Court lifts ban on media ownership restrictions

[SharonRB]

Source: AP

By JOELLE TESSLER (AP) – 15 hours ago

WASHINGTON — A federal court has at least temporarily lifted government rules that blocked media companies from owning a newspaper and a broadcast TV station in the same market.

The decision Tuesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit lifts the Federal Communications Commission's "cross-ownership" ban.

That restriction had remained in effect under a stay issued by the court in 2003 as it has tried to sort out legal challenges to attempts by two previous FCC chairmen, Republicans Michael Powell and Kevin Martin, to relax the rules.

<snip>

Robert McDowell, one of two Republicans on the five-member FCC, welcomed the court's move to lift "burdensome ownership rules that are many years out of date." He added that the decision is "particularly appropriate given the economic upheaval affecting the ongoing viability of many daily newspapers and broadcast stations."

Still, John Sturm, head of the Newspaper Association of America, said he does not expect a wave of media companies to start buying up newspapers and TV stations in the same market. Even the eased rules adopted under Martin come with some restrictions.

Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.


Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i--VTd4twDDwIs6fFZPTcO6Gkn1AD9EKJMP01

---

I hadn't seen this anywhere on DU yet. Is no one talking about this? I sure hope the FCC gets on this and fixes it soon.

[midnight]

1. This does not sound good..... I think John knows jack.... In fact I think

there will be a wave of media companies closing the market. This feeds right into privatization, and I think that is where we are heading.....

[liberalmike27]

47. Feels a Lot Like

The last few nails going into our collective coffins, along with the corporations can buy elections ruling just prior.

Oprah, Gates, other super rich folks, get busy buying media, and SAVE UUUUUSSSSSSS, or U.S., however you like it.

[Soylent Brice]

2. just peachy.

[Gwoppi]

3. This needs to be the Obama Admin's next target

Big Media MUST be broken up and recalibrated back to objectivity. We need to start marching for this and massing outside newspaper conglomerate headquarters and television news studios NOW. A mass protest outside FCC headquarters would not be a bad idea, either.

Silence the Wurlitzer and the spell will be broken. Where it goes after that is up to whoever owns Big Media next. That needs to be The People.

[theFrankFactor]

5. Barack Should ask Rupert Murdoch to Write the Bill. The DINO'S Can High Five Victory over The Man!

[midnight]

68. +1

[readmoreoften]

71. Well we are a pluralist society! We need the 5 CEOs of Viacom, Disney, Newscorp, GE, and Vivendi,

to meet with Clear Channel and one token member of the community along with one professor so that everyone can have out their opinion, and then the Administration can push through one small token reform while protecting the interests of the Big Five. Sounds totally all American to me!

[Ghost Dog]

53. Yes, Silence the Wurlitzer

and Liberate the Mind. Subsidise grass-roots media now.

Welcome to DU.

[Gwoppi]

78. Thanks for the welcome

We really do need to make media reform our next target of action.

[glinda]

66. This should be near the top and quickly.

[theFrankFactor]

4. Barack Funnels Billions to AHIP and PhRMA, SCOTUS Allows Coprorate Personhood, and Rupert Owns Media

...while IDIOT tea baggers cry "Socialism" and DLC Demos herald "success"! Lovely.

[Speciesamused]

16. Why are so many people nieve?

People just do not have a clue. We are seeing the same.
But they continue to spout change and praise, actually crying with joy
about the health care bill. There are no changes, the corporations are still large and in charge.

[liberation]

46. I think you meant "naive" right?

And for what it is worth, it is not a new development. Parables about emperors wearing "transparent" clothes spring to mind to aptly describe the amount of denial coming from certain sectors of DU.

[riverdale]

59. naive

[aquart]

43. Rupert is going to croak.

When that happens the idiots he spawned will crash his empire. Look elsewhere for the next media monopoly.

[Swagman]

48. your'e optimistic-his mother is still alive at 100 !

[aquart]

70. Yeah, but where's his daddy?

Men are fragile. It's that Y.

[Lorien]

63. It's all smoke, mirrors, and very effective advertising. nt

[Robb]

6. The silver lining I see in this

...is that big media targeted the wrong legislation.

I give print newspapers five years' relevance, tops. It won't matter who owns them, they'll be filing for bankruptcy protection.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

15. newspapers

Another lister said, "We need to start marching for this and massing outside newspaper conglomerate headquarters."

