You are on page 1of 6
9 * What They Say Is What You Get: The Media Wo owns the airwaves? Wo has the right 10 use the most powerful device ever ‘known to communicate with tie poop “The law says we own the airvaves; that radio and television stations ere granted temporary trustceships ver these limited siwaves; that if eve stations are nt operated “inthe public interes” the foenses willbe revoked and granted to another sroup that promises 10 do bet Reality ia itl diferent. Just as the law, in the words of Anatole France, “Torbids, in its majestic equality, the rich and pocr alize irom begging and seeping under Brig,” so the law permits anyone to have access to radio and television —as long as be oan raise the funds to operate a sation, or nd the several thousand dollars i costs to speak to the nation for ‘hinty seconds ‘The electronic medis—most significantly, television—is the ‘most powerhl tool we have over iad. Television seis are ‘owned by 9 percent af al Americans: i s or major source of news und entertainment. I tis possible to pick out a single 120 What They Sey Ie What You Get: The Meals * 121 act, other than eating and sleping, that most Americans do rove offen than any other, % is watching television. Tt ix hhow we find out about the world, about the country, about each other. And, with narrow exceation, itis accesible only to those with grt wealth and power. If damocracy requires fn open market place of ideas, then what television has be- ‘come isa company store “The increasing contrat of communications by corporate wealth is fact in print as well asin eleotronic media. Cer teinly, we con sake litle comfort ia the fact that there are 1,300 American towns and cites whete newspapers age under slngle ownership; or that print competition in the daily press txiss now in only 4 per cent of America’s communities, as ‘opposed to 60 per cent in 1910: or that Congress enacted a "Newnaper Preservation Act” in 1970 that lezaizes press monopolies, dexpite tho fact that newspaper publishers fled to eisclose openly the allegedly wackaned financial condition ‘that ostensibly necessiteted such an abrogation of the anti- trust laws. But taere s, nonetheless, a Key distinction between the press ang television. Print is unlimited, There are no licenses, no set number of outle's. The emergence of a challenge to the political and cultural mainstream is not just a potenciality; it i a feet The existence of important print woices born within the last twenty-five years—National Review, Ramparts, Pigy- boy, the Vilage Voice, New York magazine, Commentary, Roing Stone, Washington Monthty—shows that print diver- shes Radio and television, however, are Timited; there is not for everjone who wishes to speak. And the rules of the Ticensing game, as they are now Played, mean that TV is owned by @ handfel of corporate giants. They mean, too, ‘that eective, continuing access to of other corporate giants. The law says that frst amendaent protections epply-—subject to the doctrine of “simess’—t0 television, The facts say it isthe rich end the powerful in 122 #4 Populist Mandesto ‘America who got to tell Americans what they sbould be thinking. For the powerless, end for the ordinary American, access fo the media comes only with dramatic, even violent upheaval, The day-to-day concems of most Americans are ectively shut out of their own ving rooms. ‘Ask again, who owns the airwaves? As far as what 98 per “Americans see on television, the answer is: three hi Conglomerates. The National Brosdcasting Company is owned by the Radio Corperation of America (RCA, Tne.). RCA is alko a major deiense and space contact fand clshweshing manfecturer, and the owner of Random Houie, Penthoon, end Knopf boots. “The Columbia Broadcasting System also controls S credit affiates of Ford, GM, and Chrys iin the Caribbean and Latin Amevica, Cre Pleythings, Columbia Records, and the New York’ Yankees. “Tae American Brosdoasting Compeny also owns 399 ‘heaters, ABC-Paramount Reootés, three farm papess, end— ‘nti it wus aborted in 1958—was about to merge with Inter savionsl Telephone and Telegraph, one of the ten biggest zporations in she world, wich financial interests in forty ‘ountles. "At the level of individual station ownership —svhere control is reatest and profis biggest—concentration is ever nat- rower. The thee TV networks each own and operate five ste tions in the biggest, most lucrative media markets. The other Owners are equally Bush, xe this passage from a 1968 America frtile notes ve pest of all wevsion stations are controled by newspapers. Every commerial VHF television Iserse i top ten US, merkets contollad either By a network, ‘8 group owner, of o metropolitan newspapec bain. I the top teny-fte ackols hae ae 97 stations Pen of these nineysesen ore network oWed. Ovar half ofall television ene» regueny goes 1 these fee stations and thei What They Say ts Whet You Get: The Media * 128 Below the level of netwosk ownarship, conglomerate con- porate conglomerates with dest financial ine ‘eas of American life: azeas now subject to growing debate.