News Clips

Local newspapers provide a public good that far outweighs their financial value. And the FCC is supposed to ensure that public good is maintained. The approval of this merger with its explicit endorsement of profit over the public interest demonstrates that the FCC has lost its way.

“The majority-FCC’s vote to approve the disastrous T-Mobile-Sprint merger is a vote to raise prices, reduce innovation, and price out millions of low-income and marginalized communities from wireless service, "said former FCC chairman and current Common Cause special adviser Michael Copps. "All of the evidence shows that this deal is inherently illegal under antitrust law and does not meet the public interest criteria the FCC is required to follow. Rather than actually conduct a thorough public interest review of the merger, the majority at the FCC signaled it would approve the deal months ago pointing to promises and commitments made by T-Mobile and Sprint. But these promises and behavioral conditions are unenforceable and riddled with loopholes that do nothing to address the significant harms consumers would face from the merger."

In the coming months and during the presidential debates, the public and the candidates themselves should demand that media hold itself accountable in campaign coverage. Reporters should begin asking candidates why we don’t have net neutrality and an open internet despite polls showing 85% of the public — Republicans, Democrats and Independents — support it. Reporters should be asking the candidates if media consolidation troubles them and what they might do about it. Reporters should be asking why so many communities live in news deserts today and what they would do to fix this.

“Rather than actually examine the competitive impact, Chairman Pai’s recommended approval points to T-Mobile’s commitments and behavioral conditions,” said Yosef Getachew, media and democracy program director for Common Cause. “Not only are these commitments and conditions unenforceable and riddled with loopholes, they do nothing to address the blatant competitive harms the merger poses to consumers.”

Common Cause on Monday (May 13) filed a petition to deny the deals at the FCC, saying that the 25 TV stations Apollo would own meant putting a lot of broadcast ownership in a private equity firm, something Common Cause's special adviser, former FCC chairman Michael Copps, says has historically not been a public benefit. "History has shown that the quality of our news and information has significantly diminished under private equity control. These firms typically implement cost cutting strategies that bleed newspapers dry, leading to reporter layoffs and consolidated newsrooms," said Copps. "The profits generated from cutting costs are not invested into improving the news but rather to pay off loans and manage debt. Apollo’s entry into the broadcast market invites serious skepticism that it would benefit localism and viewpoint diversity instead of following the traditional model of laying off reporters and consolidating newsrooms." The petition identified a number of speculative harms, saying that if private equity firms' past was prologue, "Apollo would likely layoff reporters, consolidate newsrooms, and homogenize programming in order to maximize its profits."

“The Third Circuit has told the FCC on multiple occasions to examine how its media ownership rules impact race and gender ownership diversity," said Michael Copps, former FCC chairman and special advisor to Common Cause (one of the petitioners). "The FCC has not only failed to assess the impact of its rules on minority ownership but has also abandoned its rules all together. We urge the Court to reverse this unlawful decision and require the FCC to fulfill its statutory mandate to promote race and gender diversity in media ownership.”