FCC Chairman Michael Powell says the FCC will not block Sinclair Broadcast Group from running an anti-Kerry program that the broadcast group says it will run on its 62 stations within the next two weeks.
The chairman was responding to calls from Congressmen and media watchdog organizations to investigate the issue, which they claim violates broadcasters' public interest obligations by airing a one-sided political program so close to the presidential election. While Powell did say that the FCC would look into the controversy, he thinks the only legitimate issue surrounding the case is of equal time. Sinclair has invited Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic presidential candidate to respond on air, but so far he has refused.
The Baltimore-based company, no stranger to controversy in the TV technology community, owns the largest group of independent stations in the United States. The company is known for its conservative slant; according to "The Washington Post, 97 percent of its political donations for the 2004 elections have gone to President Bush and Republicans. But opponents claim that Sinclair's decision to run the anti-Kerry program called "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," featuring former Washington Times reporter and Vietnam veteran Carlton Sherwood so close to the election is over the line. Sinclair's actions prompted Democratic lawmakers this week to ask the FCC to investigate.
"We are greatly troubled over the reports that Sinclair intends to run a one-sided film attacking a Presidential candidate, only days before Election Day," wrote Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) and Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) in a letter to commission Chairman Michael Powell. "The public relies on broadcasters to provide an objective and accurate source for news and information about candidates running for office. And when they fail to do so, as CBS News did when it reported about apparently false documents concerning President Bush's record during the Vietnam War, it is important to ensure that such mistakes do not happen again."
The congressmen asked Powell to consider whether Sinclair's actions violate the Communications Act of 1934, which states that for a broadcasters' license to be renewed, the commission must find that "the public interest, convenience, and necessity would be served thereby." The lawmakers gave Powell until Wednesday, Oct. 20 to tell them how the commission determines whether an action by a licensee serves the public interest, whether airing the program, which they label a "one-sided propaganda piece," serves the public interest, and if it doesn't, how the commission would handle a violation during a station's license renewal proceeding.
Another Democrat, FCC Commissioner Michael Copps, called Sinclair's decision "an abuse of the public trust" that illustrates the dangers of concentrated ownership.
"It is proof positive of media consolidation run amok when one owner can use the public airwaves to blanket the country with its political ideology--whether liberal or conservative," Copps said. "It is a sad fact that the explicit public interest protections we once had to ensure balance continue to be weakened by the Federal Communications Commission while it allows media conglomerates to get even bigger. Sinclair, and the FCC, are taking us down a dangerous road."
Meanwhile, public interest groups opposed to media consolidation saw Sinclair's move as an opening to further their argument to restore the Fairness Doctrine, which was repealed in 1987, and specifically the "personal attack rule" which was dropped in 2000. And activists promised a campaign against Sinclair that would include monitoring of Sinclair stations, call in campaigns and if necessary, a formal challenge to Sinclair license renewals.
"If Sinclair doesn't act now to repair its shoddy intentions on behalf of the public, MediaChannel and Media for Democracy pledge to mobilize local activists against the 62 stations that operate under Sinclair's banner," said Timothy Karr, executive director, MediaChannel.org and Media for Democracy. "We already have more than 21,000 activists on the ground in Sinclair markets."
But other media outlets warned opponents not to complain too loudly. In an editorial that dismisses the issue of broadcasters' obligations to serve the public interest in exchange for free spectrum, The Seattle Times said government efforts to control editorial content offered by news stations constitutes "a very dangerous path to wander along."
"If we decide that campaign finance laws may have a veto over what Americans may or may not see during their evening news hour, where exactly do we draw the line," the paper inquired.
In its defense, Sinclair executives characterize the program as "newsworthy," and said that they had extended an invitation to Kerry to appear on its stations to respond to the program. In a message on its Web site, the company asks the public to contact Kerry's Washington D.C. campaign headquarters and had this additional message to visitors:
"We welcome your comments regarding the upcoming special news event featuring the topic of Americans held as prisoners of war in Vietnam. The program has not been videotaped and the exact format of this unscripted event has not been finalized. Characterizations regarding the content are premature and are based on ill-informed sources."
In another bizarre twist to the story, Sinclair issued a warning on Friday of an e-mail "spoof" entitled "Update on Kerry POW Film and FEC Ruling." The company says no such e-mail has originated from Sinclair and asked recipients to ignore and delete the message. Sinclair officials said they are investigating.
