Search News
For the Media
For media inquiries, call CWA Communications at 202-434-1168 or email comms@cwa-union.org. To read about CWA Members, Leadership or Industries, visit our About page.
CWA Criticizes FCC Decision on Media Concentration
Washington, D.C. -- The Federal Communications Commission's decision today to reverse long-established limits on media ownership will have serious repercussions for our democracy and the value Americans place on a free press and free speech. Fewer companies controlling the newspapers, radio stations and TV stations in a single community means fewer voices – fewer points of view – will be heard.
"It is disgraceful that the Republican majority on the FCC bowed to corporate interests so completely that they held only one public hearing – and that under pressure – for an issue that will so drastically alter the media landscape in our country," CWA President Morton Bahr said.
Yet, Bahr noted, commissioners met repeatedly with the large media corporations who stand to make billions of dollars in the buying and selling of companies made possible by Monday's vote. He noted the recent Center for Public Integrity investigation showing that FCC members have been wined and dined at all-expense paid conferences around the world to the tune of nearly $2.8 million in corporate dollars over the past eight years. "The citizen groups -- the unions, churches, educators, artists and other activists – didn't have the deep pockets to get the FCC's attention," Bahr said.
CWA is particularly concerned about the rule change that will allow a single company to own both a newspaper and a TV station in one community, Bahr said, noting the Supreme Court's 1978 decision that upheld the FCC rule that then banned such cross-ownership. The court said, "It is unrealistic to expect true diversity from a commonly owned station-newspaper combination. The divergency of their viewpoints cannot be expected to be the same as if they were antagonistically run."
"That is as true today as it was then, and media consumers will suffer because of it," Bahr said. "With a single owner controlling the top news outlets in one community, there is no financial incentive to compete. Stories that require too much time or money, or don't fall in line with the owner's point of view, won't see the light of day."
The proponents' argument that the Internet and cable channels have made the ownership rules obsolete is without merit, Bahr said. "The very same companies that own broadcast channels, radio stations and newspapers, own the top Internet news and cable channels. That's not diversity, it's a monopoly," he said. "And they're certainly not interested in local news. When was the last time you found stories on the Internet or cable about last night's school board meeting or your city's sewer project?"
###
CWA represents 700,000 workers, including 50,000 newspaper, wire service and broadcast employees.
"It is disgraceful that the Republican majority on the FCC bowed to corporate interests so completely that they held only one public hearing – and that under pressure – for an issue that will so drastically alter the media landscape in our country," CWA President Morton Bahr said.
Yet, Bahr noted, commissioners met repeatedly with the large media corporations who stand to make billions of dollars in the buying and selling of companies made possible by Monday's vote. He noted the recent Center for Public Integrity investigation showing that FCC members have been wined and dined at all-expense paid conferences around the world to the tune of nearly $2.8 million in corporate dollars over the past eight years. "The citizen groups -- the unions, churches, educators, artists and other activists – didn't have the deep pockets to get the FCC's attention," Bahr said.
CWA is particularly concerned about the rule change that will allow a single company to own both a newspaper and a TV station in one community, Bahr said, noting the Supreme Court's 1978 decision that upheld the FCC rule that then banned such cross-ownership. The court said, "It is unrealistic to expect true diversity from a commonly owned station-newspaper combination. The divergency of their viewpoints cannot be expected to be the same as if they were antagonistically run."
"That is as true today as it was then, and media consumers will suffer because of it," Bahr said. "With a single owner controlling the top news outlets in one community, there is no financial incentive to compete. Stories that require too much time or money, or don't fall in line with the owner's point of view, won't see the light of day."
The proponents' argument that the Internet and cable channels have made the ownership rules obsolete is without merit, Bahr said. "The very same companies that own broadcast channels, radio stations and newspapers, own the top Internet news and cable channels. That's not diversity, it's a monopoly," he said. "And they're certainly not interested in local news. When was the last time you found stories on the Internet or cable about last night's school board meeting or your city's sewer project?"
###
CWA represents 700,000 workers, including 50,000 newspaper, wire service and broadcast employees.