Jerold M. Starr, The American Prospect (www.prospect.org) August 14, 2000

The assault on educational licenses by conservative religious
broadcasters has its roots in the Reagan Revolution, when then-FCC
Chairman Mark Fowler pledged "to take deregulation to the limits
of existing law." Fowler's FCC abolished the guidelines for local,
news and public-affairs, and nonentertainment programming and
dropped almost all public interest standards in deference to the
"property rights" of broadcasters. By 1989 one of three network
affiliates offered no public-affairs programs, and one of six no
news. Limits on prime-time advertising were rescinded, commercial
time was doubled, and by the end of the 1980s, a new format--program-length
infomercials--consumed 3 percent of broadcast time.

Pursuing their "defund the left" strategy, Reagan's allies in
Congress rescinded appropriations for the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting while the FCC loosened PBS program underwriting
guidelines to allow "trade names," "logos or slogans," and "product
symbols" to appear before and after programs. Increasingly dependent
on commercial sponsorship, public broadcasters dropped experimental
television and programs aimed at poor and minority viewers. And
Fowler actively facilitated the religious right's access to previously
reserved educational licenses.

The Republican Party benefited greatly: The attack on public
broadcasting gave economic libertarians a chance to take swings at
one of their favorite targets, while religious broadcasters got an
unprecedented opportunity to proselytize--both for their sectarian
faiths and, more importantly, for their conservative one. Reagan
praised religious broadcasters' stands on right-to-life, voluntary
school prayer, and the balanced budget amendment as "helping to
change the world for the better." Religious broadcasters must "make
the Reagan Revolution prevail," White House Communications Director
Pat Buchanan told a 1986 convention of the NRB. The Republican
Party "needs to draw ... more recruits" from America's religious
revival, to "tap into this new patriotism and [convert] it into a
new nationalism."

And they have: In the intervening years, the religious right has
made television and radio broadcasting its most important tool.
Since Reagan's deregulation, the number of Christian radio stations
has doubled to 1,731, and the number of Christian television stations
has tripled to 285, almost all of them conservative evangelical.
Christian radio stations account for 8 percent of the total in
1981, 10 percent in 1990, and 14 percent today. With an audience
of 20 million, religious programming is now the third-largest radio
format in the nation.

And while most religious stations are on commercial frequencies,
23 television stations and well over 700 radio stations have been
awarded noncommercial licenses. According to a recent petition on
behalf of public radio's Station Resource Group, the religious
right has flooded the FCC with applications for noncommercial
licenses, accounting for up to two-thirds of pending applications
for some 750 noncommercial frequencies.

Hogging the microphone

The specific genesis of the current legislative assault was an
attempt by public TV station WQED Pittsburgh to commercialize and
sell off its popular second station, WQEX, to cover debts incurred
through admitted mismanagement and alleged embezzlement. In 1996,
with help from Republican Senator Arlen Specter and Democratic
Representative Jack Murtha, WQED received unprecedented authorization
for the action, giving the FCC only 30 days to decide what normally
takes months or years. A community group called Save Pittsburgh
Public Television (SPPTV) and several commercial broadcasters
opposed the petition, and in July 1996, the FCC ruled that WQED
had not made a sufficient case to warrant depriving Pittsburgh of
a reserved noncommercial frequency.

A year later, WQED went to its Plan B, capitalizing on the desire
of Lowell "Bud" Paxson--chairman of Paxson Communications--to
acquire a Pittsburgh outlet for his religious-themed Pax TV network.
Paxson agreed to bankroll a deal whereby WQED would swap the
noncommercial license of WQEX for a commercial license owned by
the gospel-dedicated Cornerstone TeleVision. WQED would then sell
its newly acquired commercial license to Paxson and split the take
with Cornerstone. Technically, Pittsburgh would still have two
noncommercial licenses, but Pittsburghers would tune into Cornerstone
programming where WQEX had been.

Many Pittsburghers were not happy, and with good reason. Programs
carried by Cornerstone, most of them syndicated across the country,
have been documented as calling Mormons promoters of "divorce,
teenage pregnancy, and venereal disease," Unitarians a "cult,"
Hinduism "the Kingdom of the enemy," Buddhism and Shintoism
"satanically inspired," and Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and
Methodists "[groups with] the spirit of the Antichrist." The SPPTV
campaign submitted thousands of letters and petition signatures
and numerous declarations from prominent academics and clergy in
the community documenting Cornerstone's bias against the usual
right-wing targets--public school teachers, the United Nations,
environmentalists, and gays and lesbians.

The FCC took up WQED and Paxson's proposal, focusing primarily on
whether Cornerstone's governance and programming met the eligibility
requirements for a noncommercial license. While religious programming
is permitted, it cannot take up more than half the schedule of a
noncommercial license, and the FCC observed that, according to
Cornerstone's own presentation, 70 percent of its schedule consisted
of religious programming. The FCC also found that Cornerstone's
governing board was insufficiently accountable to and representative
of the community. Several of the board's seven members were related
to one another and also served as officers and programmers.

