Archive for October, 2009
Thursday, October 29th, 2009 by Jordan Berg
The unfounded attacks against Mark Lloyd, the Federal Communications Commission’s chief diversity officer, have reached a new low.
FAIR’s Peter Hart spotted an appalling Zogby poll question that was clearly biased against Lloyd, a distinguished journalist, scholar and civil rights leader.
It reads:
Federal Communications Commission Chief Diversity Czar Mark Lloyd wants the FCC to force good white people in positions of power in the broadcast industry to step down to make room for more African-Americans and gays to fill those positions. Do you agree or disagree that this presents a threat to free speech?
This is a classic push poll. The question twists comments Lloyd made way out of context, to suggest some secret FCC agenda to force white people from their jobs. It’s no different from calling people up and saying, “If you knew Barack Obama beat his dog, would that make you more or less likely to vote for him?”
As Nate Silver of the highly respected fivethirtyeight.com blog explains:
To be clear about the issue at hand, there is a distinction between a merely leading question — merely couching a statement of fact in favorable terminology — and a misleading one — reporting a highly questionable statement as fact to the respondent. To imply from Lloyd’s statements that the FCC is considering pursuing a policy of forced resignation for white broadcast personalities seems pretty far over the line. That the question as posed is highly racially charged is somewhat tangential to the ethical issue at hand, although it arguably raises the stakes and may certainly further indict John Zogby’s judgment.
The idea that efforts to diversify media ownership pit “white people” against “African-Americans and gays” speaks to a divisive time that I had hoped we’d put behind us. That Zogby employs such racially divisive language to create a biased poll is deeply disturbing.
According to ChattahBox.com (h/t to Lisa Fager of Industry Ears), the poll questions were co-authored by conservative pundit and direct marketer Brad O’Leary to use in promoting his book Shut Up America – the End of Free Speech, which purports to expose an Obama administration plot “to ration speech like the old Soviet Union rationed wages and food.”
ChattahBox.com also posts the transcript of Lloyd’s remarks at the 2005 National Conference for Media Reform in St. Louis that Zogby and O’Leary misrepresent. Of course, those trying to smear Lloyd can’t be bothered with facts, context or nuance.
This is all part of a larger effort to slander Lloyd and marginalize his work at the FCC. Last month, after Lloyd became the target of attacks from conservative talk show hosts including Glenn Beck, more than 50 civil rights, public interest and grassroots organizations — including the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, the National Urban League, ColorofChange.org and the Communications Workers of America — signed a letter supporting Lloyd and the agency’s longstanding mission to promote localism, diversity and competition in the media.
To be clear: There’s no secret plot at the FCC. But there is an obligation at the agency, mandated by Congress, to find ways to increase media ownership by Americans who historically were restricted from such ownership. This makes sense: The FCC should work to increase ownership by women, people of color and other disadvantaged groups so that our media system reflects the dynamism that makes this country great.
But despite the requirement to pursue policies that increase diversity, competition and local ownership, our media system has been falling into fewer and fewer hands. As Free Press showed in Out of the Picture (PDF) and Off the Dial (PDF) the miniscule levels of media ownership by people of color and women are a national disgrace.
When ownership reflects the full range of experiences and backgrounds in America, the result will be media that are more entertaining, creative and informative, and we will all benefit. For that reason, women, people of color, young people, the poor, and other disadvantaged communities deserve opportunities to own parts of our media system.
We need more voices, not less. Yet Zogby and O’Leary are still trying to divide us by race in 2009. Really? Those tactics should have been left in 1869.
No Comments »
Tuesday, October 20th, 2009 by Joe Torres
When I watch CNN’s “Latino in America” documentary this week, it will be the first time that I tune in to the network in years.
I don’t watch CNN because the network profits from hate speech against the Latino community by putting Lou Dobbs on the air every night. And I know I’m not the only Latino who feels this way.
Dobbs is using his bully pulpit to launch vitriolic attacks against Latino immigrants. He has repeatedly spread lies and made bogus claims, like the one that Latinos are responsible for 7,000 cases of leprosy in America. (There are actually far fewer U.S. leprosy cases, and the disease has nothing whatsoever to do with Latinos.)
