[Peace-discuss] Fwd: [ALACOUN:10059] [IFACTION:5714] A washingtonpost.com article
from: dwood@ala.org
Alfred Kagan
akagan at uiuc.edu
Thu Jul 17 09:28:20 CDT 2003
>Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 07:21:36 -0700
>From: Michael Gorman <michaelg at csufresno.edu>
>Subject: [ALACOUN:10059] [IFACTION:5714] A washingtonpost.com
>article from: dwood at ala.org
>To: ALA Council List <alacoun at ala1.ala.org>
>X-Accept-Language: en
>Priority: normal
>X-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
>Reply-To: michaelg at csufresno.edu
>Sender: owner-alacoun at ala1.ala.org
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.8 required=5.0
> tests=EXTRA_CASH,HTML_00_10,X_ACCEPT_LANG
> version=2.54
>X-Spam-Level: ***
>X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.54 (1.174.2.17-2003-05-11-exp)
>
>
>Return-path: <owner-ifaction at ala1.ala.org>
>Received: from draco.its.csufresno.edu (draco.its.csufresno.edu [129.8.52.69])
> by zimmer.csufresno.edu
> (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.17 (built Jun 23 2003))
> with ESMTP id <0HI600NSFAAQ07 at zimmer.csufresno.edu> for
> michaelg at csufresno.edu; Thu, 17 Jul 2003 07:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from ala1.ala.org (ala1.ala.org [66.158.92.66])
> by draco.its.csufresno.edu
> (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.17 (built Jun 23 2003))
> with ESMTP id <0HI600A5DAANUQ at draco.its.csufresno.edu> for
> michaelg at csufresno.edu; Thu, 17 Jul 2003 07:16:00 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from ala1.ala.org (popper at ala1.ala.org [66.158.92.66])
> by ala1.ala.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h6HEXVJ03175; Thu,
> 17 Jul 2003 09:33:31 -0500 (CDT)
>Received: from stomp2.digitalink.com ([206.137.160.26])
> by ala1.ala.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h6HEXIJ03131 for
> <ifaction at ala.org>; Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:33:18 -0500 (CDT)
>Received: from stomp2.digitalink.com
> (stomp2.digitalink.com [206.137.160.24] (may be forged))
> by stomp2.digitalink.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id
>h6HECEMP017448 for
> <ifaction at ala.org>; Thu, 17 Jul 2003 10:12:15 -0400 (EDT)
>Received: from sane8 (sane8.washingtonpost.com [12.129.146.135])
> by stomp2.digitalink.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id
>h6HECE0l017445 for
> <ifaction at ala.org>; Thu, 17 Jul 2003 10:12:14 -0400 (EDT)
>Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 10:12:14 -0400 (EDT)
>From: dwood at ala.org
>Subject: [IFACTION:5714] A washingtonpost.com article from: dwood at ala.org
>Sender: owner-ifaction at ala1.ala.org
>To: Intellectual Freedom Action News <ifaction at ala1.ala.org>
>Reply-to: dwood at ala.org
>Message-id: <215768.1058451134573.JavaMail.wlogic at sane8>
>MIME-version: 1.0
>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ala1.ala.org id
> h6HEXKk03133
>Content-type: text/plain
>Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
>X-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.2.09/990901/11:28 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN
>Original-recipient: rfc822;michaelg at csufresno.edu
>
>You have been sent this message from dwood at ala.org as a courtesy of
>washingtonpost.com
>
> Senators Move to Block New Media Ownership Rules
>
> By Frank Ahrens
>
> Thirty-five senators have latched onto a little-used law in an
>attempt to overturn the Federal Communications Commission's new
>media ownership rules, which opponents say would allow a few
>corporate giants to gain too much control of the airwaves and other
>media.
>
> A "resolution of disapproval," which is permitted under the
>Congressional Review Act, has been placed on the Senate calendar for
>expedited consideration because it has more than the 30 signatures
>required to move it out of committee without a vote.
>
> The maneuver comes as the battle over the controversial media rules
>heats up in Congress. Dozens of television station executives from
>around the country are set to lobby lawmakers today from the other
>side of the fight, encouraging them to keep the FCC's new rules,
>saying big broadcasters such as NBC and CBS need to get bigger to
>continue providing free over-the-air television.
>
> Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), the lead sponsor of the resolution,
>has signed on 28 Democrats and seven Republicans. The measure is
>co-sponsored by eight senators, including Trent Lott (R-Miss.),
>Ernest F. Hollings (D-S.C.) and presidential candidate John F. Kerry
>(D-Mass.).
