Changing TV economics prompts fresh thinking about public airwaves

CHANGING TV ECONOMICS PROMPTS FRESH THINKING ABOUT PUBLIC AIRWAVES
[SOURCE: Seattle Times, AUTHOR: Alex Alben]
[Commentary] Shifting economics between the networks and their affiliates already reflect this: We increasingly live in an age in which producers of high-quality TV shows will go directly to the consumer to monetize their investment. This sea change in TV economics is occurring against the background of a mandatory review by the Federal Communications Commission of local TV station ownership rules and regulations. For example, the commission will consider lifting the ban against a newspaper also owning a TV station in its local market. Advocates of lifting the ban say that news quality will actually improve, if a local TV outlet can draw upon the depth and experience of local print reporters. Besides, the argument goes, in a world where people can go to the Internet any moment of the day to get news from sources around the world, the concept of maintaining independent control between territorial news outlets is outmoded. But local stations, after all, enjoy a government monopoly on a finite resource — the spectrum for VHF and UHF broadcast signals. To continue to enjoy their monopoly, local stations file simplified forms every few years when their FCC licenses come up for renewal. There are very few requirements to offer locally generated programming or even local news. Most stations make their money by inserting their local ads into reruns of "Seinfeld" and other secondhand programming. Local TV needs to do more than simply exist as an "over the airwaves" channel for the distribution of content available in other formats. Despite the changing economics of video distribution, is it really too much to ask that local stations address the informational interests of the people within the regions they are chartered to serve?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2003604342_alben07.html