Minorities and females shut out of media ownership.
Minorities and females shut out of media ownership.
FCC chair Kevin Martin is currently pushing to allowing a media company to own both a television and a radio station in the same city. The plan is endorsed by billionaires such as Rupert Murdoch, but opposed by the majority of the American public. One of the most troubling consequences of lifting the ban is that it would likely crowd out local and minority voices in the media. A new report by Free Press highlights the disparity:
– “Women comprise 51 percent of the entire U.S. population, but own a total of only 80 stations, or 5.87 percent of all full power commercial television stations.”
– “Minorities comprise 34 percent of the entire U.S. population, but own a total of 43 stations, or 3.15 percent of all full-power commercial television stations.” That percentage decreased between Oct. 2006 and Oct. 2007.
– “Blacks or African Americans comprise 13 percent of the entire U.S. population but only own a total of 8 stations, or 0.6 percent of all stations. … From October 2006 to October 2007 the number of African American-owned full power commercial TV stations decreased by nearly 60 percent.”
– “Hispanics or Latinos comprise 15 percent of the entire U.S. population, but only own a total of 17 stations, or 1.25 percent of all stations.”
American Progress Senior Fellow Mark Lloyd has more.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
11 Responses to “Minorities and females shut out of media ownership.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I support Fairness Doctrine.
November 27th, 2007 at 8:34 pmelitist swine!
November 27th, 2007 at 8:36 pm"I support Fairness Doctrine."
It's the only thing that can level the playing field, now that media consolidation rules.
November 27th, 2007 at 8:38 pmI support the Fairness Doctrine too, just as soon as someone can explain how the definition of a pundit will be decided....and who gets to do the deciding?
If a guy like Hannity is to be balanced by a guy like Olberman, do we also have to allow a voice for every other possible political opinion?
November 27th, 2007 at 8:43 pmIt's over folks. This is going to go through. Kevin Martin is going to be a millionaire by the time he hits 40. You can go complain on your blog and be sure to be upgraded to HDTV by Feb 09.
Oh yeah and don't forget to pay your cable bill.
That Republic that Jefferson was hoping we would keep, it's gone.
November 27th, 2007 at 9:02 pmI support the Fairness Doctrine too, just as soon as someone can explain how the definition of a pundit will be decided….and who gets to do the deciding?
If a guy like Hannity is to be balanced by a guy like Olberman, do we also have to allow a voice for every other possible political opinion?
Comment by Cake Incorporated — November 27, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
This is usually what ombudsman are responsible for. And they used to do a great job until you wingnuts did away with them.
November 27th, 2007 at 9:18 pmDumb Question: If the media and its owners are so all-fired liberal, why is the move to allow broader ownership not only supported, but pushed by the neocon politicians and the "liberal" millionaires like Rupert Murdoch ?
November 27th, 2007 at 9:36 pm*
Devil In The Details: Kevin Martin’s Big Plans
HuffPo:
Earlier this month the FCC convened the final of six public hearings to air out concerns about this proposed rule change. I have watched, listened to or attended all of these hearings and one thing is clear. The public is single-mindedly opposed to more media consolidation.
Martin himself admitted recently that he remembers “only one†public witness calling for relaxation of media ownership rules at these hearings.
This public opposition is not just evident in the passion of the thousands of people who came to the FCC hearings in Seattle, Los Angeles, Nashville, Tampa, Harrisburg and Chicago. It’s a fact reflected in the public record.
The last time the FCC tried to change the rules in 2003, millions of people contacted Congress and the FCC to oppose the changes, which were ultimately thrown out by the courts. My organization, Free Press, checked the filings and found that more than 99 percent of the public comments received by the FCC opposed changing the rules.
None of this has halted Martin’s headlong rush to let loose a new wave of consolidation by the end of the year.
FreePress has this .pdf report as well: 10 Facts Kevin Martin Doesn’t Want You to Know About His New Media Ownership Rules
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/27/devil-in-the-details-kevin-martins-big-plans/
.
November 27th, 2007 at 10:02 pmThis is the under-the-radar issue that is so impotant. It increases corporate ownership of the news, making blogs even more important and increasing the need for net neutraility. Good post.
November 27th, 2007 at 10:15 pmShort of picking the winning Power Ball numbers, Horatio Alger would never have a chance in today's United States of America (which, for accuracy's sake, should be renamed the United Corporations of America).
November 28th, 2007 at 2:30 amSo much for the liberal media bias.
November 28th, 2007 at 10:03 am