CABLE TELEVISION IS NOT FREE!!!

A lot of people in rural America cannot even afford cable. All of this consolidation, like ABC and ESPN is not working. THE REASON THE RATINGS FOR THE FINALS WAS DOWN IS THE SWITCH OF THE NBA FROM NBC TO ABC!!!

You cannot believe how difficult it is to get ABC in rural NC without cable. Believe me, I know. CABLE ISN’T EVEN OFFERED in a lot of rural areas. We are forced to get a satellite, and they don’t include local channels in the basic package. You have to pay extra, which we cannot afford, to get local channels.

So, it is a struggle to try and get ABC, and then halfway through the games the televisions start acting crazy or whatever. NBC plays without even having an antenna.

No one can sit up here and say that all of this media consolidation is not going to hurt, because it is. It is going to keep a lot of information from reaching rural areas…AND AS A RESULT…they are not up to speed with what is going on in the world.

THAT FAVORS BUSH for reelection…

…and I hate it.

Thanks for the response and, no, we don’t have a comment section on Federal Review, but are looking into it. I understand your point that innovation my be stifled by consolidation (and think this has already happened in radio and popular music, but that may just be a function of my age), but I find your argument much better reasoned and demonstrating a much greater understanding of the issue than Sen. Edwards. But neither of you seemed concerned about the business realities and the fact that stations will cease to broadcast in smaller markets without the ability to combine forces with other stations in the market. Not just in Raleigh, but de facto duopolies exist from Wilmington, NC to Anchorage, Alaska to Fargo, ND to Joplin, Missouri. Surely, one of those markets counts as “rural.” Search the FCC website for “Local Marketing Agreement” or “Joint Sales Agreement” or “Time Brokerage Agreement” or “Shared Services Agreement” and you will find many more.

My point about Sen. Edwards and his ability to lie was a cheap, but valid, shot. See the cross-examination of Judge Pickering to better understand his lawyerly lying in an important public venue.

And you know I didn’t represent my Edwards attack as “thorough”, but “more thorough” than my post here. But that’s splitting hairs.

Also, check out http://businesslawyer.blogspot.com where I found more discussion of the issue (on the pro-consolidation side — a rarity among blogs), and there’s a reference to a good article at the Heritage Foundation.

I read your criticism of Edwards’ letter on your blog, on which, I note, you have no identifiable place for comments. So, allow me to respond here.

Your argument would be stronger without ad hominem personal attacks on Edwards. Is your argument strengthened by claiming that Edwards can lie easily because he is a lawyer? No, it is cheapened.

Furthermore, while you do some clever research into who owns what station in the Eastern North Carolina markets, you fail to identify which stations or which market you are taling about. If you are talking about the stations broadcasting from the Raleigh market, you’re hardly talking about rural America.

Edwards’ point, that locally owned and managed stations have been centers of community information and entertainment, is not debatable. It is locally owned WBT radio which pioneered coverage of Carolina basketball in the 1940s and 50s. It is Jefferson Pilot and WFMY Channel 2 that made ACC basketball a Thursday night staple.

When those stations, like the Clear Channel robot radio stations, are controlled from Los Angeles via satellite, a vital piece of local and rural life will be lost.

That was Senator Edwards’ point, and your “thorough” attack was both weak and not all that thorough.

But why let the facts stand in the way of Class Warfare?

It would be unthinkable with the conservative tenor of todays courts for a single district judge like Judge Green to preside for years over telecom, and in fact, the 1996 Telecommuncations Act was explicitly meant to end the consent decree that gave Judge Green control over the post-AT&T baby bell activities.

We live in a day and age where MS can dictate 80-90% of a clearly defined market using conduct that, under any traditional definition, constitutes restraints of trade and still get away with it.

Common sense suggests that ClearChannel, for one obvoius example, has monopoly power (ad prices through the roof, vertical control of independent (payola) music marketers, concert venues, almost 2000 stations (when you include the ClearChannel phantom holding companies)), and the result of this concentration is harmful to competition and very harmful to consumers.

But no Court would get through all the hurdles of defining the relevant market, showing market power, showing harm to consumers, and determining the proper remedy–in this case a breakup–without reversal or getting hauled before the court of public opinion… or worse, getting hauled before the Senate.

I’m sure that rural North Carolinans are crucial to Sen. Edwards voter base and are never ridiculed on this site for their, ummm…uninformedness.