Resource:
FCC Report: The Information Needs of Communities
- Links: The Report | Website | On Twitter
- People: Steven Waldman
- Tags: Access To Information, Civic Engagement, Digital Democracy, Information Ecology, Information Needs, News Entrepreneurs, Policy
A consensus has begun to emerge around the Federal Communications Commission report, “The Information Needs of Communities,” released Thursday: The diagnosis is sound, but the remedies are lacking.
The 465-page report (see full report, embedded below) is the result of 600-plus interviews, hearings and reams of research conducted over 18 months. It represents the most ambitious attempt yet to come to terms with the consequences of the current media transformation. It’s a synthetic and comprehensive look at the entire ecosystem — commercial, non-commercial and user-generated; across print, broadcast, online and mobile — making it a tremendous resource for advocates, journalists, entrepreneurs and media educators.
Steven Waldman, journalist, editor and digital news entrepreneur, was lead author for this project and worked with a distinguished team of experts from across the country to compile both capsule histories of each sector and an atlas of current facts and figures. See the gallery of graphs from the report below, assembled by Josh Stearns of the media reform organization Free Press, for a sense of the range and depth of the research. (Overwhelmed? A two-page summary of findings and recommendations is also available here.)” Source: PBS Mediashift
The Journalism Accelerator is not responsible for the content we post here, as excerpts from the source, or links on those sites. The JA does not endorse these sites or their products outright but we sure are intrigued with what they’re up to.
Topics: Community Distribution Policy Resources
Weigh In: Remember to refresh often to see latest comments!
5 comments so far.
-
jessica durkin says:
January 2, 2012 at 1:07 pm
-
Steven Waldman says:
January 2, 2012 at 1:17 pm
-
Myles Bugbee says:
October 28, 2011 at 12:50 pm
-
Steven Waldman says:
January 1, 2012 at 11:57 am
-
Steven Waldman says:
January 1, 2012 at 12:00 pm
| ParticipantsThank you Steve for keeping journalists informed of this policy issues. I saw your article on Poynter last month, with the handy links to the FCC comments site. I am working on something with this subject. My main concern is shaping a new programs and issues list — the actual content of any future form. I know the FCC is going to abandon certain content categories on whatever standards are now for the programming lists. I think this needs further examination. The NAB has formed a task force and asked for a comments extension.
It’s a very confusing process. To wit: there are actually TWO different FCC transparency proceedings. The first, with the Jan 17, is focusing on moving the current file online and moving the current on air disclosure requirements for sponsorship ID online. The FCC actually issued a “notice of proposed rulemaking” — a proposed regulation. That proposal doesn’t presume any changes in the issues/programs lists. Just says: put what you got online
There’s a second proceeding that attempts to rewrite the rules about those issues/programs lists to make them more meaningful. I supported ditching the ‘enhanced disclosure’ form that was so complex and burdensome that it was never going to happen and replacing it with something with a few really meaningful categories. To me, the amount of local programming is key, but that’s subject to debate.
This FCC report represents a comprehensive overview of the state of journalism in 2011. It covers extensively the myriad challenges facing journalists in a period of rapid transition for an industry that has been irrevocably changed by the rise of internet. While the internet has expanded access to content, it has also altered the traditional revenue model that supported print journalism. With declining revenues from advertising and subscriptions, newspapers across the U.S. have been downsizing, leading to cuts in investigative journalism, or accountability journalism as its described in the report.
Whether hyperlocals and online outlets can fill this void remains to be seen. For now, flip through the vivid graphs in the report to gain a greater appreciation for the transformation of the journalism ecosystem.
Myles, thanks for your comment. My mood on whether the new local models can work changes by the week. There are many interesting experiments but precious few are making enough money to pay for even a few staff.
On the public policy side, the report offered a few concrete steps that the FCC itself could do — mostly by making government and media more transparent. For instance, local TV stations could put online their files logging political ads. Could be a hugely helpful.
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/local_tv_news_meet_the_internet.php
There’s a deadline of Jan 17 for comment — and so far not a single journalist or journalism professional group has weighed in.
Another topic where real progress could be made is on “pay for play” — local TV stations that allow advertisers dictate content. Again, the broadcasters are weighing in with the FCC to resist the reform.
http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/this_news_story_is_brought_to.php
Paging any journalists with experience in local TV news. The National Association of Broadcasters is opposing the FCC proposal to have better transparency on “sponsorship identifiecation” (pay for play) on the grounds that it’s not a major problem.
Any of you local TV news experts have thoughts on the prevalence (or not) of pay for play and the use of video news releases?
http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/this_news_story_is_brought_to.php