Click image to see entire line

Net Neutrality -- Part I

One of the more intelligent comments from a politician was this jewel from Liberal Democrat (UK) Member of Parliament and that party’s Shadow Culture, Media and Sport Secretary, Don Foster. MP Foster made this short and pith observation:

 “The Tories’ blind faith in the markets misses the point on media. It isn’t good enough to simply deregulate and hope the market will make everything better.
 
“If independent local and regional news providers are to survive they will require active support from Government.”

Tories can’t be trusted on media policy says Foster
Thu, 21 Jan 2010
http://www.libdems.org.uk/press_releases_detail.aspx?
title=Tories_can%E2%80%99t_be_trusted_on_media_policy_
says_Foster_&pPK=4c785dee-38cd-4786-b24d-c95f1394e447

Our British colleague makes a good point. If our common mission is to preserve and advance human culture and nurture, not, destroy mother earth we will need a media that is conducive for the purpose. Indeed the interplay between media and culture is fundamental to all human progress.  And we will have to radically reengineer our relationship to the market is all theories pedaled by so many popularly discredited, but still powerful, interest groups.

Instead of business as usual we need to start as of yesterday to business that makes senses for all of us, not for an elite and its collective entourage.

If we truly want to contribute to the vitality of human culture, we should do so by demonstrating the most positive aspects of our collective human character, the ethical values and mores with which we face every adversity as a specie and with which we will prevent the monopolist elite from destroying our common ecosphere and our efforts to create viable intra and inter-cultural exchange globally.  This is the only way to respond to the crises of the economy and ecology as these are global problems and require global solutions.

So, yes the Honorable MP is absolutely correct we cannot leave our common fate to the whims and schemes of those who are the market force, not merely behind the market.

We can only do this by providing ourselves with proper analysis and commentary on our common situation here on mother earth.  Concrete facts, fluid analyses and persuasive language are what we need now.

We have to educate ourselves constantly about the threats to human and civil liberties and rights that are rapidly developing in western society. Because this is a big part of the problems we face generally, the eroding of democratic rights.

The Culture and Media site which has a decidedly different slant on many issues than this website. Nevertheless, there are areas in which we converge.  Take for example their Senior Writer Kristen Fyfe, wrote a very useful article on the damages caused by the avaricious, bloated American media to our children.

Here are the kernels of her very useful insights:

“Children today spend more time with media than they do on schoolwork or with their parents and friends. And the messages they receive are often far from innocuous.

• 80 percent of entertainment programming targeting teens contains
  sexual themes, Dr. Nancy Snyderman reported on the November 3,
  2008 broadcast of NBC’s Today.
• In 2000, 31 percent of children, aged 10-17, reported being exposed to
  pornography on the Internet (National Public Radio)
• Sex is a dominant theme in Top 20 music lyrics, according to a report
  by the Culture and Media Institute.
• Sex, violence and profanity have risen dramatically on prime time
  broadcast television, according to recent reports by The Parents
  Television Council.
• Playing video games can heighten aggression, according to the
  American Psychological Association.”

Media Coverage Skews Toward Sex

“What children consume and how much time they spend in front of screens or on earphones make a difference. So when new studies show how children are negatively impacted by entertainment media, you’d expect the news media to be all over the story. But it seems that sex sells even in research. The two Pediatrics studies were released concurrently, but only the sex study got national media attention.

“CBS, NBC, CNN and NPR all carried stories on the study linking teen pregnancy to watching TV shows with sexual themes. The study was also featured in TIME, wire services provided by the Associated Press and United Press International as well as major daily newspapers including USA Today, The Washington Post and The Boston Globe.

“By contrast, no broadcast network mentioned the video game violence study and it was minimally covered by the national print media, notable exceptions being The Washington Post and The Los Angeles Times. Several regional papers covered both studies.

“While teen pregnancy and sex on TV are titillating topics, aggression and hostility are also culturally important. News programs are filled with crime stories and tales of bullying in schools, so why not dive a little deeper and report on studies that tie aggression to the media?

Sex and Aggression: The Media Impact on Children

While we do not share the author or her agency’s general world view, as they are self-described social conservatives, we do agree with their advocacy that the mass media, just like the Tories in the UK cannot be allowed to leave it all to the market forces.

