The FCC's 5 Questions

1. Do broadcasters use radio and television to quickly and effectively respond to the local communities needs and interests? Give examples to support your answer.

According to The Future of Media text, the answer would be no. Broadcasters do not effectively respond to the needs and interests of local communities. It seems instead, that broadcasters disguise themselves with the appearance that they are out to help normal citizens with their everyday media-related needs, but in fact this is not their intent at all. Instead, broadcasters try to take as much control as they can, at the cost of the real needs of the citizens, in order to have control of c0ntent and of course, to make money. An example the text gives is Verizon's fiber-optic "triple play" bundle. This provides voice, video, and internet services. This service may appeal to an everyday media consumer who believes that Verizon is trying to create the most convenient and efficient plan with their best interest in mind. However, the text suggests that in fact they are the "losers" in the situation, because it gives the company total control over their media and leaves consumers with fewer choices.

2. Are there certain kinds of local programming (Public Media Values) that should be available, but are not being provided by broadcasters? What could some examples of these be?

I'm not sure that local programming is completely lacking, as local programming has always been provided in my experience. When it comes to Public Media Values, I believe I am exposed to diversity of content and viewpoints. There is sufficient children's programming and reasonable access. However, it is certainly clear to me that commercial or national programming outweighs anything local. The radio I listen to is always local (I don't use satellite radio). The material I access on the internet is a mix between local, national, international, and commercial. The television I watch however, is almost never locally related. Aside from local news, and perhaps one local access channel, the bulk of TV media is commercial and national. However, I'm not sure that there would be much of a demand for much more local programming, at least from my perspective. Although the text says otherwise, I'm not completely convinced that there is a real need for more kinds of local programming. However, if it were the case that for example, more citizen participation in media production were desired, it would certainly be the responsibility of the broadcasting companies to provide it. This could mean more public access channels, giving opportunities for all who wish, to be involved in the production of their media.

3. What could the Federal Communication Commission do to promote localism in broadcasting? Explain three of these examples of public-service-oriented projects that are already in process across the US.

One example of public-service is the UTOPIA project that is in process in Utah. The UTOPIA project is designed to provide public, super-affordable digital phone and cable capabilities. Of course, larger corporations geared towards profit are taking actions against such threats, by pressuring city-council members not to fund such projects. There is also the Prometheus Radio Project in Philadelphia which is a successful form of alternative media. Local broadcasters create a forum for local talent and create a community. They have even demanded that such a license be given to more stations.

Extras

What Stanford professor and lawyer that we have discussed before is mentioned in this essay? What organization is he the founder of?

What is the "spectrum" that the authors refer to?