Cross-media ownership laws: refinement or rejection?

During the long debate about media ownership rules in Australia, the Coalition Government argued for the repeal of cross-media restrictions. It did not achieve this. The law passed in October 2006 retains limits on cross-media holdings but they are less restrictive than their predecessors.1 When the Federal Communications Commission (‘FCC’) last reviewed media ownership rules in the United States, it too proposed loosening but not removing cross-media limits.2 A federal appeals court stayed the proposed rules in 2004, essentially leaving the existing rules in place.3 The FCC is now reviewing the rules, taking into account changes since then in the media market and the way people are using media.4 This article examines the background to cross-media ownership laws and compares the approaches to changing them in the two countries. It finds different outcomes generated by different media markets, political and institutional contexts, legislative histories and levels of policy analysis. The two countries are both moving away from blanket prohibition of cross-media holdings and trying to make any remaining restrictions more sensitive to the characteristics of individual markets.