Media Ownership Deregulation Policymaking In The United States: A Case Study Of The FCC's Latest Media Ownership Policy Review

Media ownership is of critical importance in a democracy like the United States. Since the 1980s, media ownership policies in this country have undergone dramatic changes, and the most salient trend in recent years is the policy shift from regulation to deregulation by the Federal Communications Commission(FCC). Factors such as techonological advancement, more media outlets, globalization and the resurgence of neo-liberalism may account in part for such a policy shift, since they constitute the overall environment in which the FCC deliberates its policies. And indeed, most of the past research efforts have been devoted to the study of these contributing factors. However, an intelligent and serious analysis of the causes of media ownership deregulation requires also, if not more, a close examination of the dynamics within the policymaking process so as to reveal some of the more fundamental elements that determine policy outcomes. Such an endeavor is especially significant in today's world of globalization where a small move on the part of the FCC may well bring about far-reaching effects on other countries.A case study of the FCC's decision on June 2, 2003 to replace previous ownership restrictions with more lenient rules facilitates the understanding of the complex issue of media ownership policymaking in the United States. In this case, the regulator (the FCC), the regulatee (the media industry) and public interest upholders are engaged in a tripartite relationship. On the side of the regulator and the regulatee. their relationship is characterized by interactivity; on the side of the FCC regulator and the public interest upholders, they share similar goals; on the side of the regulatee and public interest upholders, a conflict of interests predominates as to whether to deregulate or not. The policy outcome, to a great extent, reflects the inherent nature of the tripartite relationship in the policymaking process. There is ample evidence of the regulator giving favor, though sometimes reluctantly, to the corporate media, or to themedia players that possess and wield much more power. This is largely due to considerations such as economic and political interests, and the FCC's own structual deficiencies. On the whole, there is almost always a tinted favoritism at play when it comes to FCC media ownership policymaking. with deep implications for the media industry, citizen groups, and policymakers at the top. What is more important, with the exclusion of public participation in meaningful ways, public policy is not at all represented by the general public, and thus participative democracy is at risk.