Media cross-ownership ban restored
Lawyer Blogs
A federal Appeals Court has restored a long-standing ban that prevents media companies from owning both a newspaper and a television station in the same market.
The 3d US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said yesterday that the Federal Communications Commission didn’t give the public adequate opportunity to comment on new rules that lifted the ban in the 20 largest media markets. The Appeals Court sent the rules back to the FCC to be rewritten.
The so-called cross-ownership ban dates back to 1975 - a time when newspapers dominated the media industry.
In 2007, then-FCC chairman Kevin Martin, a Bush administration appointee, moved to ease those restrictions in the biggest media markets. He argued that the ban no longer made sense in a media landscape where the Internet had left many daily newspapers struggling for survival.
Public interest groups challenged the changes and warned that too many media outlets falling under the ownership of a handful of large corporations could be detrimental to democracy, which relies on a vibrant press with many voices.
The decision is a setback for media conglomerates, which argue that consumers have more sources of information than ever in an age of 24-hour cable television and an endless supply of online news outlets.
Related listings
-
US court denies cash for suspected Somali pirate
Lawyer Blogs 07/07/2011A federal judge has denied a request from a Somali man accused of piracy to have $1,600 in cash returned to him for humanitarian needs, saying he failed to prove he was lawfully in possession of the money. Mohammad Saaili Shibin is accused of acting ...
-
No manslaughter convictions in ground zero fire
Lawyer Blogs 07/06/2011A toxin-cleanup director and a company were acquitted Wednesday of manslaughter in an August 2007 blaze that killed two firefighters at a condemned tower at ground zero, although the firm was convicted of a misdemeanor. The John Galt Corp. was found ...
-
Borrowers sue over apparent loan mod mishaps
Lawyer Blogs 07/05/2011It seemed Maria Campusano's financial problems were behind her when the mortgage on her Victorian home in a Massachusetts mill town was chopped by hundreds of dollars a month. She soon learned that her troubles had just begun. Weeks after making her ...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.