From the 'hey at least we're trying something' department.

Last July, we noted how media reform activists had petitioned the FCC to revoke Fox News’ local broadcast license in Philadelphia. More specifically, the group argued that Fox News’ rampant election fraud propaganda technically violated the “character clause” embedded in the Communications Act the FCC is supposed to use to determine whether an organization should hold a broadcast license.

To be clear, a single Fox broadcast affiliate losing its license to broadcast in Philly wouldn’t have much of an impact on Fox’s ongoing efforts to spew GOP propaganda nationwide.

But, if successful, it might be replicable in other markets. Even if not, it serves a useful function in terms of activism and gaining media exposure for the need for some flavor of regulatory reform (like restoring popular, bipartisan media consolidation limits stripped away by the Trump FCC, media antitrust reform, or having the FCC actually use its authority to ensure economic and racial diversity ownership in media).

  • @MicroWaveOPEnglish
    52•1 year ago

    Glad to see these thoughts spelled out:

    We inhabit an era where the question “what do we do about Fox News propaganda?” sees a real shortage of solutions that are both practical and don’t run afoul of the First Amendment. Everything in the conversation tends to steer toward what’s not possible. Or they involve unworkable gibberish like trying to bring back the Fairness Doctrine (which wouldn’t apply to cable TV anyway).

    So I think it’s good that activists are trying something creative and new. I think it’s good to have a broader conversation about what can actually be done about authoritarian and right wing propaganda. I think it’s good to form new, bipartisan coalitions that finally recognize the harm in partisan propaganda masquerading as news. Because our efforts up to this point have consisted of either stoic tut-tutting about what’s not possible under the First Amendment, or half-baked incoherence.