Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
NAB: Airwaves Belong to the People
Drafted by FAIR and signed by media activists including Noam Chomsky, Bob McChesney & Ben Bagdikian, this letter reminds the NAB that the airwaves belong to the people.
Edward O. Fritts
President and CEO
National Association of Broadcasters
1771 N Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
September 18, 2000
Dear Mr. Fritts,
We are writing to remind the NAB that this country\'s airwaves are the property of the American people. Independent, critical and genuinely representative media are crucial to a healthy democracy; without them, citizens lose the means to control and participate in the public debate that sets the nation\'s political agenda.
As it stands today, the broadcasting industry is failing to serve the public. Dissenting political viewpoints are routinely marginalized in national mainstream media, and
the interests and perspectives of women, people of color, labor, local communities, and lesbians, gays and bisexuals are consistently underrepresented. Across the
country, programming that addresses local concerns is almost non-existent: A study by the Benton Foundation and the Media Access Project recently found that local public affairs shows made up less than one half of one percent of the fare offered by commercial broadcasters. Thirty-five percent of the stations surveyed had no local
news, and 25 percent had no local public affairs programming whatsoever.
The broadcasters represented by the NAB get free access to our airwaves-- what does the public get in return? A world dominated by profit-driven media conglomerates more interested in delivering viewers to advertisers than in serving the needs of the public.
Thanks in large part to the lobbying activities of the NAB, commercial broadcasting has gone through stunning negative changes in recent years, as deregulation and consolidation have shifted the balance of power to a small handful of companies with interests and investments spread across the media landscape. The NAB was a instrumental in securing the digital spectrum giveaway, which took advantage of new technology to give broadcasters free access to up to six new channels where they previously controlled only one-- a gift the FCC estimates was worth as much as $70 billion.
Since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which was essentially bought and paid for by the NAB and other corporate media lobbies, there has been a parade of media mergers. Ironically, the consolidation has been most profound in radio, a medium ideally suited to local ownership and diverse content. The damage to radio
diversity is staggering: Over 4,000 radio stations have been bought out since the Telecom Act, and minority ownership of media declined about 9 percent in the two years following the Telecom Act, the largest drop since the federal government began tracking such data.
It\'s this historic shift that has inspired citizens to gather in San Francisco this September for the NAB\'s annual radio convention. The public\'s awareness that corporate media has failed them increases day by day, and with it comes the understanding that the NAB-- one of the most powerful influences in Washington-- is a
key player in consolidating corporate control of our airwaves. That\'s why citizens will come together in San Francisco to voice their opposition to corporate
management of the public\'s airwaves, and to reopen the debate over who exactly should get access to this precious resource.
As supporters of the planned demonstrations, we want to bring to the NAB\'s attention just a few of the key issues motivating many of the groups and individuals gathering for September\'s protests.
Of particular concern is the NAB\'s campaign for further deregulation of the telecommunications industry. Having successfully lobbied to eliminate rules that
prohibited a network from owning two stations in the same city, broadcasters are now pushing the FCC for an end to cross-ownership rules, which are all that prevent
newspapers from being absorbed by the broadcast industry. The industry is also lobbying against regulations that would guarantee open access to the Internet over
broadband cable lines, raising concerns that the Internet may grow to resemble cable television, where content is controlled by a handful of interconnected firms.
Low power radio is an area in which the NAB\'s commitment to keeping non-commercial, community-based voices off the air is distressingly clear. When the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced its plans to begin licensing low-power stations in much of the country, the NAB led an intense lobbying effort to get the FCC to reverse course. What was originally a plan to bring literally hundreds of new, non-commercial voices to the airwaves now faces an uphill battle on Capitol
Hill.
Just like low power radio, campaign finance reform has garnered support across the political spectrum. But the NAB has consistently opposed common campaign finance reform measures, in large part because much of the money raised for political campaigns is given to corporate media to buy campaign advertising. According to the Center for Public Integrity, the NAB and five major media outlets spent nearly $11 million from 1996 through 1998 to defeat a dozen bills free airtime for political candidates.
The gravy train for broadcasters keeps getting richer: One study found that House incumbents were spending 60 percent more on television and radio advertising in
1994 than they had just four years prior. The Center for Public Integrity estimates that broadcasters will earn $600 million this year from political advertising on
television. Broadcasters work the other side of the political money game as well, donating millions of dollars in \"soft money\" to the major political parties.
