The marriage of Comcast and NBC is bad news for consumers. But Washington and Wall Street have already bought into the idea that it's a done deal. That's why Americans need to speak out now and stop the mega-merger!
As we prepare to usher in a new year, we have the perfect opportunity to review the top media ownership moments of 2008. It’s nearly impossible to catalog every one of them, but there are at least five worth mentioning. And while we’ve seen both ups and downs in 2008, the truth is, the media reform movement has never been stronger.
Here’s the countdown to No. 1:
5) Bloodletting in the Newsroom
Media consolidation has always led to job cuts, but the year that followed the FCC decision to gut ownership rules was particularly painful for newsroom staff. According to the tracking Web site Paper Cuts, 2008 saw more than 15,000 job cuts at American newspapers alone. Add this to the Tribune Company filing for bankrupcy, the New York Times mortgaging their building to stay afloat and NPR cutting 7 percent of its workforce, and you have a staggering picture of an American media system that is a shadow of its past self.
4) Citizens Sound Off on Media Ownership
On August 28, in nearly 50 cities and towns across the country, motivated citizens delivered tens of thousands of petition signatures calling on members of Congress to support the “Resolution of Disapproval” that would veto the Federal Communications Commission’s latest handout to Big Media. The House ended up putting the resolution on the back burner, but took time to thank the activists who worked so hard and kept the pressure on the FCC all year.
3) Protesting Pentagon Pundits
On April 20, a chilling exposé by the New York Times revealed a widespread and secret Pentagon program to spread favorable views of the Iraq war by recruiting and planting military analysts in the nation’s news media. These pundits became fixtures of war coverage on most major network, cable, radio and print news outlets. This propaganda wouldn’t have spread far if it weren’t for corporate media owners who have gutted newsrooms and replaced real journalists with cheap talking heads. The public response to the Pentagon pundits stirred up a flurry of activity on Capitol Hill, including legislation in the Senate and investigations within the Defense Department, the Inspector General’s Office and at the FCC.
2) The Senate Stands Up Against Big Media
On May 15, the Senate cast a near-unanimous vote to reverse the Federal Communications Commission’s December 2007 decision to gut media ownership rules that have protected media diversity, competition and localism for more than 30 years. The Senate vote came after more than 250,000 people contacted their senators to call for a stop to rampant media consolidation. It was an unprecedented outpouring of protest that sent a powerful message to Capitol Hill.
1) A Media Reformer in the White House
Throughout his time on the campaign trail, Barack Obama has been a vocal opponent of media consolidation. Obama was a co-sponsor of the Senate resolution of disapproval. The day after the resolution passed the Senate, Obama released a statement encouraging his colleagues in the House to follow the Senate’s lead. He has continued that commitment as president-elect. Diversifying media ownership is one of the top priorities in his technology platform at www.change.gov. It is unclear what it will mean for Big Media to have a media reformer in the White House. While Obama has helped make media ownership a key political issue, there is still much work to be done to create a better media system in America in the coming years.
Honorable Mention:
The National Conference for Media Reform
Media ownership took center stage at the 2008 National Conference for Media Reform, where more than 4,000 people gathered in Minneapolis. The conference included innovative sessions on media consolidation’s impact on media ownership by women and people of color, the Writers’ Guild strike, and more.
A Slippery Slope in South Bend
This year saw few new consolidation deals brokered, thanks in no small part to public pressure and lawmakers’ promises to overturn the FCC rule change. But one company tried to sneak through a dangerous deal in Indiana’s fourth largest city – South Bend. However, local activists and Free Press stepped in to try and stop it. The FCC is still debating the case.
The year 2003 holds a special place in the history of the media reform movement. That was the year when then-FCC Chairman Michael Powell tried to eradicate every media ownership rule on the books.
The public response was swift and powerful, with organizations on the right and left leaping to action, mobilizing nearly 3 million people to write letters to the Senate calling for a stop to media consolidation. In the end, the Senate and the courts acted to strike down the FCC rule changes. It was a watershed moment that introduced many new people to the politics of our media system.
