Comments on: Ideas and Lamentations for Channel 6 http://www.radiosurvivor.com/2009/06/27/ideas-and-lamentations-for-channel-6/ News, views and tough love for radio. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:32:49 -0800 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Paul Riismandel http://www.radiosurvivor.com/2009/06/27/ideas-and-lamentations-for-channel-6/comment-page-1/#comment-47 Paul Riismandel Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:53:29 +0000 http://www.radiosurvivor.com/?p=181#comment-47 There is still a requirement for a broadcast station to operate in the public interest, although the specifics are vague. One element of this is to air public interest programming, and news counts for this. Stations are required to document this service and keep a log of it in their public file, which is available for public inspection during normal business hours. Members of the public may challenge a station's license renewal if they believe the station has not operated in the public interest. Several grassroots groups have attempted to challenge TV licenses in Illinois and Iowa over what they see as deficiencies in their local news coverage. None of these challenges have been successful. Many in the public interest community believe the public interest requirements are mostly toothless, and I'd agree. There is still a requirement for a broadcast station to operate in the public interest, although the specifics are vague. One element of this is to air public interest programming, and news counts for this. Stations are required to document this service and keep a log of it in their public file, which is available for public inspection during normal business hours.

Members of the public may challenge a station’s license renewal if they believe the station has not operated in the public interest. Several grassroots groups have attempted to challenge TV licenses in Illinois and Iowa over what they see as deficiencies in their local news coverage. None of these challenges have been successful.

Many in the public interest community believe the public interest requirements are mostly toothless, and I’d agree.

]]> By: winonaww http://www.radiosurvivor.com/2009/06/27/ideas-and-lamentations-for-channel-6/comment-page-1/#comment-46 winonaww Sun, 28 Jun 2009 21:09:21 +0000 http://www.radiosurvivor.com/?p=181#comment-46 I may have already asked this elsewhere. I am curious to know about the continuing requirement the FCC has/had on airwave television to provide public services. I recognize that the original understanding was one of educating the public through news, preferably, unbiased news; this was to be a balance to the biased and commercially underwritten forms of entertainment. Now, of course, news is commercially biased and more entertaining than enlightening, and hardly a service. Nonetheless, networks believe that they are fulfilling their responsibility in this way. With satellite-relayed digital images, is the commitment to public service (self- or externally imposed) now gone, along with airwave images? I may have already asked this elsewhere. I am curious to know about the continuing requirement the FCC has/had on airwave television to provide public services. I recognize that the original understanding was one of educating the public through news, preferably, unbiased news; this was to be a balance to the biased and commercially underwritten forms of entertainment. Now, of course, news is commercially biased and more entertaining than enlightening, and hardly a service. Nonetheless, networks believe that they are fulfilling their responsibility in this way. With satellite-relayed digital images, is the commitment to public service (self- or externally imposed) now gone, along with airwave images?

]]>