Note: The article below has, so far, been picked up by the following eleven (11) print outlets: Portland and Seattle's African American owned weekly The Skanner, the upstate Connecticut daily Register Citizen, The Anniston (Alabama) Star (interesting background on this non-profit daily here), The Camp Verde Bugle, an information source for Cottonwood and Verde Valley area communities in Northern Arizona published three times weekly, The Town Talk, a daily newspaper serving Alexandria, Pineville, and central Louisiana, The Coalfield Progress, serving Wise county in western Virginia twice weekly, The Sebeka & Menahga (Minnesota) Review Messenger, The Ledger (a NYT owned daily serving Lakeland and Polk County, Florida), The Crookston (Minnesota) Daily Times, the daily Montgomery News (serving Montgomery County, PA and its neighbors), and the weekly West Texas County Courier serving Anthony, Vinton, Canutillo, East Montana, Horizon, Socorro, Clint, Fabens, San Elizario and Tornillo. The op-ed article below was also picked up by the website of the bimonthly Counterpunch, which is described by its editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair as "muckraking with a radical attitude". It can be found in the e-newsletter and on the web site of Media Alliance, one of the oldest media activist organizations in the U.S. Other online publishers of this op-ed include OpEdNews, Communications-Related Headlines, a free, daily communications news summary service of the Benton Foundation, Augusta Free Press (serving the Shenandoah Valley and Central Virginia), mathaba.net, Digital Television and Mind Control at Blogspot, mysanantonio.com, an online adjunct to the daily San Antonio Express-News, Progressive Democrats of America - Illinois, healthhaven.com, and
North Texas e-News. It also can be found online at Media Industry Today, which is a European Internet Network (EIN) news service for media industry professionals. EIN distributes a multitude of subscription only online publications and has an interesting history and well-connected membership. The article has been linked to by sites such as tweetmeme.com, International Business Times, Daylife (Daylife clients here), Zimbio.com, and the News Corp owned Sky News (UK), often through the Counterpunch newswire. That is how the op-ed below wormed its way onto the NPR web site, arabamerican.net, and the USA Today website, where it is fittingly filed under "Iraq". (It does look kinda neat there with its own little summary page and link along with the USA Today logo.) The Skanner probably broke this piece first, and it has been sourced a number of times by other publishers. Thanks to each and every outlet that has published this article. And many thanks to American Forum for sending this piece out to every newspaper, tv and radio station in the U.S. gratis. This blog post was last updated 10/31/09. Keep republishing this one folks! :)
The DTV Transition Puts Corporate Profits Ahead of the Public Interest
By Scott Sanders and Steve Macek
The much-delayed switchover to digital TV is now behind us. On June 12, all full power TV stations in the country ceased their analog broadcasts and made the final switch to a digital only format.
In the lead up to the DTV transition, the public's attention focused almost entirely upon ways of mitigating the switchover's effect on the elderly, the poor and non-English speakers who rely on over-the-air television far more than the general population. In response to such concerns, the federal government created a coupon program that subsidized most of the cost of digital-to-analog converter boxes, but then failed to fully fund it. When it became clear that millions of households would not be ready for DTV by the original February 17 deadline, Congress pushed back the transition date.
The extra time -- together with an additional $650 million appropriated by Congress for more converter boxes and more public outreach -- seems to have done the trick. Though some viewers have reported losing the signals of individual stations in certain markets, the vast majority of Americans weathered the shift to DTV without losing service or being excessively inconvenienced.
Yet, there is another problem with the DTV transition, one that has never gotten the sort of headlines that the shortage of converter box coupons did. The fact is that the shift to digital television represents a massive government giveaway to a handful of powerful media conglomerates.
The Clinton-era 1996 Telecommunications Act which mandated the change to DTV stripped away most media ownership concentration limits and gave away huge swathes -- up to $90 billion worth -- of publicly owned digital broadcast spectrum to incumbent TV license holders. In return for giving up a single analog channel, each of these broadcasters received up to 10 digital channels in return. For free. Only one new public service requirement was added -- a modest increase in children�s programming.
To make matters worse, most digital subchannels run by the big network-affiliated stations air duplicative services such as sitcom reruns, old movies, weather, home shopping programs or cooking shows.
That is, if they run anything at all. Despite recent failures such as their flawed coverage leading up to the invasion of Iraq, none of the commercial broadcasters have announced plans we�re aware of to use the new channels to expand or improve their public affairs or news programming.
Where are the digital channels for women and people of color, and the set asides to support independent programming by and for youth and other less advantaged groups, local C-SPANs and other experimental services? Where are the new public affairs programs designed to showcase the perspectives normally marginalized on commercial TV?
Such diversity on the airwaves is needed now more than ever. People of color make up 34 percent of the U.S. population, but only around 3 percent of commercial full power TV license holders, with women holding just 5 percent. Glen Ford, editor of the online Black Agenda Report calls the DTV transition �the biggest squandering of public broadcast resources in the history of the United States."
Steps should be taken to ensure that corporations are not the sole beneficiaries of the digital broadcasting age. The value of the broadcast spectrum that Congress simply handed over to the big corporate media ought to be recovered through appropriate means (taxes, license fees, etc.) and used to subsidize a democratically run, decentralized public media system, the sort of media that will provide a forum for the minority and dissident viewpoints sorely missing on mainstream TV.
Many talented professional journalists are unemployed or waiting tables right now due to the deepening crisis of the corporate journalism model. We need to foster partnerships between professional and citizen journalists and public TV and radio outlets, PEG access centers, community and micro-radio stations, and other community media. Picture a local public media homepage that looks sort of like a daily newspaper but with prominent live TV and radio streams, lots of links to article and program related resources and social media, with the feel of an online public library and town commons. And no commercial advertisements whatsoever.
A functioning fifth estate is essential to the maintenance of democracy. We can and must fix this bad DTV deal, and create and permanently fund various new and extensively reworked public media outlets and centers. We must collectively piece together a system with the highest measure of accountability for every community across the nation as if lives depend on it. Because they do.
Sanders is a longtime Chicago media and democracy advocate. Macek is an associate professor of speech communication at North Central College.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed on this
website are those of the individual members of Chicago Media
Action who authored them, and not necessarily those of the entire
membership of Chicago Media Action, nor of Chicago Media Action
as an organization.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.