However, while 2003 was a moment of crisis that catalyzed a movement, 2008 has been a year of movement building that proved to lawmakers and corporate lobbyists that media reform is here to stay.
Over the past year, I have had the good fortune to work with organizations and individuals in nearly every state, and have been consistently awed and inspired by their care, commitment and creativity in the fight for media reform. It is their day-to-day work that keeps this movement feeling as fresh and full of potential as it did back in 2003. Over the past five years, we have faced many challenges, won some battles and lost others, fought with corporate giants and sometimes fought among ourselves, but we’ve also repeatedly shown that a new media system is possible and that we are ready to make it a reality.
This year provided a number of stark reminders about why we do the work we do. What I find most inspiring, however, is that each of these disheartening media failures was met head-on by a strong community of media advocates whose actions made a real difference.
In late April, the New York Times revealed how a lazy mainstream media, one that has replaced real journalists with professional talking heads, bought into a Pentagon pundit program designed to sell the war in Iraq. While independent and community media sources reported on the scandal in-depth, the mainstream media remained silent on the issue. In response, tens of thousands of citizens called on members of Congress to investigate. The public response to the Pentagon pundits stirred up a flurry of activity on Capitol Hill, including legislation in the Senate and investigations within the Defense Department, the Inspector General’s Office and at the FCC.
Last December, when the FCC gutted the long-standing newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership ban, public interest groups and Congress promised a swift response. Momentum gathered over the first few months of 2008 until more than a quarter million people had written the Senate and demanded they take action. Five years after vetoing the last FCC media ownership rule changes, the Senate vetoed them again. On May 15, by a near-unanimous vote, they sent a strong statement to the FCC and Big Media that America doesn’t want more media consolidation.
This September, the country watched in shock as St. Paul police abused and arrested journalists trying to cover the Republican National Convention and the protests outside the convention center. The haunting video of Democracy Now! producer Nicole Salazar being tackled and beaten as she held out her press credentials spread across the Web like wildfire. Within three days, more than 60,000 people across the country had visited Free Press and written to city officials in St. Paul demanding that all charges be dropped against the jailed journalists. The day after the convention ended, journalists and citizens hand-delivered the letters to St. Paul City Hall and within a month, all the charges had been dropped and the journalists were freed.
I have been amazed at all that the media reform community has been able to achieve over the past year. However, it is not so much what was done as what is being done that keeps me going. Independent media outlets across the country continue to report on the Pentagon pundits program, even while mainstream networks continue to feature the former generals as reputable sources. In communities across the country, concerned citizens are still writing letters and meeting with policy makers to push for stronger regulations of what Big Media companies can own. And in St. Paul, local journalists and activists are meeting to discuss how they can ensure that journalism is protected the next time a big event comes to town.
In 2008, we proved we can make an impact, but more importantly, we proved we can maintain the pressure. The election of Barack Obama — a long-time supporter of media reform — as the 44th president does not mean our work is done. Indeed, it is now more important than ever to translate our short-term successes into a long-term vision for media in America.
What we accomplished this year has given us glimpses of that vision, but it is only part of the picture. We need to fill in the gaps, and connect media ownership to the future of the Internet and the health of our public and community media sectors. In 2009, we’ll see these issues draw closer together under the umbrella of our digital future and our old definitions and divisions will become less and less useful. We will need to listen to new voices, engage new communities, and ask for the help of others to build this vision together. The possibilities are profound, but the challenges are immense. And yet, in 2008, I have seen what we are capable of, and I am full of hope.
What do we want? Media reform. And when do we want it? Now. As in, now that we have a champion of media reform headed to the White House.
Along the campaign trail, in recent speeches, and in his technology agenda, President-elect Barack Obama has made big promises on media and technology issues. We finally have an opportunity to see real change in our media landscape – from diversity in our news to safeguarding Net Neutrality.
At any moment, Obama will announce his pick to lead the Federal Communications Commission, and we hope he chooses someone that shares his commitment to the public interest. Today, we sent a letter to Obama – signed by over 100 individuals and organizations, representing millions of people – urging him to choose a candidate who will embrace and enact the policy proposals he’s already outlined.
