Are your local radio stations a cesspool of satellite-fed programming, with the occasional local traffic report thrown in for good measure? Do you feel your local radio stations are not serving your community? Ever tune into a local station hoping to learn about severe weather, or school closings, or breaking local news and find nothing but tape-delayed banter?
The FCC is proposing localism changes that would require broadcasters to provide more local news, more local political coverage and essentially, be more responsive to local needs.
As you could expect, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) is rallying its members (radio operators) to comment against such changes. They've actually laid out the issues and proposed changes on their website, and you can read that here. They're asking for broadcasters to flood the FCC with comments on why everything's fine the way it is right now.
The FCC has their own website of course, and they've got a pretty sizable collection of documents at http://www.fcc.gov/.... Most of the documents are quite large and filled with the sort of government legalese that you've come to expect. However, if you've got the time and want a more thorough knowledge of the issue, I strongly encourage you to read this transcript (in .pdf form, just to warn you) of a hearing last fall.
Being a progressive, sometimes it's really difficult for me to admit (especially on DailyKos) that I am not in favor of a new Fairness Doctrine. I believe that few things represent the free market of ideas than a spin down your radio dial. I'm not exactly sure how you'd enforce a Fairness Doctrine, as my broadcasting career began long after it was repealed. My counter to folks who'd like a new Fairness Doctrine is to go after a station's ability to renew their license by proving that a station that provides little or no local content is not operating in the public good. Allow me to quote from the NAB's synopsis I linked to above...
The FCC proposes to introduce specific procedural guidelines for the processing of license renewal applications, similar to the process in place in the 1970s. Thus, a station that does not air a specified amount of local programming would automatically have their renewal application reviewed not at the Bureau level, but by the commissioners themselves.
Now, for you and me this sounds like a good thing. The NAB is strongly against it.
Among other proposed changes, the FCC would like to require broadcasters to have at least one person at a radio station 24 hours a day. The NAB is against that because, hey, it costs money. However, many remember Minot, North Dakota and a train derailment a few years ago where all local radio stations had the same owner, and because the stations were automated, the public did not get any updates on the chemical spill. Democracy Now has a great article on that incidenthere.
The accident occurred shortly before two in the morning on January 18, 2002. Minutes later, the train’s conductor called the local emergency dispatch.
The chemical leak in Minot, North Dakota ended up killing one person. Approximately 330 were treated for immediate health problems and more than 1,000 people needed medical care for recurring illnesses in the next month. But questions remain to this day over how the crisis was handled and the role played by media consolidation.
The radio giant Clear Channel owned all six commercial stations in Minot, North Dakota. None of them broke into regular programming to provide emergency information to the city’s residents. After the town’s Emergency Alert System failed, local officials tried to call the stations–but no one answered.
I hope I've given you 2 good reasons why the FCC's localism changes would be a good thing for the country. Under today's business climate, I highly doubt you'll see any regression from the media consolidation we've suffered under since the 1996 Telecom Act. I understand that the vast resources of a large company can be incredibly useful in providing quality programming. However, I also know that the media does need to be held accountable, and they do need to serve their communities better. The proposed FCC localism changes would do just that. There's lots of handy links on the NAB page I linked to earlier...nowhere does it say you have to feel the way they do about it! You have until April 28 to make comments to the FCC. Please consider it.