program episodes he found offensive, including episodes of FX’s Nip/Tuck and the Shield, and Comedy Central’s South Park.

Departing from Bozell’s focus on steamier content, Jeff McIntyre
Legislative and Federal Affairs Officer for the American Psychological Association, focused his testimony exclusively on violent programming, and the studies which the APA says link children’s viewing violent content with being more prone to violence.

Overall, like most such hearings, the Commerce Committee’s exploration of decency was more bluster than content. Chairman Stevens, provided the clearest indication of where the Senate is likely to go, which is a pragmatic direction — preferring giving so-called family-friendly channel tiers a try over imposing indecency regulations on cable or satellite.

Consumer Groups Prefer A La Carte
But not everyone thinks family tiers are such a great idea. On the day before the Senate Decency Hearing, a coalition of watchdog groups, including Consumers Union, Consumer Federation of America, and Free press, held a press conference to say that family-tiers don’t offer viewers enough power and choice over their programming.

Instead the groups advocate a la carte channel selection for cable and satellite services, where households can choose the individual channels they want, rather than being saddled with packages containing channels they don’t want.

A la carte isn’t generally too popular with the cable and satellite providers, nor with the cable networks, and Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens didn’t seem to hot on pushing a la carte either.

However, at least one satellite provider is more receptive to the idea. In an interview held after the Senate Decency Hearing, Dish Network CEO Charles Ergen told the National Journal that, “The Internet is a la carte,” implying that competition from internet video providers would push cable and satellite to move in that direction. He tied the issue back to struggles with the big television networks which are making it difficult to establish family tiers or a la carte.

FCC Democratic Commissioner Michael Copps made an appearance at the consumer groups’ press conference and brought the issue of network neutrality to the fore, warning that the ability to freely receive content over the internet is being challenged by the nation’s largest telephone companies. Copps told reporters, “”Our open and vibrant and freewheeling Internet is to me the last place on earth where we should tolerate gatekeeper controls.”

Network neutrality will be the subject of a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on February 7. A draft bill in circulation on capitol hill would enshrine network neutrality in law, but would also provide an exemption so that broadband providers can establish a so-called premium-tier, privileging their own content, and allowing them to charge other internet companies to use that bandwidth.

Google Says It Won’t Pay Telcos for Consumer Bandwidth
If you’ve been listening to mediageek the last few weeks, you’ve heard about how the big broadband providers, like Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth, are trying to get internet content providers, like Google and Yahoo, to pay them for the bandwidth used when broadband customers view videos or other multimedia content online.

Many industry observers accuse the telcos of trying to double-dip, since the bandwidth a DSL or cablemodem customer receives is already paid for by the customer.

Now, Google is saying it won’t play that game. Spokesman Barry Schnitt emailed the industry website networkpipeline.com to say, “Google is not discussing sharing of the costs of broadband networks with any carrier. We believe consumers are already paying to support broadband access to the Internet through subscription fees and, as a result, consumers should have the freedom to use this connection without limitations.”

Looks like Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth will just have outspend Google in Washington.

Stern Gets Pirated
Finally, As I reported on last week’s mediageek, on Jan. 13 New Jersey became the second state to make unlicensed radio broadcasting a felony crime. In an unrelated event, that was the first week of Howard Stern’s new Sirius satellite radio program, after leaving the broadcast airwaves last year. And yet some Northern New Jersey listeners still got to hear Stern on their regular FM radios. Pirate stations operating in Newark New Jersey and Brooklyn, NY aired uncensored excerpts of Stern’s Sirius satellite broadcast, according to the New York Daily News.

The phenomena apparently has spread to the Midwest. DIYmedia.net cites listener reports of unlicensed stations airing Stern’s program in the Minnesota cities of Minneapolis and Duluth. It is not unlikely that there are other Stern pirates operating in other cities around the country.

All the new unexpected affiliates have caught the attention of Howard himself. On January 19, Sirius Satellite filed a complaint with the FCC over the New York and New Jersey pirate stations. Apparently they’re not yet aware of Minnesota’s contribution. Given Stern’s previous pitched battles with the FCC over the content of his former broadcast morning program, it’s delicious irony that he now has to go crying to the feds to silence a couple of micropower transmitters.

News Headlines from the Dec. 2 Radioshow: Indecency Day at the Senate Commerce Committe; Parents and Televangelists Not So Happy With Gov’t Indecency Regs; Giant Alternative Weekly Merger

These are the media news headlines as read on the Dec. 2 edition of the mediageek radioshow.

Indecency Day at the Senate Commerce Committee
These days, indecency is never gone too long, or, at least, Congress’ love affair with indecency. On Tuesday, Nov. 29 the Senate Commerce Committee held a hearing on broadcast indecency, and the cable industry, broadcasters and the FCC were all on hand to throw in more than their two cents.

But FCC Chairman Kevin Martin was definitely the star of the show, making a two-pronged attack on cable and satellite TV. First, Martin asked Congress to pass legislation that would allow the FCC to regulate indecent content on cable. Second, he suggested that cable channels be available individually on an a la carte basis rather than in packages as they are most currently offered.

These requests didn’t sit well with Kyle McSlarrow, head of the National Cable Television Association. McSlarrow told Senators that in the past the Supreme Court has “very clearly” ruled that these sorts of restrictions would be a violation of the First Amendment.

Interestingly, former Republican FCC Chairman Michael Powell made similar arguments during his tenure as chair, making public remarks early this year saying that he believed leveling indecency regulations on cable TV would be unconstitutional.

