General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I will tell you why Maddow's "Hubris" aired NOW and not back then. And you won't like it. [View all]stupidicus
(2,570 posts)The Act was claimed to foster competition. Instead, it continued the historic industry consolidation reducing the number of major media companies from around 50 in 1983 to 10 in 1996[25] and 6 in 2005.[26] An FCC study found that the Act had led to a drastic decline in the number of radio station owners, even as the actual number of commercial stations in the United States had increased.[27]
In the 2003 edition of his book, A People's History of the United States, Howard Zinn wrote about alternative media, community newspapers and the creation of street newspapers trying the break the corporate control of information. On that topic, he talked about the Telecommunications Act of 1996:
"...the Telecommunications Act of 1996...enabled the handful of corporations :dominating the airwaves to expand their power further. Mergers enabled tighter :control of information...The Latin American writer Eduardo Galeano :commented..."Never have so many been held incommunicado by so few."[32]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996
the abomination Clinton signed.
Here's one of the reasons I was eager to vote BHO in 2008
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/388/encourage-diversity-in-media-ownership/
Here's more of what we got http://www.google.com/search?q=obama+media+consolodation&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGHP_en
and sadly, it's an issue that is on the radar of far too few despite the role it has played in the fruition of "the plan" you addressed here