From the perspective of corporate media, the future looks brighter than ever. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin (1/2/00, CNN), whose company\'s lobbying efforts are
parallel to the NAB\'s, foresees a world where the media business is \"more important than government... more important than educational institutions and non-profits.\" He added that corporate dominance \"is going to be forced anyhow because when you have a system that is instantly available everywhere in the world immediately, then the old-fashioned regulatory system has to give way.\"
From the public\'s perspective, it is becoming impossible to escape the conclusion that corporate control of media is inimical to democracy.
Sincerely,
Janine Jackson
FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting)
Ben Bagdikian
Former Dean, Graduate School of Journalism, University of California, Berkeley
Noam Chomsky
Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Robert W. McChesney
Professor, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Glenn Austin
Americans for Radio Diversity
Peter Franck
National Lawyers Guild Center for Democratic Communications
Kevin Danaher
Global Exchange
Andrea Buffa
Media Alliance
Ofelia Ortiz Cuevas
People for Better TV
Pete TriDish
Prometheus Radio Project
Richard Edmondson
San Francisco Liberation Radio
Greg Ruggiero
Seven Stories Press
President and CEO
National Association of Broadcasters
1771 N Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
September 18, 2000
Dear Mr. Fritts,
We are writing to remind the NAB that this country\'s airwaves are the property of the American people. Independent, critical and genuinely representative media are crucial to a healthy democracy; without them, citizens lose the means to control and participate in the public debate that sets the nation\'s political agenda.
As it stands today, the broadcasting industry is failing to serve the public. Dissenting political viewpoints are routinely marginalized in national mainstream media, and
the interests and perspectives of women, people of color, labor, local communities, and lesbians, gays and bisexuals are consistently underrepresented. Across the
country, programming that addresses local concerns is almost non-existent: A study by the Benton Foundation and the Media Access Project recently found that local public affairs shows made up less than one half of one percent of the fare offered by commercial broadcasters. Thirty-five percent of the stations surveyed had no local
news, and 25 percent had no local public affairs programming whatsoever.
The broadcasters represented by the NAB get free access to our airwaves-- what does the public get in return? A world dominated by profit-driven media conglomerates more interested in delivering viewers to advertisers than in serving the needs of the public.
Thanks in large part to the lobbying activities of the NAB, commercial broadcasting has gone through stunning negative changes in recent years, as deregulation and consolidation have shifted the balance of power to a small handful of companies with interests and investments spread across the media landscape. The NAB was a instrumental in securing the digital spectrum giveaway, which took advantage of new technology to give broadcasters free access to up to six new channels where they previously controlled only one-- a gift the FCC estimates was worth as much as $70 billion.
Since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which was essentially bought and paid for by the NAB and other corporate media lobbies, there has been a parade of media mergers. Ironically, the consolidation has been most profound in radio, a medium ideally suited to local ownership and diverse content. The damage to radio
diversity is staggering: Over 4,000 radio stations have been bought out since the Telecom Act, and minority ownership of media declined about 9 percent in the two years following the Telecom Act, the largest drop since the federal government began tracking such data.
It\'s this historic shift that has inspired citizens to gather in San Francisco this September for the NAB\'s annual radio convention. The public\'s awareness that corporate media has failed them increases day by day, and with it comes the understanding that the NAB-- one of the most powerful influences in Washington-- is a
key player in consolidating corporate control of our airwaves. That\'s why citizens will come together in San Francisco to voice their opposition to corporate
management of the public\'s airwaves, and to reopen the debate over who exactly should get access to this precious resource.
As supporters of the planned demonstrations, we want to bring to the NAB\'s attention just a few of the key issues motivating many of the groups and individuals gathering for September\'s protests.
Of particular concern is the NAB\'s campaign for further deregulation of the telecommunications industry. Having successfully lobbied to eliminate rules that
prohibited a network from owning two stations in the same city, broadcasters are now pushing the FCC for an end to cross-ownership rules, which are all that prevent
newspapers from being absorbed by the broadcast industry. The industry is also lobbying against regulations that would guarantee open access to the Internet over
broadband cable lines, raising concerns that the Internet may grow to resemble cable television, where content is controlled by a handful of interconnected firms.
