Source
Automatically imported from: http://commons.somewhere.com:80/rre/1994/telecom.coup.fairness.do.html
Content
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.
telecom coup, fairness doctrine
``` Vigdor Schreibman's on-line newsletter has gotten much better over the last several months, and some of his recent up-to-the-minute analyses of US Congressional action on telecommunications issues have been exceptionally useful.
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 17:10:19 -0400
From: Vigdor Schreibman - FINS
----------------Original Message Posted in Multiple Lists----------------- ------------------------Republication Authorized--------------------------
FINS: Communicating the Emerging Philosophy of The Information Age FEDERAL INFORMATION NEWS SYNDICATE Vol II, Issue No. 21 (116 lines) October 10, 1994
READ THIS ISSUE OF FINS TO CONSIDER:
Forecast of a "Telcom Coup" The Time is Right for a "Fairness Doctrine Campaign"
---
CLOSING THE "VALUES-GAP": Alternative Telecommunications Scenarios By Vigdor Schreibman
McKinley Conway, of Norcross, Georgia, who produces an annual review of state legislative programs called "The 50 Legislative Climates," has recently published a forecast that by the end of the decade there is going to be a "Telcom Coup." Conway envisions a citizen controlled computer-driven political revolution that will "rejuvenate American society" through a national referendum that will establish a new national agenda. Conway thinks this will be guided by "performance" standards and the value of competition advanced under the National Performance Review led by Vice President Gore.
However, Conway's forecast of the "Telecom Coup" in the years just ahead may be premature. Computer communications are barely scratching the surface of American households, Internet connections now reach less than 20 percent of public libraries, the telecommunications industry is deadlocked, the public interest community paralyzed, and the Republicans have obstructed all the important legislative initiatives for the "information superhighways." Despite the exciting forecast for the future of citizen controlled computer-driven electronic communications, the preeminent electronic media at present and for the foreseable future could remain plain old broadcasting operated under the control of a small group of chain broadcast networks. In this media the voices of the citizenry are generally locked out or manipu- lated through programming based on infotainment, gratuitous violence, and exploitive sex. The dominant communications agenda is dictated by privileged groups who can alone afford to pay for the exorbitant cost of air time.
Nevertheless, based on First Amendment principles, the Supreme Court has recognized the crucial importance in the broadcast media of the fundamental right of the public "to receive suitable access to social, aesthetic, moral, and other ideas and experiences." Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367, 390 (1968). And the primary means to assure that broadcasters would fulfill that public right, was by enforcing the obligations of the "Fairness Doctrine" that were imposed upon broadcasters under section 315(a) of the Communications Act of 1934 (as amended), Id., at 376-77. Those obligations required broadcasters: (1) to provide coverage of vitally important controversial issues of interest to the community served by the licensees, and (2) to provide reasonable opportunity for the presentation of contrasting viewpoints on such issues. Report Concerning General Fairness Doctrine Obligations of Broadcast Licensees, 102 F.C.C.2d 143, 146 (1985).
The Fairness Doctrine was largely self-enforcing and worked fairly well. For example, when citizens of California became dissatisfied with excessive price increases by the insurance industry they called for an initiative to roll back insurance costs. And when the insurance industry launched a set of four counter initiatives with a $70 million advertising campaign to confuse voters on the issues, public interest groups demanded reasonable opportunity for free air time to respond to industry advertisements. With just $2 million in free air time citizens were able to effectively respond to industry claims, and received a majority of the vote for their initiative.
However, during the Administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush, the Fairness Doctrine was abolished on policy findings that rather than promoting First Amendment principles it chills them, based on subjective evidence offered by the National Association of Broadcasters. Syracuse Peace Council v. FCC, 867 F.2d 654, 660 (D.C. Cir. 1989). In 1987, the Communica- tions Act of 1934 was amended to express the sense of Congress that "the Fairness Doctrine has previously received statutory approval and to require broadcast licensees to provide a reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance." [S.742/HR 1934] However, President Reagan vetoed the bill. In 1989 the House was again favorably disposed to pass a bill to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, but this failed in the face of a veto threat by President Bush. Those affirmative actions by Congress were based on a new compelling assessment of the viability of the fairness doctrine, overriding contrary findings of the Reagan and Bush Admin- istrations [S.Hrg. 100-48; S.Rpt. 100-34].
President Clinton has indicated that he would sign such a bill if it is presented to him, according to Gigi B. Sohn, deputy director of the Media Access Project (202-232-4300). Sohn and Scott G. Denman, executive director of the Safe Energy Communications Council (202-483-8491), told a gathering of public interest groups at a meeting of the Telecommunications Policy Roundtable Oct 4 that the time is right for a "Fairness Doctrine Campaign." Rush Limbaugh has dubbed the legislation the "Hush Rush Law," and criticism exists from other broadcast and newspaper interests, but all the essential political signs left and right are otherwise favorable [Fins-PaN-10]. With a little push the people could likely reinstate the Fairness Doctrine soon.
---
BECOME A MEMBER OF FINS--COLLABORATE IN ADVANCING THE GENIUS OF CYBERSPACE
---
Membership rate: $30.00 a year. United States and International members receive 24 issues of Fins News Columns a year; plus networking, or print reproduction rights in primary markets; plus Fins Information Age Library.
---
Federal Information News Syndicate, Vigdor Schreibman, Editor & Publisher, 18 - 9th Street NE #206, Washington, DC 20002-6042. Copyright 1994 FINS. Internet: fins@access.digex.net. Browse Fins Information Age Library located at the University of Maryland inforM system: if you have a Gopher client : gopher to inform.umd.edu and go to the directory Educational_Resources/ AcademicResourcesByTopic/Computers_and_Society/Fins_Information_Age; or if you have ftp : ftp to inform.umd.edu cd to inforM/and the same directory.
--- ```
This web service brought to you by Somewhere.Com, LLC.