Particularly when the big magnates behind these absolutely fictional market forces, are the deciders, to use a “W” word. They are the element that makes the policy decisions, which in turn direct the society’s resources in directions that only benefit the big magnates behind the political scene, at the massive cost of the overwhelming majority.

We need to change the way things are done, we have to find ways to create popular controlling capabilities and structures to guide the overall political decision making process.

Whether our goal is simply to reduce and quickly eradicate the levels of violence in our children’s lives or to rein in the threatening excesses of our already overly concentrated society, we have to be visionary enough to see that both of these causes have the same antagonistic.

The devil in the matter are all those who put filthy lucre ahead of all else…including our natural environment and the sanctity of ethical human civilization

Thus we should support formations such as those involved in the struggle against violence in the media as the media’s adverse impact on our children is well established.

Perhaps, while we are demonstrating our mutual opposition to the misuse of mass media in instances such as those the author points out, we might also help convince others of the benefits of a broader agenda of cooperation, such as joining the anti-concentration alliance formed in opposition to the NBC, Universal and Comcast deal to form a giant, no, mega, mass media conglomerate. Certainly more power and resources in the hands of the market-first elements cannot be good for the children either.

Maybe some social conservatives can see that the powers of the monopoly elements is not conducive to the kind of ethical society most people want, even if they have never thought of it that way.  Maybe, maybe not. But it is probably worth a try, as it is our common future and world that is at stake.

Net Neutrality -- Part II

Monopoly concentration of power in finance, manufacture, general commerce as a rule threatens the well being of our families, our children and our common cultural values.

As Adam Smith observed market big players, no matter what the market, will exploit every opportunity to collude with each other to increase profits if given the chance.

"Inside the Military-Industrial-Media Complex", a December 27, 2009 t r u t h o u t article reveals the insidious consequences of the military and industrial elite have merged with big monopoly media to create the conditions for steadily escalating military conflits around the world. If you have not seen it load it here: www.truthout.org/topstories/122709vh4

You may alsorecall the rancor and tension over the House of Representatives' timid Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009 (HR 4173) and perhaps you are following the progress of the Supreme Court case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, in both instances, and a whole slew other, the powerful monopoly interest make it clear that they are not satisfied with the enormous power they have in society and are determined to siphon even more control from the rest of us.

The process of accumulating immense power in the hands of tiny elite of wealthy corporate entities and ultra-wealthy private individuals is everywhere. The concentration and undue influence of banks, commercial and investment, insurance companies, real estate giants and the like continue to play havoc with the global economy

Big money, as pointed out by many including Sen. Durbin of Illinois (who complained that the big banks owned the legislative and general political processes in Washington) is firmly in the driver seat and instead of seeing the dangerous folly of their actions are growing ever more reckless as we see by the mass media situation the elites have imposed on all of us..

The Battle over Net Neutrality

There are forces which do not wish to see the internet and the WWW to remain the relatively democratic and open vehicle for intra- and inter-cultural communication it has been. Many forces have begun fighting back under the banner of Net Neutrality.

Here is how the Consumer Union explains the concept:

"Network neutrality is a fancy way of saying the networks that deliver the Internet should treat all content, sites, and applications equally and shouldn't discriminate against certain traffic based on its source, destination or message. The basic idea is the Internet should be open so consumers have unrestricted access to lawful Web sites and online businesses can compete freely.

"Some Internet service providers want to give preferential treatment to certain network traffic -for example, their own content or that of those willing to pay extra fees. Without network neutrality Internet service providers could block or slow down traffic to any Web sites or services they choose. Services, such as making free or cheap phone calls over the Internet, or streaming video, could be blocked. So could the sharing of lawful media content or access to certain political content. "

"What is at stake for consumers?"
"Allowing Internet service providers to pick and choose which Web sites and features they favor would hurt the free and aggressive competition that is vital to a healthy consumer marketplace. No consumer should be punished with a slower download speeds or face steep price tags to view, access or share lawful content based on the whims of service providers. Web sites and online businesses should succeed or fail based on their ability to provide competitive prices and quality services. Not because they can't afford to pay a special fee or don't have the market power to cut a deal with a service provider. "
Open Access and Content: What is Network Neutrality?
http://www.hearusnow.org/internet/5/

This battle for the digital soul of the world is one that we can win, if we unite. Organizations such as Consumer Union, NOW and others have already shown us the way forward by uniting with others against the Universal, NBC and Comcast trust busting deal.