>
> "We are moving to roll back one of the most complete cave-ins to
>corporate interests I've ever seen by what is supposed to be a
>federal regulatory agency," Dorgan said in a statement.
>
> The measure would require a simple majority of the Senate for
>passage. In an interview, Dorgan said he hoped to get a vote before
>the August recess: "I hope it puts pressure on the House," he said.
>
> On June 2, as part of a congressionally mandated biennial review
>of its media ownership rules, the Republican-dominated FCC voted
>along party lines to lift the ban preventing a newspaper company
>from owning a television station in the same city. At the same time,
>it allowed network broadcast companies, such as General Electric
>Co.-owned NBC, to buy more stations at the local and national levels.
>
> Previously, networks could not own a group of stations that
>reached more than 35 percent of the national audience. The FCC's
>vote raised that threshold to 45 percent.
>
> Dorgan's resolution would roll back the FCC's rules, fixing the 35
>percent limit in law and reinstating the newspaper-television
>cross-ownership ban. If the resolution is approved by the Senate, it
>moves directly to the House calendar, bypassing powerful committees,
>such as those headed by Rep. W.J. "Billy" Tauzin (R-La.), whose
>members have vowed to block attempts to overturn the FCC's rules. It
>is likely that a rider will be introduced on an appropriations bill
>today that would cancel the agency's funding to implement the new
>rules. Tauzin sent members a letter yesterday urging them to drop
>such a rider.
>
> Fighting to keep the FCC's new rules are the network broadcasters.
>
> Today, about 70 general managers who run television stations owned
>by networks such as ABC, CBS and Telemundo plan to meet with
>lawmakers and lobby against returning the cap to 35 percent. The
>networks believe there should be no limit to how many stations they
>can own and say the market should decide that number, not the
>government.
>
> The networks argue that they need the extra cash generated by
>owning more stations -- which achieve annual profit margins of 25
>to 50 percent -- to continue providing free television, due to the
>escalating cost of making shows.
>
> Television stations not owned by networks disagree, saying that the
>networks are falsely pleading poverty and that if networks are
>allowed to own more stations, local news and programming will be
>hurt.
>
> Michael Jack, general manager of NBC's WRC-4 in Washington, said
>network-owned stations will not retreat from providing local news.
>He said his station produces nearly 40 hours of news per week,
>leading the local market.
>
> "Out intent is simply to be able to let our point of view be heard
>because there are so many misguided opinions about this," Jack said.
>
> Also yesterday, the FCC's Jonathan S. Adelstein -- who voted
>against the agency's new media rules along with fellow Democratic
>Commissioner Michael J. Copps -- said he uncovered flaws in the
>rules that would allow unintended consolidation in the nation's
>smallest cities.
>
> While preparing to address a group of South Dakota broadcasters, he
>discovered that the new rules treated several public television
>stations in the state -- which all show the same programming -- as
>separate stations and independent voices, which is the key test the
>FCC uses when considering mergers. Under this scenario, Adelstein
>said, Sioux Falls, S.D. (the nation's 112th-largest media market),
>is counted as being served by more television stations than Detroit
>(10th-largest), meaning that: "The newspaper in Sioux Falls can now
>acquire not just one but two of the five commercial TV stations, and
>it can buy twice as many radio stations than it could otherwise
>own," Adelstein said.
>
> An FCC spokeswoman said that this is the type of issue that the
>agency may be asked to study by groups requesting it reconsider
>portions of the new rules.
>
>
>
>
>Would you like to send this article to a friend? Go to
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/admin/emailfriend?contentId=A61629-2003Jul15&sent=no&referrer=emailarticle
>
>
>Visit washingtonpost.com today for the latest in:
>
>News - http://www.washingtonpost.com/?referrer=emailarticle
>
>Politics -
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/politics/?referrer=emailarticle
>
>Sports - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/sports/?referrer=emailarticle
>
>Entertainment -
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/eg/section/main/index.html?referrer=emailarticle
>
>Travel - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/travel/?referrer=emailarticle
>
>Technology -
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/technology/?referrer=emailarticle
>
>
>
>
>Want the latest news in your inbox? Check out washingtonpost.com's
>e-mail newsletters:
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?node=admin/email&referrer=emailarticle
>
>
>
>© 2003 The Washington Post Company
--
Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA
tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list