Public Interest

Government regulation of the media has long been an issue of debate. A recent article in the New York Times brings up this issue in relation to the controversy that occurred when ABC, on the day of the Academy Awards, took away its signal from many television providers in the New York area. As a result of this incident, the big television providers are asking the Federal Communications Commission to revise the current regulations. These regulations, according to the providers, give the stations too much power, and apparently allow the stations to demand that providers pay them more to broadcast their programs. As of right now, a station like ABC can “withhold their signals from the providers” in an effort to be paid more for their programs. The article goes on to state that the FCC has not yet responded to the provider’s petition, though political figures such as Senator John Kerry have been active in the situation and advocated for a change in the rules. The providers are asking for more government intervention involved in these “retransmission disputes,” as well as for the “FCC to require stations to keep sending a signal as long as the provider ‘continues to negotiate in good faith.’” The representatives of the stations are arguing that increasing their pay is a huge investment in a service that is vital to the production of the community’s news.
The FCC is supposed to operate out of a concern for the “public interest.” What is this “public interest” you ask? There is not a definitive answer to that question, other than simply to state that adhering to public interest requires acknowledging what will benefit the public the most. This of course begs the question, who decides what will benefit the public most? The FCC tries to determine this by “attempting to balance the interests of various groups, suggesting that there is no single public interest…they believe that regulation that promotes diversity in programming and services is in the public interest” (Croteau and Hoynes pg. 86).
With that in mind, in relation to the above dispute over retransmission, what is in the public’s interest? As was mentioned above, the FCC has not yet responded to the provider’s pleas for intervention. The stations claim that increased regulation on their freedom to withhold their signals from providers would infringe on their ability to bring essential news to their local communities. Is this true? What would the impact of increased official regulation on these disputes have on our daily lives? If the stations cannot demand more money from the providers, it is possible that they will not have the revenue to continue their programs. However, is it fair to the providers that the stations can simply “cut-out” their signals in order to gain more money? How much should the FCC be involved in this issue? What do you think their response should be?