Diversity Is Urged in Media Ownership

Weighing in on a debate that the advertising industry has heretofore avoided, a major ad agency will urge federal regulators to foster more diversity in media ownership because a wave of consolidation has “induced blandness” in network TV.

In 40 pages of comments expected to be submitted to the Federal Communications Commission today, MediaCom -- the world’s ninth-largest advertising agency and a unit of New York-based Grey Global Group Inc. -- says increasing media concentration will drive up advertising costs and discourage innovative television programming.

MediaCom was joined in its remarks by Sony Pictures Television, the Directors Guild of America, the Screen Actors Guild of America and other entertainment organizations. The groups, which call themselves the Coalition for Program Diversity, are fighting a bid by the television networks and big TV station groups to expand their media holdings.

“The narrow prime-time television programming marketplace has become dysfunctional as diverse sources of independently produced, non-network programming have been eliminated,” MediaCom and the others say.

The group points out that during “the Golden Age of Television in the 1970s and 1980s,” the networks were required by the FCC to license all prime-time programming from independent producers.

A copy of the coalition’s filing was obtained by The Times.

The FCC is considering lifting restrictions on mergers between TV broadcast networks and easing the limits on the number of local TV or radio stations a single company may own. A majority of commissioners have signaled that they are in favor of relaxing the rules, and the FCC is expected to act by the summer.

Among other prohibitions, current FCC regulations bar one company from owning TV stations and newspapers in the same market; prevent TV station owners from reaching more than 35% of the national audience; and place some limits on the ownership of local radio stations one company or individual can control.

Media ownership rules have been dramatically liberalized since the 1940s, when one company or individual could own only three TV stations. But industry giants -- including Tribune Co., owner of The Times; Viacom Inc., operator of the CBS and UPN television networks; and News Corp., parent of the Fox network -- say more changes are overdue following the proliferation of cable TV channels and the emergence of the Internet.

Meanwhile, many Hollywood producers and entertainment organizations have sided with consumer groups, which fear that relaxing the rules would trigger another wave of media consolidation and reduce the diversity of viewpoints and programming.

For its part, MediaCom’s characterization of television as bland is particularly striking, given that many advertisers have studiously avoided TV shows that stir controversy.

In 1990, for instance, ABC lost $1 million in advertising revenue when the drama “thirtysomething” showed two men in bed together. And as recently as 1997, Sears, Roebuck & Co., American Isuzu Motors Inc. and at least five other companies stopped advertising on the ABC series “Nothing Sacred” in part because of claims by the New York-based Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights that the show insulted the Catholic church.

In light of that history, some experts think the coalition may be overstating the diversity of choice that was available during TV’s so-called Golden Age.

“I’m not an apologist for media concentration, but if you look at television in the 1970s and 1980s, a good chunk of the population was getting their programming from just three or four networks,” said Robert J. Thompson, founder of the Center for the Study of Popular Television at Syracuse University.

“Today, of course, you have things like ‘The Sopranos’ [on HBO] and ‘The Osbournes’ [on MTV] and everything in between,” said Thompson, who added that even the traditional Big Three TV networks have gotten edgier. “We can hardly call that homogenous.”

But Jon Mandel, co-chief executive of MediaCom, contends that television has become increasingly mundane because a wave of mergers has left prime-time programming almost completely in the hands of the networks and a small group of affiliated producers. That, in turn, has raised the cost of advertising, he asserts.

“Because the networks are not putting on programming that is diverse enough to attract a broad audience,” Mandel said, “it costs advertisers more to reach people.” He criticized the FCC for not doing enough to promote localism, diversity and competition.

If so, the agency may well be acting with the blessing of President Bush and the federal courts.

Since Bush took office two years ago, his administration has been attempting to undo decades of government regulations aimed at promoting diversity of media ownership. The federal courts largely have supported the effort with a string of decisions that challenge or strike down the FCC’s media ownership restrictions.

Last February, for instance, a federal appeals court ordered the FCC to reconsider its regulation preventing broadcasters from reaching more than 35% of households with televisions. The court also set aside a rule that prevented companies from owning a cable system and a TV station in the same market.