Uh, yeah, and we need to start massing outside the steam locomotive manufacturers' conglomerate headquarters while we're at it. We might as well break up that concentration of power too.

Actually, Gannett stock has done quite well over the last year, much to my surprise. I don't think it's because of the newspapers they own.

[Robb]

20. Probably not.

And as I read more carefully, the language is "newspapers" and "broadcast TV stations."

Over-the-air TV isn't far behind, I expect.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

28. I'm among

the ten percent that still watches TV over the air. The FCC has proposed a sale of much of that bandwidth, with the frequencies to go to broadband Internets service.

[Steerpike]

21. Hey Robb!

I suspect they will either buy the competition to shut them down or transform them into a primarily Web Based Product.

[Myrina]

40. Bingo!

n/t

[SpiralHawk]

7. "Huzzah for total hegemony of corporate 'citizens.' Smirk." - The Supremos (R)

[Thothmes]

65. 3 of those justices should be wearing the logos

of the developers that had the city of New London in their pockets. Remember Kelo vs. New London.

[mbperrin]

8. What a surprise.

Well, no.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

9. This of course doesn't have anything to do with Comcast buying NBC...right?

Move along people, nothing to see here.

[AlbertCat]

10. And we need to get back to ONE phone company too!

Deregulation has been such a success!

[Speciesamused]

17. Madness is it not?

AM I missing the changes? Seems like others
are thrilled with the current processes of corporate
power that continues to rule.

[sweetloukillbot]

11. Gannett already owns a TV station and a newspaper in Phoenix

Not sure how they got around the ban, but it was an issue 10 years ago when Gannett bought out the local paper, I think the FCC basically just said "No problem."

[vduhr]

32. They did the same for Rupert Merdoch

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch

[Stumbler]

12. Can anyone spell Berlusconi??

[OnyxCollie]

13. K&R. nt

[liberal N proud]

14. Removing the illusion of exclusive sources of propaganda

[melm00se]

18. with newspapers floundering

in financial disarray, I agree with the John Sturm.

No TV group would really want to go chasing good money after bad and Newspaper groups probably don't have the cash to make a significant buy.

[No Elephants]

19. If money is speech (Citizens United v. FEC), this case makes sense.

But, money's isn't speech.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

77. Oh but...

Money talks!

I really want to see capitalism fail and soon!

[NashVegas]

22. OMG! Such Bullshitting!

Still, John Sturm, head of the Newspaper Association of America, said he does not expect a wave of media companies to start buying up newspapers and TV stations in the same market.

I expect to see 5 companies make bids in the next 48 hours, then campaign for legislation to legalize their investment before the issue can go to a higher court.

[kestrel91316]

23. Confusing headline. made it sound like GOOD news. Should read:

Court lifts media ownership restrictions.

BAD.

[SharonRB]

26. Had to use the exact title of the article

[kestrel91316]

44. I know. Journalists are idiots.

[tom_paine]

37. Your Corporate Propaganda at work, framing the article

They just HAD to work "ban" in there. See, getting rid of a "ban" is good.

Orwell's nightmare comes closer and closer in our RW Authoritarian Corporate State.

[dkofos]

24. More change I can do without.

[ezmerelda39]

25. How appropriate?

Why is a lower court making this decision? Pretty soon they will be making decisions in our local county court. Makes one wonder how much Murdock and the rest of the big wheelers are forking over to control the entire news media. Regulations are a waste of time. They may have good intentions, but they are not enforced so why bother. Deregulate everything. No rules, no regulations.

[melm00se]

34. because

Why is a lower court making this decision?

because that's the way the federal court system is set up. Only in exigent cases can a case go straight to the Supreme Court.

[Enthusiast]

74. They won't be satisfied until

it becomes the "wild west". This is the plan of the PNAC.

[KamaAina]

27. "the ongoing viability of many daily newspapers"

Doubleplusgood duckspeak for "the broadcast media conglomerates see them as easy pickin's". :eyes:

[dem mba]

29. who would want to buy a newspaper??

there's maybe a handful of decent brands in the whole country (WSJ, NYT, a few others). I don't think this restriction is as important as it used to be.

[vduhr]

33. I got a free newspaper with my pizza!

It was the Sunday paper. I looked at the Sunday sale ads, but threw the rest away. I get my news from the internet - it's easier to research what I read.

[Enthusiast]

75. So just allow them to

consolidate to their heart's desire? This is a huge mistake.

