Recent events in the broadcast policy-making system of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) have raised the question: can public voices effectively participate in the broadcast policy-making process? This paper examines the factors working against public involvement, as well as those that have made recent intervention possible, especially the growth of the internet and its ability to facilitate more public activity. The authors conducted private in-depth interviews with FCC Commissioner Michael Copps and former FCC Commissioner Nicholas Johnson to discuss their exceptional efforts to better involve the public in the policy-making process during their service with the agency. Our analysis shows that the factors facilitating greater public involvement have developed to the point where, at least sometimes, the public and civil society organizations can either block, or at least modify, the demands of entrenched corporate interests.
Ahrens, F.2003a. Democrats Decry `Compromise' on FCC Rule. Washington Post, November 26, E1.
2.
_______. 2003b. FCC Panel to Study Local Media: Powell Pledges to Facilitate More Low-Power Stations. Washington Post, August 21, E1, E4.
3.
Ahrens, F., and L. de Moraes.2004. FCC is Investigating Super Bowl Show: Halftime Performance Faces Indecency Standards Test. Washington Post, February 4, A1.
4.
Alger, D.1998. Megamedia: How Giant Corporations Dominate Mass Media, Distort Competition, and Endanger Democracy. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
5.
Aufderheide, P.1999. Communications Policy and the Public Interest: The Telecommunications Act of 1996. New York: Guilford .
6.
Beckerman, G.2003. Tripping Up Big Media. Columbia Journalism Review November/December, 15.
7.
Berkman, D.2004. Media Talk, Wisconsin Public Radio Network program , July 9. http://www.nicholasjohnson.org/writing/masmedia/wpr40709.html
8.
Blevins, J.L.2007. The Political Economy of U.S. Broadcast Ownership Regulation and Free Speech after the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Democratic Communiqué21, (2): 1-22.
9.
Blevins, J.L., & D.H. Brown.2006. Political issue or policy matter? The U.S. Federal Communications Commission's third biennial review of broadcast ownership rules. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 30(1), 21 -41.
10.
Brown, D.H.1994. The Academy's Response to the Call for a Marketplace Approach to Broadcast Regulation. Critical Studies in Mass Communication11 (3): 257-73.
11.
Calabrese, A.2004. Stealth Regulation: Moral Meltdown and Political Radicalism at the FCC. New Media & Society6 (1): 106-13.
12.
Center for Digital Democracy2002. Outcome of FCC's Media Ownership Proceeding Will Hurt National Security, Including a Weakened News Media. In Post-WorldCom, Adelphia Era, Questions Must Be Raised About FCC's Ability to Protect the Public Interest, September 12. http://www.democraticmeda.org/news/ownershipNPRM.html
13.
Cole, B., and M. Oettinger.1978. Reluctant Regulators: The FCC and the Broadcast Audience. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
14.
Cooper, M.N.2001. Statement of Dr. Mark N. Cooper, Consumer Federation of America, at the FCC roundtable on media ownership policies, Washington, DC. Retrieved October 28, 2002, from http://www.fcc.gov/ownership/roundtable_docs/cooper-stmt.pdf
15.
Cooper, M.N.2003. Media Ownership and Democracy in the Digital Information Age: Promoting Diversity with First Amendment Principles and Market Structure Analysis. Stanford, CA: Center for Internet & Society, Stanford Law School.
16.
Copps, M.J.2002. Concurring Statement of Commissioner Michael J. Copps. In the matter of 2002 Biennial Regulatory Review-Review of the Commission's broadcast ownership rules and other rules adopted persuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, MB Docket No. 02-XXX; Cross-ownership of broadcast stations and newspapers, MB Docket No. 01-235; Rules and policies concerning multiple ownership of radio broadcast stations in local markets, MB Docket No. 01-317; Definition of radio markets, MB Docket No. 00-244, September 12. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-226188A2.pdf
17.
_______. 2003a. Statement of Commissioner Michael J. Copps, Dissenting. Re: 2002 Biennial Regulatory Review-Review of the Commission's Broadcast Ownership Rules and Other
18.
Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, June 2. http://www.fcc.gov
19.
_______. 2003b. Private Interview Conducted by Duncan H. Brown and Jeffrey Layne Blevins at the Federal Communications Commission Office Building in Washington, DC, August 19.
20.
Davidson, P.2003. Singers Take On Big Radio. USA Today, January 31, 3B.
21.
Domhoff, G.W.1978. The Powers That Be: Processes of Ruling Class Domination in America. New York: Vintage.
22.
Dunbar, J.2004. Who is Watching the Watchdog? In Our Unfree Press, One Hundred Years of Media Criticism, edited by R. W. McChesney and B. Scott.New York: New Press.
23.
Federal Communications Commission.2001. Transcript of the Roundtable Discussion on Media Ownership Policies , October 29. http://www.fcc.gov/realaudio/tr102901.pdf
24.
