"FCC Commissioner Warns of Agency’s Plan to Monitor Newsrooms" study ?

[Leifer]

This looks like a headline/rumor/story/study, that found it's way into news because of a possible over-intrusion of gov't into America's newsrooms.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/fcc-commissioner-warns-of-agency’s-plan-to-monitor-newsrooms/

An FCC commissioner is warning people about an agency study that would bring government monitors into newsrooms and inspect issues like the amount of time spent on the “critical information needs” of Americans in news content. FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal bringing people’s attention to this study, saying “the government has no place pressuring media organizations into covering certain stories.” And while participation is technically voluntary, ignoring them would not be a wise decision for any news outlet that wants an FCC license

Content from external source

The WSJ opinion editorial (op ed) by FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai.....
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304680904579366903828260732

There are many sites claiming something similar.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/fcc-chief-addresses-controversy-over-proposed-study-in-u-s-newsrooms/
and "cough, cough"...The Blaze:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ok&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=ShareButtons

Here is (was) the FCC "C.I.N." (critical information needs) study....
FCC_Final_Research_Design_6_markets.pdf

But now, the study has been suspended.....

The NY Daily News explains how and why the FCC study was hotly contested...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/fcc-longer-media-gathers-news-article-1.1699676

Uproar over a government research project questioning reporters on their newsgathering has caused the Federal Communications Commission to rethink its approach.

The FCC's "Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs" (CIN) included questions aimed at editors and journalists about why they cover certain stories, unleashing outrage that the federal government was encroaching on freedom of the press.
Though the proposal was presented to the public in May 2013, it only attracted attention in early February. (2014)

>..........>
Conservative watchdog group, American Center for Law & Justice, began an online petition in protest and FOX News talk show host Greta Van Susteren told viewers on-air that she wouldn't mind answering the government's questions with the response, "None of your business, read the Constitution."

Eleven days after Pai published his Journal article, the agency conceded, "Concerns were raised that some of the questions may not have been appropriate ... and overstepped the bounds of what is required."

Content from external source

 

[Mick West]

The study is kind of an extension of things like the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) or anti-discrimination laws - what the Right would call the "nanny state" and the Left would call something like "social equality programs". The study is:

a research design that can be used to identify and understand the critical information needs (CINs) of the American public (with special emphasis on vulnerable/disadvantaged populations).

Content from external source

So the idea seems to be to try to ensure that everyone gets a fair slice of relevant info in TV news. Of course the Right don't like the interference with the free markets, and nobody likes the hinting at restrictions on freedom of speech, or even imposition of government propaganda objectives.

It all seems largely academic, and and has got to this stage because of lack of clarity in the study proposal, and the media taking advantage of an easy target.

 

[Leifer]

I agree.....parts of the requested study could seem invasive because of it's wording, and possible content monitoring within the media before publishing the content.
On the outside, it looks like parental FCC monitoring.....but it would have been only a critique (the study's results).

In some ways, a published critique could be seen as an implied need (or forced) to change programming (recommended by the FCC), if the critique spelled-out inconsistencies of media reporting, or if a favoritism led to certain "media market" goals.

a. Media Market Census

i. Understanding of Media Market Census goals

The core goal of the media market census is to determine whether and how FCCregulated
and related media construct news and public affairs to provide for CINs across
different communities. This includes a thorough study of local media ecologies, with
special emphasis on performance and access/barriers to CINs. This census will consist of
two primary components:
1) Constructed databases of local content1 (including services/media providing
alternative languages, media description, closed captioning, etc.) for a
constructed 1-week period that tap into CINs (i.e., accessibility or lack
thereof), coded per research design.
2) A qualitative analysis of local media services providing for CINs, with
particular emphasis on media ownership/management characteristics,
employment data, demographics of decision makers, and barriers to entry

Content from external source

It reminds me of the new deal with Comcast, where minority programming was recently given a new push...
http://www.npr.org/2013/11/12/244558834/comcast-deal-puts-new-minority-run-channels-in-play

Rapper and producer Sean "Diddy" Combs, director Robert Rodriguez, and basketball legend Magic Johnson each now has his own new cable TV networks. Their channels were part of a merger deal Comcast made with the FCC to give a shot to new networks owned by African Americans, Latinos and others.

Content from external source

In 1973 (the infancy of cable), a similar proposal of ensuring content diversity was put forth....
Cable Television and the Promise.pdf


So it's many-sided.......
....The FCC recommends or requires diverse content (good thing)
.....and the FCC is steering content, or putting rules on free speech (bad thing)