Worse, Dobbs has proudly promoted the most extremist anti-Latino and anti-immigrant groups like the Minutemen American Defense. A leader of that group is suspected in the murder in June of nine-year-old Brisenia Flores and her father Raul in Arizona.
That’s just one of the shocking and tragic hate crimes that have occurred recently but that have been largely ignored by the national media. Last year in Shenandoah, Penn., teenagers yelled racial epithets at 25-year-old Luis Eduardo Ramirez Zavala, saying, “Go back to Mexico,” while beating him to death.
According to the FBI, hate crimes against Latinos soared by 40 percent from 2003 to 2007 — likely a conservative figure, since many Latino immigrants are afraid to report crimes to the police.
Yet CNN continues to profit from a show that unabashedly creates an increasingly dangerous, intolerant, anti-immigrant environment. As long as Dobbs continues to get ratings and make money, the network seems unconcerned about what he says – even while simultaneously and awkwardly trying to reach out to the fast-growing Latino market with programs like “Latino in America.”
Big media companies may soon realize that it’s against their economic and political interests to align themselves with the likes of Dobbs. Two new major efforts are being organized to pressure CNN to get rid of Dobbs.
Presente.org launched the BastaDobbs.com campaign and just released a moving video that calls out CNN for its hypocrisy for employing Dobbs while also airing a documentary that will showcase Latinos. Presente is organizing local groups in at least 25 cities.
Another campaign, DropDobbs.org, was launched by several national civil rights groups, including the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) and the National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC).— which also has called on the FCC to study the impact of hate speech on our society.
As NCLR’s Lisa Navarrete recently told Media Minutes:
“Accountability is what we’re seeking here, not to imperil anyone’s free speech. … It’s about making sure that people uphold journalistic standards and making sure that we have accuracy, balance and fairness in news.”
I hope millions of Latinos watch “Latino in America” to show the network how big their audience could be if they treated Latinos with more respect. I am also going to watch and see whether CNN allowed its journalists to address the role that talk show hosts like Dobbs have had on the rise of hate speech and hate crimes in our country.
CNN likes to promote itself as “the most trusted name in news.” It’s not too late to make that more than a slogan.
No Comments »
Tuesday, October 13th, 2009 by Megan Tady
Talk about creating a monster: It appears that cable giant Comcast is negotiating with General Electric to take over NBC Universal.
In the deal under discussion, according to news reports, Comcast would contribute money and its cable networks toward a 51 percent stake in NBC Universal, with the goal of eventually owning the entire company.
If you just got a little nauseated, you should see my face: I’m green. This deal would potentially give Comcast massive control over TV and online content, as well as a delivery system for that content. Comcast is the largest cable company and the second-largest Internet service provider in the United States, and NBC Universal has a huge stake in the television market and in Hulu, one of the top online video services.
What else would Comcast own if it snatches up NBC Universal? Here’s what: Bravo, CNBC, NBC News (MSNBC), NBC Sports, NBC Television Network, Oxygen, Syfy (Sci Fi Channel), Telemundo, USA Network and the Weather Channel. Are you green yet?
Although details of the merger are still murky, the prospect of Comcast acquiring a content empire raises troubling questions regarding competition, the public interest and antitrust violations.The monster that would emerge from this joint venture would be large enough to dictate what programming American consumers receive, and whether independent and diverse viewpoints will be heard on cable and the Internet.
This merger needs immediate and close scrutiny by both the Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission. The DOJ under President Obama has given every indication that it will be more active than it has been in the past decade, and we hope they won’t let Big Media get monstrously bigger.
Although details of the merger are still murky, the prospect of Comcast acquiring a content empire raises troubling questions regarding competition, the public interest and antitrust violations.
No Comments »
Friday, October 9th, 2009 by Josh Stearns
Earlier this week, we reported on the growing citizen protest surrounding a media merger in Hawaii. The media companies at the heart of the merger are trying to sneak around the FCC by consolidating three television stations without transferring ownership. In the end, the stations’ letterhead may have different logos, but this deal would effectively merge all three newsroom operations into one.
