Latest On Local News

Media reform is now a hot topic. The controversy over controlling the internet, combined with the recent changes of who's in control in Washington, D.C., has culminated in making media reform the equivalent of the new black for the spring of 2007.

The sudden public interest in what we do all day inspired us to kick off 2007 by introducing you to our Media Savvy Bill of Rights, with 10 rights and responsibilities created specifically with you in mind. The bill of rights serves as the perfect springboard for what else we’ll be introducing this year.

There’s also much talk about media ownership and what the FCC will do to revise the rules that enabled big media to grow bigger. Even the Fairness Doctrine is back on the table. With all these issues suddenly front and center, now’s the time to address where we stand and, with your help, where we’re heading.

To begin with, "reform" is a word with a bad rep.

That’s why we use “advocacy” when we discuss how media needs to change. It gives what we do a connotation that we’re working for you, the public, with a positive outlook that improvement is possible. Reform? Well, that makes it sound like the solution involves giving someone a good smack.

Your garden-variety media reformistas will tell you the problem with our society is that a handful of companies control the media you watch, read and hear. While it’s true the era of media consolidation has dwindled ownership down to about six companies accounting for the majority of your news and information, there’s much more to it than that. So, please, read on.

For the record, the Fair Media Council is anti-consolidation. We always have been. Not because we believe in limiting someone’s business success, but because people need a variety of news and information sources in order to understand the issues at play and how what’s happening will affect their lives. People also need a variety of opinions from a diverse array of people in the news and information they receive.

One of the huge problems with media consolidation is the repackaging of content: same information, just presented differently. Helps to fill time and space, and it’s cost effective, too. But the formula fails when it reaches the public because, despite having 600 channels and plenty of free publications to pick up, the public is suffering from information starvation. There’s lots of white noise out there, but there’s a dearth of reliable, credible information offered up in a manner that provides the perspective of how the information impacts those who work and live real lives.

Aside from content considerations, the current media ownership rules make it impossible for small and even medium-sized media companies to compete, let alone prosper, alongside media conglomerates. Whatever happened to the theory that the success of the free enterprise system was contingent upon the employment of businesses of all sizes? In our market, we’ve watched our 19 commercial radio stations turn from news and information providers into mere marketing tools. Now, not one of those stations employs a news reporter. Local radio used to have a purpose, but anyone younger than a Gen Xer isn’t able to remember that.

With the vast majority of our local media owned by out of towners, here’s something else to think about: Where are your advertising dollars going? There was a time when they stayed here, to strengthen your local economy. Now, they go to corporate, to make shareholders happy.
Like media consolidation, cross ownership creates a similar litany of ills within a marketplace. Tribune Co.’s owning Newsday and CW11 is problematic for many of the reasons stated above.
But the state of media policy is only one part of the equation that affects the quality of your local news, and this is where we differ from other media reform organizations.


We believe there are three, equally important parts to the formula for improving media: media policy, education and accountability.


Educating the public about media is vital to creating a media literate society, one that can readily distinguish between news and opinion, as well as news and advertisements. Most people can’t recognize the difference between a news show and a talk show, or a news story and a column.

The problem, of course, is that we don’t have an education standard in our education system for teaching media literacy, yet we live in a country built on the premise of freedom of the press and freedom of speech. You’re just supposed to know, by osmosis, what that means. If adults have such issues with the media delivered into their households, how will their children fare?

Last, but certainly not least, is media accountability. Holding the media accountable for what it publishes and broadcasts is imperative to improving local news coverage. In order for accountability to happen, the public has to be educated on how media works and what to do when it fails. Inside newsrooms, receiving no complaints translates into everything was just fine with the news. We know that’s not true. That’s why we’re here, to help.

To that end, in 2007 you’ll see us unveil a new local news monitoring project. We’ll be monitoring the news in the market for news you need versus the news that’s being delivered to you. We call it “big-picture monitoring.” It’s vastly different from other news monitoring projects happening around the country, which focus on singular stories or the amount of time or space a story is given.

Also on tap: our expansion into Queens and beyond.

With so much happening already, 2007 is going to be interesting. Join us now. Be an advocate for improving your local news coverage.