_______. 2002a. FCC Initiates Third Biennial Review of Broadcast Ownership Rules: Cites Goal of Updating Rules to Reflect Modern Marketplace, September 12. FCC Press Release, http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachment/DOC-26188A1.doc
25.
_______. 2002b. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, September 12. FCC 02-249 . http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-249A1.pdf
26.
_______. 2003. FCC Chairman Powel Launches "Localism in Broadcasting" Initiative, August 20. FCC Press Release. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-238057A1.doc
27.
_______. 2006. Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, June 21. FCC 06-93. http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266033A1.doc
28.
Fowler, M., and D. Brenner.1982. A Marketplace Approach to Broadcast Regulation. Texas Law Review60: 207-57.
29.
Fox Television Stations, Inc .et al. v. F.C.C., 280 F.3d 1027. 2002.
30.
Gomery, D.2001. Ownership policies, diversity, and localism. Prepared statement delivered at the FCC roundtable on media ownership policies, Washington, DC. Retrieved October 28, 2002, from http://www.fcc.gov/ownership/roundtable_docs/gomery-stmt.pdf
31.
Haas, P.M.1992. Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination. International Organization46 (1): 1-35.
32.
Hickey, N.1995. Revolution in Cyberia: As the FCC, the Congress, and Megamedia Redraw the Map, Who Will Tell the People?Columbia Journalism Review, July/August, 40-47.
33.
_______. 1997. So Big: The Telecommunications Act at Year One . Columbia Journalism Review January/February, 23-28.
34.
Horwitz, R.B.2001. Broadcast Reform Revisited: Reverend Everett C. Parker and the "Standing" Case (Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ v. Federal Communications Commission). The Communication Review2 (3): 311-48.
35.
Jensen, E.2004. Sinclair Broadcast Group Thrusts Itself Into the News: The `Nightline' Pullout Prompts a Closer Look at its Coverage and Political Contributions. Los Angeles Times, May 8, E14.
36.
Johnson, N.1970. How to Talk Back to Your Television Set. Boston, MA: Little-Brown.
37.
_______. 2004. Private Interview Conducted by Jeffrey Layne Blevins at the University of Iowa College of Law in Iowa City, IA, October 11.
38.
Kingdon, J.W.1995. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. 2nd ed. New York: Harper Collins.
39.
Klinenberg, E.2007. Fighting for Air: The Battle to Control America's Media . New York, NY: Metropolitan Books .
40.
Krasnow, E.G., L.D. Longley, and H.A. Terry.1982. The Politics of Broadcast Regulation . 3rd ed. New York: St. Martin's.
41.
Labaton, S.2003. Senators Move to Restore FCC Limits on the Media . New York Times, June 5, C1, C10.
42.
Lee, J.B.2003a. Radio Giant Defends its Size at Senate Panel Hearing . New York Times, January 31, C4.
43.
_______. 2003b. Media; On Minot, ND, A Single Corporate Voice . New York Times, March 31, C7.
_______. 2003. Powell Says `NOI' to Media Localism: But Critics Hear `No' On Rules Rewrite. Broadcasting & Cable, August 25, 1, 22.
48.
McQuail, D.1992. Media performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest . London: Sage.
49.
Media Access Project.2004. Tell the FCC What You Think About Local Media!, October 7. http://www.mediaaccess.org/programs/diversity/TELLTHEFCC.pdf
50.
Mosco, V.1982. Pushbutton Fantasies: Critical Perspectives on Videotex and Information Technology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
51.
Napoli, P.N.2001. Foundations of Communications Policy: Principles and Process in the Regulation of Electronic Media. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
52.
Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ v. F.C.C., 359 F.2d 994. 1969.
53.
Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.2003. Strong Opposition to Media Cross-Ownership Emerges: Public Wants Neutrality and Pro-American Point of View, July 13. http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=188
54.
Prometheus Radio Project vs. F.C.C., 373 F.3d 372. 2004.
55.
Scott, B.2004. The Politics and Policy of Media Ownership. The American University Law Review53: 645-77.
56.
Shales, T.2003. Senate Panel Cuts Big Media Down to Size. Washington Post, June 20, C1.
57.
Snider, J.H.2005. Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick: How Local TV Broadcasters Exert Political Power. New York: iUniverse, Inc.
58.
Steinberg, J.2003. Facing Criticism, FCC is Thinking Local. New York Times, August 21, C1, C5.
59.
Sterling, C.2005. BEA at 50: Some Possibly Radical Proposals. Feedback46 (6): 20-22.
60.
Sterling, C., and J. Kittross.2002. Stay Tuned: A Concise History of American Broadcasting. 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
61.
Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56. 1996.
62.
Turow, J.1994. Hidden Conflicts and Journalistic Norms: The Case of Self-Coverage . Journal of Communication44 (2): 29-46.
63.
Yan, M.Z., and P.M. Napoli. (2006). Market Competition, Station Ownership, and Local Public Affairs Programming on Broadcast Television. Journal of Communication56 (4): 795-812.