* The coacept of an independent voice ob serving and commenting on conflicting interests {a joke in the television industry; Lowever devached the woies tat speak fo us from television may try t0 be, however honoreble they are, these voices are ubizmately n the control of forces with @ iret inzorost in th The concentra wishes to speak to thirty millon Americans can do so—p2> Viding, of eocre, he has $60,000 to buy a minute of time on tie "Flip Wilson Show," and provided he does not wish to celiver an explicidy politcal message {political advertising |s permitted, with very few exceptions, only for the promotion of candidates; a group simply wishing (9 argue against the ‘wat in Vietnam cannct even buy time even it hs the money to do 20). ‘What this mess is tha: the centers of eccmomie power ia reality control the media, sing television to sel their prod- ‘but what is rarely understood is that this commercial Soe Ro Sn at cae Pele ae me ane cov sae tes Pon toa 1 i 124 * A Populist Manifesto enterprise may have profound politcal and social implica tioas. We recognized thie inthe late 1960's, when the Federal CCominunieations Commission extended the faimess docirine requiring a far presentation of all points of view on im portant issues—into the commercial feld for the frst time by ftipulating that antiemaking ads be put on television free of charge, But the faimess doctrine has not been extended to the cedlest kinds of commercial messages that shape our politcal beliefs every day. If General Motors wants to advertise a Convair, of un automobile that pollutes the atmosphere, all it recds is the money. A group wishing to angve that the aviomobile is a deeely weapon whowe uso should be restricted ies neither (ree no purchased time—that is a “politcal” issue." Backs, insurance companies, of companies, all can pparchase time—writen off as a business expense—to argue that they are concemed, generous, righttinking citizens; 2 case that Banks ignore ghetto neighborhoods, oF tat the oll Import quota costs the average American $50 to $100 a year, for that Insurance companies acbitrarlly cancel polices, is al best buried in a Sunday “public affairs” show. The average American never bears those cases on prime-time slevision, ‘This restricted use of tslvison does not mean that nothing controversial gets on the alr, CBS in particular, with such * To the summer of 197, feral Coutt of Apnesis Washinton fled that versing for highsoweredsotomaoise at? for leaded feats wee fen “entree io wack nea Tovalon cone bad aft sentncad Guy to provide ees ar {Beate of svorenil tec Uke te war ta Viena The Nixon ‘inion apr oes ther ean oe aces Hs NSss, sinctor of the Prendents Oflve of Teles Proposed scraping tm fen dosin,exdreninig ‘tis dost fo sommuniy groupe or inviais wibout the [oney [urchoe tine eto tke ane) the oe chance they aaw have for Shen the “zou” dette What They Say fs Whar You Get: The Media * 125 shows as “Hunger in America” and “The Selling of the Pentagon,” a8 wel as Ed Murrow’s classic “See It Now” show fon Senator Joseph McCarthy, has demonstrated that tcle- jon ean be used to probe and expose. ‘The question is more funcarental and structsral chan whether an oocasionaly challenging show gets on the air. It Js whether television provides groups that do not have great eeonomie power with acces to use this incredibly powerful medium, ‘Part of the problem i economic; putting aside the Sunday morning public afsirs shows, which rack up "Brownie points” ‘vith the FCC, network shows either make money or go off the dir. The heralded “CBS Repors” und “See t Now,” ard NBC's Project 20," all were once regular prime-time features. They tno longer exist. Because ofthe profit motive, television must try to teach most of the people most of the vime. And what this tends to do, apart from reducing mest prime-time enter- tainment fare to mush, ito legitimize the politcal perceptions of the majority, while shuting out the rest of Americans. “Thus, “The Smothers Brothers" show, wis is antiwar slits and occasional sttires of political leaders, was immediately Considered a “controversial.” even “offensive” show. But when, in tho fall of 1967 atthe height of the debate over the war in Vietnam, Bob Hope came on the air with a show from Viet~ znam in which he praised the wat eflort and jokingly approved tt division's moto, “Itt moves, shoot iy” this was considered acceptable prime-time entertainment. There was no faimess Soctine, 20 equal tins for those opposing the war. A group fof radiel historians seeking to present x “revisionist” history ‘of Amesica in songs and sts would almose certainly be denied television time, Rut 2 show featuring patriotism a la John Wayne Becomes the most expensive TV special ever staged. In the fall of 1970, the American Broadcasting Company refused to show the half peciormance ofthe University of hfalo bond becease i amar and ecology themes were “political” But that same Saturday, viewers watched a ale 126 A Populist Manes What They Say te What You Gets The Media * 127 tarsi salute to America, and all season the three networks tse; we do not deny the fact thet wit, thought offered types for the Nikon administration's Prisoner of War Campaign, ané pregame salutes to the heroes of the Sontay i television, oF that television news has at times given prison raid into North Vietuam, Tessons to print journalists in how fo inform people about Indeed, the content of television enterisinment offers a Important sexes. revealing picture of who is excluded from television. With the ‘Our challeage is more basic. Tt goes to the heart of how rive of black anger inthe 