Jay Inslee: Washington's 1st Congressional District
Home > Issues > Media Ownership > FCC Letter
Issues
Media Ownership
Inslee Working to Build Support for Media Diversity Legislation
18 June 2003
U.S. Rep. Jay Inslee today sent a "Dear Colleague" letter to members of the House of Representatives urging them to cosponsor planned legislation that would roll back the new FCC media ownership rules. A portion of Inslee's letter is below:
Dear Colleague,
The public reaction to the FCC ruling of June 2nd has been nothing short of outrage. Over 750,000 citizens personally contacted the FCC in the run up to the June 2nd decision - 99% opposed the rule changes. Beside them stood a bipartisan coalition of dissenting institutions - from the NRA to NOW - which was unlike any other that has ever addressed media and democracy in America. The relaxation of the ownership rules permits unprecedented levels of consolidation in broadcast and print. Control over public access to information-what we read, watch, and hear-will be ceded to fewer and fewer large corporations. These corporations prioritize sales over the public interest. Whats good for democracy is not always good for revenues. That is why the government regulates the media industry, to make sure that public service remains paramount in the media system. But the FCC has dropped the ball.
It is easy to see why the public is united against the June 2nd decision. Contradictions and inconsistencies plague this ruling. For example, two of the top four television stations in a market are prevented from merging to prevent undue concentration of power. However, a dominant newspaper and the top rated television station in the same market are permitted to merge! The Consumer Federation of America reports that in one-paper towns, this type of merger would produce a degree of concentration twenty times greater than the level that triggers antitrust investigation by the Department of Justice. Before June 2nd, 100% of Americans lived in markets protected from this type of monopoly. Now just 2% are protected. There can be no gains in market efficiency commensurate with the loss of integrity in public media. Commissioner Michael Copps in his scathing dissent concluded: Where are the blessings of localism, diversity and competition here? I see centralization, not localism; I see uniformity, not diversity; I see monopoly and oligopoly, not competition.
Please join in protecting the cornerstone of our American democracy by cosponsoring this legislation.
Sincerely,
Bernard Sanders
James A. Leach
Sherrod Brown
Maurice D. Hinchey
Janice D. Schakowsky
Jay Inslee