| As you know there was a huge media reform movement during the early part of this century that drew out millions of people who wrote to the FCC and members of Congress and the Senate expressing their concern that too many voices were systematically being stifled. The public airwaves were for many, no longer serving the public good. Relevant news and information were taking a backseat to sensationalism and over the top antics designed to spark controversy and cause uproar which in turn would garner more listeners or viewers which in turn would lead to higher ad revenues.
While one might wish to debate whether or not that formula actually worked and more listeners were gained is not that important with respect to this discussion. First for the record,, we know that traditional outlets ranging from terrestrial radio on down to broadcast television are losing listeners and viewers by the millions every year. A major destination point has been the Internet.
Its important to understand this backdrop when we consider what is going on today and how key players in these same corporations that many of us ran away from are now trying to harness the Internet and basically control it and take away its most appealing features -The democratic, equal access make up'.
The irony to all this is many of those same power players who wish to control the Internet in 2007 were dismissive to the concerns of millions just a few short years ago. Many of them stood solidly behind former FCC chairman Michael Powell who would flippantly tell the public that they had the Internet and therefore we should not be opposed to further consolidation. In fact he would often state that further consolidation was needed so that these large media corporations could keep pace.
Apparently millions of people took Powell's advice and did just that. They stopped protesting and started making paths for themselves on the Internet. Many became citizen journalists as they started blogging, doing photo essays. They popularized social networking spaces like Friendster and Blackplanet and later Myspace, YouTube and Facebook. More importantly people many discovered Internet radio and found it to be a welcome relief from the same top ten dribble we were being forced fed on terrestrial outlets.
But just as things started seriously moving along and more and more people broke their dependency on being fed news and information from a handful of sources along comes these big corporations with all sorts of fancy sounding schemes which ultimately would result in them controlling key provisions of the Internet, gutting Net Neutrality and rearranging how content would be distributed or not distributed.
The end game would be the general public being back at square one where we would again be totally dependent upon a handful of media giants who weren't really serving our interests in the first place.
As the Internet comes under attack by these media giants you are starting to see disturbing trends that give us a glimpse as to how corporate control can be excercised and eventually abused. For example, Myspace recently limited the amount of written material you can attach in a bulletin. That means after obtaining a large and loyal following over the past two years, without warning, rhyme or reason, I can no longer send out full copies of my own articles because Rupert Murdoch and his team made changes and didn't solicit any feedback from loyal users like myself. There was no phone number to call. Writing in only got you a form letter response that did not address the question at hand. How convenient of him to do this as many of us have just begun writing and debating the presidential elections.
On AOL, they routinely knock people off line who they feel are spamming the system. Spam in their case includes people who may have 50 or more people on an email list which red flags their staff and may result in you being bumped off their network. Getting back on and proving you are legit and actually have 50 friends who want what you are sending is difficult.
The case around Internet radio where local artists suddenly have a middle man (Sound Exchange) they had no idea about until recently collecting money on their behalf is more then disconcerting. It even more disturbing when they discover this same middle man organization has made it difficult for themselves or friends who are small webcasters to stream their music and not run into complications over royalty payments.
Recently we did several radio shows here in the Bay Area to ask local artists if Sound Exchange had ever done any outreach to them to either introduce themselves, explain how they work or even to get feedback, since this would directly impact them. What we discovered is Sound Exchange and none of the groups which supposedly sit at the table representing the interests of artists had even bothered advertising, pitching stories or requesting radio interviews with people, publications or outlets frequented by the many within the very community they are supposed to represent. Many of us find the whole business shady.
I could go on and on pointing out concerns, but unfortunately this can get complicated which is part of the challenge. Many of these issues can not be put in simple 30 second soundbites. When the mega corporations who are in opposition start hijacking words and phrases that connote a certain idea like 'independent', 'grassroots' or 'hands off the internet', those of us who are on the other side have to spend time defusing and dismantling this falsified image they set up in addition to showing exactly who and what they are connected... The bottom line is that we have to first make sure the Internet remains free and clear from corporate control.
Hence keep Net Neutrality in place.
Second, the net should be affordable and accessible by all, not just those who can pay higher fees.
Three, companies that do get our trust and business have to have uniformed, streamlined ways to be accountable and not be in position to suddenly change the rules, close down people's email accounts etc In some respects we should look at some of these outlets as utilities and move away from a buyer beware mentality.
Last point, with respect to Internet radio we have to make sure there is a transparency in the way Sound Exchange and the RIAA does business. They should be required to do specific types of outreach in particular to communities that are often left out of the discussion. They should have a comment period that is made available to all before new policies go into effect. We should be able to know how much big companies like Clear Channel are paying in royalty rates versus non profits and small webcasters so we don't secret side deals being cut that favor the big guys while the little guy is left footing the bill. |