But newsroom consolidation isn’t just a problem in Hawaii. In today’s Los Angeles Times, James Rainey describes a similar deal between KCOP-TV and KTTV-TV in California. “The merging of KCOP-TV and KTTV-TV has left the former not even a shell of its previous self, unless beefcake and dancing anchors count,” Rainey writes. “The losers: Angelenos who crave real, local reporting.”
KCOP and KTTV are both owned by Fox Television, but less than a year ago, each station was still offering separate newscasts. Then in December, KCOP cancelled its own newscast and replaced it with KTTV’s. To top it off, KTTV and KCOP entered into a “local news sharing” agreement in June with the NBC- and Tribune-owned stations in Los Angeles. This means that four of the top stations in the Los Angeles market are sharing news coverage instead of competing against one another for stories.
We have been calling these arrangements “covert consolidation” for the underhanded way they seek to skirt media ownership rules. But Rainey may have come up with something better. “In the television news business, they call them duopolies,” notes Rainey. “How about a more descriptive name? Zombie stations.”
The trend continues as we move east. A recent deal between Granite Broadcasting and Barrington Broadcasting resulted in mass layoffs in Syracuse and Peoria. TVNewsCheck detailed the deal, “In Syracuse, Barrington’s NBC affiliate WSTM took over Granite’s CBS affiliate WTVH. Meanwhile, in Peoria, Granite’s NBC affiliate WEEK took over Barrington’s ABC affiliate WHOI. Technically, all four stations will continue to air news, but, in fact, two stations, WTVH and WHOI, have ceased to exist as independent journalistic enterprises.”
Regardless of location, Big Media’s talking points around these mergers all sound the same. Rainey reports that in L.A., “corporate executives promised duopolies could help save, rather than continue to emasculate, local news.” In Syracuse and Peoria, it’s the same story: “In their press release, Barrington CEO Jim Yager and Granite CEO Don Cornwell gushed about how the deal would improve service to the good citizens of Syracuse and Peoria,” TVNewsCheck reported. In Hawaii, the companies are blaming the economy and describe the deal “as a matter of survival.”
But is it survival when three stations turn into one? If this deal is about survival, we have to ask what will survive the deal.
1 Comment »
Wednesday, October 7th, 2009 by Corie Wright
If it looks like consolidation and it sounds like consolidation, is it consolidation?
Over the past year, local television broadcasters have been quietly pooling their resources, and in some cases, completely merging news staff and operations. Most recently, in Honolulu, the CBS, NBC and MyNetwork affiliates announced that they will combine the staff and newsrooms of three local television stations to create the “largest television news operations” in Hawaii. The consolidated operation will be controlled by one company – Raycom Media.
The Federal Communications Commission has longstanding rules governing how many local broadcast stations can be controlled by a single company. The rules are in place to protect competition and viewpoint diversity in local communities. The Honolulu stations are trying to circumvent these rules, saying they’re not negotiating a merger, but are instead entering into a “shared services agreement.” Of course, to misquote Shakespeare, “A merger by any other name smells just as suspicious.”
As with consolidation, these joint service agreements lead to staff layoffs, fewer viewpoints and less local news.
Now local citizens are calling the stations out for their backdoor attempt at consolidation.
Today, the nonprofit group Media Council Hawaii, represented by the public interest law firm the Institute for Public Representation, filed an official complaint with the FCC. The complaint alleges that because Raycom will effectively control the local news programming, personnel and finances of all three stations, the shared services agreement is actually an illegal license transfer that violates FCC local television ownership rules.
Read the complaint.
The complaint asks the FCC to issue a “cease and desist order” preventing the de facto consolidation from taking place. Media Council Hawaii argues that this order is necessary to protect Hawaii television viewers because if the joint services agreement goes into force, there would be imminent danger of reduced competition, less local news coverage, less diversity of viewpoints and lower quality news programming.
Citizen action around the country helped to overturn disastrous media ownership changes at the FCC in 2003, and mounted a significant challenge to rule changes in 2007. Those changes are still being debated in the courts. We can’t let companies like Raycom skirt the rules we have fought so hard for, and sneak this kind of covert consolidation through. Not only would this deal be bad for the citizens of Hawaii, but it would set a dangerous precedent for other media companies looking to do the same.
For more information, read this earlier blog post and listen to an interview on Media Minutes.
2 Comments »
