Appeals Court Again Blocks Tribune Co.'s Run Around Cross-Ownership Rules

By: Mark Fitzgerald Tribune Co. thought it saw a silver lining in the dark cloud that was last June's federal appeals court ruling that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) improperly lifted the ban on the cross-ownership of newspaper and television in the same market.

True, the court back then sent most of the FCC's plan to loosen media ownership restrictions back to the commission for a rewrite. It found faults with the rules ranging from the way the FCC calculated the so-called "diversity index" of same-market media ownership to the legal notice the commission gave for the rule-making process.

At the same time, though, the highly nuanced ruling pointedly said the FCC's "decision to replace its cross-ownership rules with the (looser) cross-media limits is not of itself constitutionally flawed." The justices even hinted in parts of the ruling that in large markets -- where Tribune now owns both papers and television outlets -- cross-ownership might not be so bad.

Last Friday, however, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia again rained on Tribune's ambitions to get regulatory approval for its operation of TV stations in the big cities where it publishes newspapers. An order signed by Circuit Judge Thomas L. Ambro denied Tribune's narrowly drawn appeal of the June ruling.

In that appeal, Tribune did not challenge the entire ruling, but argued that the court should permit the looser FCC regulation in the case of cross-ownership in the nation's biggest markets.

Because of its acquisitions in the 1990s of the old Times Mirror group and other broadcast owners, Tribune now owns newspapers and TV stations in Los Angeles, the New York City market, south Florida and Hartford, Conn. In some markets, the FCC has granted Tribune an exemption from the cross-ownership ban, while in others the issue has not yet come into play because the broadcast licenses have not come up for renewal.

In a Los Angeles Times article by Lorenza Munoz, Tribune lobbyist Shaun Sheehan was quoted as saying the company intended to appeal again. It would "take it up a notch and see if the Supreme Court will hear our case," he said. A Tribune spokesperson did not immediately return a message for comment.