ABSTRACT
Attempts to define, quantify, and enforce notions of public interest have pervaded the legal atmosphere of broadcast, cable, and satellite since their invention. The Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) immediate past chairman, Michael Powell, struggled with the meaning of the words since first taking office. He told a group of communications attorneys shortly after he took office: “The night after I was sworn in, I waited for a visit from the angel of the public interest. I waited all night, but she did not come. And, in fact, five months into this job, I still have had no divine awakening and no one has issued me my public interest crystal ball” (Powell, 1998). Powell’s predecessor, Bill Kennard, conducted his own year-long investigation into the public interest obligations of broadcasters, just a few months after Vice President Al Gore’s public interest advisory committee spent 18 months doing the same thing and failed to enact or quantify public interest requirements. In short, the study of the public interest has received significant attention as the government attempted to determine how to make the concept more tangible and, perhaps more important, what concepts of public interest could be enforced and later upheld in the courts. During the last 70 years, public interest has focused on three areas: localism, children’s TV programming, and political broadcasting (Sarver, 2004).