But when challenged to respond, Cornerstone simply added two members
to its seven-member board. It also followed FCC instructions in
reformatting its program presentation, but made no changes, finally
attacking the FCC for religious discrimination. Meanwhile, WQED
hired the powerful corporate lobbying firm of Patton Boggs to press
its case, splitting the cost with Paxson. Patton Boggs assigned
Clinton adviser Lanny Davis, who successfully solicited the support
of four Democratic congressmen and Republican Billy Tauzin of
Louisiana, who in turn sent letters to Susan Ness, recently
re-appointed as FCC commissioner but facing confirmation by the
Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee--chaired by
Senator John McCain.

McCain on the Case

McCain's involvement initially came under the spotlight during the
Republican primaries, when reporters unearthed his memos written
to the FCC on behalf of Paxson, urging the commission to resolve
the pending applications. The media focused on McCain's travels in
Paxson's private jet and on his receipt of $20,000 in presidential
campaign contributions from Paxson's family, associates, and
attorneys. However, they failed to examine the nature of the deal
itself--or why, at the time, it had been stalled before the FCC
for two and a half years.

McCain's directive in December 1999 spurred the FCC to vote, by a
narrow three-to-two majority, to approve all pending applications,
including Paxson's. The two Democratic appointees, William Kennard
and Gloria Tristani, voted against approval, explaining that "there
are simply too many unresolved questions of fact regarding whether
the proposed programming is primarily educational or primarily
something else." But the swing vote in favor of approval came from
Ness, who said she based her decision "in significant part on the
absence of clarity" in the guidelines and also on promises by
Cornerstone that it would "broaden" its board and program schedule
in the future. When questioned by New York Times reporter Stephen
Labaton, Ness declined to discuss either the case or her pending
confirmation before McCain's committee.

Paxson had won approval for his new acquisition--but now the
religious broadcasters and their allies faced a new hurdle. Ness,
Kennard, and Tristani had also voted in a three-to-two majority to
clarify the eligibility requirements for noncommercial licenses,
arguing that, by itself, "the majority's decision to grant this
application would eliminate all eligibility standards for the
reserved band." Ness added that commissioners "have an obligation
to provide additional guidance ... if we are to assess whether a
broadcaster's judgment is reasonable." The majority agreed that
the "additional guidance" would include the understanding that
"programming primarily devoted to religious exhortation (e.g.
preaching), proselytizing or personal statements of belief [while
permitted] generally [would] not qualify as educational programming."

The two Republican commissioners dissented, claiming the guidelines
would "open a Pandora's box of problems." And it did, in a way:
The NRB alerted its 1,200 members to this "dangerous precedent,"
telling them that the "net effect" of the ruling would be "less
preaching of the gospel, less programming of church services," the
primary staple of syndicated religious right programming. Conservative
newswires promoted the misinformation that "more than 125 noncommercial
television broadcasters may be forced to drop religious broadcasting."

On January 6, at Paxson's urging, four Republican congressmen, led
by Republican Representative Michael Oxley of Ohio, sent a letter
to FCC Chair Kennard advising him "to reverse this ruling, or stand
by and see it overturned legislatively or in court," while five
conservative Republican senators wrote to Kennard accusing the FCC
of suppressing "religious speech on the basis that it may not be
'educational' or 'cultural.'" Kennard responded by pointing out
that Paxson's applications had been approved, that the standards
do not prohibit religious programming, and that they apply only to
noncommercial licenses.

It wasn't the first time Republicans had criticized the FCC. But
Kennard probably didn't count on opposition from Vice President Al
Gore, who also received a letter from the four Republicans urging
him "to condemn the FCC's actions and counsel the Commission to
withdraw its order." Gore replied that such intervention "with
respect to an individual broadcaster's license application" would
be "inappropriate." But he affirmed support for "the First Amendment
rights of broadcasters" and suggested that relief may be sought
"before the Commission" or "in the courts."

The FCC Caves

Thus emboldened, Oxley and 42 co-sponsors introduced the Religious
Broadcasters Freedom Act to strike the language in the Pittsburgh
decision and prevent the FCC from making such decisions on future
applications. Republican Sam Brownback of Kansas introduced a
companion measure in the Senate. In response, Citizens for Independent
Public Broadcasting--of which I am executive director--organized
the Coalition to Defend Educational Broadcasting, consisting of
several organizations, including the National Education Association,
People For the American Way, the National Council of Churches, and
Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. Coalition
members expressed concern about the use of educational broadcasting
stations as extensions of religious ministry and geared up to defend
the FCC's Pittsburgh decision.

At the last moment, however, Kennard and Ness caved, vacating the
two paragraphs in their decision that spelled out what it meant
for a license to be used for "primarily educational" purposes. Why
the about-face? In January The Washington Post reported that Kennard
and Ness had responded to pressure from presidential candidate Gore
to rescind the guidelines, quoting Oxley's boast that "Al Gore's
people saw this as a huge liability politically and they wanted to
lance that boil."

But the Republicans weren't done. FCC commissioner Tristani had
inveighed passionately against Kennard and Ness's retreat, deploring
the commission's "capitulation to an organized campaign of distortion
and demagoguery" and promising that she would continue to cast her
"vote in accordance with the views expressed in the additional
guidance and in this statement." This was a red flag to the religious
right, which along with its congressional allies undertook to strip
the FCC of all discretion in the assignment of noncommercial
licenses.