Some of the people and organizations who are stepping up to support the Obama media agenda include members of Pearl Jam, R.E.M., and My Morning Jacket as well as organizations like SEIU, NOW, DailyKos, the Hip Hop Caucus and hundreds more.
The letter includes six of Obama’s best quotes on media reform to remind him that his words have not fallen on deaf ears; we’ve been listening, and now we’re watching to make sure these promises aren’t hollow.
What did Obama say? Enough to bring a tear to the eye of any media reformer battered during the last administration. Here are the choicest sound bytes:
Protecting an Open Internet: To “take a backseat to no one in my commitment to Net Neutrality” and “protect the Internet’s traditional openness to innovation and creativity and ensure that it remains a platform for free speech and innovation that will benefit consumers and our democracy.”
Promoting Universal, Affordable Broadband: To see that “in the country that invented the Internet, every child should have the chance to get online” by bringing “true broadband to every community in America.”
Diversifying Media Ownership: To create “the diverse media environment that federal law requires and the country deserves.”
Renewing Public Media: To foster “the next generation of public media,” and “support the transition of existing public broadcasting entities and help renew their founding vision in the digital world.”
Spurring Economic Growth: To “strengthen America’s competitiveness in the world” and leverage technology “to grow the economy, create jobs, and solve our country’s most pressing problems.”
Ensuring Open Government: To reverse “policies that favor the few against the public interest,” close “the revolving door between government and industry,” and achieve “a new level of transparency, accountability and participation for America’s citizens.”
Obama has already made the call to create a more vibrant, diverse and democratic media system and to deliver the benefits of the open Internet and new technology to all Americans. Now he simply has to appoint someone at the FCC who will carry out his mandate.You can read the letter and add your name here.
Yet while today we can marvel at this extraordinary declaration to protect the rights of every individual, we also take note that decades later, injustice and inequality, violence and terror, and egregious abuses of power are still prevalent throughout the world.
How does it happen that in 2008, we’re still witnessing human rights abuses and genocide? Partly because the witnesses are few. Abuse and impunity can thrive in an environment of silence, where actions go unnoticed and unreported to the global community.
When is the last time you read an investigative report in the mainstream media about the genocide in the Congo, or watched a TV news report female domestic workers in Jordan? Unfortunately, human rights abuses rarely lead or even appear in the corporate news cycle, wholly ignoring the situations unfolding for millions of people across the world and leaving the American public unaware and uninvolved unless they have access to alternative media.
“After you’ve had somebody say to you for the thousandth time, ‘How come we never hear about these issues in the media,’ you start to realize that the media itself is an issue,” said Svend Robinson, Canada’s first openly gay elected official, in Robert McChesney’s book Rich Media, Poor Democracy.
Corporate media haven’t necessarily set out to shun human rights, but the very infrastructure of a consolidated media means that many important stories – particularly those that require investigative and overseas reporting – go untold. As big media companies have bought up more and more news outlets, they’ve stretched themselves thin, leaving many print publications financially vulnerable and unable to sustain the staff that can adequately report on human rights issues. And as companies have become increasingly beholden to flashing a profit to Wall Street stakeholders, many news outlets have slashed foreign news bureaus, laid off staff, and replaced real reporting with celebrity journalism and punditry..
Sometimes it’s hard to grasp the full ramifications for a consolidated media, but today marks the perfect opportunity to reflect on how human rights abuses won’t stop until our mainstream media start reporting on them.
The journalism profession is in crisis, where every week brings another bleak announcement.The situation looks dire for the mainstream media industry, particularly for newspaper companies. Tribune Company, the third-largest newspaper chain in the nation and owner of 23 TV stations, declared bankruptcy. Gannett, the largest newspaper chain in the country, announced it was slashing 2,000 jobs. Scripps put a “for sale” sign on The Rocky Mountain News, and the Miami Herald is reportedly on the block.
