For years one activist organization after another has expressed concern about the “control” of the media. They slice and dice the markets to attempt to demonstrate all of the untold harm that will befall listeners or viewers if this, that or the other business is allowed to merge with or purchase control of another media entity. The wailing and gnashing of teeth has been heard from the FCC to the FTC to the Department of Justice.
These same meddlers were heard from when the barely solvent XM Satellite Radio sought to merge with Sirius Satellite Radio. The resulting entity still struggles to date, but as one with no evident harm to consumers. The same voices were heard opposing newspapers seeking to merge in an effort to put off rigor mortis. And of course, we should allow radio and newspapers to compete without arbitrary impediments such as restraints on mergers, extracting policy commitments from companies while they are at the mercy of a regulatory agency during a merger review, ownership caps, or discriminatory taxes based solely on business model rather than product delivered.
And yet, where are these voices when television programmers collude at the urging of the President to manipulate the messages on the airwaves? The silence is deafening.
In late October, the four networks coordinated storylines for a week to promote “volunteerism.” Setting aside the clamor that most of the Website direction and on air examples were to politically liberal causes, the question is whether such coordination at government urging is justifiable for any message.
The problem is that government influence can be pervasive, especially when you understand that a media company’s greatest asset, the license to be on the air, is firmly controlled by government. So, suggestions from government, no matter how slight or how oblique, take on a new and urgent meaning. And of course government is also law enforcement, so their suggestions are backed by handcuffs and fines.
Make no mistake--a single company with that sort of influence would be no better than the government as both take on a “single programmer” appearance. However, if the real concern is about control of messages and about consumer choice then one should be at least as concerned about government manipulation of media content as they are about any supposed media monopolies, since government is the ultimate monopoly.