Old media companies are continually trying to get the FCC to relax their regulations so that they can increase their holdings in response to the changing media climate.
Some of those opposing them say that if this is done, it will decrease diversity of the options available for viewers.
To me all sides are still missing the point. For example, the biggest dinosaur of the old media, NBC Universal, with their Chairman Bob Wright, talks about the "risk" of buying Internet companies being like 
"putting a new sitcom or drama on NBC's prime-time schedule--you're not too sure what you are going to get. Even if it succeeds, you don't now how long that success will last."
That statement doesn't even make any sense. TV studios are endlessly offering new shows to try things. How could this be something negative to consider?
Take News Corp.'s (NWS) buying of MySpace. Even if it fails in a year, they've already made their money back on it. How many shows will be dropped this year that haven't made it, and won't make their investment back?
Whether the FCC relaxes rules or not, they will simply be buying up more fragmentation. The reason people like some of these other stations are because they're unique. To have big media companies buy them up and then clone them into what they already are, won't add any value to the company or the viewer's experience.
Those that are concerned about the diversity factor have nothing to fear. It won't be too long when anything we want to watch will be made available through Internet downloads.
Buying up other properties will do nothing to help media companies be profitable. Eventually they will have to face the changes in the marketplace and what people want. Nothing will change that reality.
Like I've mentioned here before, the real reason all of this is happening is so the big media companies can buy time so they can figure out how to monetize the digital option. The truth is that they may never be as big as they once were. That's what they're really fighting!
Comment Preview