Low power radio is an area in which the NAB\'s commitment to keeping non-commercial, community-based voices off the air is distressingly clear. When the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced its plans to begin licensing low-power stations in much of the country, the NAB led an intense lobbying effort to get the FCC to reverse course. What was originally a plan to bring literally hundreds of new, non-commercial voices to the airwaves now faces an uphill battle on Capitol
Hill.
Just like low power radio, campaign finance reform has garnered support across the political spectrum. But the NAB has consistently opposed common campaign finance reform measures, in large part because much of the money raised for political campaigns is given to corporate media to buy campaign advertising. According to the Center for Public Integrity, the NAB and five major media outlets spent nearly $11 million from 1996 through 1998 to defeat a dozen bills free airtime for political candidates.
The gravy train for broadcasters keeps getting richer: One study found that House incumbents were spending 60 percent more on television and radio advertising in
1994 than they had just four years prior. The Center for Public Integrity estimates that broadcasters will earn $600 million this year from political advertising on
television. Broadcasters work the other side of the political money game as well, donating millions of dollars in \"soft money\" to the major political parties.
From the perspective of corporate media, the future looks brighter than ever. Time Warner CEO Gerald Levin (1/2/00, CNN), whose company\'s lobbying efforts are
parallel to the NAB\'s, foresees a world where the media business is \"more important than government... more important than educational institutions and non-profits.\" He added that corporate dominance \"is going to be forced anyhow because when you have a system that is instantly available everywhere in the world immediately, then the old-fashioned regulatory system has to give way.\"
From the public\'s perspective, it is becoming impossible to escape the conclusion that corporate control of media is inimical to democracy.
Sincerely,
Janine Jackson
FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting)
Ben Bagdikian
Former Dean, Graduate School of Journalism, University of California, Berkeley
Noam Chomsky
Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Robert W. McChesney
Professor, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Glenn Austin
Americans for Radio Diversity
Peter Franck
National Lawyers Guild Center for Democratic Communications
Kevin Danaher
Global Exchange
Andrea Buffa
Media Alliance
Ofelia Ortiz Cuevas
People for Better TV
Pete TriDish
Prometheus Radio Project
Richard Edmondson
San Francisco Liberation Radio
Greg Ruggiero
Seven Stories Press
For more information:
http://www.fair.org/nab.html
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Grab Nab by the horns and shake and bake them. They only want competition amongst themselves, but cannot stand the competition from others. NAB and nab members are after total control of the airwaves, total control of the news, total control over what the public is allowed to hear over the airwaves, total control over our lives, and with this total control, and censorship comes the power they so desire over the public awareness and knowledge. Simpley put they do not want the public to know the real and truthful story of reality, without the coporate spin that NAB puts on everything they broadcast. They(NAB)live in a world of deception, world of half-truths, a world that does not reflect negative of their corporate world, a world that does not bring the public the real story. NAB is very anti-democratic, very anti-people, very-anti Consitution, and bad for freedom, democracy and our Declaration of Independence.
Thank you,
Fred
Thank you,
Fred
Corporate control over the financing of political campaigns plus corporate control over the media in general destroys democracy. The majority no longer bother to vote even in presidential elections, and an overwhelming majority (88% in Real Democracy project poll in New Hampshire in January 2000) believe that "No government can be considered truly democratic if it lets wealthy people buy more influence and control than is available to others."
The Real Democracy Project is boycotting this year's presidential election to demand meaningful campaign finance reformS, including free air time on radio and television for all candidates qualifying through a reasonable number of petition signatures.
The current control of the media by an ever smaller and smaller number of corporate "owners" distorts the political process and invalidates any pretense that this country is still democratic. If the government is not democratic it is, obviously, not legitimate, and neither are the "laws" that get enacted nor the tremendous disparaties of wealth that get created.
Let's validate the current de facto boycott of elections in this country by deliberately, vocally, and actively joining it. Demand meaningful campaign finance reforms, such as a $100 limit on campaign contributions, public financing of cmapaigns on an EQUAL basis, and free air time on radio and TV for ALL qualified candidates. At the same time, demand democratic control of the airwaves, where the people have the 50,000 watt transmitters and the corporations transmit their ads and their distorted points of view on low power radio.
BOYCOTT ELECTION 2000: HOLD OUT FOR REAL DEMOCRACY
David Diamond
THE REAL DEMOCRACY PROJECT
The Real Democracy Project is boycotting this year's presidential election to demand meaningful campaign finance reformS, including free air time on radio and television for all candidates qualifying through a reasonable number of petition signatures.
