The Journal Company & WTMJ, Inc. KSD/KSD-TV & Pulitzer Publishing Co. St. Louis, Missouri Landmark Communications, Inc. Norfolk, Virginia Louisiana Television Broadcasting Multimedia, Inc. Greenville, South Carolina The Salt Lake Tribune Salt Lake City, Utah Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Company Cincinnati, Ohio E. W. Scripps Co. The Standard Corporation & KUTV Bonneville International Corporation Salt Lake City, Utah Presented for record of hearings by the SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES June 1, 1979 In re: H.R. 3333 Comments of D. Williams McClurken on behalf of the COMMUNICATION COMMISSION NATIONAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST IN THE U.S.A. The The National Council of Churches is an agency of 32 Protestant and Orthodox communions in the United States, which together have a total membership of about 42,000,000 persons. Its member communions have charged the NCCC "to study and to speak and act on conditions and issues in the nation and in the world which involve moral, ethical, spiritual principles inherent in the Christian gospel." Governing Board of the National Council of Churches does not claim to speak for all the members of its churches, but they express the considered judgment and position of the representatives of those churches sitting for that purpose on the Governing Board. The Communication Commission is the arm of the National Council officially charged with responsibility to speak out on matters relating to communication. We have long believed the Communications Act of 1934 was overdue for a re-write and have testified previously before Congressional Committees considering legislation to accomplish this purpose. Fortyfive years is a long time for basic legislation to prevail in such a rapidly changing and developing area of our common life. The recognition of this need by the Chairman and other members of the Subcommittee is laudable. It is, therefore, my unhappy task to be very critical of H.R. 3333. We believe this bill does a grave disservice to the public. It is a step backward into a past in which commercial interests in broadcasting made promises to public groups that seem to be conveniently forgotten and which this bill would now deny altogether. Last year Dr. William F. Fore, the NCC's Assistant General Secretary for Communication, testified, along with representatives of many other public interest groups, on the provisions of H.R. 13015. Looking at H.R. 3333, we find little to suggest that Dr. Fore, or the representatives of other public interest groups, were heard. These public interest groups, who cannot afford to retain attorneys to attend all of the hearings, are at a serious disadvantage in preparing testimony. Many have had to rely on a partial compilation of testimony obtained only by soliciting this from a witness at a time after the hearings. Surely, it also must be a disadvantage to other members of Congress not to have such a record of reference available when they must determine in their best wisdom the limits of regulation and communication that might prevail for the next 45 years. We respectively suggest that a public record be made of these hearings on H.R. 3333. Marketplace Forces vs. "Public Interest" H.R. 3333 would allow Commission regulation in communications only when "marketplace forces fail to protect the public interest," but the bill emasculates the concept of public interest and fails to define what it means by marketplace forces that are "deficient." We strongly disagree with this approach. In our opinion, the role of communication should be determined by public policy considerations, not by the economic marketplace. We believe that the working of the marketplace inherently tends to constrict rather than enhance the free flow of ideas. Just as antitrust laws were found necessary to keep the economic marketplace open, so governmental regulation is necessary to keep the marketplace of ideas open. We oppose the idea that there should be regulation only when the marketplace forces are deficient. The function of communication is 58-360 0 - 80 - 11 We far too important to the national welfare, perhaps even the national survival, for it to be used primarily to satisfy economic goals. believe that the economic marketplace inherently tends to constrict the free flow of ideas as groups attempt to dominate and control as much as possible the power and wealth that communication represents. Communication regulation should serve first the needs of the society for a free flow of ideas, information and entertainment, and only second serve the needs for economic gain. The public interest standard should not be removed. A body of law has evolved around it which still renders the standard useful. On the other hand, we agree that it is too vague to constitute an adequate guide for regulation. We believe Congress should both include the public interest standard and also lay out clear guidelines as to what it means and how it affects regulation. H.R. 3333 seems to place a blind faith in marketplace forces, but provides little protection for the public if this faith proves to be misplaced. If this approach fails, after the horse is out of the barn, how long would it take and how could the public's rights be recaptured? Marketplace forces are even now tending to limit choices in the selection of religious television programs. Major faith groups in this country are experiencing a rapid loss in television station acceptance of their sustaining programs, while there is a rapid increase in the sale of time to other religious groups, many of whom use the air time for fund-raising purposes. The fact is that the preponderance of religious programming on the air today does not represent the major portion of religious groups in this country. Sustaining religious programs such as those associated with national Catholic and Jewish broadcast offices and the National Council of Churches--for its constituents, including the American Baptist Churches, the United Methodist Church, the Lutheran Church in America, the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., the Episcopal Church, and many others--are being dropped by stations, often in order for them to carry paid religious fund-raising programs. "Marketplace forces" were partially unleashed by the Federal Communications Commission when it declared that commercial public service programming was equally acceptable as sustaining public service programming. So we are seeing an effect of "marketplace forces" and we do not believe that the result, on balance, fairly provides the kind of religious programming that the public interest requires. H.R. 3333 is a very radical document in its sudden abandonment of many safeguards that have been developed through years of experience in communication regulation. The Regulatory Structure We support a strong regulatory agency and therefore oppose provisions which would remove much of the power of the present Federal Communication Commission. The present regulatory structure is basically sound. The proposal to have a Communication Regulatory Commission with only five commissioners represents far too great a risk, and limits the amount of diversity needed among members of the Commission in order to reflect adequately broad public interest. A smaller Commission diminishes the possibility of particular members developing expertise in specialized areas, making them more dependent on staff recommendations. It diminishes also the probability of minorities and women being represented on the Commission. Here, H.R. 3333 runs the risk of being interpreted by some as racist and sexist. The limitation of Commission membership to industry professionals decreases the chance of having a Commission with a strong orientation to public interest. The provision for a single term of ten years is a positive feature. Scarce Public Resource - - H.R. 3333 acknowledges that "the spectrum is a scarce public resource" we are appreciative of that recognition but then it proceeds to sell it away, and sell out the public, to powerful economic interests. We live in a society increasingly dependent on the rapid communication of diverse ideas and information to sustain the public welfare. As the U. S. Supreme Court ruled in Red Lion ". "...it is the right of the public to receive suitable access to social, political, aesthetic, moral and other ideas which is crucial....That right may not constitutionally be abridged either by Congress or by the FCC..." And the court further declared that there is a scarcity of stations |