Mass media really does shapes us

In an article entitled, "Does the Media Impact the Culture? How about 'The Brokeback Effect?'" by Cynthia H. Cho, we find the following observations:

"The LA Times calls it "The Brokeback Effect" Brokeback Mountain-the movie about two homosexual cowboys-is creating a ripple through our culture. An associate professor at the University of Iowa in Iowa City plans to use the movie for an introductory course on sexuality. Other colleges are using the film for academic fodder

"But it's not just academia. There are Brokeback T-shirts, a set of videos, and a collection of songs. There are Brokeback coffee mugs, Brokeback mousepads, and Brokeback stickers.

"And fashion designer Valentino gave his own salute to Brokeback. In a recent menswear show in Milan, he had two men dressed in cowboy garb walking down the runway-holding hands

"Lines from the movie are now becoming catch phrases-such as "I wish I could quit you." There are Brokeback jokes. Brokeback sweatshirts. Brokeback gifts

"And The Brokeback Effect doesn't stop there. Brian Helander, president of the Gay Rodeo Association, says ever since the movie came out, he's seeing more people "come out" to gay rodeo events."

Cynthia H. Cho,
LA Times , March 1, 2006
www.philcooke.com/brokeback

The same can be said about the power of such media products as the Twilight films, Avatar and several others; not to mention TV and video games, music vides... some have been fighting back

Media and children

Most of Culture View users are aware of the studies that show the devastating effect on young girls caused by the images of females diffused by the mass media.
And of course the long list of studies showing the detrimental effect of the mass media on children in areas such as violence, ability to focus, problem solving and so forth

Beyond the problems that media content causes, the monopolization of media will drastically reduce the number and diversity of media content based on the interest of the particular monopoly and the system of concentration generally.

In May 23, 2003 Democracy Now ran the article, "Children's Programming is at Risk from a Concentration of Ownership in the Media"

" As the FCC is poised to unleash the largest wave of media consolidation, a new study has found that concentration of media ownership leads to a dramatic decrease in children's programming. "

"… a new study reveals how a rise in media consolidation has led to a dramatic decrease in children's TV programming.

"The new study is released by a children research and action organization called Children Now. It concludes that there is a strong link between a reduction in children's programming and concentration of ownership.

"The wave of further media consolidation expected after a relaxing of media ownership rules does not bode well for children's programming. The FCC solicited 12 studies to assess the impact of the rules changes on the media, but none of them examined children's programming.

Patti Miller, director of the Children and the Media Program for Children
Now.

http://www.democracynow.org/2003/5/23/childrens_programming_is_at_risk_from

Guess what kinds of shows are doomed to banishment from mass media, why of course the content that does not suit the monopoly elements plans and desires for profit.

Media and the family

The same circumstances can be seen in the general family structure, which is one reason that the Net Neutrality issue is not a partisan issue, because many conservative elements disapprove of the decadent affect the mass media imposes on society, that is why groups such as the Concerned Women for America, a very influential coalition of conservative women, dedicated to Biblical and family values, have join with the likes of feminist women, principled media interests, consumer groups, communication workers activist organizations and others in opposition to continued concentration of the media in these elitist hands.

Here is a useful; summation of the major problems with media dominance over the development of family culture and structures:

"… paper discusses mass media images of family life, the impact of media on families and evidence concerning sexually explicit programming. Section One identifies characteristics of family images (including sex-related differences and typical themes) found in women's magazines, comic strips, films, children's books and television. Television researchers have found that the themes of home and family and close personal relationships between the sexes are those which appear most frequently in network prime-time and weekend-daytime dramatic programming. Section Two considers the impact media have on families. First, the research on the uses and functions of television within the family is summarized. Next, research on the context of family viewing is reviewed and the consequences of the family viewing environment on television's effects are inspected. Finally, the kinds of family life expectations television may cultivate are discussed. It is argued that television seems to cultivate attitudes about when to form a family and how many children to have.
Section Three reviews research on how television depicts sexual activity. It is concluded that television is becoming more sexy but not less sexist. (Author/RH)
. Media and the Family: Images and Impact. Gerbner, George; And Others
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?
_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED198919&ERICExtSearch_
SearchType_0=no&accno=ED198919

Women and the mass media

This essay was adapted for Reclaim the Media and NOW's NW Organizing Project from an essay in BitchFest: Ten Years of Cultural Criticism from the Pages of Bitch Magazine.

