PREMIUM SEARCH Search by job title, geography and build a list of executive contacts
MASS MAILINGS. Powell tends to minimize the breadth of the anger he has stirred up. He isn't giving interviews these days to print media, his spokesperson says, but he said in a recent C-Span appearance that "three-quarters" of the 2 million missives opposing his rule changes were from one group, the NRA, which had its more fervent members each send in five postcards, one to each commissioner. Even if that's true, it means 300,000 NRA members opposed the issue, as well as 500,000 non-NRA-ites.
That's probably more opposition than the FCC has ever gotten before. It typically gets about 5,000 calls and letters on controversial issues, the FCC says.
Powell never mentioned the outpouring of calls and e-mail aimed at members of Congress. Common Cause and MoveOn.org, an Internet-based liberal advocacy group started by two Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, each say 300,000 people griped to their senators and representatives via their Web sites. MoveOn also collected 207,500 signatures on a petition to stop the FCC.
TIPPING THE SCALES. One reason for public anger is the shoddiness of the FCC's research. Powell proudly noted in his C-Span appearance that the FCC studied the issues for 20 months and did "12 empirical studies" of media concentration before coming up with its new rules. Trouble is, most of the FCC studies were so poorly designed and inconclusive that they don't illuminate much of anything (see BW Online, 5/30/03, "Stop the FCC's Covert Operation").
Just as poorly thought-out is Powell's new "diversity index." In an attempt to assuage critics who fear the new rules will squash local news coverage, Powell came up with a scale that purports to measure to measure "news diversity" in various markets. But an analysis by the Consumers Federation and the Consumer's Union (publisher of Consumer Reports magazine) found it full of "flawed analytic thinking" and "riddled with internal contradictions."
For instance, the consumer groups note that in the Tallahassee (Fla.) area, the proposed FCC index gives the suburban Thomasville Tribune newspaper (circulation 10,000) equal weight to the Tallahassee Democrat (circulation 50,000), and twice as much weight as the local CBS affiliate, which has 50,000 viewers per day and 59% of the local TV market. In the New York City area, Shop at Home Inc., the Dutchess Community College TV station, and Multicultural Radio Broadcasting, owner of three small local radio stations, each counted for more than The New York Times.
POPULIST GROUNDSWELL. Even without the relaxed rules, big media just keeps getting bigger. Both Viacom (VIA ), which owns CBS, and News Corp., which owns Fox, already surpass the FCC's cap on TV station ownership. The FCC gave them a waiver pending passage of its new rules. And the media-consolidation boom shows no sign of abating. Witness NBC-parent General Electric's (GE ) bid to buy Vivendi's (V ) media assets, which include Universal Studios (see BW Online, 9/5/03, "Why GE Went for a Little Glitz"). The media behemoths still hope to beat back opposition with a big-buck ad campaign and the slogan, "America Says: Don't Get Between Me And My TV."
That won't wash. The populist groundswell, from both the left and the right, against greater media concentration is real. And leaders of both parties have good reason to oppose the FCC's plans. "Politicians fear that it will give the media even more leverage over them," says Joseph Turow, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg School for Communication.
So, to recap: Powell refused to make a public case for the merits of his proposal. Then, he skewed the data to try to fool people. Plenty of other telecommunications policy experts have the political skills to handle the FCC job less contentiously than Powell. He should leave, before he's shown the door.
Peterson is a contributing editor at BusinessWeek Online. Follow his weekly Moveable Feast column, only on BusinessWeek Online Edited by Douglas Harbrecht
Copyright 2003, Bloomberg L.P.
Printer-Friendly Version
