Big Media Censors Competition

Tweet

A short while ago, the Janesville Gazette ran an Op-ed article titled “FCC must separate speech and state” written by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. What is the Competitive Enterprise Institute? Don’t let the name fool you. This outfit appears to be nothing short of an extreme right-wing anarco-capitalist groupthink whose name oddly enough reminds me of the Cancer Institute. You know, the Cancer Institute is dedicated to stamping out cancer. Similarly, the Competitive Enterprise Institute is for, you know, stamping out competition. Simply, their attempt to throw the proliferation of media monopolies onto the coattails of speech and state separation is weak. The war between big business and free speech is all about power and control, nothing less. But this rather naively written opinion piece about “big media” is really not a reason to get concerned.

What is more telling of the Gazette's intentions is that they print such an easily debunked and extreme piece of work without running a competitive opposing view. In a real-time sample analysis, the lack of a side-by-side rebuttal in the paper actually disproves the authors philosophy. So, why blame the FCC for censorship and media business restrictions when the supposedly free market (Gazette) does it regardless. The absence of an opposing view censors at least half the available information. I for one do not want the government to practice censorship. But just as well, I want the government to create and enforce laws preventing free market or otherwise, from doing the same.

This article seemed to support the Gazette’s decision to consolidate their own business affiliates. They announced a couple of weeks ago in an info-commercial editorial that Bliss Communications(parent company) has decided to “converge” their radio and newspaper operations thereby creating, in their view, a better product speaking with one voice. Granted, newspapers are facing competition for readers with other multi-media but make no mistake, the Gazette is the only daily newspaper in Janesville, they have no competition. Sure, you can get the Journal Sentinel, Madison Newspapers and even the Chicago Tribune from boxes and stations around town, but they will not carry even poorly written stories about Janesville schools or the broken water main near your home.

In my view, their “convergence” happened for two primary reasons. One, to cut costs resulting from duplication and number two, to tighten the grip on their mini-monopoly. It certainly is their prerogative to do so, but under the guise of a better product?

The Gazette not unlike the cable company Charter has a monopoly in Janesville, they dictate prices, services and most importantly, the content. Take it or leave it.
In a letter to the Gazette editor titled, ”Football fans deserve more from cable TV,” the writer believes if consumers had more than one cable company in town, the quality of service and content would be better. Although the letter writer identified himself as the director of TV4US, the Gazette editor, as they oftenly do, noted afterwards that TV4US is a non-profit consumer advocate. But strangely enough, continued on with an endorsement for more cable competition and choices with this.

JG excerpt:
EDITORS NOTE: TV4US Wisconsin is a nonprofit, grass-roots coalition advocating on behalf of cable TV customers toward competitive alternatives, leading to lower cable bills and improved service. The coalition’s Website is We Want Choice Wisconsin

Remember, this is the editor’s note. So my question is: Why would the Gazette advocate more competition in other industries, but within their own, think convergence is best?