Is it just me, or has Michael Copps undergone a complete make-over since January 20? This was the Commissioner who could not get anything done in the FCC. He was not a team player, didn't do consensus building (except with Adelstein), and didn't work within the FCC system. He was forced to take his rant to the media, which he's supposed to regulate. He led the charge against loosening rules on Newspaper-Broadcasting cross-ownership. His reason was it would mean more consolidation. Now all of a sudden, he seems to have changed his tune.
In an interview with Bloomberg, Copps says the FCC should revisit this issue:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aYAdWOXUq9FA
Now careful reading of this article doesn't actually make any proposals. One might remember that Jonathan Adelstein made headlines saying he'd support the XM-Sirius merger with certain provisions. When they were published, it was obvious they were not acceptable, and Adelstein went on to oppose the merger.
Clearly, something needs to be done with regards to newspapers and broadcasting. The record clearly shows that in markets where newspapers (by virtue of waivers) are allowed to own broadcasting, they don't act as a monopoly. In fact, the broadcasting facilities they own are highly rated and well respected in their communities. When newspapers were forced to divest their broadcast holdings, it led to the quick demise of those newspapers, as evidenced by the Washington Star.
Perhaps the deal would be that newspapers would count in some multiple as a broadcast facility. So if you own a newspaper, you can't own more than two broadcast outlets in the same market. That way, you couldn't own as many broadcasting facilities as a broadcasting-only entity, controling the media concentration.
In an interview with Bloomberg, Copps says the FCC should revisit this issue:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aYAdWOXUq9FA
Now careful reading of this article doesn't actually make any proposals. One might remember that Jonathan Adelstein made headlines saying he'd support the XM-Sirius merger with certain provisions. When they were published, it was obvious they were not acceptable, and Adelstein went on to oppose the merger.
Clearly, something needs to be done with regards to newspapers and broadcasting. The record clearly shows that in markets where newspapers (by virtue of waivers) are allowed to own broadcasting, they don't act as a monopoly. In fact, the broadcasting facilities they own are highly rated and well respected in their communities. When newspapers were forced to divest their broadcast holdings, it led to the quick demise of those newspapers, as evidenced by the Washington Star.
Perhaps the deal would be that newspapers would count in some multiple as a broadcast facility. So if you own a newspaper, you can't own more than two broadcast outlets in the same market. That way, you couldn't own as many broadcasting facilities as a broadcasting-only entity, controling the media concentration.