Public airwaves should always be used to best serve the public interest

One only needs to hear a few minutes of most any talk radio show before hearing the term “mainstream media.” a derogatory term meaning “grand left-wing media conspiracy.”

The conspiracy theorists imply that the mainstream media is so powerful that it trumps even the mega influence of media titans like Bill O’Reilly or Rush Limbaugh.

In fact, the mainstream media got to be vast primarily by government policies allowing consoli-dation and mergers of media companies. During the Bush administration this accelerated via pro-consolidation policies of the Federal Communications Commission.

It would seem to follow that if conservatives can’t get the word out with the media that we currently have, then a more diverse ownership of the media might tend to encourage the airing of different points of view, possibly some more to their liking.

But the issue of media consolidation is dismissed by most political conservatives. The conservative think tank, Heritage Foundation has called media consolidation “a myth.”

Even the largest conservative media watchdog group, Accuracy in Media, complains about media bias but has virtually nothing to say about the increasing concentration of media ownership possibly being part of the problem.

In some respects, the media industry is not so much different from other industries that became dominated in recent years by a few powerful corporations, often through leveraged buyouts.

Media conglomerates have been able to exploit economies of scale by sharing printing facilities, reporters, etc.

In spite of that apparent advantage, most media giants — including Media General, the owner of this newspaper — have seen their stock prices plummet in the past few years.

But having consolidation of media is not the same as consolidation of the fast food or home decor industry.

The media shapes our understanding of the world. It is essential to our democracy. We depend upon the news and information we get from the media to make informed decisions and to hold our government and corporate leaders accountable.

Of particular concern is the broadcast media.While print media is largely beyond the jurisdiction of public policy, our broadcast media system wasn’t just created by the “invisible hand” of the free market. It was the direct result of policies made by Congress and the FCC.

The print media is free to operate by buying its own newsprint. But the airwaves are owned by the people. Those airwaves are no different than a public park, or a road. Private radio and TV broadcasters get to use these airwaves free of charge. In return, broadcasters are required by law to serve the public interest.

Dan Isett of Parents Television Council — a nonpartisan educational organization advocating re-sponsible media — speaking before the FCC in 2007 said “Continued media consolidation puts the corporate interest before the public interest. It is up to the FCC to maintain a media ownership policy that benefits the public and not merely those who would exploit the media landscape for their own gain.”

It seems like there should be a natural coalition of those who prefer more responsible use of broadcast TV and radio, those who think the media is too left wing, those who believe the media is too controlled by corporate interests, and those who want a locally owned media that is more likely to be more responsive to local interests, all who would see their interests served by a more diverse media ownership structure.

I think it’s time for the FCC to reverse its “anything goes” ownership structure of media consolidation. It is hard to conclude that the public interest is served by the vast majority of broadcast media offerings.

If they can’t start serving the public interest, the FCC should grant localities the right to charge them for using our public airwaves.

Legge’s column appears every other Thursday on the editorial page.