February 1996: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 becomes law. Section 202 of the Act instructs the Federal Communications Commission to review its media ownership rules every two years, and to consider "whether any such rules are necessary in the public interest as a result of competition." ("FCC initiates third biennial review of broadcast ownership rules," news release, September 12th, 2002)
September 20, 2001: The FCC initiates a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comment on whether the Commission should revise its rules limiting common ownership of a broadcast station and a newspaper in the same market. The Commission adopted the rule in 1975. It "prohibits common ownership of a full-service broadcast station and a daily newspaper when the broadcast station's service contour encompasses the newspaper's city of publication." The Commission's NPRM notes that when Congress passed the Telecommunications Act, it "expressly considered but rejected making changes to the news/broadcast co-ownership policies." But the Notice asks whether the "proliferation of new media" means that "the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule is no longer necessary to ensure that consumers of news and information have access to diverse ideas and viewpoints" (Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, September 20, 2001, Sections 2, 6, 15).
October 29, 2001: The FCC announces the creation of a media ownership working group "that will be tasked with developing a solid factual and analytical foundation for media ownership regulation." The group consists of seven economists, attorneys, and managers employed by the FCC ("FCC Chairman Michael Powell announces creation of media ownership working group," news release, October 29, 2001)
On the same day the FCC holds a "roundtable panel on media ownership policies" that includes consumer advocates, economists, government officials, and academics.
November 9th, 2001: The Commission opens an NPRM on its local radio ownership rules, asking for public comment on the impact of radio ownership consolidation since the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the FCC's own relaxation of local radio ownership rules in 1992.
September 12, 2002: The FCC initiates its Third Biennial Review of ownership rules. The NPRM asks the public three questions:
- Does the marketplace provide a sufficient level of competition to protect and advance these policy goals?
- If not, do the current ownership rules achieve these goals?
- Are revisions to the rules required to protect and advance diversity, competition and localism in the media market? (News Release, "FCC Initiates Third Biennial Review of Broadcast Ownership Rules," September 12th, 2002)
The docket opens the questions to six rules:
- Robert M. McDowell [0] to the Federal Communications Commission. The appointment, when confirmed by the United States Senate, will give Martin the 3/2 Republican majority he needs to reopen the media ownership proceeding.
February 8, 2006: National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) president David K. Rehr files a statement with the FCC [0] calling for the Commission to "reform the prohibition on owning a newspaper and even a single broadcast outlet in the same market." Rehr also asks the FCC to permit local TV duopolies.
"Clearly, localism and diversity cannot be served by restrictions that doom local broadcasters to ownership arrangements no longer economically viable in today's highly competitive media marketplace," Rehr concludes in his letter.
February 24, 2006: A filing indicates that Rehr has personally met with FCC Chair Kevin Martin about the media ownership question on or around February 24.
March 15, 2006: A group of prominent media reformers meet with the FCC [0] and ask for "procedural transparency and extensive public participation" when the Commission again considers revising its media ownership rules. The activists meet with a media advisor for Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate. They include representatives of the Media Access Project, Free Press, U.S. Conference on Catholic Bishops, the Prometheus Project, and the Institute for Public Representation.
April 4, 2006: Speaking before the Newspaper Association of America's annual convention, FCC Chair Kevin Martin [0] says that the "public has not been convinced of the need" for lifting the FCC's ban on TV/newspaper cross-ownership.
"The public needs to understand both the value that your papers offer and the struggles you face in continuing to provide news in an increasingly competitive media market," he tells the gathering. "Indeed, the failure of the Commission to modify our rules is not our fault alone."
May 26th, 2006: The United States Senate confirms Robert M. McDowell to the Federal Communications Commission.
June 21, 2006: The FCC announces that it will launch a new media ownership proceeding lasting 120 days, but Democrats Copps and Adelstein express skepticism about the new proceeding, particularly the fact that it does not guarantee the public a chance to comment on any final rules the Commission formulates.
"I am deeply disappointed that this Notice does not contain a specific, up-front commitment to share proposed media concentration rules with the American people in advance of a final vote," Copps says. "I do not see how we can be transparent and comply with the dictates of the Third Circuit without letting the American people know about and comment on any new standards of measurement that we adopt in developing our ultimate decision."
July 24, 2006: FCC launches [0] new Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on media ownership limits. Public has until September 22nd to comment and until November 21st to reply to comments.
Bookmark/Search this post with:[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]