(This article is written and researched by Guy Heston, a good long-time friend and return contributor to LeftWingCapitalist. It is thoughtful and insightful. He is very even-handed about these things, so you will probably find this to be more informative and entertaining than anything I could have written on this topic. --LWC, ed.)
My friends on the right are in an election
year tizzy over government regulations.
The United States Chamber of Commerce, of late funding a massive
pro-Republican television ad campaign in battleground states such as Virginia,
Ohio and Florida, has invoked the name of conservative icon William F. Buckley
by declaring, “At some point we must stand athwart the growing regulatory blob
and yell stop!” The Republican Party
Platform 2012 contains various references to regulations, including this
doozy: “Experience has shown that, in
caring for the land and water, private ownership has been our best guarantee of
conscientious stewardship, while the worst instances of environmental
degradation have occurred under government control.”
Anyone who has ever dealt with a city planning
department can attest to onerous regulations.
And I would argue that deregulation of the airline industry has been
largely beneficial to the public. We flyers get herded like cattle and nickeled and dimed on fees (at least the loo is
still free) but the price and access are better under deregulation and the
airlines do have to worry about competition.
But be careful what you wish for. Deregulation does not always serve the public
interest.
The radio broadcasting industry -- it used to be fun, but those good ol' days are just quaint
Take for example the radio broadcasting
industry. Once upon a time radio
stations were closely regulated by the Federal Communications Commission under
the Communications Act of 1934. The
theory was that since broadcast frequencies were limited and belonged to the
public (unlike the newspaper industry or what’s left of it where anyone is free
to publish) there should be some rules to protect the public assets. And so it came to pass that no one, including
corporations “who” have since been ruled by the Supreme Court to be people,
could own more than seven AM and seven FM stations and no more than one AM and
one FM in any city. The idea was
diversity of ownership and programming.
And a station was required to devote a certain amount of air time to
news and public affairs. Radio flourished, even with the former and now quaint
regulation limiting the amount of commercial time in any one hour of
broadcasting.
Prodded by the Reagan administration, both the
FCC and Congress began to ease regulations, lifting restrictions on the amount
of advertising that could be carried, somewhat easing restrictions on the
number of stations one could own and so forth.
Most famously, the Fairness Doctrine was turned off in 1987 (another
quaint regulation that simply and without any prior restraint required
broadcasters to be fair in the presentation of their programming).
Fast forward to 1996 when the radio industry
was vastly deregulated (OK, I admit it happened under a Democrat
president). With encouragement by the
National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), those pesky regulations on
ownership limits were mostly tossed.
Corporations were freed to buy hundreds of stations all over the country
(there are still certain limitations to how many stations you can own in one
market, so even today you cannot buy every station in Los Angeles and
monopolize the market--a small tribute to government regulation).
Radio broadcasting now -- all monsters, all the time
What do we have to show for this? The radio industry is now dominated by a few
corporate players such as Clear Channel, Cumulus and CBS Radio. The largest is Clear Channel, which owns more
than 850 stations according to its website.
As a result of a huge cost cutting effort at such companies, thousands
of local DJ’s, newscasters and other radio employees have been laid off. Much of the programming you hear originates
from out of town via computer, explaining why you infrequently hear the time
and temperature or much local news unless you are listening to one of the few
metropolitan news/talk stations. If you
are traveling around the country, it’s often difficult to know what city you
are in just by listening to the car radio since the programming is so often
piped in from who knows where. Kind of
like elevator music. So much for
deregulation.
Let’s return to the National Association of
Broadcasters, that potent force for the free market place. It turns out that when it suits the interests
of its corporate members, the NAB is all in favor of government regulation. So for example it recently proposed the FCC
require/mandate/order (pick your regulatory verb) smart phone manufacturers to
include FM radio access on your device.
Some manufacturers already provide this option, so consumers are
regulation-free to choose this if they so desire. But, no, the NAB wants this
regulated--consumers would get it and pay for it whether they want it or
not. Those blasted government
regulations!
I can appreciate the NAB’s concerns. Radio advertising has been sluggish. More than 20 million Americans have freely
chosen to subscribe to Sirius/XM satellite radio. Pandora Internet radio is hugely
popular. And now even Apple has
announced it’s getting into the personalized on-line radio game. That blasted competition!
So by all means let those of us who wish stand
athwart the growing regulatory blob.
Unless of course the blob affects your corporate interests. Meanwhile, others of us occasionally listen
to terrestrial radio and pine for the glory days of a little more regulation.
No comments:
Post a Comment