The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out
  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
  • Opinion
  • Sports
    • NFL
    • NBA/WNBA
    • MLB
    • NHL
    • Tennis
    • Golf
    • Motorsports
    • Soccer
    • NCAA
    • Olympics
    • Outdoors
    • Other
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Themes
  • Communities
  • Marketplace
    • Autos
    • Jobs
    • Real Estate
    • Classifieds
    • Shopping
    • Dining Out
    • Education
    • TWT Store
  • Videos
    • Two Guys
    • Birnbaum on Washington
    • Liz Glover
    • Amanda Carpenter
    • Morning Briefing
    • Documentaries
    • Joe Giganti
    • Video Game Minute
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • World

    Stalled talks may kill Israel's Labor Party

  • Politics

    Bill Clinton urges Dems to pass health bill

  • Security

    Obama: No religious faith justifies Fort Hood shootings

  • Local

    Families meet as sniper's execution nears

  • Politics

    EXCLUSIVE: Warner: Obama misplayed health care debate

  • National

    Justices weigh juveniles' life without parole

  • National

    Leadership changes at The Times

Home » Opinion » Commentary

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Dialing up to reregulation

Rate this story

Average 0.00
after 0 votes
Login or register to rate this story

  • Font Size -+
  • Print
  • Email
  • Comment
  • Tweet this!
  • Share
  • Article
  • Comments ()
  • Click-2-Listen
  • Videos

More Commentary Stories

  • Securing the vote for all
  • Serving America, again
  • BOOK REVIEW: Revisiting the atomic bomb debate
  • Currency that kills

By

One thing President Reagan taught us all is that government regulations often restrain economic activity and restrict personal freedom. Or one would have thought.

The Federal Communications Commission has just proposed reimposing content regulations on radio broadcasters similar to ones the Reagan FCC repudiated in the early 1980s.

The rationale for the original content regulations (imposed over several decades) is that radio broadcasters tend to lose touch with the local populations they were intended to serve under their "public service obligation." The theory (never really proven) is that, since they typically faced little competition from other broadcasters, they would respond only to narrow commercial interests, not the public as a whole. This led to quotas for certain types of government-preferred, non-entertainment programming.

The same reasoning led to the so-called Fairness Doctrine, which throttled real debate and almost strangled talk radio in its infancy. The result was that broadcasters not only had to fill out a lot of paperwork no one ever read, but the public was saddled with messages and formats they really didn"t want.

The Reagan FCC, under Mark Fowler (a k a the "Mad Monk"), recognized that content regulations were shortchanging consumers. Moreover, as the FCC noted at the time, competition in the radio broadcast industry had grown dramatically over the last decades. That, plus the increasing sensitivity and efficacy of radio receivers (especially in automobiles), meant consumers had access to far more radio broadcasts than when the original regulations were promulgated.

So what is the FCC thinking? Is there less competition among radio stations than before? Have radio receivers deteriorated? No, there are nearly twice as many radio stations in the typical market than there were 25 years ago, and receiver technology has continued apace.

Did the FCC hear an outcry from consumers who feel neglected? No. What the FCC commissioners did receive was a staff report, based on a several-year study of the "problem," which concluded that people really don't know what types of programming are in their interests. Based on this report, the FCC concluded it would be a good idea for some folks in Washington, D.C., and in the local communities to decide what types of programming radio listeners really need to hear.

According to the FCC's press release of last December, radio stations would have to "establish permanent advisory boards ... with which to consult periodically on community needs and issues." Also, ominously, the commission would adopt license renewal procedures to "ensure that all broadcasters provide some locally-oriented programming." And who determines what qualifies as acceptable locally produced programming? Why, the FCC of course!

Imagine, for a moment, the outrage that would ensue if some federal agency were established to assure that publications were "responsive to the needs and issues" (FCC language) of their customers. Or, think of a federal agency to decide the kinds of foods Safeway, Kroger and Wal-Mart, as well as the local grocer, must carry and the space devoted to each type. Or a home improvement czar to tell Home Depot, Lowe's and the local Ace Hardware just what building materials to carry and how they should be displayed. Think this would really help consumers? If so, I'm sure you're a big supporter of the FCC's proposed rule.

Not everyone at the FCC is marching mindlessly lock-step toward more regulation. Commissioner Rob McDowell recently warned, "We must keep in mind that we live in an exciting, market-driven, on-demand world that empowers all of us as consumers. As technologies and consumer habits continue to evolve, we should proceed with a healthy skepticism of regulation. Simply put, government cannot outsmart an unfettered and competitive market. ... So why are policymakers like us at the FCC dusting off decades-old regulations to impose on broadcasters?" Why indeed!

James C. Miller III, a member of President Reagan's cabinet, is a senior adviser at Husch Blackwell Sanders, LLP, and is a consultant to the National Association of Broadcasters.

Post a comment

There are comments on this article, submit your opinion!

Please login or register to post a comment

Ask a Question

You Report

Do you have another point of view, photos, audio, video or more information about a story?

Top Stories

Most Read

  1. KELLNER: New Apple mouse really is 'Magic'
  2. EXCLUSIVE: Rare virus poses new threat to troops
  3. EXCLUSIVE: Warner: Obama misplayed health care debate
  4. Parents buying homes for kids at college
  5. EDITORIAL: Too scared to recognize terrorism
More Top Stories »
  1. PRUDEN: Fatal reluctance to see evil
  2. Families meet as sniper's execution nears
  3. Deer dies after leap into D.C. zoo lion exhibit
  4. Federal Reserve opposed as big bank savior by odd allies
  5. Court refuses to halt sniper's execution

Most Shared

  1. PRUDEN: Fatal reluctance to see evil
  2. KELLNER: New Apple mouse really is 'Magic'
  3. Defense nominee won't reveal potential conflicts
  4. 'Fuzzy math' could drive health bill cost higher
  5. EXCLUSIVE: Rare virus poses new threat to troops
More Top Stories »
  1. EDITORIAL: Too scared to recognize terrorism
  2. Deer dies after leap into D.C. zoo lion exhibit
  3. The siren call of Shariah
  4. Parents buying homes for kids at college
  5. Sinking dollar fuels new gold rush

Most Commented

  1. PRUDEN: Fatal reluctance to see evil
  2. 'Fuzzy math' could drive health bill cost higher
  3. EDITORIAL: Too scared to recognize terrorism
  4. Defense nominee won't reveal potential conflicts
  5. Lieberman vows probe of Hood rampage
More Top Stories »
  1. Jihadists in the military
  2. Health bill faces roadblocks in Senate
  3. EDITORIAL: Mr. Obama, stay away from this wall
  4. Hood suspect earlier came under FBI scrutiny
  5. 'Anti-vaccine' attitude hampers H1N1 effort

Listen to Washington Times Radio

  • America's Morning News

    with John McCaslin and Melanie Morgan

Question of the day

White House officials and Senate Democrats met in private three times last week to craft health care legislation. Do you think these discussions should be more public?

Blogs & Columns

  • POTUS Notes

    New Dem talking point on Obama approval doesn't wash

  • The Back Story

    12 arrested at Pelosi's office

  • Belief Blog

    New Vatican constitution released

  • Out of Context

    Foods that might kill libido

  • Technology

    Facebook wins round against phishing spammer

  • On the Fly

    United lifts some 'award' blocking

  • Redskins 360

    Hall, Portis on radio

  • Tara's Two Cents

    On their way to summer vacation..

  • SNOBlog

    Beyond 'Woody'

Videos

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.