JOUR 3060: Communication Law & Regulation
Dr. Powers
Spring 2015
Writing
Assignment: Media Ownership Review [1]
Background: Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act of
1996 requires the Federal Communications Commission to review its ownership
rules every four years and determine whether they are in the public
interest. Under Section 202(h), the
Commission shall repeal or modify any regulation it determines is no longer in
the public interest.[2]
Summary
of assignment: Each student
is asked to write a public comment arguing for the reform of the FCC’s 2010 Media Ownership Rules.[3] Each brief must include the following
sections: (1) What legal authority does the FCC have to regulate media
ownership?; (2) The problem(s) with the current media ownership rules; (3) The
proposed change in media ownership rules; (4) The likely consequences of the
proposed change in media ownership rules and (5) a rebuttal to possible
criticisms of a change in media ownership rules.
·
Section I: What legal authority does the FCC have to
regulate media ownership? In this
section, you should: (a) outline the statutory origins of FCC media ownership
regulations; (b) provide historical context explaining why Congress provided
the FCC the authority to regulate media ownership; and (c) identify the
constitutional basis for Congressional regulation (which was delegated to the
FCC) of media ownership. (No more than 1000 words; 20 points.)
·
Section II: The problem(s) with the current media ownership
rules. This section should include: (a)
why media ownership matters; (b) the evolution of its regulation; (c) how new
and emerging technologies require additional reform of media ownership
policies; and (d) the specific problem or problems with the current regulatory
regime requiring reform. (No more than
1000 words; 20 points.)
·
Section
III: The proposed change in media
ownership rules. This section should include (a) a specific policy proposal
(and language) that would alter the FCC’s current media ownership regulations;
(b) key differences between existing regulations and your proposed changes
should be highlighted, and (c) specific citations of either Congressional
legislation or legal precedent that demonstrates the FCC’s legal authority to
enact the proposed changes. (No more than 500 words; 10 points.)
·
Section IV: The likely consequences of the proposed change
in media ownership rules: (a) How does the proposed change remedy the problems
you outlined regarding the current regulatory regime? (b) What is the primary
benefit of the reform? (c) What industries are affected, and who are the key
players in those industries? (d) What other consequences would the change have?
(e) How would the proposed change impact consumer access to diverse
programming? (f) Make a comprehensive and persuasive argument for the reform
you’ve proposed. (e): Extra credit (up to five points, depending on quality
of argument and evidence): connect the reform to media policy outside the
United States, using its similarity to another country’s media laws as evidence
of its likely effect. (No more than 1000
words, or 1200 words if you attempt the extra credit; 20 points.)
·
Section V: A rebuttal to possible criticisms of a change in
media ownership rules. (a) Who loses out in the proposed change in policy? (b)
What are their best arguments against the reform? (c) Why are those arguments
wrong? (No more than 500 words; 10 points.)
Where do I start?
1.
Get to
know the rules. The Commission's current ownership rules can be found in
the Code of
Federal Regulations.
b.
It has
extensive research and resources for you to draw from.
2.
Do
background research on (1) why media ownership matters, (2) the history of its
regulation, and (3) how new and emerging technologies are impacting media
ownership policies.
3.
Approach
the assignment step by step. Start with section 1, proceed to section 2, and on
and on. Set deadlines for yourself: Section one done by Spring Break, etc.
4.
To help you
get started, I’ve gathered some resources that you may consider using. See attached bibliography.
5.
Use me as a
resource as much as you need. This is challenging assignment, and by the end of
it I want you to be proud of the brief you have produced.
6.
Keep in mind
that you can propose any media ownership reform you like as long as it can
constitutionally defended. You could
argue for further restrictions on media ownership or less; different types of
restrictions, etc. All legally grounded
perspectives are welcome!
Grading:
1.
Section 1: 20
points; Section 2: 20 points; Section 3: 10 points; Section 4: 20 points;
Section 5: 10 points.
a.