We include it in its entirety because the organized power of women is a fundamental element in the drive to rescue human civilization and culture from those who only seek gain at any cost.

"If we truly care about women's rights and social justice, we must simply roll up our sleeves and tackle corporate media's failings, while strengthening independent media.

"Ask a feminist to identify what the most important issues are facing women, and she might mention reproductive freedom, violence against women and children, the disproportionate burdens women bear in light of the growing gap between rich and poor in America or the many ways in which war specifically impacts women. Chances are she wouldn't immediately point to the media. But she should.

"Without accurate, non-biased, diverse news coverage and challenging, creative cultural expression it is virtually impossible to significantly impact public opinion of women's and human rights issues or to create lasting social change. Indeed, corporate media are key to why our fast-moving culture is so slow to change, stereotypes are so stubborn and the power structure is so entrenched. Pop culture images help us determine what to buy, what to wear, whom to date, how we feel about our bodies, how we see ourselves and how we relate to racial, sexual, socio-economic and religious "others."

"Journalism directly links and affects every individual issue on the socio-political continuum in a national debate over the pressing matters of the day, from rape to racism, hate crimes to war crimes, corporate welfare to workplace gender discrimination. By determining who has a voice in this debate and who is silenced, which issues are discussed and how they're framed, media have the power to maintain the status quo or challenge the dominant order.

"And how have media used this power where women are concerned? With a vengeance.

"Let's start with female politicians. Ever since the midterm Democratic upset, media have been exclaiming over Democratic Representative Nancy Pelosi's new position as the first female Speaker of the House, a position which puts her only two steps away from the presidency -- but few outlets have noted that in 2006, we still lag behind many other developed countries in electing women to the highest political offices.

"Ever wonder why American women are still stuck with only token representation in the House, the Senate and the Supreme Court, or why the closest a woman has come to the Oval Office was Geena Davis on a short-lived ABC drama? In part, it's because women audacious enough to seek political office are routinely dogged by double-standard-laced news coverage that focuses on their looks, fashion sense, familial relationships and other feminizing details that have nothing to do with their ability to lead -- as noted in a previous TomPaine.com commentary, "Commander In Chic."

"From headlines speculating about whether or not New York Senator Hillary Clinton "had millions of dollars of work done" to make her look less "hideous" to the New York Times likening Pelosi to a nagging grandmother, this sort of coverage implies that women should be taken less seriously and are less electable than their male counterparts. (Of course, their male counterparts aren't helping to dispel such stereotypes, as when Dubya said, in his first post-election press conference, that his "first act of bipartisan outreach" he "shared with [Pelosi] the names of some Republican interior decorators who can help her pick out the new drapes in her new office.")

"Even the most powerful women in America suffer this media indignity: When Condoleezza Rice wore black leather boots last year, the Washington Post described the Secretary of State as a "dominatrix"; on the day she was chosen as America's first African-American female national security adviser, a front page New York Times story reported that "her dress size is between a 6 and an 8," and she has "a girlish laugh" and "can be utterly captivating -- without ever appearing confessional or vulnerable."

"Media content matters, and not just to women at the highest echelons of power. In fact, the more vulnerable women are, the more hostile media coverage becomes. Young, low-income mothers of color have been derided for decades by a bigoted and misogynistic press as "promiscuous," "lazy moochers" and "brood mares" supposedly popping out babies for welfare checks. A Newsweek editor once even insisted that "every threat to the fabric of this country from poverty to crime to homelessness is connected to out-of-wedlock teen pregnancy." The end result of this scapegoating? Punitive welfare reform that decimated the social safety net for poor women and children.

"As feminists, we need to prioritize media among our top political concerns. Is sexual assault your most urgent issue? Media still imply that women "ask for it," as when a Wall Street Journal column blamed rape and murder on "moronic" women who don't have enough "common sense" to keep themselves safe. Think anti-abortion violence is a threat to women's safety and to our reproductive freedom? An American anti-abortion fanatic attempted to blow up a women's health clinic in Iowa on September 11, 2006, yet only one newspaper in the entire Nexis news database deigned to report this terrorist attack. Against the war? When three pretty, blond country singers are called "Dixie Sluts" by major magazines and TV news reports, banned from airplay by ClearChannel, Cox and Cumulus Radio and censored with radio-funded CD-stomping spectacles simply for expressing anti-war sentiment, it's a safe bet that corporate media won't be giving much press to Iraqi women who complain that their safety and autonomy are now curtailed by new Sharia laws imposed by the U.S.-approved Iraqi Constitution.

