FCC Urged to Relax Rules

Excellent article Fox. I, for one, do not desire that corporations become bigger and bigger and more controlling.

The following should startle any freedom loving American...

"But radio is just the tip of the iceberg. Today, six companies -- Viacom, Disney, Time Warner, General Electric, Bertelsman, and News Corporation -- own 90 percent of all U.S. media holdings. This means that a handful of corporations determine what most Americans read in daily newspapers, see in movie theaters, watch on broadcast and cable television, and hear over the airwaves."​

 

Let me get this straight. You want the goverment to step in and control how big a citizen can grow his buisness, in order to preserve freedom. :laugh:

 

My preference would be that the airways be free. However, so long as the FCC has claimed jurisdiction over these areas and is a controller of radio and television waves, then they need to attend to the public interests rather than the interests of Corporate pigs who are infected with the love of money and controlling the thoughts of the American people.

 

Your preference is that the airways be free. That means I can set up the 24/7 porn on ABC. That is what the FCC does, monitor the public airways for decency.

 

How effectively do you think they're doing their job if this is what they do? When I gave up television their was regular pornography in the programs and commercials a tremendous amount of gore, violence and even torture. Has television improved in the last year and a half?

 

No doubt there is a lot of trash on the tv. How much worse it could be if there was no regulation at all. Can you even imagin.

What if Hugh Heffner (playboy mag.) and Larry Flint (hustler mag.) could own a free air TV station.

 

It is axiomatic that when there is little competition in business, there is no free enterprise. Why do you think these companies are arguing that there is too much freedom given to bloggers and other internet news sources?

Their much hope-for control of information is in serious trouble as fewer and fewer people get their news from papers and television, and more and more of them are looking to the freedom of the internet. "Unauthorized" sources undermine the "new information order."

Take a look here at the plans they have for that "problem."
http://www.savetheinternet.com/=faq#about

The problem, of course, is the generation that relies primarily on papers and television for information. As that passes, control of the print and broadcast media will mean less and less.

 

Who cares? With the advent of the new media (internet), the news will get out. Besides, why not just turn it off? If six companies own everything that nobody watches or listens to, what good will it do them?

If you don't want six companies to own them all, then start your own.

But why get the government involved?

 

And, of course, in the broadcast media, the companies don't actually own the bandwidth they use; they are just borrowing it from the public, which owns all of it.

If they don't want to be regulated, they shouldn't be using public resources for their business.