As I reported in another blog post in November, the newspaper industry has slashed more than 10 percent of its work force since 2000. And according to the running tally at the blog paper cuts, more than 15,000 newspaper positions have been eliminated through layoffs or buyouts in 2008.
The crisis in the media industry mirrors why our financial system is a mess. Big corporations pressured the government to deregulate industries. Companies got even bigger through mergers, controlling the major institutions that impact our lives with little oversight, facing less competition and refusing to innovate. Instead, companies obsessed over profit margins to please Wall Street while failing to serve the public interest. As these companies take on greater debt, they can’t pay back their loans — and workers get the ax.
Profits vs. the Public
It is true that profit margins have shrunk for some media companies, and the larger financial crisis undoubtedly impacts advertising. The Internet has changed the public’s media habits. But most media companies remain extremely profitable, just not profitable enough to please Wall Street. (Some papers in the now-gutted Gannett chain enjoy profit margins above 40 percent.)
“We know that newspapers are making money – just not the astronomical profits of the 1990s,” the National Association of Black Journalists said in a Dec. 5 press statement. “NABJ is reminding media companies of their sacred trust, which is more than the bottom-line. Never mind that media companies provide a private trust.”
The crisis has revealed how little media executives care about journalism or serving the public’s news and informational needs. It has also revealed how the government has utterly failed across party lines to protect the public by allowing for greater consolidation.
“As great newspapers, magazines, TV networks, and publishing houses dismember themselves around us, it would be marginally consoling if the pink slips were going to those who contributed so vigorously to their companies’ accelerating demise,” said Tina Brown in a post at the Daily Beast.
What Can Be Done?
Even though there is much to criticize about mainstream media, our nation needs the important work performed by journalists. The vast majority of journalists are motivated by the noble mission to keep the public informed about the world they live in.
But the current media crisis demonstrates that our nation’s reliance on corporate-funded journalism is failing us. While bloggers and online news sites are stepping in to fill the gaping hole left by the crash of our mainstream media, few can afford to fund long-term investigative journalism. As a result, fewer journalists are covering the critical institutions that affect us all, leaving the public more uniformed and vulnerable.
Now, more than ever, we need to roll back media consolidation. We need to make a greater investment in public and community media. And we need to figure out and support the models — private and public, corporate and independent, online and off, professional and amateur, local and international — that give us the news we need to hold our leaders accountable.
We also need to finally recognize that our media system is the result of policies and politics. Just like the weak-kneed watchdogs at the SEC and Treasury stood by as subprime lending and “credit default swaps” sank our economy, the public servants entrusted with the airwaves cheered deregulation as local voices and viewpoints were crushed by the now-tottering media behemoths.It didn’t have to be this way. And the next time the Zells and Gannetts come to Washington seeking special favors and massive giveaways, we ought to remember how we got into this mess. Too much “regulation” wasn’t the problem.
In case there was any question about what the American public wants from a new Federal Communications Commission, it’s clear now.
More than 9,000 people and counting have voted on the top three qualifications they most want in President-elect Barack Obama’s choice for FCC chair. Obama is expected to announce his pick for the office at any moment.
Outnumbering eight other choices by a wide margin, voters said breaking up media conglomerates, enforcing Net Neutrality and stopping propaganda, fake news and radio payola should be the top three priorities of any candidate for the FCC position.
The poll is part of a national campaign to pressure Obama to hold true to his campaign promises to make media in America more open, diverse and democratic. This week, Free Press placed a “help wanted” ad on behalf of the American people in four influential Washington publications to remind the incoming administration that the new chair must put the needs of Main Street before Wall Street.
The ads appeared in the classified sections of the Washington Post, Washington Times, Politico, The Hill, Craigslist and Ars Technica.
Free Press will be delivering the results of the poll to Obama’s FCC transition team soon, but it’s not too late to cast your vote. Already done it? Get others to vote too by spreading the word. We now have a widget available that you can embed in a blog post or on the side bar of your Web site. And be sure to keep posting your nominations for the new FCC chair in the comment thread below.
