<HTML>In a message dated 1/30/2003 1:30:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, dmonaco@pop3.utoledo.edu writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">...and why is the FCC so silent?  Who "owns/regulates/controls" whom? </BLOCKQUOTE> The FCC is silent, except for occasionally Michael Copps, the more vocal Dem on the commission, because deregulator Michael Powell thinks bigger is better (and he's got the widening girth this year to prove it - pardon the low blow). He has stated on numerous occasions that content is not in the jurisdiction of the FCC. He has said that he 'trusts' the 'media' to select the best news and create the best programming and that it is not his place to dictate what that means. He thereby acknowledges no connection between deregulation, which he still advocates as being pro-competitive, and corporate consolidation, which he stresses can be in the 'public interest' and bad or restrictive content due to restricted access resulting from too few companies owning too many paths of access. Of course, he still doesn't see how current policy unleashed an industry meltdown either. In terms of who controls whom - Congress sets overall regulatory policy, based however, on recommendations from the FCC. The media / telecom industry happens to be a particularly generous political donor. Since 1990, and mostly since 1996 deregulation, it has contributed over $421mln in political donations to Congress on top of another $750mln to lobbyists. That's second only to the financial industry. Nomi </HTML>