Doctoral Dissertations

Date of Award

12-1987

Degree Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Major

Communication

Major Professor

Herbert H. Howard

Committee Members

George Everett, Lewis Hodge, Barbara Moore, Michael Singletary

Abstract

Government regulation to achieve the First Amendment freedom of speech rights of the public on public access cable television can deprive cable system operators of their freedom of the press. This study examines this conflict in rights and the question of what best serves the public interest.

Four types of data collection were used in this study of cable television and the public interest. Before passage of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, (1) policy makers were interviewed and (2) a survey of members of the National Federation of Local Cable Programmers was conducted. After the Cable Act was passed, (3) the Act was analyzed for its characterization of public access and (4) U.S. Supreme Court decisions were examined for judgments that could affect public access.

The results support a functional model for cable television presented by interviewee Dr. Henry Geller, Director of the Washington Center for Public Policy Research. The functional model combines several models of media operation. Since cable can operate like a newspaper, like a broadcasting station and like a common carrier, a functional model provides that the law applying to each medium be applied to cable in the appropriate circumstances. If the functional model is applied, there can be regulation to achieve public access cable television without denying cablecasters their First Amendment rights. Both survey respondents and the Cable Act acknowledged First Amendment rights for cable operators and for citizens desiring access to cable tele vision. The Supreme Court has not yet said which interest is dominant.

In conclusion, the public interest contribution of public access cable television lies in training citizens to speak on cable television, in providing the opportunity for freedom of speech in the electronic media, and in presenting community and public affairs programming. If public access is to contribute to diversity, local communities, not cable operators, must control access. To support public access cable television, the courts can uphold the validity of requiring public access in cable franchises and the public can use the opportunity for expression.

Download
Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Share

COinS