CIN Study Goals Can Be Met Without Newsroom Questions, Clyburn Says
The goals of the FCC critical information needs (CIN) studies can be met without using the questions for journalists that were stripped out by Chairman Tom Wheeler (CD Feb 24 p21), Commissioner Mignon Clyburn said at a Media Institute lunch Wednesday. But she also defended the original form of the study, saying that as a former Charleston, S.C., newspaper publisher, she would never “be a part of any effort to chill speech, shape the news or influence news gatherers.” Commissioner Mike O'Rielly said after Clyburn spoke that it’s time to kill the CIN study, a report every Republican senator joined their GOP House counterparts in opposing.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
The FCC should “seek a better understanding of the industry it regulates” and make decisions “based on research and not rhetoric,” Clyburn said. Media reports on the objections to the CIN studies from Republican lawmakers (CD Dec 11 p11) and Commissioner Ajit Pai (CD Feb 13 p1) haven’t included enough coverage of the objective of the study, she said. Studying barriers to entry and determining whether it’s appropriate to craft policies to remove them is what Congress ordered the FCC to do, she said. It’s difficult to create a “sound regulatory landscape” in a “data vacuum,” she said.
The CIN studies can’t be revised enough to make them viable, said O'Rielly in a written statement Wednesday (http://fcc.us/1jBb1AZ). “If any value was ever to come from this particular exercise, that ship has sailed,” O'Rielly said. “It is probably time to cancel the CIN study for good.” He shares the concerns aired by Pai and Republican lawmakers, wrote O'Rielly. “I appreciate the Chairman’s willingness to make revisions, but I am afraid that tweaking it is just not enough."
Republican senators slammed Wheeler for the agency’s role in the CIN studies in a letter to Wheeler dated Wednesday. “We demand an explanation of how the Commission internally justified the CIN Study as fulfilling its statutory requirement to report on market barriers to entry, as well as the costs incurred by the Commission on this blatantly inappropriate study,” Senate Republicans said in the letter released by the office of Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind. “We also insist all commissioners be involved in future statutorily required studies in order to guard against the clear potential for abuse.” They said it’s “impossible to imagine a rationale” for the agency putting together this study, calling it “flagrantly unconstitutional.” House Republicans have also weighed in against the studies (CD Dec 11 p11). Wheeler had agreed the study design overstepped bounds but insisted the FCC had no intent to regulate speech or exert any role in that capacity. Republicans have widely feared a revival of the Fairness Doctrine (CD Feb 13 p1). The FCC didn’t comment.
There are “very important questions” in the rest of the draft CIN study that make it worthwhile to forge ahead even without the newsroom questions, said United Church of Christ policy adviser Cheryl Leanza in an interview. She disagreed with the decision to “remove the newsmaker perspective” from the study. Moving the study along may be more than a matter of simply removing the controversial questions, Leanza said. “It’s a very carefully crafted research design” that may require extensive work to proceed without the journalism questions, she said. Clyburn said the final form of the study and the timeline for the pilot program to proceed are decisions “that will be made by the chairman."
Meanwhile, the CIN studies are continuing to take heat from broadcasters despite the decision to remove the newsroom questions. State broadcaster associations are planning to ask the commission to “eliminate the study in its entirety,” said an ex parte letter filed Wednesday by the Nevada Broadcasting Association. “The NBA is pleased that the Commission has decided to rethink the survey of newsrooms,” said the filing (http://bit.ly/1lmcxKu).
Plans to change the way joint sales agreements are regulated “present a quandary” for Clyburn, because of the conflict between her desire to look out for the needs of small and medium-size markets, and protect local journalism in those markets, she said at the Media Institute luncheon. Clyburn has “an open mind” on the issue of regulating sharing arrangements, and she said she will “look closely” at any proposed rule changes when they are put in circulation “to ensure consumer choice.” Clyburn said she favors competition and markets should be “left alone when things are going well,” but she also favors a “diversity of voices” and policies that recognize that some groups face barriers to entering the market. Wheeler appears to plan to circulate an order for the next FCC meeting that would make it harder for broadcasters to have JSAs (CD Feb 25 p1).
Efforts to rewrite the Communications Act should build on the 1996 Telecom Act without “destroying the fabric of the law,” Clyburn said. Competition, consumer protection, universal service and public safety should remain “a core part” of a rewritten act “no matter what,” Clyburn said. She said the process of rewriting the act is “quite a bit away.” -- Monty Tayloe (mtayloe@warren-news.com),