Severe
More Severe
Most Severe
Featured
Change the Channels
All Voters Deserve Access to the Information Hiding in Political Files
Last Friday, the Federal Communications Commission voted to put television broadcasters’ public and political files online to make them easier to access. This is a major victory.
But while all TV broadcasters will have to migrate the majority of their public records online this year, only stations in the top 50 media markets that are also affiliated with major broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, Fox or NBC) are required to digitize their political files this election season. All other TV stations can delay posting until 2014.
These exemptions mean that not a single Spanish-language station will be required to put its political file online this election year.
Who Owns What
Did you know that Viacom owns 160 cable channels that reach more than 600 million people worldwide?
Or that the Hearst Corporation owns 31 television stations and 20 U.S. magazines?
Television Stations Don't Like Television Cameras
What happens when a group of broadcast journalism students set out to inspect the public files at their local television stations?
Three out of four stations refuse to let their cameras in.
“Cleveland television stations,” one student said, “don’t like television cameras.”
Collaboration, Competition and Consolidation: Where Is the Line?
Many of the same technological changes and economic pressures that have driven the development of collaborative journalism are also driving media consolidation. In both cases, proponents argue that benefits include reducing overhead costs and pooling resources to provide quality journalism to the community.
Collaboration, Competition and Consolidation: Where Is the Line?
As this site explores the promises and pitfalls of collaborative journalism, I'm particularly interested in the invisible and often porous boundary between collaboration and consolidation.
Many of the same technological changes and economic pressures that have driven the development of collaborative journalism are also driving media consolidation; in both cases, proponents argue that benefits include reducing overhead costs and pooling resources to provide quality journalism to the community.
Media consolidation is a dangerous problem, reducing the number of independent sources of news—that’s why there are rules to control it. But media companies have devised a way around those rules, and are pursuing profits at the expense of the communities they’re supposed to serve. “Covert consolidation” takes many forms, but the results are the same: Media companies pad their bottom line by sacrificing local journalism, competition and diversity. In many cases, one news team produces a single newscast for multiple stations. The result: less news about your community and fewer journalists holding our leaders accountable.
Worst of all, stations claim they don’t have to report these deals to anyone.
At changethechannels.org, you can join with others in your community to demand change at the local level. Help uncover these dirty deals; submit video and information to our national database; and take action to pressure local broadcasters. Together we’ll build a case against covert consolidation that the Federal Communications Commission won’t be able to ignore.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Covert Consolidation?
Hundreds of TV stations across the country have quietly merged newsrooms, getting around media ownership rules at the expense of the communities that depend on them for news and information.
Rather than competing for scoops, these stations are colluding to cut costs and reduce competition. What you get is one story – from one viewpoint, by one reporter, from one camera angle – broadcast on several stations.
During the last gubernatorial election in Hawaii, a Honolulu viewer tuned in to Channel 5 for coverage of the contested race. When she switched to Channel 7, she found the same reporter conducting the same interview. And on Channel 9? Identical news coverage.
Why is Covert Consolidation happening?
A government agency – the Federal Communications Commission in Washington – has rules in place to ensure a diversity of voices and viewpoints and to protect local communities from media monopolies. These rules limit media consolidation in TV and radio markets because broadcasters use public airwaves – a valuable, limited resource that requires them to serve the public interest.
But there are loopholes. Even though companies are only allowed to own a limited number of TV stations in one area, there’s no rule that prevents them from controlling as many stations as they want. As long as a company’s name isn’t on the broadcast license, it can control everything from news programming to office operations, and it doesn’t even have to tell anyone what it’s up to.
Is this happening everywhere?
Why does this matter?
How can we stop Covert Consolidation?
Why now?
What can I do to Change the Channels?
- Sign the petition. Tell the FCC to stop letting media companies skirt the rules.
- Help us build our case. Because this is local TV, we rely on submissions from activists to document what covert consolidation looks like on the air. Download our guide to learn how to submit documentation of covert consolidation in your community.
- Spread the word. Tell your friends on Facebook and Twitter, then download our toolkit to organize your community to change the channels.
- Change the Channels Toolkit
Download our activist toolkit for tips on how to Change the Channels in your community. - Covert Consolidation Crisis
A helpful discussion guide for spreading the word about this sneaky form of media consolidation. - Outsourcing the News
This white paper by Free Press's Corie Wright and Josh Stearns lays out our research on covert consolidation and provides in-depth case studies of three covert consolidation deals. - Local TV & Shared Services Agreements, Honolulu
This study by Danilo Yanich analyzes the daily newscasts of all five television stations in Honolulu, HI, before and after the Shared Services Agreement went into effect. - Covert Consolidation and the Future of Media
Read more about our official stance on covert consolidation in this excerpt from joint comments filed at the FCC by Free Press and our allies. - Formal Complaint Against Honolulu Shared Services Agreement