"Sexist, racist media content is fruit from a poisoned tree. The demonization of women and the near invisibility of progressive feminist perspectives in American media are the result of institutional factors, including the financial and political agendas of mega-merged media monopolies; the pandering of news networks and entertainment studios to advertisers' profit motives without regard for the public's interest; the limited access of women, people of color, low income people, LGBTQ people, Native people, immigrants and other marginalized constituencies to the means of media production, distribution and technology; decades of right-wing investment in media messaging, production and advocacy; and, funding restrictions of independent media alternatives.

"Also at play is the systemic underrepresentation of women and people of color in content (on op-ed pages, network newscasts, cable debate shows, as hard news reporters) and in the industry (as top-level executives, board members and owners in news and entertainment companies), as dozens of depressing studies document.

"Luckily, a vibrant movement for change is gaining steam at the grassroots level, and there are plenty of ways to begin to fight for a feminist vision of media justice and reform . Here are just a few places to start:

"Pressure public officials to defend the public interest in media policy: The next Congress will likely have the opportunity to weigh in on media and communications policy issues which will reshape the ways we can make use of our first amendment freedoms for decades to come. These issues include Internet freedom, media ownership consolidation, privacy rights, copyright reform and more. Progressive media policy reform by itself won't make the media more just but it's a necessary step. Look into your local and national representatives' positions on media and telecommunications issues -- or ask them for their stance if their views aren't public knowledge -- and urge them to support media policy that prioritizes the public's interest rather than corporate profit.

"Debunk media bias, amplify public interest voices and demand accountability from corporate media: Become an engaged, critical media consumer. Women In Media & News debunks media sexism and inaccuracy through multimedia presentations on college campuses, an online alert list and a women's media monitoring group blog and conducts media skills-building workshops to give women's and progressive groups the tools they need to propel their messages onto the public stage. Groups like Youth Media Council, Third World Majority and GRIID conduct media trainings, release reports and provide organizing tools to women, people of color, youth, immigrants and other underserved populations. FAIR's Extra! magazine and CounterSpin! radio show are invaluable resources.Center for Media & Democracy and Commercial Alert can help you fight corporate and governmental propaganda in the form of video news releases (VNRs) that masquerade as independent news. Send letters to the editor, conduct your own studies and organize public protests.

"Defend the public interest in telecommunications policy: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has all but abdicated its responsibility to regulate the U.S. media industry in the public interest. Urge Congress to fight against media concentration and support legislation for diverse, local, independent and uncensored media alongside Reclaim the Media, the National Organization for Women, the Center for International Media Action, Free Press and other national and grassroots campaigns. Learn more and develop action plans at the National Conference on Media Reform

"Demand open access to existing and emerging media technologies: It is crucial that existing and emerging media communications technologies remain broadly accessible as a public good. Join the fight for Network Neutrality at SaveTheInternet.com. Stand up to internet censorship and control, protect bloggers' rights, advocate privacy protections and work to close the digital divide between wealthy, white Americans and low-income people and people of color with help from the tech-savvy Electronic Frontier Foundation, the D.C.-based Center for Digital Democracy or the grassroots United Church of Christ's Media Empowerment Project.

"Claim the cable systems and radio airwaves for your community: Challenge cable license renewals and equitable service to low-income communities with models from Reclaim the Media, and help press for better pricing and programming through the Grassroots Cable Coalition. Organizations such as Prometheus Radio, WINGS (Women's International News Gathering Service), Media Access Project, National Lawyers Guild and Community Media Services can help you set up low power microradio stations, advocate fairer radio spectrum regulations that support diversity and access and demand accountability from ClearChannel and other powerful radio conglomerates.