1960's, we became aware that tele television is structured; who rons the networks and stations; vision had shut the black out fom its vision of what the world and how television can be opened up to people without great js like in efow shor: year, Blacks turned up ix commercial, wealth and power, Iti not enough to rely on the good wil, fea news programs, and on the whole spectrum of entertain for honesty, oF courage of the few who do have a voive ‘ment. Yet, all through the 1950's and 1960's as the demand in the use Of television, The Constzation isa skeptical docu for black equality was rising, blacks were depicted on te ‘men itis based on the presumption thatthe potetie! forthe vision from the viewpoint of the white work's sereotype: buse of power is itseif an evil and that power should be Beulah, the perplexed. but happy-go-lucky maid in a wpica! Gispened, When it comes to questions of speech and press, white aubuzb; George, the bug-eyed, lobotomized elevator the Constitution truste no one with control over such poten operator in the all-white building where Vern and Mergic ‘ely disastrous power, peferring instead to confer the power Albright ved; “Ames ‘a! Andy,” which rdicaled the very to speak and advocate on every one of vs. ‘concept of @ black lawyer or community group, and which That is the centeal question we face in watching how featured Lightain—the bag-eysd, lobotomized, lazy porte. television performs; not whether the people who run it mean ‘Only the rows Brought reform to the Lly-hite word of tle- ‘wel, but wether they should control suck enormous power vision in the frst place. Maybe Time, Inc—which owns radio and ‘The man who worked with his hands was also short television stations and cable TV——willfealesly examine the changed; a dolt incapable of the simplest exerciss of the practices of commercial bans; maybe the fact that Chem ‘mind, he was epitomized by Willam Bendix in “Tae Lite fal Bank and the Fitst National Bank of Chicago own large 2 eyes Chunks of Time, Ine. sill make no diference. But human jealous, covetous, gosipy, Shature—the seme human nature understood by the framers redezrned by “women’s intuition,” which substitute for logic. Of the Constittion—enttes us to be skeptical ‘And pectape most staring, the ordinary American family term important suc we will continse to ‘composed of people trying to get by as best they could, was jsion-—tong ater the bullying of Spiro Agnes Ssloost ignores, except in the most sanitized, sentimentalized is forgotien is how 10. diversity control of television in forms (Ozzie and Hartet," “Father Knows Best"). Detec- Amoriea, How Go we disper coatrol—contral that, thous tives, comboys, cops—all sd serious problems; bet, except fis eld by “iberal” and “conservative” forces ali, 's none for the radio holdovers of early television lke “The Golde theless eld by a cempacative handful of Americans? beigs” and "I Remember Mara," ordinary people were "The traditional methcd envisoned by the Federal Com: happy people with happy problems. nications Aet-—that of challenging Scenses is practically “Tho use of television for entertsioment and xmusement ut of the question. Congress and the Federal Communica- 128 * A Poplist Mantes tions Commission have almost always acted to protect the licensees from attsck—treating them as though they were owners, rather than temporary trustees, of the slrwaves In the entire history of the FCC, no station ever had it. ricense fevoked; and, when the FCC finaly acted to transer control of Boston sation WHDH, Senator John Pastore prompely introduced ¢ bill im Congress requiiag the com- fission to show favoritism toward the current license holder in any proceeding. If enacted, Pastor's bill would have totally setapped the original concept of the Inw—that challenger with bettr ideas and capabilities of serving the public ought to be favored, Only a partial adoption by the FCC cf the Pastore view prevented the bill ftom passing ‘When challenges are permitted, they arc lengthy, costly proceedings. In New York City, a citizens group, Forum Communieations, chalenged the license of Channel 11, WPIX—owned by the New York Dally News, which in tum 4s part of the Chicago Tribune ownership, which itself holds ‘radio and television licenses in Chicago. The evidence showed that Channel 11 bad offered slmost no news or public lars programming, had lied about the location and dates fof mews fin it was showing, had ordered that black teen fgers not be shown during # dance show, and had vical'y Jgnored New Yorks racial and ethnic minorities. The chal lenge was supported by former television executives, public oflcials, entertainers with broadcast experience, and com- tunity groupe—s distinctively impressive colietion of talent "Yet even this relatively well-placed group of applicants haas had to wait wo years for a heating, and the final de sion will be years fn coming. (And during those hearings, ie Dally News distoned AP news reports of the proceedings in such a way as to favor the sation it owned.) The time ‘and cost of such proceedings guarantees that a group of fveragerincome Americans could not posibly mount an ‘ellective challenge 10 # radio oz TV station busked by the economic clout of a corporate conglomerate, These stations What They Say te What You Get: The Media * 120 Ihave the resources to wait out