As Americans we should hope that one day the print media will again become an important part of our literate society.

[valerief]

30. Grr! nt

[w4rma]

31. Very bad. Legislating from the bench. (nt)

[mikehiggins]

35. okay. fascism it is

Why not just accept it? Hey, they made the trains run on time, right? Something the free market can't do with airlines.

A benign dictatorship isn't really all that bad, is it?

Is Iraq better off today than under Saddam? Are women in a better position? Christians?

Sure, it sucks to see democracy come to an end but who guaranteed it would succeed in the first place?

People get the leaders they deserve.

And no, I'm really not being sarcastic.

Just depressed.

[Writer]

36. I thought that this had already been lifted. n/t

[blm]

38. FASCISM wins another one...THIS is why pro-fascism judges were appointed.

I wonder when the teabaggers will gather to protest the REAL FASCISM that has been usurping our democracy and freedom the last 3 decades.

[Jester Messiah]

39. Well that's just peachy

One robber-baron can control ALL the media, and spend unlimited amounts from the company bankroll to influence elections as well! WHAT THE HELL, JUDICIAL BRANCH!?

[Wednesdays]

56. Heh, the judicial branch is doing what they set out to do...

After all, who do you think appointed the federal judges from 2001 until just 14 months ago?

[madamesilverspurs]

41. Was a time when every day started with a newspaper

and a cup of coffee, two newspapers on Sunday.



At least I still have coffee.

--

[Wednesdays]

58. ...and DU!

Not such a terrible substitution, eh?

:daily: :donut:

:)

[madamesilverspurs]

60. Of course DU!

But I still miss the smell of the ink on newsprint, and I used to save the Sunday funnies to use as giftwrap...

--

[aquart]

42. Based on WHAT?

[bobthedrummer]

45. The PolitBuro Channel is coming into its own now instead of operating behind masks n/t

[Triana]

49. And more media consolidation is a good thing - WHY? Pfft. n/t

[A wise Man]

50. Now they are going...

to multiply the limpdicks and crazy becks all over this country until the teapartyer's start a new civil war on their own countrymen...as the rest of the world looks and laugh us into oblivion

[louis-t]

51. FCC is part of the problem. Read the quote from

McDowell.

[Shining Jack]

52. Dammit !

Bring back The Fairness Doctrine !

[Javaman]

54. Thinking long term, I don't really believe this will have the effect it once could...

In about 10 years, newspapers, tv stations, radio stations and cable tv will be a thing of the past.

Everything will be broadcast via the net.

There won't be anymore traditional "markets". They will be a thing of the past.

[Blue_Tires]

55. Still proving that no one learned the lessons of the '96 TeleCom act

signed,

former newspaper reporter whose career was killed off before getting off the ground...

[Lost4words]

76. You got that correct!

[defendandprotect]

57. More regulation of capitalism getting knocked down . . . more right wing propaganda will result...

[eppur_se_muova]

61. Lifting ban on restrictions? No, they're lifting restrictions.

Careless headline by AP.

[Canuckistanian]

67. It confused me, too

As written, it says that the restrictions will stay. It's like the "Bureau of Redundancy Department"

[Boojatta]

72. Are you sure that it was accidental?

If the title of a story doesn't make sense, then people may be more likely to ignore the story. Also, using both words "ban" and "restriction" creates a strong impression that something unpleasant is being eliminated. Also, observe that the media are reporting the story, but obviously the media isn't an unbiased third party for this particular story any more than banks were an unbiased third party when they lobbied for legislative changes that gave us the saving and loan crisis and the more recent financial crisis.

[NobleCynic]

62. Thankfully we have the internet

Only partially mitigates the damage this ruling presents, but on the other hand the public would have been more upset if this happened in an earlier decade.

[snot]

69. The internet is no panacea; & our freedoms there are also eroding under constant pressure/attack

[conspirator]

81. For now nt

[Earth_First]

64. OPEN WIDE!

Time to feed the masses some more bullsh*t!

[Enthusiast]

73. This is a horrible decision.

When the country already wallows in the mire of media consolidation the FCC is encouraging more of it? What kind of country do we want to live in? Closer to 1984 every fucking day.

[Blue_Tires]

79. ttt

[fascisthunter]

80. yeah great... because the right wing and corporate America aren't propagandistic enough

less voices... way to kill the fourth estate... ooops, already dead.