Wiley, Copps Agree on Diversity, Meetings, but Debate Title II, Internet, Political Ads
Former FCC Chairmen Richard Wiley and Michael Copps agreed on promoting diversity and allowing more private commissioner meetings, but disagreed on broadband regulation, the Internet's direction and political advertising at a Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council conference Thursday. Both said more should be done to promote minority ownership and diversity in general in the communications sector. They also expressed concern the upcoming incentive auction would reduce the number of broadcast TV stations run by minorities and small business owners.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Copps said his biggest disappointment while at the FCC was that the agency didn’t make more progress in promoting diversity. He said it's an “embarrassment” that the commission hasn’t even completed related Adarand studies on media ownership despite directions from a federal court. The commission needs more data to do some sort of “race conscious” or “diversity conscious” policy, he said. Both said Congress should bring back a tax certificate program that used to encourage minority broadcast ownership but was eliminated in the 1990s. “Yeah, it got abused,” but that doesn’t mean the concept is bad, Wiley said.
Both also said the FCC should expand Lifeline low-income support to cover broadband. “It’s going to happen,” Wiley said. Broadband access “is a civil right” that's needed to be a “fully productive citizen,” Copps said. They also agreed Congress should eliminate Sunshine Act restrictions that prevent more than two FCC commissioners from meeting privately.
Copps and Wiley disagreed on the FCC’s broadband reclassification under Title II of the Communications Act. Copps said Title II facilitated net neutrality safeguards and enforcement while Wiley called it “public utility regulation” that was “anathema” to broadband and "just doesn't make any sense," given Internet dynamism. Each thought his side should win current litigation at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, but both said the case is likely headed to the Supreme Court.
Copps said the U.S. needs to have a broader conversation about the Internet and what it means for American democracy. “We’ve got to get ahold of this technology and make sure it serves the people, and not just the suppliers,” he said. “Are we just going to let the market run wild?” he asked, warning of increased industry concentration and commercialization. Wiley said he was more optimistic about the Internet’s potential to provide greater opportunity without more government control.
Copps urged the FCC to create more transparency in political advertising so citizens know who's behind ads, particularly from groups with misleading "America the Beautiful" type names. Noting a letter from 160 House Democrats calling on the FCC to act (see 1601200062), he said the commission should conduct a rulemaking or issue a declaratory ruling in as little as 60 to 90 days, in time for the fall campaign.
Wiley said there already is some disclosure and questioned what the details of the rule would be. For instance, he asked, would broadcasters have to identify everybody behind an ad? Regardless, he said, FCC action won’t happen in an election year because it would be seen as politically motivated. He said it was up to Congress to make any changes. Copps said Congress had already authorized the FCC to act in the Communications Act. “It’s on the books,” he said. “The law requires due diligence and now there’s no diligence.” An NPRM could help the FCC flesh out the issues and craft a disclosure formula, he said. Currently, ads paid for by a single person sometimes don't identify that person, he said. "You don't have to put everybody on there, but you have to have at least some idea who's behind them."