any challenge, andthe potitieal connections to protect themselves. And, even while the lense is being challenged, the licensees sill rske in the tremendous profits of TV stations. This process in effect bulls in protec- lon for the powerful and shuts out those without wealth and power. The alternative to licensing challenges is public brosd- casting: television financed by a combination of government, foundation, aad viewer contibutions, As it now stands, ‘America has a National Educctional Television network, & Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and a Public Broad- casting Service. While these new sources of televison are welcome, and while they have offered outstanding examples cf drama, enterainment, and education, we are skeptical of the long-range chances for publ broadcasting 10 alter the power strucure of television without other, more funda ‘meatal reforms. ‘We are skeptical fst because there are a limited number of VHF statins—sull the key to television viewing—and ‘this means that only one station per city ar most will provide an alternative source of television. In many cites, including such metropolitan areas az Washington, D.C. and Boston, public television is available only on UHF ‘hich requires 4 separate dial that must be fine-tuned, rather than clicked into place. Second, there is no tradition in this country separating funding fiom control. Congressmen who offer the loudest speeches about the specter of socialism and government con- twol ste usually the fist to protest any chow of independence by a govemumentfunded project, whether a legal services| program or a ‘elevision station, And the Nixon admitsta- tion has already shown it willingness to poltclze public television. In Novernber of 1971, Clay Whitshead threatened the Public Broadcasting Service by promising no permanent financing as long as public broadcasting was unwilling to be wat the administration wanted Ito be. Thete Is no partiulae 130* A Populi Manijeso reason w think a Democratic administration would be any more willing to tolerate an independent, government-funded fervie. And Congress Is already daeply suspicious of the activities of foundations, an alternative souree of funding. ‘The best guess we have is that public tstevison In America will tend to develop more along the lines of French TV ~aubservient tothe goverameat in power—rather than slong the lines of the largely independent British Rrondcasting Service. (Even the national BBC i not weal; the real recipient ‘of public funds should be local stations, with a requirement for public access by groups aow shut out of sny relation with telovsion except as passive viewers.) ‘The key 00 real reform lies in diversity—in breaking the stranglehold on TV ownership by those who already have 8 voice in tho community and by great corpo ‘As touch a powible, Wwe must civersiy control over the ‘We think the following. ‘power more broadly: cistrbute ONE Prohibit absolutely any owner of a newspaper feom ‘owning « radio or television station in is own city Hf a Chicagoan distrusts the Tribime, he should not, when hhe toms om his radio or TV, have to listen to the voice of that same ownership on WGN. Coneervatives who isssiaed with the Washington Post and ts policies now have {hana of TV stations 40 choose strong, bet one of the rest powerful is owne! by the Post, This pattern zepeats| iteeit all ver America, Kind of concer ed ownenthip wore disallowed Tis hypocrisy to say noone ee has the money, because rasio| and TV stations are t0 profitable that any kind of smnity group could find money from e iot of small investors if the TCC followed the law and treated licenses 26 tr Whar They Say Ne Wha: You Get The Media * 131 ships, rather than as quitelaim deeds. Forter, newspapers would not be barred from operating a radio of TV station in another city, so long as their conglomerate network as not already in that city. This would mean tha, for instance, Washington and Chicago popots could buy stations in each ‘other’ eity thus giving ellizens « chance to hear something sliferent. TWO Require that community geoups be given time on any cable television system Cable TV is going to revolutionize television. A single cab) sgstem can bring dozens of channels into a person's home ‘This system cannot be allowed to fall into the hands of corporate giants like Westinghouse, CBS, or Time, Tae. But that i jst what bas alveady begun to happen. Tastcad, tho diversity promised by cable TV should he seized on by the FCC—as Commissioner Nicholas Johnson open. up scorss to television, Comunity wld, by petition, win the sight 10 air i ey qualified, a cable sy technical staff could be required to given them asitanc te 8 conéition of the original ioense. Th's means that i @ city, landlords and tenants could debate housing law d and petients could each produce their shows expressing attitudes toward hospital cae and doctor's bile. Tae ‘of a towa hall destocracy in which every citizen gete the chance 0 have his say is fself a real posiilty once we rake the commitment to disperse the ower to be heard THREE — Requite congressmen to divest themselves of all interests in radio and television ‘Today, dozens of congressmen own interess in radio end ‘TY stations and more wor: for law ems with such client. The possibilities for corrup of interes

You might also like