New FCC Officer’s Proposed Regs Would Stifle Free Speech
August 17th, 2009 at 11:20 am by DUSTIN SIGGINS | 5 Comments |
Share
According to Jillian Bandes, localism (read: government-forced diversity) and progressive radio proponent Mark Lloyd has been named to the position of Chief Diversity Officer at the Federal Communications Commission. Bandes and Seton Motley of the Media Research Center, while uncertain of what Lloyd might do in the position, have no good news for those who support the free market in radio. In 2007 he wrote “We call for ownership rules that we think will create greater local diversity of programming, news, and commentary. And we call for more localism by putting teeth into the licensing rules” in addition to other anti-free speech rhetoric.
This is of great concern to many around this country- fortunately, freedom-loving private citizens are not alone. Mike Pence (R-IN) has been taking on localism and the Fairness Doctrine over the last few years- some, including myself, thought he was overreacting to the doctrine and not paying enough attention to the localism part, but either way Pence has been a tireless supporter of the right to free speech. He gave a very good speech about the Broadcaster Freedom Amendment he sponsored about a month ago (and in 2007), and in it he described the negative effect the Fairness Doctrine had on talk radio on all sides of the political spectrum. As a former radio man himself, Pence understands freedom of speech and how it should be allowed, even if you disagree with what is said.
Last fall, I conducted a partial case study on proposed FCC localism regulations and their probable effect on small, local markets (which they are supposed to help). In interviewing a number of media people in the Littleton, New Hampshire area, I found only one supporter of any kind of regulations -a well-established author and former newspaper reporter in Littleton - but no other local media owners in favor of the regulations. The cost of business, the owners felt, would be prohibitive and encourage further conglomeration strangleholds, which the regulations were also alleged to prevent (according to the regulation supporters). Again, freedom of speech is too important to be left to government intervention.
In recent years, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez has shut down free radio stations- this month alone, he shut down 12 of the 34 stations told to go off the air. Chavez, of course, has said he is “democratizing” radio- a number of civil rights groups, however, disagree, including several in the United States. Ironically, our media hammers Chavez - but praises and supports government regulation in this country because it doesn’t like talk radio. I wonder what would happen if localism regulations and radio conglomeration rules were applied to newspapers, magazines, television news and Hollywood, where liberals dominate, and not just to conservative talk radio, where the much-ridiculed Rush Limbaugh is king. |
