Big Brother Knows Best

F.C.C. Commissioner Proposes ‘Public Values Test’ 

Michael J. Copps, one of the five commissioners on the Federal Communications Commission, is proposing a “public value test” for television and radio stations that he thinks should replace the current licensing process.

The first tenet of Mr. Copps’ proposed test would be “meaningful commitments” to news and public affairs programming.

Just in case there's any doubt, Copps is a democrat.

In an interview with “BBC World News America” that was broadcast Wednesday, the anchor Katty Kay anticipated what critics may say about Mr. Copps’ proposal. Ms. Kay asked, doesn’t a public value test “raise the specter of over government control of information? I mean, people would say to you, ‘Well, what one person’s public value is is not another person’s.’ ”

Mr. Copps answered, “What we’ve had in recent years is an aberration where we have had no oversight of the media. For years and years we had some public interest guidelines that was part of the quid pro quo between broadcasters and the government for the free use of airwaves that belong to the American people and in return for that free use, and the ability to make a lot of money, they agreed to serve the public interest and that public interest to me right now is crying ‘news and information, news and information, news and information.’ “

Right - "to me" - I, Michael J. Copps, am uniquely qualified to determine what the American people should and should not see on television.

With regards to local programming, Mr. Copps said, “the goal here is a more localism in our program diet, more local news and information, and a lot less streamed-in homogenization and monotonous nationalized music at the expense of local and regional talent.” He added, “Homogenized music and entertainment from huge conglomerates constrains creativity, suppresses local talent and detracts from the great tapestry of our nation’s cultural diversity.” He suggested that 25 percent of prime-time programming should be locally or independently produced.

That will effectively kill what's left of network television. While I'm not a big fan of the pap that currently taints the airwaves (who gives a rat's patoot about who is dancing with who?) I am a big proponent of the people's right to choose what they pollute their minds with.

Fortunately, some congresscritters are showing a little spine on this one.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) pushed back on Monday against a contention by a Democratic FCC commissioner that the government should create new regulations to promote diversity in news programming. 

"I hope … that you do not mean to suggest that it is the job of the federal government, through the [FCC], to determine the content that is available for Americans to consume,” Barton wrote Monday in a letter to Copps. 

(Copps) said outlets should be mandated to do the following: prove they have made a meaningful commitment to public affairs and news programming, prove they are committed to diversity programming, report more to the government about which shows they plan to air, require greater disclosure about who funds political ads and devote 25 percent of their prime-time coverage to local news. 

The regulations would apply to all news outlets operating on the public airwaves.

I'm sure the diversity provision would, of course, include NPR and Univision, which broadcasts its programs in Spanish. BET would be exempt, since it's a cable network.

In his letter, Barton questioned whether Copps believes the government should reinstate the defunct Fairness Doctrine, a controversial standard that required broadcast licensees to offer "balanced" coverage. Critics saw it as an affront to free speech.

Barton also asked whether "five commissioners can do a better job of ensuring that Americans have access to a wide diversity of content and viewpoints than Americans can themselves by expressing their preferences ... in the vigorously competitive marketplace."

That's the issue in a nutshell. Who decides what the American public gets to watch? A five-member commission, that is appointed, not elected, or the viewing public, which votes with their clicker?

I know which one I'd pick...