Issue Position: Media Consolidation

Issue Position

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reviewing its rules governing media ownership. Under the 1996 Telecommunications Act, rules limiting the number of radio stations a single company could own in the United States and how many they could own in a single media market were eliminated. Since 1996, the number of radio station owners has declined by 34 percent. In Madison, for example, Clear Channel communications owns six stations. Nationwide, Clear Channel owns more than 1,200 stations. The FCC is now considering changes to the rule that limits the number of television, newspaper and radio stations a company can control within a media market. They are also considering increasing the number of stations nationwide that can be owned by a single company.

I am very concerned about the potential impact of these changes. As we have seen with radio, relaxation of these rules is likely to lead to media consolidation and a reduction in the diversity of media outlets and content. Under the FCC's proposed changes, a single company would be allowed to own a major newspaper, the major television station and multiple radio stations in that community. This concentration threatens to reduce the quality and number of providers of information to such a community. Access to diverse and different media voices is important in a free society and a healthy democracy.

It is absolutely critical that we have a broad, public debate about these media ownership rules. So far, that has not occurred. The FCC has only held one public hearing and there has been almost no media coverage of this issue. Because of my serious concerns about the truncated process by which these rules have been reviewed, on February 14, 2003, I sent a letter to FCC Chairman Michael Powell asking for additional public hearings and a delay in the final proceedings.

I am also a cosponsor of H.Res. 218, expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that no changes to the media ownership rules be made until there is a much more extensive debate. On May 13, 2003, I joined 93 other Members of Congress on a letter to Chairman Powell expressing our concerns about any changes and urging a delay and additional debate on these proposals.

Source