The State of the Net Conference annually focuses on internet-related policy. But for FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, the potential rapid consolidation of media ownership was a topic too important to ignore.
In her speech, Gomez acknowledged the financial realities that affect broadcasters today, almost 30 years to the date of the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
But she argued that easing or removing ownership limits for broadcasters should not be considered as the only solution, and in fact, she believes it would end up exacerbating some of the same problems proponents claim it solves.
Most of the commissioner’s comments were geared toward the local TV ownership rules, but the FCC is currently reviewing all of its local ownership rules — including for radio, as we have covered. The National Association of Broadcasters, and other radio groups, support a total removal or easing of current caps, believing that such reform is needed to merely keep radio afloat against big tech.
Gomez argued that ownership concentration ends up hurting consumers the most.
“If the FCC continues down its current path, it risks repeating the same mistake that hollowed out local newspapers, only this time in broadcast television,” she warned.
Blurred lines
Speaking at the event today, the lone Democratic commissioner explained that because the lines once separating communications markets no longer exist, preserving local journalism is more important than ever.
“Even when people get their news through social media, search engines or streaming platforms, much of the original reporting still comes from local journalists,” Gomez said.
Using the newspaper industry as an example, she said there is clear evidence of what happens when local journalism weakens.
“Newspapers were not eliminated because people stopped caring about the news,” Gomez said. “They were hollowed out through consolidation, cost cutting and the loss of advertising revenue to digital platforms, as ownership decisions were increasingly made far from the communities they affected.”
Gomez worked at the FCC three decades ago when Congress passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996. She said that back then, even with the easing of limits the act allowed, part of its implementation was ensuring that no single voice, company or interest could dominate what communities see, hear and rely on for information.
She acknowledged that broadcasters today are dealing with declining revenues from advertising, digital platform competition and changing consumer habits.
But when consolidation becomes the default solution, Gomez said, it often accelerates “the very decline it is supposed to address.”
“Fewer owners does not just mean fewer balance sheets,” Gomez explained. “It means fewer independent editorial decisions and fewer local perspectives.”
Gomez cited a recent email she received from a viewer stating that a single corporate owner controls or operates most of the major broadcast TV affiliates in their local market. While it might appear that viewers in that market have more options, many of those stations share reporters, crews, anchors and often the same stories, she explained.
She also pointed to a recent poll revealing that nearly three out of four likely voters oppose large broadcast corporations buying or merging with local TV stations.
We reported on a recent poll cited by NAB, which demonstrated the opposite.
Regulatory power
The FCC itself, Gomez said, has used its power to pressure coverage in ways that are favorable to President Trump’s administration, including a recent public notice sent to ensure “equal time” for late-night TV programming. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr later clarified the notice was not geared toward talk-radio shows.
“These billion-dollar media companies have significant business before the FCC. They need regulatory approval for transactions, and they are actively seeking to reduce regulatory guardrails so they can grow even larger,” she said.
“That reality leaves local stations trapped in the middle, as corporate owners weigh regulatory risk against editorial independence and impose their will and their values on communities they may never meaningfully engage with.”
Gomez reminded the audience that Congress established a national TV ownership cap to prevent excessive concentration that threatens competition, localism and viewpoint diversity.
“It is not a suggestion,” she explained. “It is the law.”
She noted that one of the clearest examples of the agency ignoring this is its openness to transactions that would further entrench national dominance, including a potential merger between two major broadcast groups in Tegna and Nexstar that she argued would violate Congress’s restriction.
“The FCC’s responsibility is not to manage consolidation, but to steward a media ecosystem that serves consumers and communities in the real world,” Gomez concluded. “If we keep that focus, we can meet this moment without sacrificing the voices that make our democracy work.”
This article was originally posed by our sister publication Radio World. Their coverage of business and regulatory issues can be found here.