Powell also had opposed cable a la carte, and Martin took aim at a report on cable a la carte written by the FCC’s Media Bureau under Powell’s direction. Martin said that report “makes mistakes in its basic calculations” and is based on “incorrect and biased analysis.” According to Martin a new FCC report on a la carte show that it “could be economically feasible and in consumers’ best interest.”

Martin backs a la carte because it would allow parents to select only the cable channels they want to receive, and count out ones they believe will contain material they don’t want their children to see.

Another option Martin offered was for cable operators to offer tiers that would be what he calls “family friendly.”

Consumers groups also back cable a la carte, but for different reasons. They like it because it gives more power and choice to consumers to only pay for channels they want, rather than having to subscribe to an entire tier just to get one or two channels.

Media conglomerate Disney split its vote on the issues. As a large owner of broadcast television stations the company is willing to see indecency regulations apply equally to broadcast and cable. But as the owner of cable channels like ESPN, Disney’s executive Vice President told hearing attendees that a la carte would end up costing cable operators billions of dollars.

On the commerce committee, Martin found the most support coming from committee Democrats like Jay Rockerfeller of West Virginia, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Ron Wyden of Oregon.

Extending indecency regs to cable and satellite is most popular with committee Republicans, especially chairman Ted Stevens of Alaska. He told the committee that if the courts end up overturning new indecency regulations, it “would be a great disappointment to the American family.”

Parents and Televangelists Not So Happy With Gov’t Indecency Regs
And yet, according to a new poll, the folks at the top of the Amercian family, the parents, would rather that the government butt out. 91% of parents polled said they favored parental involvement as the best way of preventing children from “seeing what they shouldn’t see.” Only 9% of parents said the government should increase control and enforcement of network television programming.

If the poll is an accurate representation of the nation’s view on the subject of broadcast indecency, then it would appear that Congress is greatly out of step on the issue.

The survey, conducted by Rusell Research, polled 513 parents with children ages 2-17 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.3%.

Yet, it should be noted that the poll was funded by TV Watch, a broad-based coalition that opposes government control of TV programming and promotes the use of such tools as content ratings and parental controls. Its members include the American Conservative Union, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and TV network owners like Viacom Inc., News Corp. and NBC Universal.

And still another group that you’d think would be rallying around any effort to restrict indecency would be Christian televangelists. But not if that effort involves a la carte. Just like the rest of the cable industry, televangelists don’t want consumers to pick and choose their channels individually, because many people might not choose to receive evangelist networks.

Paul Crouch Jr. of the Trinity Broadcast Network told the Los Angeles Times, “The bottom line is that we want to be everywhere on cable.”

Giant Alternative Weekly Merger
Moving from broadcast indecency to corporate indecency, it looks like federal regulators aren’t going to get in the way of the merger between the nation’s two largest weekly newspaper chains. New York Based Village Voice Media is set to combine with Phoenix-based New Times to create a chain of 17 alternative weeklies.

Although the Federal Trade Commission and the Antitrust division of the Justice Dept. don’t appear to see anything anticompetitive about the merger, that’s not been the opinion of the US, California and Ohio attorneys general in the past

The two chains have been cited for direct and willful violations of antitrust laws in a deal under which the chains effectively traded monopoly markets, closing competing papers in Los Angeles and Cleveland so each could dominate the alternative weekly market in one city. The consent decree that all parties signed in 2003 bars New Times and Village Voice Media from doing any more business deals without the approval of both federal and state regulators.

The combined New Times-Village Voice company would reach between 22 and 25 percent of the total circulation of the 126 members of the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. Even the largest operator of daily newspapers, Gannett, reaches only 13.8 percent of all readers nationally.

The corporate cultures of the two companies are known to be very different, with Village Voice giving a great deal of autonomy to individual papers, and New Times taking much more corporate control. New Times has policy against making political endorsements and editorials. Industry observers wonder if the merger will spell the end of stories critical of the Bush administration in Village Voice papers. Readers of these papers are worried that they will see an overall decline in the quality of reportage and commentary in their local weeklies.

According to merger documents obtained by the San Francisco Bay Examiner, the merged company may close three papers, the SF Weekly, East Bay Express, and Cleveland Scene. The SF Weekly and East Bay Express may also be combined. The new company may also be sold in as little as three years – most likely to an even bigger chain such as Gannett or to a high-tech company like Google, Microsoft or eBay.

It all just goes to show that in the world of alternative weeklies, the alternative ain’t so different that what it’s supposed to be alternative to.

News Headlines from the Oct. 28 Edition of the Radioshow: FCC Chair Wants to “Expedite” Teleco Video Franchises;

These are the media news headlines as read on the Oct. 28 edition of the mediageek radioshow: FCC Chair Wants to “Expedite” Teleco Video Franchises; FCC Democrats Try To Protect Public Interest in Big Telecom Mergers; House Commerce Committee Passes DTV bill.
Read more »

News Headlines from the Oct. 21 edition of the Radioshow: Sen Comm Committee Passes DTV Bill, VNR Labelling Bill; RIAA Pushing for Radio Broadcast Flag …

These are the news headlines as read on the Oct. 21 edition of the mediageek radioshow: Senate Commerce Committee Passes DTV Bill, VNR Labelling Bill; RIAA Pushing for Radio Broadcast Flag; A Wolf in Consumers’ Clothing.
Read more »