<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

[IP] INTERVIEW WITH FCC COMMISSIONER POWELL





Begin forwarded message:

From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: July 7, 2004 10:08:52 PM EDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] INTERVIEW WITH FCC COMMISSIONER POWELL
Reply-To: dewayne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

INTERVIEW WITH FCC COMMISSIONER POWELL

Michael K. Powell, a Republican, was nominated 31 July 1997 as a member of the FCC by President William J. Clinton and confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 28 October 1997. President George W. Bush appointed Powell chairman of the FCC on 22 January 2001. Gartner Fellow Kenneth McGee met recently with Chairman Powell in his Washington, DC, office to discuss issues and policies concerning broadband, telecommunications, media ownership and content issues and digital TV. On Media ownership Powell said: Here's the truth: the ownership debate is about nothing but content. Don't be fooled. I mean, this is my greatest warning to the American public. It's easy to go after every ill in society by claiming it's the media's fault. It's the American pastime, right? Anything you don't like, it's the media's fault. What scared me in that debate is that it's not about the ownership rules at all. The vast majority of people don't even know what the rules say, to be perfectly candid. Name all six of them. Name what they actually do. Nobody can. They became a stalking horse for a debate about the role of media in our society. I can expect and understand consumer anger and anxiety about that. But the ownership rules are not the cause or the cure. It was really an invitation for people with particular viewpoints to push for a thumb on the scale, for content in a direction that people preferred. The danger with that? It's easy to say, "I'm comfortable with that when the government's doing it for something I like. But I get really scared when it's something I don't." And what is juxtaposed against the media ownership debate? Indecency, which maybe is what you mean by content. Hollywood was happy to beat up on ownership liberalization because they want the government to intervene so we can promote more independent programming — which is content. But the same Hollywood says the government can't say that Howard Stern can't say the F word, because that's censorship and inappropriate.

[SOURCE: Gartner, a provider of research and analysis on the global IT industry]
<http://www4.gartner.com/research/fellows/asset_91308_1176.jsp>

Archives at: <http://Wireless.Com/Dewayne-Net>
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/