Where's the "original" FCC mission statement?

e.g.
“under the Communications Act of 1934, the FCC is charged with allocating spectrum space to maximize the public interest, convenience, or necessity…The Communications Act and its revisions mandate promotion of the public interest, and thus the encouragement of a diversity of voices so as to promote a vibrant democracy.”

Not that fascist god damned garbage that's on their site now.

EXAMPLE #1
(sounds like fascism to me, Customer?! )
OIG Mission Statement

Values - Products and services are competent, objective, timely, and relevant.
A customer focus which is responsive to the needs of decision makers.
A positive working environment within the OIG which encourages us to be innovative and reach our potential through teamwork and open, candid communication.

EXAMPLE #2
(Way authoritarian, no mention of the public, no mention of running things from an engineering standpoint.)
EB mission statement

To promote robust competition and innovation in the telecommunications marketplace by strictly enforcing the Communications Act and the FCC's rules.

Then look at their documents about Public Files..

I'll grind it down for ya in a paraphrase. (been awhile since I seen this)
An un-determined date in the future, "they'd like" to have stations have their public file's online.

What horseshit!

Anyway the FCC should only be controlling POWER and FREQUENCY, not politics and fascism.

It's another ruined United States agency, which if we ever clean out the corruption in the rest of the government, this will be on the list.

If they followed their "Original Mission Statement" there would be no need for a fairness doctrine. But instead, we have a democracy about to disintegrate in probably (my opinion) 5 years.

As a side note this reminds me of all the "Leadership" training the government seems to be pushing around throughout different agencies. ONCE this leadership training infects an agency it's turned to crap. DON'T MAKE ME SHOW YOU EXAMPLES! Go find them. And see for yourself. If your a government employee for say 20+ years you already know what I am saying is true.

It's almost like a diversion, so they can fuck up something while the honest non oath breakers are busy fucking with performance evaluations for 3-4 months of the year.

This isn't leadership, it's a hidden warfare. Common sense goes out the window once the change has taken place.

The public is called "Customer."

The Communications Act and its revisions mandate promotion of the public interest, and thus the encouragement of a diversity of voices so as to promote a vibrant democracy.

Thank you, Phil. Wouldn't that be swell?

It COULD be swell.

But yeah Brad, this is another sore thumb for me it's right up there, with electronic vote tabulation devices.

In essence the "current corporate owners" of our "public spectrum" (wow sic sic sic) are exploiting it to steer political issues, public opinion, and wipe the best candidates (in the public interest) off the ballot before we can even worry about getting our vote stolen by an electronic signal. They just won't be on the ballot since they were forced by all the gank polls and fascist media tricks to change public perception, losing support and fail.

Other things are effected as well. I remember when Motorola, Mitsubishi, Lockheed ringed the earth with satellites. Guess what AT&T did back then? Bought NEARLY all the frequencies, except for the military's (The Military part is understandable and reasonable -imo) part of the spectrum.

You know what AT&T's stock did back then? And I could have been a millionaire if I had some money back then.. Their stock doubled and then split.

Anyway.. Yeah good topic brad, long overdue, and perhaps each station's PUBLIC FILE should be integrated into this discussion. If it's a public file shouldn't it be publicly accessible? (And I don't mean making an appointment) It needs to freaking be ONLINE.

It's also damned good reasons to keep the FCC out of our web.

Good analysis, Brad. I was the first to comment at AlterNet:

The "public interest" right now is best served by all us citizen journalists and independent media makers transparently using media as a tool to do our work for change. This is how I define advocacy journalism. Used this way it is a public service and changes the relationship [of power] We The People have with the corporate/military/government/media juggernaut. Changing that relationship of power is peaceful revolution.

[In a separate comment directly replying to my first...]

I meant to add that long-established media figures such as Tribune Media Services syndicated columnist Bob Koehler, and radio talk show host Peter B. Collins, have recently given video interviews at ManifestPositivity.org that echo this take on advocacy journalism. Not only does this approach need to be transparent, its success needs to be defined by the results we collaboratively produce, in the public interest.

--

Brad, I'd like to invite you to do a video Skype interview with me about this.

Peace,
Dave

Lol Brad, yer from Missouri, you would be a 'feller' there instead of a 'fellow', no?

Even my old Grandma from Iowa would say that.

Gary Webb tried real journalism, but then he shot himself in the head...twice.

Dave Berman - Always happy to support your indy media efforts, as you know. Gimme a shout anytime. Would be honored.

Floridiot - I may be from MO, but not from The Ozarks!

Brad, I'd have much preferred a call for restoration of the Fairness Doctrine to a borrowing of "Fair and Balanced," the meaning of which has been perverted by Fox News.

While a roll back of the wave of corporate media consolidation and a restoration of diversity of ownership would reflect improvement, we delude ourselves if we do not confront the core issue --- that even dating back to 1934, the U.S. made a major mistake in conceding control of the public airwaves to the most undemocratic of institutions, corporations, the political counterpart of which, per Noam Chomsky, is a totalitarian state.

As James Madison observed, "knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who wish to be their own governors must acquire the power that only knowledge can bring."

The only way to truly achieve true democracy is to divest corporations of their current control over 95% of what we see, hear and read.

Ernest said:

Brad, I'd have much preferred a call for restoration of the Fairness Doctrine to a borrowing of "Fair and Balanced," the meaning of which has been perverted by Fox News.

That's exactly why I used it.