Faulhaber's comments on Capek's comments (was more on Copps Blasts Media Review at FCC)

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Peter G Capek <capek () us ibm com>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:00:45 -0400
To: "Faulhaber, Gerald" <faulhabe () wharton upenn edu>
Cc: dave () farber net
Subject: Faulhaber's comments on Capek's comments (was [IP] more on Copps
Blasts Media Review at FCC)



Thank you for your comments on mine.

Perhaps I didn't express myself clearly and explicitly enough, and
certainly I'm not as well-informed on this topic as I'd like to be.

I well understand that lobbying is a constant.   My point, perhaps not made
explicitly enough, was that the "rich" and well-organized media companies
have the upper hand on this kind of "public  interest" issue against
citizens acting as individuals, and even against citizens acting through
various public interest organizations.   Add to this that the issue at hand
is one which the media are failing to cover (cf. Frontline) and it's
difficult to get much of a public groundswell.   Further, the issue strikes
me as a real "one way door" in the sense that, if my worst fears are
realized, it will never be possible to undo because the (then concentrated)
media are in control, and won't permit the news coverage to generate the
pressure to undo it.

I'll try to find and read the relevant court decision.  I hear what you say
the FCC has been told by the court, and perhaps there's no way out for the
FCC.   That said, this seems to me to be an issue which is not (or at least
should not be) primarily an economic one -- it's more of a free speech and
informed populace issue -- and that's why I see it as so important.    I
guess I see too-concentrated media ownership as a bizarre kind of non-free
press.

Lastly, perhaps I've taken Copps' comments too seriously.  Nonetheless, I
can find no indication on the FCC's web site of solicitation of public
comments on this issue, and if the June 2 "deadline" is indeed to be taken
as real, I'd expect a schedule which would allow for public comment by now.
My point about the secrecy with which the Bush administration conducts its
affairs (which are really also my affairs!) is PERHAPS irrelevant here.
Nonetheless, I presume that at least the raw facts in Copps' remarks are
correct, and it certainly seems as though a process is taking place behind
closed doors.

                   Peter Capek

------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/