Over 1000 March Against NAB: Corporate Media Ignore Demonstrations Against Corporate Media
Posted Tuesday, September 26, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: fair.org
September 26, 2000
From September 21 - 23, media activists from across the country converged in San Francisco for a historic protest at the annual radio convention of the National Association of Broadcasters'(NAB), culminating in a march and rally on September 23 attended by well over 1,000 people.
FAIR endorsed and played an active role in the demonstrations, as did a broad slate of media, labor and human rights groups; the San Francisco-based Media Alliance was one of the key organizers.
Activists gathered to spotlight the undemocratic activities of the NAB, which is the principal lobbying and membership organization of the broadcast industry and oneof the most powerful interests in Washington. According to the Center for Public Integrity, the NAB has spent $16.9 million since 1996 on pressuring lawmakers to assure corporate control of the airwaves.
It's thanks in large part to the NAB that telecommunications deregulation has proceeded with such dizzying speed in recent years. The NAB has also worked diligently to block pro-democracy measures like low power radio and campaign finance reform.
Nine activists were arrested during the protests, including Steve Rendall, FAIR's senior analyst and co-host of CounterSpin. In addition, three National Lawyers Guild (NLG) representatives were arrested while negotiating with police for access to their clients, the imprisoned activists.
FCC ADOPTS RECONSIDERATION ORDER FOR LPFM
Posted Saturday, September 23, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: fcc.gov
FCC ADOPTS RECONSIDERATION ORDER FOR LOW POWER FM RADIO: AFFIRMS PROVISIONS OF ORIGINAL ORDER; INSTITUTES PROTECTION FOR RADIO READING SERVICES AND INTERFERENCE COMPLAINT PROCEDURE. Go to http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/News_Releases/2000/nrmm0040.html for details
New FCC Rules to Smooth Way for LPFM?
Posted Friday, September 22, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: NY Times
WASHINGTON, Sept. 21 — The Federal Communications Commission, seeking to win political support for its proposal to issue licenses for hundreds of new low-power FM radio stations, has completed new regulations that permit larger stations to raise complaints about any signal interference from the start-ups, agency officials said today.
They said the commission approved the new rules in principle on Wednesday in an effort to defuse the criticism of the plan by National Public Radio and the nation's leading commercial broadcasters.
The rules are expected to be released as early as Friday. They come in response to criticism of the low-power radio plan from broadcasters and members of Congress, who support legislation to curb the program, which would issue licenses to groups like schools, churches and community organizations.
NAB Convention Protest Coverage
Posted Thursday, September 21, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: San Francisco IMC
For up to date coverage of this weekends (Sept 20th-23rd) protest at the National Association of Braodcasters convention, visit the San Francisco Independent Media Center at http://www.indybay.org/
Congressional Hall of Shame Updated
Posted Sunday, September 17, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: pirateradio.about.com
More useful information from John Anderson over at pirateradio.about.com. There are now 42 Senators that support the anti-lpfm bill's S2068 and S3020. Click here to see the details at John's Congressional Hall of Shame page.
Remeber that you can find the info you need to call or write your Senators at http://www.vote-smart.org
Media Activists Send Letter to NAB
Posted Sunday, September 17, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: FAIR.org
MEDIA ACTIVISTS SEND NAB A REMINDER: The Airwaves Belong to the Public
In support of this week's demonstrations at the National Association of Broadcasters' annual radio convention in San Francisco, some of the U.S.'s most committed advocates for democratic media have written an open letter to the NAB to remind the group that "this country's airwaves are the property of the American people."
Drafted by FAIR, the letter is signed by a variety of activists and analysts, including noted media scholars Ben Bagdikian, Noam Chomsky and Robert W. McChesney; Media Alliance; People for Better TV; Global Exchange; the National Lawyers Guild Center for Democratic Communications; and several low power radio groups, including Americans for Radio Diversity.
The letter notes that it is thanks in large part to the multi-million dollar lobbying efforts of NAB that commercial broadcasting has been reshaped over the last few years by deregulation and consolidation, undemocratically shifting the balance of power to a handful of companies with interests and investments spread across the media landscape.
