|
|
|
|
Business New Haven
3/20/2000
By: BNH
|
Say It Ain't So, Joe
In just the last month, two of the state's largest newspapers have gone on the block.
In early March, the Toronto-based Thomson Corp. announced that it was quitting the dirty, low-tech newspaper business for good to concentrate on Internet-related ventures. The company said it would seek a buyer or buyers for its 126 newspaper properties, including the Bridgeport-based Connecticut Post, while retaining only its flagship Toronto Globe & Mail.
Then, on March 14, came the blockbuster: The Chicago-based Tribune Co. announced a $5.9 billion deal to acquire Times Mirror Co. of Los Angeles, which owns (among many other things) the Hartford Courant.
Connecticut was already well on the road to becoming a two-paper state, with most of the dailies owned either by Times Mirror (Hartford, Stamford, Greenwich) or the Trenton, N.J.-based Journal Register Co. (JRC, which controls New Haven, Middletown, Bristol, Torrington). With the announcement that the Connecticut Post would be sold, most knowledgeable observers predicted that one of these two conglomerates would scoop it up in short order - securing in-state dominance over its rival and steering the state firmly onto the path of newspaper monopoly.
Indeed, the JRC had earlier announced its intention to raise $500 million to $750 million by shedding many of its Midwestern papers in order to invest more aggressively in Web-based business and concentrate on its Northeastern paper - including, it seems likely, a play for the Post.
The appearance onstage of a true 800-pound gorilla - the Tribune Co. - alters the equation. The $12 billion multi-media behemoth dwarfs the JRC (market capitalization: $680 million).
But there's another side to the story. A 25-year-old Federal Communications Commission rule bans companies from owning daily newspapers and televisions stations in the same market. The Tribune Co. already owns two stations (Channels 20 and 61) in the Hartford market. Its acquisition of the Courant is in direct contravention of the rule, meaning it would need to divest either the stations of the paper by 2006, when the station's licenses come up for renewal.
One of the many dangers of media ownership concentration - in addition to leaving us with fewer voices, opinions and political views, and beyond creating market monopolies which can raise prices at will - is that the giant companies it creates have enormous political muscle. And to be sure, the Tribune Co. has lobbied frantically for Congress to change the cross-ownership rule. That lobbying now assumes a new urgency.
We've already seen what unfettering media amaaalgamation can do in the case of radio. Before the Telecommunications Act of 1996, companies were prohibited from owned more than one AM and one FM station in any single market - or more than seven overall. Once the restriction were eased it allowed giants like Clear Channel to gobble up hundreds of stations and drive down quality.
One federal lawmaker who styles himself a big thinker on media issues is U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of New Haven. Lieberman has been one of the most outspoken voices in Congress calling filmmakers and the television and recording industries to task for selling images of sex and violence to young people.
That's a message that ought to be heard. But now comes a chance for Lieberman to take a stand on a much more important issue that hits home squarely in his own state: media monopolization.
We hope Lieberman will do the right thing in opposing changes to the cross-ownership rule. And we urge business people to contact him and tell him they don't want a newspaper and television monopoly in Connecticut.
|
Go FirstGo PreviousGo
NextGo LastGo
to Index
|
|
