Broadcasters Must Push Hard For Deregulation

[Commentary] Should broadcast journalists get involved with the government's efforts to save journalism? On the one hand, it may be a good idea for broadcasters to participate. It's a perfect opportunity for them to make the case that consolidation isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to journalism, and that outdated ownership restrictions must go. In fact, and somewhat paradoxically, they can argue that consolidation is good for journalism. Newspapers have done their best journalistic work since becoming monopolies or near monopolies. Flush owners are willing to trade dollars for the power and prestige that comes from operating first-rate journalistic enterprises. What's wrecking such papers is the uncontrollable invasion of competition from the Internet. They've lost their local news and classified advertising franchises and they can't get them back. By contrast, excessive competition seems to bring out the worse in journalism. In broadcasting, it leads to rundowns filled with the lowest-common-denominator reporting on crimes and fires. In cable, among the news networks, it has produced a mad race to the bottom in search of the most viewers. On the other hand, the proceedings could be a trap. Whatever benefits the government grants the legacy media are likely to come with strings. For every break the Federal Communications Commission grants TV stations it will want something in return. A larger principle is at stake here too. Journalistic organizations simply shouldn't be involved in what will surely lead to some quid pro quo or put them on an economic footing that depends on the continued beneficence of the government.