"Protect the future of feminist and independent media: Subscribe, donate to and give Bitch: Feminist Response to Pop Culture, Ms., World Pulse, Women's Review of Books, New Moon and Teen Voices as gifts to your friends. Support nonprofit advocacy groups like WIMN, the WAM (Women, Action & Media) project, the Women's Media Center and others working to propel women's voices onto the media mainstage. Independent news sources such as ColorLines, In These Times, The Nation, Stay Free, Clamor, Democracy Now!, Uprising Radio, WomensEnews.org and AlterNet.org are crucial to our ability to inform ourselves, educate others and effectively work for social justice. Remember, if you don't like the media, be the media!

"More tips on how you can reclaim, reframe and reform the media are available at http://www.wimnonline.org/action/ and at www.reclaimthemedia.org.

"The fight for media and gender justice needs you. The right has prioritized media messaging, production, policy and ownership since the 1970s, which is in large part why the American political and media landscapes have become as problematic as they are today. If we truly care about women's rights and social justice, we cannot afford to be overwhelmed by the scope of the problems in our media system -- we must simply roll up our sleeves and begin to tackle them."
Why Fixing the Media System Should Be on the Feminist Agenda
By Jennifer L. Pozner, Women in Media & News. Posted January 11, 2007.

http://www.alternet.org/media/46546?page=entire

The Net Neutrality Coalition to the rescue

A solution or at least a start…as it is not exactly every thing we need. But until something better comes along this is a good pony to ride.

Several groups have sent a letter to the President USA and Congress addressing the issue of Net Neutrality and the problem of monopoly concentration. Here is the text in full:

Dear President Obama and Members of Congress:

We represent a broad group of industry, labor and public interest organizations that are gravely concerned about Comcast's proposed acquisition of NBC-Universal. We believe that a merger of this size and scope will have a devastating effect on the media marketplace. It will result in less competition, higher consumer costs and fewer content choices. It also will give one company unprecedented control over innovative new media that offer news, information, entertainment and cultural programming through emerging technologies.

A combined Comcast/NBCU would control a major television network and film studio, the nation's largest cable company and its largest residential broadband provider. The merged giant would have strong incentives to discriminate against other multi-channel video providers in granting access to its wealth of programming, including all of its broadcast stations and "must-have" national and regional networks that air live or same-day sporting events, as well as the market power to enforce anticompetitive "bundling."

The proposed deal could make it even harder for diverse and independent voices to find an audience, as Comcast would have the incentive to prioritize NBC channels and programs over others. Control of NBCU programming also would give Comcast the opportunity to prioritize its own online video products over those of its competitors - or sharply reduce online video distribution altogether - pushing independent producers out of the picture.

Comcast has proposed to voluntarily agree to a handful of commitments in an attempt to avoid the imposition of more effective, and competitively essential, conditions on this merger. While these "commitments" purport to address concerns about localism and program diversity, and would extend the current (and arguably ineffectual) program access rules to broadcast and HD programming, they are mere window dressing. Moreover, they do not mitigate the competitive danger of the vastly increased vertical integration that would result from a Comcast/NBCU marriage, and they do not address the competitive issues raised by the merged company's control over online video distribution - an increasingly important platform for television distribution. To prevent a disastrous impact on competition and consumer choice, any approval of the merger must include meaningful conditions that extend well beyond those previously
imposed on less significant mergers.

The proposed deal raises the most basic antitrust and public policy issues for an administration that has declared both the importance of media diversity and an intention to be more vigilant against anticompetitive conduct and abuses of market power. We ask that you take a hard look at this merger and take the necessary measures to prevent harm to both consumers and competition.

Signed,

American Cable Association
Center for Media Justice
Common Cause
Communications Workers of America
Concerned Women for America
Consumer Federation of America
Consumers Union
Free Press
Kids First Coalition
Media Action Grassroots Network
Media Access Project
Media and Democracy Coalition
Morality in Media
National Association of Independent Networks
National Consumer League
National Organization for Women
National Telecommunications Cooperative Association
Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies
Parents Television Council
Public Knowledge
Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association
Sports Fans Coalition
U.S. PIRG
Writers Guild of America East
Writers Guild of America West
http://www.freepress.net/files/Comcast_NBC_Letter.pdf

Typical of the opinion of the alliance is the position of American Cable Association (ACA):

ACA, Diverse Partners Urge Regulators To Impose Conditions On Comcast-NBC Universal Deal

Small Cable Operators Fear Media Giant Will Use Clout To Raise Prices, Limit Consumer Choice
PITTSBURGH, January 7, 2010 -

The American Cable Association, joining a broad group of industry, labor and public interest organizations, called for major conditions on the Comcast-NBC Universal transaction to ensure that the media giant can't inflict anticompetitive harms on small cable operators or injure consumers by imposing business models that both drive up prices and require the purchase of unwanted content available on cable and the Internet.

