WE CAN all sleep easier at night now --- Michael Powell, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission and son of outgoing Secretary of State Colin Powell, announced his resignation last week. This marks the end of his conservative attempt to initiate flawed and foolhardy media reform policies.
Powell headed the FCC for four years and in this short time managed to pander to large media corporations and simultaneously instill conservative ideology across all media programming.
Many Americans agree with Powell's assertive regulatory powers to curb obscenity and indecency on television, as seen in the support for the hefty fines issued to Howard Stern and Viacom after the Janet Jackson "nipplegate" incident.
Yet this policy contradicts Powell's obedience to media conglomerate interests. During Powell's tenure, the FCC relaxed regulations on media ownership. In true conservative, big business fashion, Powell allowed conglomerates to gain more control in national television, newspaper and radio markets and push out smaller, independent companies. So instead of individualized decision-making power and competitive marketplaces, corporate-driven media companies now produce artifacts based solely on profit interests, instead of audience concerns of decency, creativity and quality. When it comes to embracing nudity and obscenity or taking away decision-making power, Americans should choose to follow Howard Stern and retain their First Amendment rights.
This condemnation of conglomerates is embodied in a political economy critique of media. The industry is ruled by a few corporate owners who seek to maximize profits and increase advertising venues. Media programs are thereby indistinguishable from advertisements. Standardized products which often serve commercial interests become the norm in the industry. Therefore, in a thriving democratic society, Americans should not support monopoly control of the media market -- all decision-making power is left to a commercially-charged machine that values profits over quality programming.
The effects of a concentrated media industry are far more dreadful than a glance at Janet Jackson's breast. Although the Jackson case is different due to the spontaneity of the action, Howard Stern's foul language and obscene actions are known and expected by the general public. Parents and individuals can choose not to listen to Stern's radio show. No one is forcing individuals to accept Stern's ideology -- if you are repulsed, turn the dial! Also, competitive marketplaces help to shape media programming to match societal tastes. If there is an overwhelming disgust at the "Desperate Housewives" advertisement on ABC, the network will not blatantly reproduce the condemned obscenity and lose viewers. Parents can effectively control their children's exposure to obscene programming, but they have no power against influential, commercial advertising machines. Conglomerates realize children's impact on parent spending and the future buying power of young generations and therefore want children to be subsumed in this capitalist environment.
We all know the trite saying "sex sells" -- commercials, billboards, magazines, etc. are all marketing sex and perfect figures to children. If conglomerates continue to gain more control, how will the FCC be able to regulate indecent and obscene commercialization? Powell's FCC already bulldozed one blockade to conglomerate control -- another conservative FCC term is sure to continue its support of big business interests and looser conglomerate regulations. The increasing enormousness of these corporations should concern the FCC and its ability to exert regulatory power. Hence, the foolishness of Powell's media reform. Powell attempted to increase FCC regulatory power in the decency and standards realm, but also mitigated the FCC's power by strengthening conglomerates and once again demonstrating the Republican Party's curiously strong support for the interests of large corporations.
Although we can take a deep breath of relief after Powell's resignation, Bush's appointment of the new FCC chairman is sure to be just as conservative and just as foolish. Soon the FCC will allow conglomerates to own the world while handing out meaningless fines to these billion-dollar companies for obscene programming.
Michael Behr's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at mbehr@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
GILLIKIN and JOHNSON: U.Va., please rescind your Federal Executive Institute bid
By Steven L. Johnson and Matthew Gillikin | YesterdayBy withdrawing its competing bid and endorsing the Charlottesville City Schools’ bid, the University has a high-profile opportunity to strengthen its partnership with Charlottesville City Schools.
GARVIE: Commend the University’s continuous care for the environment
By Adeline Garvie | 3 days agoWe must applaud the University for the efforts they are continuously making to be more sustainable.
CARTER: Did anyone actually want VERVE?
By Nathaniel Carter | April 19, 2025While VERVE may shift student demand closer to Grounds, whether housing market effects will outweigh the harms of the University’s expanding presence is a gamble Charlottesville residents may not wish to take.
