Changes

:The majority instead chooses radical deregulation - perhaps not quite so radical as originally intended a year ago before so much pressure was brought to bear upon them - but radical nevertheless. This decision allows a corporation to control three television stations in a single city. Why does any corporate interest need to own three stations in any city, other than to enjoy the 40-50 percent profit margins most consolidated stations are racking up? What public interest, what diversity, does that serve? This decision also allows the giant media companies to buy up the remaining local newspaper and exert massive influence over some communities by wielding three TV stations, eight radio stations, the cable operator, and the already monopolistic newspaper. What public interest, what new competition, is enabled by encouraging the newspaper monopoly and the broadcasting oligopoly to combine? This decision further allows the already massive television networks to buy up even more local TV stations, so that they control up to an unbelievable 80 or 90 percent of the national television audience. Where are the blessings of localism, diversity and competition here? I see centralization, not localism; I see uniformity, not diversity; I see monopoly and oligopoly, not competition.

:Copps is one of the few former Capitol Hill staffers to serve on the FCC, and his experience in that crucible of partisan politics came into play when Powell began pushing for an overhaul of media ownership rules in 2001. Copps decided the public needed to know the stakes and reached out to consumer and public interest advocates. ...