As you write
each section, make sure that you are addressing on each of the sub-points
clearly and sufficiently. Feel free to note which question, using the letter
associated with the sub point, you are addressing.
b.
Example: “The
proposed changes would certainly disadvantage media conglomerates like News
Corporation and Turner Broadcasting, among others, who benefit from the current
hand-off approach to regulating cable television (5a).”
2.
Treat this
like a document you would submit to the FCC for review in the lead up to its
2014 review of media ownership regulations. It is a legal document.
Writing should be formal and clear. Grammar, punctuation, precision and
accuracy all matter (10 points)
3.
The word
limits are strictly enforced. Do not go
over the noted word limit for each section. Brevity is an asset in legal
arguments. (Excess words will result points lost in the particular section in
question; see above for point distribution between sections).
4.
Arguments need to be grounded in legal precedent
and well-researched scholarship, not one’s one perspective. Research, research, research. You need to cite
relevant research to defend your arguments. So start by reading as much as you
can about media ownership. (10 points)
5.
Wikipedia is
not a citable reference. Use published, qualified research papers and
books.
7.
All work must
be your own. If you copy text or ideas without proper citation, I will know,
and you will receive an F.
8.
Due by 11:59p
on May 4th. You have over three months to complete this assignment.
Start early. Late papers will be deducted 10% a day. Email final papers to smp@gsu.edu.
9.
Professor
will return the paper to students with specific comments by request.
10. Professor
will review drafts up until April 19. If you would like me to review your work
before you turn in a final paper, then start early.
Bibliography
D. Linda Garcia and Ellen Surles,
“Media Ownership and Communications: Enriching the Research Agenda,” Telecommunications
Policy 31, no. 8–9 (October 2007): 473-492.
Robert W. McChesney, Rich
Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times (New Press,
The, 2000).
Lee C. Jr Bollinger, “Freedom of
the Press and Public Access: Toward a Theory of Partial Regulation of the Mass
Media,” Michigan Law Review 75 (1977 1976): 1.
Victor Pickard, America's Battle for Media Democracy
(Cambridge University Press, 2014).
George Glider, The Freedom Model of Telecommunications
(The Progress and Freedom Foundation, 1995).
Robert W. McChesney, The
Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication Politics in the Twenty-First Century,
1st Printing. (Monthly Review Press, 2004).
Michael Wolff, The Man Who
Owns the News: Inside the Secret World of Rupert Murdoch (Broadway, 2008).
C. Edwin Baker, Media
Concentration and Democracy: Why Ownership Matters, 1st ed. (Cambridge
University Press, 2006).
Ben H. Bagdikian, The New
Media Monopoly: A Completely Revised and Updated Edition With Seven New
Chapters (Beacon Press, 2004).
Henry Jenkins, “The Cultural
Logic of Media Convergence,” International Journal of Cultural Studies
7, no. 1 (March 1, 2004): 33 -43.
Lee C. Bollinger, Uninhibited,
Robust, and Wide-open: a Free Press for a New Century (Oxford University
Press, 2010).
Eli M. Noam, Media Ownership
and Concentration in America (Oxford University Press, 2009).
Ben Scott, “Politics and Policy
of Media Ownership, The,” American University Law Review 53 (2004 2003):
645.
Scott Cleland and Ira Brodsky, Search
& Destroy: Why You Can’t Trust Google Inc., 1st ed. (Telescope Books,
2011).
Bruce M Owen, “Regulatory Reform:
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the FCC Media Ownership Rules,” Law
Review of Michigan State University Detroit College of Law 2003 (2003):
671.
L. P Hitchens, “Media Ownership
and Control: A European Approach,” The Modern Law Review 57, no. 4 (July
1, 1994): 585-601.
[1] 35% of your final grade
[2] To learn more about the FCC’s
rulemaking process, and see other legal documents similar to the one you are
asked to write, see: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/rulemaking
[3] While the FCC does ask for and
will review all public comments regarding media ownership, and students are
welcome to submit their paper as a public comment, this is not a requirement of
the assignment.
