More Free Speech On Radio
The Center for American Progress and Free Press recently released a report confirming the stunning lack of balance in talk radio. According to the report, 91 percent of talk radio owned by the top five commercial stations is conservative. Ninety-two percent of these stations (236 stations out of 257) do not broadcast a single minute of progressive talk radio programming. The report has spawned a far-reaching debate over the imbalance in talk radio, with conservatives raising false claims about free speech, claiming "bloody murder...censorship...and propaganda." "There is little free speech or free choice in a market system that pushes out one-sided information 90 percent of the time on the radio,” said John Halpin, one of the report's co-authors. Progressives, including several members of Congress, have unfortunately allowed the right wing to control the debate on this issue, focusing their legislative attempts at reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, a federal regulation that was repealed in 1987, required broadcasters to devote airtime to important and controversial issues and to provide contrasting views on these issues in some form. Reinstating that doctrine is not the answer. With talk radio being one of the most widely used media formats in the country and reaching an estimated 50 million listeners each week, it is imperative that progressives reclaim the debate from the right wing and instead address the increased concentration of talk radio ownership that has occurred over the past decade. As report co-author John Halpin stated, "If we break up concentrated ownership, and encourage greater local accountability over radio licensing, and still end up with lots of conservative talk, then so be it. We don't think this will happen but at least the playing field would have been made more level."
RIGHT-WING DISTORTIONS: The right wing has baselessly twisted the debate about the structural imbalance of talk radio into one about free speech, claiming progressives "want to revive a policy to require broadcasters to present multiple viewpoints on controversial issues." Michelle Malkin titled her post about the CAP/FP report "Fairness Doctrine Watch." Jonah Goldberg of the National Review stated, "Does anyone really believe liberals would even entertain this renewed passion for the fairness doctrine if talk radio were overwhelmingly liberal? It just strikes me as so transparently opportunistic and unprincipled." "This next one may make you think twice about freedom of speech," announced a Fox News host on Wednesday. But the CAP/FP report does not argue that the Fairness Doctrine should be resurrected. In fact, the report specifically states that this likely would not correct the massive imbalance in talk radio. "[T]he Fairness Doctrine was never, by itself, an effective tool to ensure the fair discussion of important issues. The Fairness Doctrine was most effective as part of a regulatory structure that limited license terms to three years, subjected broadcasters to license challenges through comparative hearings, required notice to the local community that licenses were going to expire, and empowered the local community through a process of interviewing a variety of local leaders." Thus, legislation that would singularly revive the Fairness Doctrine is misguided, failing to address the more important issue of media ownership. "Simply reinstating the Fairness Doctrine will do little to address the gap between conservative and progressive talk unless the underlying elements of the public trustee doctrine are enforced, in particular, the requirements of local accountability and the reasonable airing of important matters."
A MISGUIDED APPROACH: With conservatives wanting to shift the debate into one about the Fairness Doctrine, some progressive members of Congress proposing remedies that do not primarily address the problem. Some progressives in Congress have called for "reinstituting" the Fairness Doctrine, possibly introducing legislation to revive the rule. This approach would not mitigate the structure of a talk radio system that fails to meet the public interest and spends 90 percent of its time churning out one-sided talk. In fact, the report warns, "Misguided policy solutions may also lead to unintended consequences that reduce the diversity of speech on the radio rather than expand it." Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) said he will introduce legislation today "that would prevent any future president or the Federal Communications Commission from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine." Congress is clearly gravitating around the Fairness Doctrine; progressives should understand, however, that simply reviving the Fairness Doctrine will not ameliorate talk radio imbalance.
REAL SOLUTIONS LIE IN OWNERSHIP: Talk radio reform proposals should address the pressing issue of concentrated ownership and ineffective regulation in order to promote balanced news coverage. Since the Telecommunications Act of 1996 eliminated ownership caps, there has been a 34 percent decline in the number of radio station owners, allowing conglomerates like Clear Channel to increase market share from 40 stations to over 1,200. As a result, women, minorities, and small local owners have been deprived of opportunities to participate. Leading progressive radio talker Ed Schultz recently debunked the right-wing claim that there is a "free market," explaining that the market is being controlled by a few ownership groups that are forcing conservative talk shows into local markets. "I beat Sean Hannity in Denver. I beat him in Seattle. I beat him in Portland. I beat in San Diego. How many markets do I have to beat Hannity in before I get 200 or 300 stations? It's an ownership issue," Schultz said. "The fact is, it's market opportunities and liberal talkers, progressive talkers are being held to a totally different standard than conservatives." Congress should propose legislation that addresses the ownership problem, promoting diversity by restoring local and national ownership caps, for instance, allowing no entity to control more than 10 percent of total commercial radio stations. Last week, Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA) introduced the Local Community Radio Act, potentially prompting "hundreds of new low-power [local] FM radio stations to sprout up around the country." Said Doyle, "We have announced legislation that we believe has the potential to revolutionize what Americans hear on their radio."
No comments:
Post a Comment