Hit Fox in the OTHER place it hurts: FCC Approvals.

[TomTX]

I'm actually surprised that I haven't seen this tactic posted yet. Along with advertisers, this is the other major weakness of broadcasters/networks.

The other critical items we can influence directly are the FCC broadcast license for each affiliate, AND FCC approval for station purchases/mergers/trades. By specifically targeting FCC approvals, your comments will have a LOT more long-term weight. Endangering the local affiliate's license with enough negative comments in the right way will change their attitude from "It's the network, nothing we can do" and largely ignoring you to actually calling the NewsCorp on your behalf saying "OMG, fix this NOW!"

Remember, the FCC threatened to hit EACH broadcast station with a 6-figure fine for the half-second "wardrobe malfunction" at the SuperBowl*.

Key trigger phrases:

"FCC Public File"
"Not acting in the public interest"

1) At the beginning of EACH email or FAX to an affiliate (actual broadcaster, not the network) ask that the comment be placed in their "FCC Public File." They are required to comply with your request.

This "Public File" is reviewed by the FCC each time that station's license is up for renewal. Not getting a license renewed means the station is worthless.

Give your opinion that the broadcaster is "Not acting in the public interest" and give detailed reasoning.

We can specifically start slamming each affiliate under the FCC "Equal Time Rule."

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/E/htmlE/equaltimeru/equaltimeru.htm
http://www.fcc.gov/eb/broadcast/pif.html


2) Comment to the FCC directly on media ownership:

http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/ecfs/Upload/

Check next to "Media Ownership Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking - Docket 06-121 "

1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322)
1-866-418-0232 FAX: toll-free

Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554

Chairman Kevin J. Martin: [email protected]
Commissioner Michael J. Copps: [email protected]
Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein: [email protected]
Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate: [email protected]
Commissioner Robert McDowell: [email protected]

...and make sure to comment how NewsCorp is "acting against the public interest."

-TomTX

*This was later reduced to only hitting the direct-owned stations. Other events such as the "Without a Trace" teen orgy did fine affiliates directly at 5 figures.

 

[freedom-maniac]

Holy Crap! This is genious for taking down Fox, but when is their license renewed? The end of the year I hope.

 

[Kingfisher]

The FCC is part of the Regime

 

[TomTX]

Holy Crap! This is genious for taking down Fox, but when is their license renewed? The end of the year I hope.

License renewals are on a continuous, rolling basis for each local broadcaster.

However, your comments MUST stay in the public file - and there are rarely very many of them.

Several dozen (hundred?) negative comments in each affiliate's public file WILL scare them.

 

[Castrensis]

Since 1959, the FCC has provided a number of interpretations to Section 315's exemptions. Presidential press conferences have been labeled on-the-spot news, even if the president uses his remarks to bolster his campaign. Since the 1970s, debates have also been considered on-the-spot news events and therefore exempt from the equal time law. This has enabled stations or other parties arranging the debates to choose which candidates to include in a debate.

Link

 

[mosquitobite]

Explain what you mean by affiliate? Our local Fox station?

 

[Think12345]

I think this might just work!
5 stars to this thread.

 

[TomTX]

Yes, we have a bit of an uphill battle with the "debate exception" to the equal time rule.

1) This is NOT a debate. It is a "roundtable discussion"

2) Modern "debates" are VERY different from the original exception 30+ years ago. Originally, media was just reporting "on the spot news" for an event organized by an independent third party, such as the League of Women Voters.

Today, debates are being run by the media themselves and therefore by my reasoning are NOT "on the spot news"

Affiliate: The local broadcast station in or near your town, such as "KTBC Austin Fox Channel 7". "Fox" is the national Network which produces much of the content. "KTBC Channel 7" is the local broadcaster in Austin affiliated with Fox, who owns the transmitter in Austin broadcasting Channel 7 to your TV and re-broadcasting the content produced by the Fox Network, plus their own local news, weather and such. "KTBC" is the unique set of call letters assigned by the FCC. Each local station has their own license from the FCC.

 

[robertwerden]

What about the blow back to Ron on this?

 

[TomTX]

The campaign was pretty clearly behind a strong grassroots response with their PR release.

 

[Think12345]

Is there a list of Fox affiliates?

 

[Dan Klaus]

wow...this is a quality post with good information...thanks 4 posting...

 

[Crickett]

This really is genius. The fact of NAMECALLING (crackpot, kook) seems specifically prohibited. They sure have broken that rule, along with the excerpts one. Even if the FCC is "part of it", like RP has done for YEARS, we must stand up and say something, AND get it into the public file. THIS IS GREAT!

 

[robertwerden]

Larger groups than us have tried to stop FOX and have failed.
This is a futile effort.
FOX has been before Congress before defending them selves and have won. There is a major collusion in the FCC and congress to protect FOX and unless we have people on our side in Congress and in the FCC we will not win this fight barring a major violation by FOX of FCC regulations.
I think this is a time consuming plan that takes away from the efforts we need to focus on to get Ron Paul elected.
My advice is to keep an eye out for gross violations and then strike, but until that has happened we should ramp up our efforts to get our man in the White House.

 

[RonPaulCult]

Fox and its parent company DO NOT own more than about 20 of the hundreds of Fox affiliates.

FOX NEWS CHANNEL is not licensed by the FCC because it is a cable channel.

 

[TomTX]

Larger groups than us have tried to stop FOX and have failed.
This is a futile effort.
FOX has been before Congress before defending them selves and have won. There is a major collusion in the FCC and congress to protect FOX and unless we have people on our side in Congress and in the FCC we will not win this fight barring a major violation by FOX of FCC regulations.
I think this is a time consuming plan that takes away from the efforts we need to focus on to get Ron Paul elected.
My advice is to keep an eye out for gross violations and then strike, but until that has happened we should ramp up our efforts to get our man in the White House.

Futile? Time consuming?

Has Fox succeeded against a largely Democrat Congress?

How long does it take to fill out a bloody web form and send a few emails? It took me all of 5 minutes to fill out the FCC "open comments" form about media consolidation and send an individual email to each commissioner detailing how the "debate exception" no longer applies.

I'm also working hard organizing my County for Ron Paul - we have a meeting this afternoon to get areas/precinct organizers designated to coordinate regional canvassing and sign posting, we'll be stuffing door-hangars and collecting $ to pay for more 4x8' signs - we already have landowner permission for several new high-visibility spots.

 

[parke]

When are they going to learn? This crap only strengthens our movement.

 

[schmeisser]

//

 

[another rp constituent]

I think the 'Equal Time Rule' was abolished in the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Is this correct? Otherwise, this is very sound advice. I worked at radio stations all through the 80's and 90's and we were always paranoid about the 'Public File' whenever license renewal came up. Please take advantage of this system while it still works. And, we do have at least one level-headed commissioner at the FCC - Michael J. Copps (D). He is the lone voice of reason at that alphabet agency...and he's a democrat.

 

[TomTX]

Even if the specifics have changed, the theme that they are abusing the public trust and acting "against the public interest" should be effective, IMO.