"The broadcasters represented by the NAB get free access to our airwaves-what does the public get in return?" asks the letter, pointing out that "dissenting political viewpoints are routinely marginalized" in mainstream media, and "the interests and perspectives of women, people of color, labor, local communities, and lesbians, gays and bisexuals are consistently underrepresented." It is clear, says the letter, that the industry is "more interested in delivering viewers to advertisers than in serving the needs of the public."
Among the issues addressed are the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the NAB's ongoing campaign to further deregulate telecommunications, and the NAB's efforts to stymie campaign finance reform and low power radio-an area in which, notes the letter, "the NAB's commitment to keeping non-commercial, community-based voices off the air is distressingly clear."
"The public's awareness that corporate media has failed them increases day by day, and with it comes the understanding that the NAB-one of the most powerful influences in Washington-is a key player in consolidating corporate control of our airwaves. That's why citizens will come together in San Francisco to voice their opposition to corporate management of the public's airwaves, and to reopen the debate over who exactly should get access to this precious resource."
To read the full text of the letter, visit www.fair.org/nab.html
Pacifica Listeners Gain Legal Victory
Posted Saturday, September 16, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: savepacifica.net
LEGAL VICTORY: California attorney general rules listeners can sue Pacifica. Pacifica to pack the Board with more corporate executives September 15: On the eve of this weekend's Pacifica National Board meeting in Washington DC, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer has ruled that Pacifica listeners have the right to sue the Pacifica Foundation for a wide variety of alleged abuses of Pacifica's charitable trust. Meanwhile, the Pacifica board has announced that it will seek to add two more non- representative candidates to the board this weekend. Francisco Rocciolo is an investment banker with Citibank in New York; Luis Wilmont works as a consultant to long distance telephone providers. See above link for more.
Second LPFM Filing Window Applicants Announced
Posted Thursday, September 14, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: fcc.gov
The Public Notice announcing Low Power FM Appplications for Original Construction Permits Received is now available at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Public_Notices/Brdcst_Applications/ap000915.txt
Kennard to Leave FCC?
Posted Wednesday, September 13, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: NY Post
Federal Communications Commission Chairman Bill Kennard is making plans to leave the agency - and already the jockeying has begun for his job.
Kennard, who was nominated and sworn in by President Clinton in November 1997, will not stay on the job if Vice President Al Gore is elected, say sources with ties to the commission.
"Let's just say he's had a lot of job offers in the past few months," said one FCC insider.
In line for the chairmanship is Commissioner Gloria Tristani, a Democrat who sources say has been promised the top job.
"Anti-LPFM" Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000 introduced (Senate)
Posted Saturday, September 9, 2000 by glenn
Story Link: thomas.gov
Note: this is the bill that passed the house and is not the same as S2068 the bill introduced by Senator Gregg in February. Click here to read senate bill S3020.
Grams' comments on the floor:
RADIO BROADCASTING PRESERVATION ACT OF 2000 introduced on the floor of the Senate by Rod Grams, R-Minn: "Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to address the ongoing dispute between advocates of low power FM radio and full power FM radio broadcasters.
I am pleased to be joined in this bipartisan effort by Senators Baucus, Inhofe, Gregg, and Hutchison. Our legislation, the 'Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000,' was overwhelmingly passed by the House of
Representatives on April 13th by a vote of 274-110.
On January 20th, the Federal Communications Commission narrowly adopted a proposal that would establish a new radio service known as low power FM radio (LPFM). Under this program, the Commission would license hundreds of new low power FM radio stations in two classes. The new service would license stations with a maximum power level of 10 watts that would reach an area with a radius of between 1 and 2 miles, and a second class of stations with a maximum power level of 100 watts that would reach an area with a radius of three and a half miles. Although the commission adopted first- and second-adjacent channel interference protections as part of its rulemaking, it chose to allow LPFM stations to be licensed on third-adjacent channels. The FCC began accepting applications for this new service on May 30th.
