FCC Inspector General Says Ownership Reports Not Suppressed

Personality conflicts within the bureau may have caused an author of the TV report to feel the document should have been published once the writer responded to internal criticism of the report, said the IG, not naming the author. “The author we interviewed felt that they responded completely and made all changes they thought necessary to meet the criticisms they considered valid,” said the report. Senior bureau economists disagreed. “The resulting tension was within the framework of pre-existing tensions between the authors and their supervisors on personnel and personality matters,” the IG said.

The IG inquiry was hampered by lack of cooperation from former bureau staffer Adam Candeub, who the IG said had alleged to senators that documents were being suppressed at the agency. Candeub, now a professor at Michigan State University, wouldn’t talk with the IG about his allegations. The IG said it couldn’t verify his claims. “We neither saw nor heard any direct evidence that anyone in senior management at the Commission stated orally or in writing that he or she disliked the results of the local TV news report,” wrote the Inspector General. “The two authors of the report both state that they believe the report was not released because the then-Media Bureau Chief did not like its results, and not because of any issues with the quality of the report.” The IG report was sought by Democratic Sens. Barbara Boxer of California, Byron Dorgan if North Dakota and Ron Wyden of Oregon.

The decision to not release a report finding more radio industry consolidation was “more troubling,” said the IG, nonetheless concluding that no malfeasance occurred. Ferree could have decided to submit a final version of the study to Powell’s office for publication, but decided not to, said the IG. The inspector heard of no concerns about shoddiness in the radio report, as claimed in regard to the TV study. The IG included an e-mail from Ferree saying he didn’t want to release the radio study so as not to be “stirring the ‘radio consolidation pot.'” At the time, the commission was under court and legislative scrutiny for media ownership rules. “All in all this is a really bad time to release something like this,” wrote Ferree. “If we can change the focus to make it more positive… then perhaps we can do something like this again.”

Commissioner Michael Copps said he isn’t satisfied with the outcome of the investigation, which the IG said was the largest ever of its sort. Foes of media consolidation voiced concern that in concluding there was no untoward interference the report is at odds with its own findings that point toward suppression. Copps said the report is most “notable for what it fails to contain.” He said the IG should have interviewed more FCC officials. “The nagging feeling remains that we don’t yet have the entire story,” said a prepared statement from Copps. “It declined to seek interviews with FCC officials all the way up the chain of command.”

The Inspector General reviewed 150,000 pages of documents, searched more than a terabyte of data, read “dozens” of Commission reports and orders and interviewed 35 people, the report said. Among those interviewed were Ferree and Dan Gonzalez, chief of staff to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin. “The extent and thoroughness of our investigation on these matters and the lack of any corroborating evidence give us comfort we have been able to investigate these matters adequately and that our findings and conclusions rest on solid grounds,” the IG said. An FCC spokesman declined to comment. He referred an inquiry to an IG official. The IG did a thorough job, tracking down every possible lead, said Carla Conover, deputy assistant inspector general.

Opponents of media consolidation agreed with Copps that the IG didn’t do enough to investigate allegations of document suppression. “This report is much more of a whitewash than I would have preferred,” said Media Access Project President Andrew Schwartzman. “It’s clear that there was an atmosphere within the bureau that was intolerant of potential dissent, and in that context the report seems to resolve every potentially disputed issue in favor of management.” Georgetown University Professor Angela Campbell agreed: “It’s very troubling for a lot of reasons… The Ken Ferree e-mail is an example of how every time there is any arguable ambiguity, they interpret it in favor of no suppression. Yet I think any reasonable interpretation of this e-mail is he said ‘don’t put this report out because we don’t like it and we don’t want it out there.'”

The probe found no evidence of suppression, but it noted possible efforts to “distract attention” from the 2003 radio report. “The evidence in this matter is sometimes contradictory, often ambiguous and generally rests on recollections far after the events in question,” the IG said. Although there is no “evidence” that rules or laws were broken, Ferree may have been singled out for internal scrutiny, it said. “We suspect that, were the then-Media Bureau chief still in place, we would refer the matter to the chairman for administrative concerns,” said the IG. Ferree, who recently left Sheppard Mullin’s communications practice, didn’t respond to a query relayed to him through that firm.

Candeub, the former bureau staffer, also slammed the report for what he called inaccuracies. He said he never contacted senators about allegations of impropriety, as the IG wrote. The IG identified Candeub as the person who brought alleged document suppression to public attention because the senators’ letter requesting the probe said he made the allegations, said Conover. Candeub also was identified in media reports, she added. “I think it’s revealing about the IG’s attitude that they would make such utterly unsubstantiated and irresponsible claim,” he said in an interview. “I believe my decision not to participate has been shown to be sound.” He said Ferree’s e-mail indicates the climate of suppression at the bureau during Candeub’s tenure there. “There was an e-mail that demonstrates a willingness to suppress data, which the report concedes,” said Candeub. - Jonathan Make