On the same day Clear Channel canceled the Howard Stern Show on its network, a federal judge in Denver ruled that there is sufficient evidence for an antitrust trial on charges that Clear Channel, the nation's biggest radio broadcaster and concert promoter, kept artists off its stations unless they performed at its shows. Meanwhile, the Justice Dept. is investigating similar antitrust allegations. Is concentrated Clear Channel trying to curry favor with Washington by chilling free expression? Is media concentration chilling free expression?
Creative artists share the public’s concerns about indecency on the airwaves. However, media executives, eager to placate the angry politicians and FCC Commissioners who oversee them, are bluntly excising legitimate artistic content, chilling free expression. This heavy-handed censorship does not address the root cause of indecent content and only results in more of the homogenization of broadcast network programming already bemoaned by those in and out of the entertainment industry. Instead, lawmakers, regulators, media executives, and the public must address the link between indecent content and the rapid consolidation of America’s broadcast media.
Reacting precipitously and insensitively to the understandable uproar over the Super Bowl half-time show, NBC reedited “E.R.” to delete a brief incidental exposure of an 80 year old woman's breast. In turning “Must See TV” into “Must Not See TV,” NBC overrode the strong objections of John Wells, “E.R.”’s creator and one of the most respected and responsible producers in television. Said Wells, "While the unexpected exposure of Ms. Jackson's breast during the Super Bowl Half-Time Show was inappropriate and deplorable on a broadcast intended for viewers of all ages, 'ER's' incidental exposure of an elderly woman's breast in the context of a medical trauma is not comparable."
Perhaps NBC over-zealously edited “E.R.” to curry favor with Washington politicians and regulators who are considering whether to further relax media ownership limits or approve NBC’s big merger with Vivendi Universal Entertainment. Whatever the network’s reasons, the message to those who work in television is clear: “Bland is beautiful.” Controversy, no matter how responsibly presented, means trouble in Washington. The result will be an even more homogenized television. Radio will suffer as well, as Rush Limbaugh understood when he came to the defense of Howard Stern. The public is the ultimate loser.
Lawmakers and regulators should consider the underlying cause of the Super Bowl half-time fiasco – media consolidation. Brought to you by the Viacom-owned combination of game broadcaster CBS and half-time producer MTV, this family-unfriendly extravaganza dramatically demonstrated the seamy side of the corporate “synergies” that media executives eagerly tout to justify “Bigger is Better.” Exposing MTV to CBS’s mainstream family audience made great sense for Viacom’s bottom line. But for the public, the synergies of media consolidation meant “indecent exposure.”
Rich Hanley, director of the Graduate School of Communications at Quinnipiac University in Connecticut, says "This trend (toward increasingly indecent programming) is going to do nothing but accelerate," in large part due to existing FCC policies. "The interesting point with Michael Powell protesting is that this is the spawn of his doing."
Professor Hanley says that FCC policies have encouraged the consolidation of a handful of huge media companies all struggling to survive in an increasingly cutthroat business environment. The notion that the networks should operate in the public interest is a quaint relic of another time, he says. When the corporate structure is focused on ratings and profits, stunts like the one during the Super Bowl half-time show will become the norm.
Many of today’s outraged lawmakers and regulators signed off on changes to laws and regulatory policies that enabled a few favored media goliaths to gain a chokehold over access to the public airwaves. One of the unintended consequences of those changes is indecent programming. Indecent programming requires little creativity or imagination and is a cheap, easy, and proven method of drawing an audience. The conglomerates’ bottom line focus produces programming that is “bottom of the barrel.” That may be in the conglomerates’ interest, but it’s not in the public interest.
To combat indecency, politicians and regulators must rethink and reverse government policies that encourage media’s relentless consolidation. Otherwise, as Shakespeare penned in Julius Caesar, “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.”
Chill Media Consolidation To Fight Indecency, Not Free Expression
