Members of Congress Call on FCC to Rectify Mismanagement of Media Ownership Studies

Press Release

In an effort to ensure transparency and accountability in the continuing debate over the future of media ownership in America, Representatives Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Bart Stupak (D-MI), Louise Slaughter (D-NY) and Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) today wrote to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Kevin Martin to request his immediate attention to a number of controversies surrounding the FCC's activities on ten scientific studies released by the agency in late July.

"While we wholeheartedly support the Federal Communications Commission's effort to generate scientific research that will help inform future action on media ownership in America, we are very disappointed that this effort has been so woefully lacking in transparency," the House members wrote. "We hope that you will take immediate steps in order to address these very serious problems."

"It's clear from the manner in which the FCC handled these studies that the conclusions were pre-determined: this administration is ideologically motivated to encourage the consolidation of the American media into the hands of a few, so the FCC purchased the research that would support its agenda -- even if in doing so they flouted their own rules," said Rep. Hinchey, chairman of the Future of American Media Caucus.

Said Rep. Stupak, "The FCC has a bad reputation for strategic inaction and delay tactics on matters relating to media ownership, especially when it comes to small and minority-owned businesses. It appears the Commission's latest ownership research studies were, once again, nothing more than a result-driven scheme to stubbornly support deregulation. As Chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee's Oversight & Investigations Subcommittee, I will continue to press the FCC to ensure that ownership proceedings and resulting regulations are transparent and fair."

"I am deeply concerned with the way the FCC handled these studies," said Rep. Slaughter. "The consolidation of our media is detrimental to diversity and objectivity in the press, and it is the American people who suffer because of it. These studies present a real opportunity to examine media consolidation in America and determine whether media ownership in this country is varied, objective, and all embracing. This analysis is necessary to ensure the most accurate information is disseminated to our fellow citizens. Yet here we have the FCC waiving rules that were designed to ensure the delivery of unbiased, transparent information. We deserve answers."

"We rely on the media for information that influences so many of our decisions, so it is absolutely essential that the wide spectrum of opinions and voices in America is well represented," said Rep. Price. "The FCC is right to try and gain a firm, scientific understanding of media ownership in America. Unfortunately, the validity of these studies will continue to be in question until the FCC fixes the flaws as outlined in our letter and releases a full and accurate picture of the media terrain."

"It is absolutely critical that we have a broad, public debate about media consolidation and the ownership rules needed to arrest that consolidation," said Rep. Baldwin. "Media consolidation has huge repercussions for American consumers, as it reduces the diversity of media outlets, and more importantly, content. The FCC's prompt response to our concerns and requests is an important first step to having that debate and to ensuring a diverse media and an informed public."

The ten studies, commissioned by the FCC in late 2006, analyzed the following aspects of media ownership: How People Get News and Information; Ownership Structure and Robustness of Media; The Effect of Ownership Structure and Robustness on the Quantity and Quality of TV Programming; News Operations; Station Ownership and Programming in Radio; News Coverage of Cross-Owned Newspapers and Television Stations; Minority Ownership; Vertical Integration; and Radio Industry Review: Trends in Ownership, Format, and Finance.

Among the problems highlighted by the letter are the following:

• One of the reports was written by a scientist who, shortly after its completion, was appointed Chief Economist at the FCC, a potential conflict of interest;
• There exists a lack of transparency in the recruitment process used for study authors and peer reviewers;
• The FCC appears to have ignored a number of requirements set forth by the Office of Management and Budget on peer review of scientific works, including a prohibition against the release of studies before peer reviews were complete, an insufficient scientific diversity in the review, and a general failure to complete the peer review process; and
• The agency offered the public only a very brief opportunity for comment on these studies, even though the FCC has not yet completed its own work on peer reviews. This window is currently set to close at the beginning of October.

"Finally," the authors wrote, "in September 2006, we learned of the existence of two FCC draft reports on media ownership that, for unknown reasons, had never been disclosed to Congress or the American people before. A full year later, we are very troubled that the FCC Inspector General, Kent Nilsson, has failed to complete the investigation you requested into the mystery of why these reports had been kept from the public eye. It is impossible for us to understand how it is appropriate for the FCC to proceed with its current reports on media ownership without resolving lingering controversies over these hidden reports first."

In addition to an extension of the public comment period, the House members called on the FCC to take seven additional actions to improve the transparency and integrity of the media ownership studies. A copy of the letter follows.