As any Medill student present at one of Dean Lavine’s lectures is painfully aware, the media industry is changing. But one proposal promises to hit readers picking up newspapers at dining hall newsstands too: The Federal Communications Commission may repeal a decades-old rule that would change who owns the news.
On Oct. 17, the FCC announced a plan to loosen ownership restrictions. A 1974 law that prevents companies from owning a newspaper and a television or radio station in the same city is the scourge of current FCC chairman Kevin Martin. He wants to repeal the law within the next two months, though he faces opposition from consumer groups and Democrats.
What’s wrong with changing the rules? Doing so opens the doors for billionaire tycoons like Rupert Murdoch and Chicago’s own Sam Zell to treat the media industry like a high-stakes game of Hungry Hungry Hippos. But, instead of being fun for the whole family, the consolidation of news sources may make them too responsive to the wills of their powerful patrons.
Murdoch’s acquisition of The Wall Street Journal was a legitimate concern for the Bancroft family, then owners of the newspaper. Several family members disapproved of the deal, and the family would not discuss financial terms without first discussing matters of “editorial independence.” They feared a heavy-handed Murdoch would use the Journal to further his political interests.
If local broadcast stations also fell under the umbrella of corporations like those owned by Zell and Murdoch, the varied and personal nature of local news companies would be threatened. According to Gene Kimmelman of Consumer Reports, lifting the FCC’s ban on media consolidation would lead to a few conglomerates dominating local coverage.
Still, the media landscape is changing, said Steven Duke, managing director at the Media Management Center here at Northwestern.
“I was a lot more concerned about the cross-ownership rule being relaxed 12 or 15 years ago, and would have adamantly opposed it,” Duke said. “[But] the rules changed.”
Because news is accessible on the Internet and free, alternative media sources, the audience of conventional media outlets has declined, Duke said. Relaxing the rules will give new life to an ailing industry.
“If those [conventional media outlets] are to survive, they need the ability to offer their news on multiple platforms,” Duke said. And because so many sources provide news, the issue is no longer whether powerful companies will squeeze out alternative voices. It’s that the major outlets themselves are threatened.
At least in Chicago, Duke has a case. The newspaper industry is losing readership and the money that comes with it, and Zell’s standing offer to buy out the Tribune Company would benefit it: His proposal to pay $34 a share for the company’s stock exceeds the Tribune’s prices. Because it was grandfathered in, the Tribune Company now owns WGN 720 AM radio and WGN Channel 9 TV, but that exception would end if Zell buys the company. The Tribune is in uncertain times, and a positive FCC ruling or a temporary waiver that permits the deal may help the company climb out of its financial problems.
Whether you’re a Medill student planning a career in this tumultuous industry, or a student picking up the Tribune at a dining hall, a change in ownership has an undeniable effect on the news we’ll be reading and making. The last thing an ailing industry needs is a bunch of media monopolists restricting their content: There are some of us out there who don’t want everything we read to be “fair and balanced.”