Pay tv certainly hasn't taken up the slack, and citizen journalists can't do it all. Not to mention the ongoing assault on 'net neutrality.
Has everyone here called their Reps in support of HR 550?
Have you seen the following (I haven't checked all the links lately, pardon if any have expired)?
FCC Plans Relaxation of Media Ownership Rules, Watchdogs Say
John Byrne
Published: Wednesday May 31, 2006
Move to allow more consolidation could come as soon as June 15.
The Federal Communications Commission is poised to propose new media ownership rules that will allow media companies to own newspapers, television and radio stations in the same city, according to media watchdog groups.
The proposed rule would dissolve a longstanding policy that prohibited corporations from owning a television station and a daily newspaper in the same market. The "cross ownership" rule, promulgated in 1975, was enacted to ensure media diversity.
Individuals close to the Commission say the FCC will propose relaxing media ownership rules, possibly as soon as June 15 when the Commission next meets, the media watchdog Center for Media and Democracy says.
"All indications are that the next time the FCC meets – now that they have a full commission – we expect to see media ownership come up, and we think it will be the cross ownership rule," said spokesman Craig Aaron.
More at:
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/FCC_plans_relaxation_of_media_ownership_0531.htmland
http://www.boingboing.net/2006/06/20/la_times_censors_new.html :
LA Times Censors Newsroom Internet Feed
Peacefire, an anti-censorware site, says that journalists at the LA Times have told them that the LA Times has begun to censor the Internet feed in its newsroom. LA Observed says that the Times told them it uses Websense to restrict reporters' access to the Internet <
http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2006/06/friday_deskclearing_5.html> , and that peacefire.org is blocked in the newsroom, along with many other sites.
This is the first example I've heard of a Western newspaper censoring its reporters' Internet feeds. The companies that sell censorware services deliver a notoriously biased and Orwellian system. For example, sites like Peacefire and Boing Boing, which report on the bad judgement in these services and expose their technical failings, are classed as "proxy avoidance."
Once you start writing checks to these companies, they stop letting you see the sites that tell you why you should stop.
Some of these companies also provide censorship services to repressive governments, like those in China and Syria. A company called SmartFilter <
http://www.boingboing.net/censorroute.html> provides such services to several governments; they offered to stop censoring Boing Boing if we would accept a secret deal to restructure our site to make it easier for them to block parts of it.
The LA Times has previously reported favorably <
http://www.peacefire.org/archives/latimes.on.cybersitter.txt> on Peacefire's groundbreaking efforts to expose the corruption and bias in censorware companies. Now that the Times's reporters can no longer visit Peacefire's website, I suppose we shouldn't expect more articles on those lines.
(snip)
Link <
http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2006/06/protecting_reporters_from.html> At least now, the journalists know something about what it is that’s being censored. What will we do when it gets to the point that censorship is excercised more surgically — e.g., just blocking certain stories rather than whole website?