Over the last several months, I have carefully listened to Minnesotans who care deeply about the issues involved in the debate over LPFM. In the absence of third-adjacent channel protection, incumbent FM broadcasters believe that low power FM radio stations would cause interference to existing radio services. LPFM advocates argue that the Federal Communications Commission has conducted adequate testing for
interference and that requiring third adjacent channel protections would unnecessarily limit the number of licensed low power FM radio stations. Further, they suggest that the 1996 Telecommunications Act has resulted in unprecedented concentration within the telecommunications industry.
Although I have many concerns about the impact of LPFM service upon current FM radio broadcasting, I share the commission's stated goal of increasing diversity in radio and television broadcasting. Earlier this Congress, I supported the enactment of the Community Broadcasters Act,
which preserves the unique community television broadcasting provided by low power television stations that are operated by diverse groups such as high schools, churches, local government and individual citizens. I also look forward to reviewing the findings and recommendations from the ongoing survey of minority broadcast owners being conducted by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration that will be used to analyze the impact of the 1996 Telecommunications Act upon minority broadcast ownership in the United States.
Mr. President, I am also very mindful of the concerns about LPFM raised by radio reading service programs. In my home state, the State Services for the Blind sponsors the 'Radio Talking Book' program. Radio Talking Book is a closed-circuit broadcast system which uses FM subcarrier frequencies from radio stations in Minnesota and South Dakota to deliver readings from newspapers, magazines and books on a daily basis to more than 10,000 blind and visually impaired persons. Sub-carrier signals are the most vulnerable to low power FM radio interference because they are located at the outer edge of the frequency space.
[Ed. Note: According to our sources, most interference comes from the subcarriers' parent signal itself!]
I am troubled by the Federal Communications Commission's decision to adopt LPFM without conducting field testing of subcarrier receivers. Nearly eight months after the Commission approved LPFM, engineering studies and field testing of these receivers have not yet been completed by the Commission, and it remains unclear as to how the FCC
intends to address interference that may be caused to radio reading services. The agency's inaction underscores the haste in which the LPFM plan was developed and gives credence to the view that the adoption of the FCC rules was a rush to judgment. I ask unanimous consent that letters from Minnesota Public Radio, the Minnesota State Services for the Blind and the International Association of Audio Information Services be inserted into the Record at this time.
For these reasons, I am pleased to introduce the 'Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000.' I believe this legislation represents the interests of LPFM advocates, full power FM broadcasters, and most importantly--radio listeners. This compromise bill will allow the Federal Communications Commission to license lower power FM radio stations while requiring additional third adjacent channel protections for full power FM broadcasters.
Among its other provisions, the Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000 would require that an independent party conduct testing in nine FM radio markets to determine whether LPFM without third adjacent channel protections would cause harmful interference to existing FM radio services. The legislation would require the FCC to submit a report to Congress which analyzes the experimental test program results; and evaluates the impact of LPFM on listening audiences, incumbent FM radio broadcasters, minority and small market broadcasters, and radio stations that provide radio reading services to the blind.
Mr. President, some advocates of the low power FM plan adopted by the Commission argue that the Congress should simply allow the agency to move forward on LPFM without any input or modifications from Congress. Those individuals apparently favor granting legislative authority to federal regulatory agencies. Since the establishment of the Federal
Communications Commission through an Act of Congress in 1934, members of the House and Senate have consistently exercised appropriate oversight of FCC rules and proposals.
As a member of the Senate, I have carefully monitored the Commission's activities to ensure responsible public policy and the wisest use of taxpayer dollars. Over the last few years, I have expressed my concern over a number of issues considered by the Commission, including satellite television, rights-of-way management, universal service, the impact of digital television rules upon low power television and translator stations, and most recently low power FM radio. Congress should not abdicate its oversight responsibilities when considering the LPFM issue.
Mr. President, I firmly believe that the 'Radio Broadcasting Preservation Act of 2000' will strengthen community broadcasting without sacrificing existing radio services. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this bill and additional material be printed in the Record and I yield the floor."