It’s been happening gradually for more than two decades and, unless you were really paying attention, you probably didn’t notice it. I know I didn’t until recently. I’m talking about the trend of telecommunications mergers set off by the 1996 Telecommunications Act. This little piece of legislation made it possible for a single media company to control previously unheard of numbers of media licenses. Under these rules, one company, for example, could control most of the media outlets in a given area.

“What’s the big deal?,” you say.

“It’s called capitalism,” you say.

And you’re right.

It is the way businesses in our country function. They’re in the telecommunications business to make money and, if there is a way to make more money, these companies owe it to their shareholders to do so.

I’m not saying there is anything wrong with that approach.

I am, however, saying that there are some subtle, yet significant, drawbacks to the proliferation of recent telecommunications mergers.

Perhaps the most insidious of these is the decline in female and minority ownership of media companies.

As a few companies, mostly led by white males, amass vast media holdings, more and more small media companies, many led by people in the “other than white male” demographic are being pushed out.

This is a problem both socially and culturally.

Why?

Because the fewer viewpoints we are exposed to, the narrower our thinking becomes. Our nation was not built through mass agreement or homogenization. We cannot afford to go down this path.

Diversity matters in all areas and ownership of media properties is no different.

Even if you’re not currently in school, try to think back to when you were. Now, imagine you’re writing a paper. Would you feel comfortable turning it in knowing you’d based it on one source? Likely not.

You’d want a wide variety of sources and you’d want the ability to, after looking at varied viewpoints, form your own opinion.

You should expect the same in life. However, if certain demographics are removed from the mass media equation, we are going to hear from only one voice and that is something we cannot afford.

As I said earlier, I don’t blame the companies amassing these holdings and pushing others out. They’re simply doing what they should do. This wouldn’t be possible, however, if government regulations prohibiting this sort of business weren’t removed.

Competition and diversity made this country what it is and competition and diversity should continue to play a role in the telecommunications arena. This can only happen if diverse media companies are allowed to get in the game.

Without the support of our government, specifically the FCC, however, they won’t be able to compete with the bottomless pockets of the bigger telecommunications conglomerates.

Our culture needs diversity in media. If the trend toward consolidation continues, we could, in a worst-case scenario, end up with one giant media company only providing content they approve of. There would be no debate. There would be one viewpoint. One voice. To me, this is unacceptable.