Posted on: Monday, December 23, 2002
ISLAND VOICES
Column tried to discredit council
By Richard S. Miller
Bob Rees' Dec. 16 Counterpoint "Liberalism on a wobbly road" discussing the Honolulu Community-Media Council's opposition to the Emmis Corporation's ownership of two of Honolulu's top four TV stations, KHON and KGMB, contains false facts and implications.
The council decided to oppose the Emmis duopoly largely on grounds that it would undermine the diversity of TV news views in the Hawai'i market. A draft of a letter to the FCC was approved unanimously by the executive committee and circulated to members for comment and suggestions before being further edited and sent.
During this process, Rees, himself a Media Council member, wrote a letter to the FCC attempting to discredit the council's position and stating that our letter was the work of only a few members and did not represent the views of the council.
On Nov. 19, Rees attended a Media Council meeting in which Rick Blangiardi, the current director of both TV stations, had been invited to speak.
Blangiardi gave his views on why the Emmis duopoly should be allowed to continue, notwithstanding that it clearly violated, and had received a temporary waiver of, the FCC rules (now being re-examined) that prohibit joint ownership of two TV stations among the top four in any market.
Before Blangiardi spoke to the council, I gave a brief summary of why the council opposed the duopoly: mainly because it could reduce the diversity of TV viewpoints here. I pointed out that federal courts had held that preserving diversity of views in a news market was a legitimate reason for interfering with the market and disallowing joint ownership of TV stations.
Blangiardi gave a spirited and enthusiastic defense of the benefits of and the reasons to allow joint ownership of the two stations. A principal point was that there is an economic limit to the size of the Hawai'i market and only cost savings that can be achieved through joint ownership will allow any TV station to really improve the quality of TV broadcasting, which he promised to do.
Anyone who was at the meeting, however, would have seen that Blangiardi's views were sharply and well-contested. It was pointed out rather forcefully that his ability to reduce costs by sharing resources between his two stations would enable Emmis to cut its advertising fees and thereby weaken and perhaps destroy the competition — the remaining TV stations.
This might require those two stations either to merge or to shut down.
Thus, Rees' statement, "The battle was over. The liberals in the audience didn't have a principle to stand on, and most fell silent," was pretty much the opposite of what really occurred at that meeting.
Worse, Rees' essay described what he deemed to be "liberals" had sold out their principles by undertaking "politically correct" positions that actually undermined important civil liberties positions.
It then tried to paint the Media Council with the same brush — "intellectually spineless jellyfish" selling out their principles by opposing Blangiardi's plan to improve the quality of TV journalism by reducing its costs.
However, many, if not all, Media Council members are also critical of the kinds of political correctness he described.
It is hardly illiberal of us to take the position that retaining, and even increasing, the diversity of editorial voices among the news media in this isolated state is of transcendent importance, and should not be defeated by those who seek to monopolize the media.
Many other citizen organizations have taken that position and are vigorously opposing current attempts to weaken FCC rules against joint ownership of news outlets.
We are deeply troubled by his attempt to discredit the council and to defame council members by associating us with ideas that most of us do not share.
Law Professor Emeritus Richard S. Miller is the vice chair and former chair of the Honolulu Community-Media Council.
