Congressman Mike Doyle on Media Consolidation & Net Neutrality
Speaking at an event today co-sponsored by ACS and the Future of Music Coalition, Congressman Mike Doyle (D-PA), Vice Chair of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet, spoke out against media consolidation and in favor of net neutrality:
One disturbing product of the Telecom Act of 1996 has been the rapid consolidation of the ownership of television and radio stations across the country.This is disturbing on a number of levels.
There’s obvious concern that a radio stationed programmed out of Denver won’t provide much timely local news for residents of, say, Pittsburgh.
That can, at worst, have serious public safety implications, as many have pointed out.
But even on a more mundane level, this process squeezes out all but the most mainstream voices in communities large and small.
I ask you: Could WKRP’s commitment to local news and Jonny Fever’s musical vision have survived in today’s consolidated media market?
On a more commercial and artistic level, there’s real concern – which I share – about the homogenization of the content that these broadcasters provide.
It’s clear that the media consolidation we’ve experienced over the last 10 years has reduced the diversity and independence of TV and radio broadcasts dramatically.
Much has been said about the XM/Sirius merger, and I don’t need to add to it.
Except to wonder if both are at full capacity right now, what artists and what music is going to be cut to make room for Howard Stern on XM and baseball on Sirius. Now I’m a baseball fan, as you already know, but it’s a question that musicians and artists should be asking.
That said, I can still hear Steely Dan and the Doobies on the generic oldies stations that clutter up the dial, but I believe that this stifling of new and different music frustrates many American listeners and prevents many up-and-coming artists from getting the exposure they deserve.
On the subject of net neutrality, Congressman Doyle added:
net neutrality certainly ranks at the top of the list in terms of issues affecting musicians and webcasters.Without net neutrality, smaller content providers face the prospect of prohibitive costs or service quality so poor it discourages consumers from accessing their content.
Today thousands of people are calling and writing Congress – demanding that we preserve an open and free Internet.
Not a free Internet like a free lunch.
But a free Internet like the first amendment guarantees free speech.
A free Internet on which no matter who you are, what you have to say can be heard loud and clear by whoever wants to hear it.
Without a net neutrality fix, a researcher at Pitt—or kids in a dorm room at Carnegie Mellon might not get venture capitalist approval for their big idea.
Not when the first line of their business plan reads -- “Get approval from the telephone and cable company.”
Congress and the courts are currently grappling with this issue.
There are a number of ways in which the federal government could define net neutrality.
The recent ATT/Bell South decision defines net neutrality in a way that appears to be acceptable to internet innovators as well as the largest last-mile Internet provider in the country, for example.
In my opinion, the net neutrality advocates are on the side of the angels in this debate.
A full transcript of Congressman Doyle's prepared remarks is available at this link. Streaming video will be available shortly at ACS' website.