Supreme Court Lets F.C.C. Relax Limits on Media Ownership

Discuss whatever you want here ... movies, books, recipes, politics, beer, wine, TV ... everything except classical music.

Moderators: Lance, Corlyss_D

Post Reply
maestrob
Posts: 10211
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:30 am

Supreme Court Lets F.C.C. Relax Limits on Media Ownership

Post by maestrob » Thu Apr 01, 2021 1:43 pm

COMMENT: This continues the conservative move toward deregulation of our media, and is dangerous beyond belief, IMHO!

The justices said the commission had adequately considered whether easing rules on cross-ownership of radio and TV stations and newspapers would hurt female and minority ownership of media outlets.

By Adam Liptak
April 1, 2021, 1:49 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Thursday that the Federal Communications Commission could relax rules limiting the number of newspapers, radio stations and television stations that a single entity may own in a given market.

The decision is likely to prompt further consolidation among broadcast outlets, some of which say they need more freedom to address competition from internet and cable companies. Critics fear that media consolidation will limit the perspectives available to viewers.

The rules at issue in the case, initially adopted between 1964 and 1975, had been meant “to promote competition, localism and viewpoint diversity by ensuring that a small number of entities do not dominate a particular media market,” Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote for the court. But the rules, he added, were a relic of a different era — “an early-cable and pre-internet age when media sources were more limited.”

“By the 1990s, however, the market for news and entertainment had changed dramatically,” Justice Kavanaugh wrote. “Technological advances led to a massive increase in alternative media options, such as cable television and the internet. Those technological advances challenged the traditional dominance of daily print newspapers, local radio stations and local television stations.”

The case, Federal Communications Commission v. Prometheus Radio Project, No. 19-1231, concerned three rules. One barred a single entity from owning a radio or television station and a daily print newspaper in the same market, the second limited the number of radio and television stations an entity can own in a single market, and the third restricted the number of local television stations an entity could own in the same market.

In 2017, the commission concluded that the three rules no longer served their original purposes of promoting competition and the like. The vote was 3 to 2 along party lines, with the commission’s Republican members in the majority.

“The F.C.C. explained that permitting efficient combinations among radio stations, television stations and newspapers would benefit consumers,” Justice Kavanaugh wrote.

Public interest and advocacy groups objected, largely on the ground that changing the rules would harm minority and female ownership of media outlets. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, in Philadelphia, agreed, ruling that the commission had not adequately considered evidence on that point. The appeals court ordered the commission to do more work “whether through new empirical research or an in-depth theoretical analysis.”

The evidence before the commission in 2017 was thin and mixed, Justice Kavanaugh wrote, with some of it suggesting that lifting the rule on newspaper and broadcast cross-ownership could increase minority ownership. He concluded that the commission’s analysis of the limited evidence before it was adequate and that the court should defer to it.

“In short, the F.C.C.’s analysis was reasonable and reasonably explained,” he wrote.

“The F.C.C. considered the record evidence on competition, localism, viewpoint diversity and minority and female ownership, and reasonably concluded that the three ownership rules no longer serve the public interest,” he wrote.

“The F.C.C. reasoned that the historical justifications for those ownership rules no longer apply in today’s media market,” Justice Kavanaugh wrote. “The commission further explained that its best estimate, based on the sparse record evidence, was that repealing or modifying the three rules at issue here was not likely to harm minority and female ownership.”

Carmen Scurato, a lawyer with Free Press, an advocacy group that was one of the challengers in the case, said in a statement that “this Supreme Court decision couldn’t come at a worse time, as the country reels from the harmful impact media consolidation has had on communities of color in the United States.”

David Chavern, the president of the News Media Alliance, a trade group, welcomed the ruling.

“The cross-ownership ban is a prime example of an outdated regulation that had shackled the newspaper industry for far too long,” he said in a statement. “The repeal of the ban will generate much-needed investments and cross-platform synergies that will help sustain local news media at a monumental time in our country’s history when local news is needed more than ever.”

Justice Kavanaugh did not address the question of whether female and minority ownership was a relevant factor under the governing statute. In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that it was not.

“The F.C.C. had no obligation to consider minority and female ownership,” he wrote. He noted, too, that “the F.C.C. has recently questioned the validity of the assumption that ownership diversity promotes viewpoint diversity.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/us/s ... e=Homepage

Rach3
Posts: 3321
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 9:17 am

Re: Supreme Court Lets F.C.C. Relax Limits on Media Ownership

Post by Rach3 » Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:05 pm

Even “Beer” Kavanaugh agrees the evidence supporting the FCC loosened rule is “sparse” , but says Ok. As figured, incompetent Thomas once again rules against women and minorities, in his continuing revenge for the Anita Hill hearings, a ruling his alt . right wife , who tweeted real time encouragement to the Jan.6 Capitol insurrectionists , no doubt approves.

maestrob
Posts: 10211
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:30 am

Re: Supreme Court Lets F.C.C. Relax Limits on Media Ownership

Post by maestrob » Fri Apr 02, 2021 8:27 am

Rach3 wrote:
Thu Apr 01, 2021 7:05 pm
Even “Beer” Kavanaugh agrees the evidence supporting the FCC loosened rule is “sparse” , but says Ok. As figured, incompetent Thomas once again rules against women and minorities, in his continuing revenge for the Anita Hill hearings, a ruling his alt . right wife , who tweeted real time encouragement to the Jan.6 Capitol insurrectionists , no doubt approves.
Agreed. We live on the same continent as two separate countries now, both struggling for dominance. One of these threatens democracy, the other wants to expand it. Guess whose side I'm on! :wink:

Republicans have given up on even beginning to cite our Constitution to support their governing philosophy at this point. It's just a knee-jerk reflex to oppose progress and inclusivity, in spite of the hopeful words in our founding documents. Even the very idea of "originalism" has been shown by their actions to be meaningless by now.

They want to rule, not serve and govern. I firmly believe that this troglodyte approach of turning back the clock will lead ultimately to their downfall unless they reform as a party, but we cannot take this for granted and must oppose them at every turn.

Never forget. :evil:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests