Mediaboss Marketing

AMERICANS pride themselves on a sense of fairness. When one side of a controversy gets to articulate a point of view to the public and the other side doesn't because of lack of resources or access to media, we conclude that the "marketplace of ideas" has broken down. On the other hand, we also believe that government should not intervene to control public debate over the issues of the day. This is particularly critical in the realm of elections, both local and national.

This past August, the "Fairness Doctrine" was expunged from the Federal Register. From 1949 to 1987, the Fairness Doctrine required radio and television stations to offer a "range of opinion" on public matters in their broadcasts. Although no station ever lost its license for failing to comply with this regulation, broadcasters perpetually claimed that the doctrine was burdensome and restricted their First Amendment rights.

Television and radio are still the primary sources of news for most Americans, and it is vital that the broadcasters who enjoy the license of this public resource — the radio spectrum — serve the public with news coverage of the critical issues of the day. Because the spectrum is licensed on a geographic basis, more than 1,700 television and 14,000 radio stations serve the U.S. population.

These stations both compete and cooperate with cable- and satellite-television networks, which are required to retransmit local television programming to their local service areas. Most TV viewers don't know that their local ABC station pays a license fee to use the airwaves, while CNN does not, because both pure cable and old-fashioned broadcast stations appear equally on their cable or satellite TV menus.

In the changing media landscape created by the explosion of 24-hour cable networks and millions of websites since the 1990s, the Fairness Doctrine went the way of the dodo bird. With saturation coverage of presidential elections and national issues on the Internet and news networks, it became harder to argue that the public wasn't exposed to a wide range of views.

Yet, the gaping hole in the new media universe is coverage of local controversies, elections and mundane matters such as the activities of city and county governments.

According to the Pew Research Center, the number of daily newspapers declined from 1,800 to 1,600 in the two decades between 1990 and 2010. Pew further reports that this 20-year view shows a steady slide in paid circulation. Daily circulation, which stood at 62.3 million in 1990, fell to 43.4 million in 2010, a decline of 30 percent. Sunday circulation held up slightly better, declining by only 26 percent.

With fewer newspapers serving communities and broadcasters freed of responsibility to cover civic affairs, how will people keep up to speed with salient topics facing their communities? While the cost of local transit projects or waste-treatment plants is not as entertaining as the peccadilloes of presidential candidates, one could argue that local projects, funded by local tax dollars, have a more immediate impact on people's lives than a national candidate's vision for moon colonies. Although a few promising local websites have emerged to cover local matters, they reach only a small fraction of the regular radio or TV audience.

I propose that we bring back the Fairness Doctrine, specifically for local matters defined by the service areas of licensed radio and television stations. Local broadcasters, for example, should be required to devote at least five hours of programming per week to areas such as public education, city and county services and taxes. Citizens deserve to know where their tax dollars are going and how local agencies are managed. Local elections deserve more coverage than 500 word statements printed in voter guides.

While broadcasters will complain about the "unfairness" of this new Fairness Doctrine, it would be a small price to pay for coverage of local issues and elections. Public-affairs programming, as evidenced by first-rate local programs like KIRO's daily radio program, "The Newsmakers," and King 5's "Up Front," can make for engaging programming when addressing topics that impact Seattle and King County. In the age of global communication, it's time to reestablish the primacy of issues that are close to home.

Alex Alben has worked in broadcast journalism and the high-tech industry. He is writing a book about digital culture. His email is alexalben99@yahoo.com

See the original post here:
Media and democracy: It's time for a new Fairness Doctrine