ACA and 24 other signatories expressed their concerns about the Comcast-NBCU transaction in a letter ... sent today to President Barack Obama and members of Congress.

In addition to ACA, the group includes: the Satellite Broadcasting & Communications Association (representing DIRECTV and DISH Network), the National Telecommunications Cooperative Association and the Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies (representing small telephone companies), Free Press, Consumers Union, and Common Cause (representing consumer interests) and others. The group reflects a cross section of interests committed to promoting the public interest and consumer welfare through thoughtful government oversight of market-dominant media companies.
In the letter, ACA and the others said: "The merged giant would have strong incentives to discriminate against other multi channel video providers in granting access to its wealth of programming, including all of its broadcast stations and "must-have" national and regional networks that air live or same-day sporting events, as well as the market power to enforce anticompetitive 'bundling.'"

ACA expects to play an active role in the federal government's review of the Comcast-NBCU transaction, the most significant media deal to come under close government scrutiny in at least a decade.

"By taking control of NBCU, Comcast would become the country's most powerful online and traditional programming company with every incentive to raise prices, restrict choice and force operators to sell consumers content that they don't want in order to continue viewing programs they sincerely desire. In their ads, Comcast and NBCU ask people to 'Dream Big' but small cable operators know this deal will be a nightmare for millions of their customers without appropriate conditions," ACA President and CEO Matthew M. Polka said.

Comcast and NBCU announced their joint venture in early December, hoping to create the first major combination of a large cable provider and a national broadcast network in U.S. history. The $30 billion deal requires approval of the Federal Communications Commission and U.S. Department of Justice in a review that could take up to a year. The Senate Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights Subcommittee recently announced plans to hold a hearing in late January or early February.

If the deal is approved, Comcast-NBCU would control major information arteries critical to keeping Americans entertained as well as informed about the nation and the world. Wielding unprecedented economic power, Comcast-NBC would operate two broadcast TV networks, 26 TV stations, 10 regional sports networks, and marquee cable networks in addition to being the country's largest cable and residential broadband provider by subscriber.

"Driven by the need to increase cash flow and net income, Comcast-NBCU would have the incentive and ability to use its powerful array of media assets to compel competitors to pay more for programming than they should, especially in the area of retransmission consent for NBC broadcast stations and for other national and regional networks that feature live or same-day sporting events considered 'must have' content by consumers," Polka said.

Polka added that in reviewing the transaction, FCC and Justice Department officials need to look beyond Comcast-NBCU's vague promises of good behavior and focus instead on the company's undeniable ability and financial incentive to distort competition and easy inclination to migrate to the Internet a flawed cable programming market that routinely results in higher monthly cable bills and the inability of operators to offer consumers the programming packages they want to view.

http://www.americancable.org/node/1751

****

And here are two American Cable Association members' statements that put the plight of these small service providers dilemma in context:

Trust Communications (Jackson, MS)
"Year after year, the broadcasters and programmers put pressure on our company to add their affiliated networks to my basic programming package resulting in a more bloated, costly tier with channels that my customers neither want nor can afford. Most of our Communication's customers in rural communities are satisfied receiving only 65 channels as basic, especially those in low income areas - not everyone wants to pay for 125 channels."
Steven Inzinna, President
http://www.americancable.org/node/230

CableCo dba TVision (Colorado Springs, CO)

With the upcoming round of retransmission consent negotiations, we know that we'll be forced to pay fees to broadcasters for the first time, and unfortunately our customers will have to foot the bill. As a small cable operator, programming is our already largest expense by far, and we simply cannot absorb any more increases in our carriage fees
~David Shipley, Business Manager
http://www.americancable.org/node/716

Clearly, the media fight is one that is in the interest of most of the us population to take up,

it is a cause that cuts across all the distinctions demographically and otherwise that often keeps the US public divided and impotent in such critical matters. Since mass media is so ubiquitous and pervasive, progress in this area will have a very positive impact on the rest of the problems of our overly concentrated society.