Television and the Public Interest

Abstract

1998).Many of the arguments in this Article were framed through the opportunity to see, through work on the Advisory Committee, two groups close up.The first was a large number of broadcasters-most of them public-spirited, most of them extremely nervous about growing competition from cable and elsewhere, most of them sharply opposed to government mandates, few of them unwilling to accept governmental help.The second was the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB)-at the time an extraordinarily defensive, fearful, uncooperative, aggressive, and self-protective organization, consisting of many honorable people, but often unwilling to compromise or even to reflect.In this way, the NAB was reminiscent of the tobacco industry in, say, the 1960s, and was enthusiastic about using the First Amendment in the same way that the National Rifle Association uses the Second Amendment, that is, as an all-purpose shield against any action adverse to their interests.The author is grateful to other members of the Advisory Committee for many helpful discussions of these problems and, in particular, to the two co-chairs of the Committee, Norman Ornstein and Leslie Moonves.The Committee's final report has influenced the treatment here, not least when there are disagreements.He is also