The current control of the media by an ever smaller and smaller number of corporate "owners" distorts the political process and invalidates any pretense that this country is still democratic. If the government is not democratic it is, obviously, not legitimate, and neither are the "laws" that get enacted nor the tremendous disparaties of wealth that get created.
Let's validate the current de facto boycott of elections in this country by deliberately, vocally, and actively joining it. Demand meaningful campaign finance reforms, such as a $100 limit on campaign contributions, public financing of cmapaigns on an EQUAL basis, and free air time on radio and TV for ALL qualified candidates. At the same time, demand democratic control of the airwaves, where the people have the 50,000 watt transmitters and the corporations transmit their ads and their distorted points of view on low power radio.
BOYCOTT ELECTION 2000: HOLD OUT FOR REAL DEMOCRACY
David Diamond
THE REAL DEMOCRACY PROJECT
For more information:
http://members.ttlc.net/~ddiam
September 22, 2000
My father and his 3 brothers were "code talkers" in the US NAVY; of WWII. After the war my father became an electronic repairman for the military. In his civilian life (simultaniously) he was a D.J. for RCA Victor @ Sunset and Vine in Hollywood, California. He could well be the first "American Indian" broadcaster. In his day there were no races, just Americans working to build a dream together. My father was one of the founders of the American Television Association. My father's generation had read Orwell's "1984" and knew it was a book of prophesy if citizens in this country did not keep a vigil eye on censorship and power propaganda. My father and the ATA members kept in touch with federal legislatures to help guard against cable television instillations. This is why there was such a long delay, after cable's birth and practicle applications to come to light and in everyone's home. Orwell's book had predicted that the most oppressing beast, yet to be born, was via cable. My father would turn in his grave if he knew it was his own NAB that became b.b.
My father and his 3 brothers were "code talkers" in the US NAVY; of WWII. After the war my father became an electronic repairman for the military. In his civilian life (simultaniously) he was a D.J. for RCA Victor @ Sunset and Vine in Hollywood, California. He could well be the first "American Indian" broadcaster. In his day there were no races, just Americans working to build a dream together. My father was one of the founders of the American Television Association. My father's generation had read Orwell's "1984" and knew it was a book of prophesy if citizens in this country did not keep a vigil eye on censorship and power propaganda. My father and the ATA members kept in touch with federal legislatures to help guard against cable television instillations. This is why there was such a long delay, after cable's birth and practicle applications to come to light and in everyone's home. Orwell's book had predicted that the most oppressing beast, yet to be born, was via cable. My father would turn in his grave if he knew it was his own NAB that became b.b.
Dear Ones:
I have been observing the dwindling influence of the public on our airwaves and in news print for years. Where is the news about labor problems and other common folk except in some news making tragedy. How sensational a news story is and how many viewers will be watching at a given time now determines what gets on the air or in the print media. The debate is limited to those with a conservative and far right-wing point of view. NPR was supposed to address public needs -- but they have caved in from the threats of their funds being cut back in the days of Bob Dole. I now must get any news that would make sense to me from the internet. I prefer news with diverse opinions so I can be truly informed and make up my own mind about issues. I must tell you I see the present two major parties as just playing charades with the American public for their votes. I will no longer vote for the lesser of two evils like I have for so long now. All the media seems to be is -- just one giant propaganda mill to get me to think a certain way.
Sincerely,
James Judd
I have been observing the dwindling influence of the public on our airwaves and in news print for years. Where is the news about labor problems and other common folk except in some news making tragedy. How sensational a news story is and how many viewers will be watching at a given time now determines what gets on the air or in the print media. The debate is limited to those with a conservative and far right-wing point of view. NPR was supposed to address public needs -- but they have caved in from the threats of their funds being cut back in the days of Bob Dole. I now must get any news that would make sense to me from the internet. I prefer news with diverse opinions so I can be truly informed and make up my own mind about issues. I must tell you I see the present two major parties as just playing charades with the American public for their votes. I will no longer vote for the lesser of two evils like I have for so long now. All the media seems to be is -- just one giant propaganda mill to get me to think a certain way.
Sincerely,
James Judd
For more information:
http://htt://jamesjudd.com
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$55.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network