We should not confuse 'multiple' choices with 'independent' choices. For example, we now have 'multiple' sources of news and information offered by NBC -- the national broadcast network, CNBC, and MSNBC -- which is all to the good. However, by contrast, 'independent' choices are available to viewers by the emergence of competitors to CNN -- MSNBC and Fox News (as cited in Ann, 2003)." While, on the other hand, Commissioner Michael Powell (Republican) paid attention to the intangible, manifold proposes and implications of variety:

In all likelihood, however, the pivotal issues in this proceeding are likely to revolve around diversity. While competitive concerns are traditionally evaluated using well-established analytical standards, diversity is a much more visceral matter -- bathed in difficult subjective judgments and debated in amorphous terms. It has always been difficult to articulate clearly the government's interest in 'diversity', and it has become even more difficult to do so in light of current judicial precedents. Yet we must do so, if we are to affirm any of our ownership rules based on such an interest, and we must do so with adequate rigor and clarity in order for such rules to withstand judicial scrutiny (as cited in Ann, 2003)."

Even though the above declarations exhibit the wide difference of opinion with the Commission in the 2002 Biennial Review, the general view of the nation appeared to be mainly analogous regarding the imminent regulation alterations...

A survey carried out in February 2003, by an affiliation of the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism: the Project for Excellence in Journalism brought forth stats that showed that only four % of the respondent had "heard a lot" or had proper information about the projected regulation alterations while 72% of the respondents had learned "nothing at all (Ann, 2003)."
What needs to be done here is that not only does the structure of the telecommunications and its significance be reviewed, reformed and upgraded but the ese changes need to be distributed through the right and clear channel to all the involved parties and the nation so that when an analysis is done it will be done in an informed manner and with efficiency (Ann, 2003).

Conclusion

What is now probably projected and anticipated is an effort towards understanding and analyzing the application of court verdicts that will affect the regulations alterations, the examination that led to these verdicts, along with the tactic employed for the preference amid the contradictory study outcomes, in light of the record of the law structures of the precedent media ownership regulations. The study will confirm several drawbacks of involving rules that need to be corrected by practical evidence.

Bibliography

Ann L.P. (2003). Proposed Changes in Media Ownership Rules: A Study in Ventriloquism?…