C-Span threatened by FCC and you know who. Please read and

help.

"Current Status
… as of June 2, 2006


FCC MAY RE-VOTE on MUST-CARRY RULE in JUNE
As of today the Federal Communications Commission is preparing to take another vote on the so-called "multi-cast, must-carry" proposal. If approved, this proposal would force cable operators to give broadcasters additional space on cable systems to deliver several broadcast signals instead of just one.

The FCC's move is significant because it firmly rejected the "multi-cast, must-carry" proposal in a 4 to 1 vote in February 2005. However, since that decisive vote the FCC has gotten a new chairman and new members. Before he became the current chairman, Commissioner Kevin Martin, was the only vote in favor of "multi-cast, must-carry" in 2005. Observers of the FCC note that with the appointment of two new Republican members, the chairman may believe he now has a 3 to 2 majority that will approve the proposal."

There is more at -

http://www.mustcarry.org/

Please get active. Especially now that they are covering Dems a little better and have given us some wonderful coverage - Tavis Smiley Seminar, Cindy, etc - I should have written down the list of things that have moved me.

They cover the Press Conferences and Dem briefings when corporate propaganda networks cut away. They cover live sessions at night as well as the day, they repeat what they cover three times. AND THEN there is Book TV.

As much as I have criticized them, I couldn't wouldn't shouldn't survive without their coverage. They are living history. - protecting our history - and they give meaning to our history. They get our kids interested in our history with all their special programs and contests. We can't become anymore secret than we already are.

Between defunding PBS at getting rid of C-span they will have totally eliminated what little TV I watch. It is uncanny how they have attacked the only channels I ever tune into...

last yr. he slipped and said he would be shot if he had a certain person/subject on air. (forget who/subj)

at the time I wanted to ask him - shot by who?

Thanks for posting this! I was aware of the COPE bill and the proposed cuts for PBS but not this. I'll be forwarding it to my media reform listservs.

PBS, cspan and the internet attacked all at once.
and we are still thinking we can get the msm to cover anything? No, the repugs are way ahead of us, cutting off any communication that's left.

:kick:

that this administration has us knee-deep in. 'Protecting little johnny' seems to be something that the Marines wouldn't want to support, knowing what I know about free speech and marine verbal expressionism in the media.

One of the secrets they wish to cover up for is the BFEE's role in the coup d'etat they planned to foist the country with fascism only USMC Gen Smedley D. Butler blew the whistle on them. Put the word out on THAT.

Jules Archer's book The Plot To Seize The White House should be more available if you know what I mean.

C-SPAN is very important.

If I hadn't been witness to all that this administration has already done, I'd be shocked.

I'm sure C-SPAN junkies, from the left and the right, would hate to lose access to all their programming.

Must carry means your cable system must put on local television signals over those of the large corporate cable stations. This includes your local PBS stations and other stations that only cover your area, not the entire country. This leglislation regards the future of local TV...digital TV signals, that are currently operating, can carry upwards of 6 channels. The debate revolves around if the local cable operators must carry these signals at all.

The option to put C-SPAN on cable systems have always been at the discretion of the cable operators and Must Carry does not apply to them. How C-SPAN is affected is if the digital Must Carry provision goes through where all the "sub-channels" of your local station must be carried on the cable system or only a handful or none at all.

In a major city, this could mean your cable operator losing control of upwards of 20 or more channels...and the revenues they earn from them. C-SPAN is being used as a pawn in this game as if they did have to take these channels, they would either have to take off or move other channels.

The real deal here is that most cable systems have upgraded to digital...offering enough channels to handle all the local must carry signals as well as all the C-SPAN channels.

Yes, C-SPAN is "living history"...but it's also owned by the same cable entities that are crying wolf here. They've used it as a backdoor way to curry favor with the powers to be inside the beltway with Mr. Brian Lamb...a Repugnican...playing as the "good cop" here...while sneaking a GOOP agenda on his Washington Journal every morning.

On Edit: The FCC has NO jurisdiction over C-SPAN. This is a debate in the Congress.

you shut down opposition.

For this issue to grow legs - it needs to be made personal.

see my ramble... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1401612

I wondered if this would apply to satellite systems, like Directv?

Meg

just provides the means to get programing - for the most part it doesn't create the programing - just like your cable company doesn't create programing, it provides the means of getting it

so who ever controls the programming - controls the message

this can be even more limited by controling the means or a better question to ask is WHO is determining which programs to 'offer'

related but a bit off topic - we just get basic cable, the extended packages do not offer enough of the programs we like to make it worth the extra few bucks. We've looked into satellite, direct TV etc - same problem, for the cost VS programs it's not worth it to us.

If you want real free and open broadcasting the "package" you would be offered would be for "x" amount of channels and you pick the channels.