At each phase of the legislative process, the Republican majority
controlled public input and media oversight by giving only two days
meeting notice and submitting new or revised bills at the last
minute. On April 13, five Republican members of the House
Telecommunications Subcommittee substituted Mississippi Republican
Charles Pickering's H.R. 4201, the Noncommercial Broadcasting
Freedom of Expression Act, for Oxley's H.R. 3505. Representatives
Clifford Stearns, John Shimkus, Tauzin, Oxley, and Pickering held
a lopsided hearing that consisted mostly of attacking the FCC and
grilling the diminutive Tristani. Tauzin ranted that "the FCC is
infamous for imposing its own opinion," and Shimkus characterized
Tristani as "an FCC czar of information" who would allow programs
about "collecting pet rocks" before those advocating "the Ten
Commandments." The FCC's original decision represents "the classic
liberal tendency to try to get through government procedures or
court decisions wha!  !  t this country will not tolerate," Pickering
told Tristani. "We're going to do everything we can to keep your
views from ever happening."

The lone Democrat attending the subcommittee hearing, Representative
Edward Markey of Massachusetts, found himself mounting a futile
defense. Protesting that leaving out the word "educational" in
defining eligible applicants would open up the spectrum to "scam
artists" and "hate groups," Markey declared, "I don't want Bob
Jones University owning the only noncommercial educational station
in my hometown and telling me that Catholics are a cult, telling
me that the Pope is the emissary of Satan." Tauzin, who had already
rejected examination of videotaped programs in evaluating Cornerstone's
or any other broadcaster's qualifications, nevertheless responded
that there were no "examples of abuses or shams in the past or in
the present" by religious organizations operating on noncommercial
licenses.

Proselytizing as "education"

One crucial maneuver by the Republicans was to reframe eligibility
in terms of the tax code, permitting a noncommercial license to
any station "used primarily to broadcast material that the organization
determines serves an educational, instructional, or religious
purpose"--thus seeking to pre-empt a potential legal challenge
based on the First Amendment's establishment clause. Another change
specified that religious programming is to be treated "on a par
with educational and cultural programming," while a further addition
exempted noncommercial licensees from any requirement to allow
"free air time to commercial entities or political candidates."

Indeed, throughout mark-up, the act's supporters downplayed concerns
over its constitutionality. Twice Markey sponsored amendments that
inserted the word "educational" as a qualifier after "nonprofit"
and before "religious," arguing that these licenses were intended
to serve the "entire community" and "what is educational to one is
not educational to another, especially those of another religion."
Twice they were voted down. Similarly, the Republicans ignored
Michigan Representative John Dingell's observations that the act
would not only permit a noncommercial licensee 100 percent religious
programming and deny the FCC any objective criteria to choose
between competing religious applicants, but would also allow any
extremist group claiming to be religious, like that of David Koresh
or Jim Jones, to get a noncommercial license. In late June, H.R.
4201 came up for a House vote--and passed by a margin of 263-159,
with 56 Democrats voting in favor.

A companion bill introduced in the Senate by Arizona Republican
Tim Hutchinson has not been scheduled for Senate action, but
opponents worry that the House sponsors could attach it to a
must-pass appropriations bill. But even if the measure fails this
session, conservatives have given the FCC an object lesson in power
politics it is not likely to forget. In fact, shortly after the
FCC reversed itself, Roy Stewart, chief of the FCC's Mass Media
Bureau, spoke at the NRB's annual meeting to reassure members that
the FCC would not be making any more clarifications of educational
guidelines in future decisions regarding license applications. The
net result of all this will be more control of mass communications
by the right and waning fortunes for the Democrats, too many of
whom have been complicit in this capitulation.

The FCC, of course, is a creature of Congress. Both parties have
been heavily influenced by the commercial broadcasting industry,
which is why the FCC, ironically enough, has always been notoriously
lax in investigating and enforcing standards for licensees. In its
entire history, the FCC has denied only three license renewal
applications; it has never denied a local license transfer application
and did not even do so in the Pittsburgh case. The battle over H.R.
4201 illustrates that the current eligibility guidelines are so
vague as to be unenforceable, but while the FCC has the authority
to call a rule-making to resolve such confusion, it has thus far
declined to do so.

But the battle also shows that the only break in business as usual
for broadcasters comes when the community, like Paxson's opponents
in Pittsburgh, mounts a significant challenge and appeal to the
FCC to recognize its charter's stated mission to "protect the public
interest, convenience and necessity." In Pittsburgh the public
interest did prevail. In the midst of all the furor, on January
19, 2000, Cornerstone abruptly filed with the FCC to withdraw its
transfer application. Cornerstone President Oleen Eagle explained
that "Cornerstone is called by God" to serve as a "media ministry"
and could not "jeopardize" that "mission." When ordinary citizens
choose to fight for truly public broadcasting, they can stop
multimillion-dollar deals in the name of the public interest.


#################################################################

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to