When Media Giants Wed: NOT a Feminist Love Story

August 20, 2010

By Lisa Bennett, NOW Communications Director

When big media companies merge or partner it's rarely a good thing. Sure, it might be profitable for those at the top and stockholders. But generally it's bad news for the little people -- otherwise known as their viewers, listeners, readers and users.

Why is this a feminist issue? Because the ever-increasing consolidation of media ownership means fewer and fewer people decide what you and I have access to through our TVs, PCs, mobile phones, radios, newspapers, etc. Having just a few big conglomerates in control of our communication, news and entertainment options makes it that much harder for new and independent providers to compete. What we're left with is a landscape of limited viewpoints and voices, newly erected roadblocks and higher prices. Try getting a feminist message out when the big-moneyed ranks are closing in and tightening their grip.

We've got two such potential calamities on our hands right now. First up is Comcast's bid to acquire NBC-Universal. The Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department are reviewing the proposed merger, which would be "the largest consolidation of media power in American history" according to Washington, D.C.'s NewsChannel 8, which ran a multi-page ad in Politico on behalf of local news consumers across the U.S.

In addition to the tens of millions of cable customers and Internet users it already boasts, Comcast would take control of the NBC network, 10 local NBC affiliates in major markets, 16 Spanish-language stations, numerous top-tier cable networks, a wealth of original TV programming and movies from Universal Studios.

NOW is part of The Coalition for Competition in the Media, which has expressed vocal opposition to the buyout. Others concerned about the deal include Bloomberg and the American Cable Association.

Corie Wright, policy counsel for Free Press, explains it like this: "In its current form, this proposed merger suffers from a sizeable public interest deficit. If this merger is allowed to go through, consumers will have less, not more choice, especially if they seek access to independent or diverse voices. It will mean less innovation in the emerging market for online video, fewer local voices and diminished media diversity."

At the same time, media giants Google and Verizon are entering into a dangerous dance of their own. Just last night, at a public hearing in Minneapolis on the future of the Internet, Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) had this to say: "I believe that net neutrality is the First Amendment issue of our time."

What is net neutrality? Quite simply, it's the principle that protects choice of content and equal opportunity on the Internet. Net neutrality levels the playing field by promoting the widest possible dissemination of speech. But there are no explicit laws enforcing net neutrality, and this latest venture puts the principle at risk. As Google was once a solid defender of net neutrality while Verizon was not, this partnership is terribly discouraging.

Earlier this month the two companies put forth a joint proposal suggesting a legislative framework they admit is a "compromise" on net neutrality. The compromise is focused on the wireless market, just as more and more people are accessing the Internet via their cell phones and other mobile devices.

What we could end up with is a "tiered" wireless Internet, with some content delivered to our cell phones at a faster speed courtesy of content providers that are able to pay for preferential service. NOW has been warning that a plan like this could hurt non-profit organizations and others lacking the same deep pockets as big corporations. The beauty of the open Internet has made it possible for NOW to connect with so many people and to help them, in turn, connect with their elected officials and with each other. Unlike traditional media, the Internet makes it affordable and relatively simple to educate and empower millions. Is that all about to change?

As we've seen with the Wall Street and oil disasters, big companies cannot be trusted to regulate themselves. In the quest for greater profits and market domination, it's usually the consumers who suffer. The media industry is no exception. The stakes are high, and we're not just talking about your ability to watch Glee or download your favorite tunes -- we're talking about the ability to cultivate an effective movement for women's rights and secure equality for all. It really is that important.

Make sure you're signed up for NOW's action alerts, so you'll receive furture emails on this issue

Read more about NOW's work on media issues