BOWLING GREEN, Ky. - Comcast and Time Warner Cable are two of the largest cable TV and internet providers in the nation, and Comcast wants to acquire Time Warner. Sprint and T-Mobile are the third and fourth-largest wireless providers in the U.S., and Sprint pursued a merge with T-Mobile until abandoning the idea late last week.

John Bergmayer, senior staff attorney with the media watchdog group Public Knowledge, is skeptical of the end result for the public should 'super-size' corporate deals like these come to pass. He says the primary reason is these proposed mega-deals would reduce the competition that keeps prices down, service decent and content diverse.

"As the Department of Justice and the FCC found when they blocked the merger of AT&T and T-Mobile, you need a certain number of competitors to ensure a market is actually competitive," says Bergmayer.

Other consumer advocates point out that mergers seldom address the needs of communities of color, which are historically under-represented in media ownership and control. Bergmayer predicts with enough public pushback, government agencies could be convinced to block attempts at media "empire-building."

Betty Yu, Media Action Grassroots Network coordinator with the Center for Media Justice, says her organization takes the general view media mergers are always bad for consumers, and customers are always on the losing side.

"People of color make up about 30 percent of the population, but we barely own any real media infrastructure," says Yu. "We know how this affects how issues like labor and education or health care and the environment are covered for poor people, working people and people of color."

Bergmayer says the merger that "frightens" him the most is Comcast and Time Warner Cable. He says with NBC and NBC News already owned by Comcast, their domination of cable would affect everything from news coverage to entertainment programming.

"Comcast plus Time Warner will be so big they can essentially make or break any independent programming," says Bergmayer. "You're creating a single gatekeeper that really determines what's going to be the successful video content, nationwide."


get more stories like this via email

Cities and towns across Massachusetts hope to increase young voter turnout in local elections by lowering the voting age to sixteen or seventeen. Somerville, Northampton, Southborough and Concord are just a few of the municipalities which have attempted but failed to secure state approval.

State Sen. Becky Rausch, D-Norfolk, said allowing young people to vote on local matters helps ensure they'll keep voting throughout their lives.

"That voting power fosters a real sense of civic duty and does in fact encourage higher turnout rates among young adults," she said.

Opponents contend teenagers lack the ability or motivation to fully understand what's at stake in an election. But Rausch points to Takoma Park, Maryland, where the turnout rate for sixteen and seventeen-year olds exceeded that of any other age group for the first election in which they were allowed to vote.

Rausch is sponsoring legislation to allow Massachusetts' municipalities to lower their voting age for local elections without approval from the state legislature but it's been tabled for the session. She says it's just one of a few issues where home rule gets in the way of local autonomy. Still, she said young people are already engaged in local issues, often related to their schools, and many students hold jobs and pay local taxes.

"And they are active members of every community I represent, and they are both contributors to and beneficiaries of community and local government services," she continued.

Rausch added the effort is part of civics education, which was solidified as a centerpiece of K-12 education in Massachusetts in 2018, and which received a significant funding boost from the state legislature this past year.


get more stories like this via email

Minnesota is closing in on the 35th anniversary of a volunteer program for clearing litter and debris along highways and rest areas.

With spring in full bloom, officials call on residents to maintain this service.

In the early 1990s, Minnesota launched its Adopt a Highway initiative.

Last year, roughly two thousand church groups, community organizations, business teams, and individuals filled up more than 42,000 bags of trash.

The Department of Transportation's Spokesperson Anne Meyer said about 900 sections of state roadways are available for adoption this year.

By pitching in, she said volunteers allow MN DOT staff to focus on other needs.

"Filling potholes, fixing fences," said Meyer, "really keeping roadways safe."

She added that the program also saves taxpayers money.

People considering volunteering can adopt a roadway section or rest area for two years and clean it at least twice a year. There's also an option for a one-time clearing of garbage near a state highway.

The agency provides training, resources, and safety vests. The state observes the program's 35th anniversary next year.

Meyer encouraged drivers to use caution if they approach an area with volunteer crews at work.

"A lot of our volunteers do go out and pick up trash on the weekends," said Meyer. "So, that's a time to really be alert out there for those volunteers - to slow down, to give them space, to do their job safely. "

Meyer said areas outside Minneapolis and St. Paul tend to have more opportunities for highway adoption.

More details are on the department's website, including a list of local coordinators around the state.




get more stories like this via email

Concerns about potential voter intimidation have spurred several states to consider banning firearms at polling sites but so far, New Hampshire is not among them.

Only a dozen states and Washington, D.C., prohibit both open and concealed-carry weapons at voting locations.

Emma Brown, executive director of the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said most of the bans were enacted after the 2020 election, when unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud took hold.

"The risk of gun violence at the polls is heightened," Brown contended. "Which means that legislation at the state level is even more critical than it ever has been."

Brown argued America's elections are free and fair, and prohibiting guns at polling sites and government locations is constitutional. Opponents countered the bans unfairly disarm law-abiding gun owners.

Recent surveys reveal election workers have faced increased threats and harassment since the 2020 election with one in three reporting some form of abuse. And nearly half of election workers said they are concerned for their colleagues' safety.

Brown pointed out armed intimidation tactics disproportionately target people of color and add to the growing exodus of election workers.

"This is a threat that we can't ignore," Brown stressed. "These attacks have also served as a deterrent to Black and brown election workers, who've historically been a really key part of ensuring that our democracy endures on Election Day."

As state legislatures consider banning guns at voting sites, legislation in Congress known as the "Vote Without Fear Act" would place a nationwide ban on weapons within 100 feet of a federal election facility, with exceptions for on-duty law enforcement and security personnel. It has been languishing in a House committee for a year.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.