1
FCC CHAIRMAN JULIUS GENACHOWSKI
“INFORMATION NEEDS OF COMMUNITIES” FIELD EVENT 
WALTER CRONKITE SCHOOL OF JOURNALISM & MASS COMMUNICATION 
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY 
PHOENIX, AZ
OCTOBER 3, 2011 
Thank you, Dean Callahan for your kind introduction and for your outstanding leadership 
of the Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. 
Thank you to the panelists who are here today, many of whom traveled great distances to 
be part of this important discussion. I’m particularly pleased to see so many young people 
in the audience who care about journalism and our democracy.  
When I was about the age of the students here, I had the privilege of studying under and 
working for the great Fred Friendly. Fred had been President of CBS News, and before 
that was a producer for Edward R. Murrow and for Walter Cronkite. Fred Friendly has 
been gone for too many years, but I know he would be proud and moved that students 
every day learn about journalism at an institution named for Walter Cronkite, a powerful 
symbol of journalism and its vital role in our democracy.
I commend this school – and Dean Callahan – for being at the forefront of news innovation. The 
School has launched important programs such as its News21 initiative, which enables students to 
report on critical issues facing the state and the nation and uses innovative digital methods to 
distribute the news on multiple platforms. Cronkite School students now comprise the largest 
bureau covering the Arizona statehouse – and the only state bureau covering the federal 
government in Washington, DC.
I’d also like to thank Commissioner Michael Copps for being here today and for his 
commitment to these issues. Mike and I don’t always agree on the most effective role for 
government in media and journalism policy, but there’s no arguing over this: No one 
brings more passion, persistence or dedication to these important issues than 
Commissioner Mike Copps. 
Almost two years ago, catalyzed by a report from a bipartisan Knight Commission, I 
asked Steve Waldman to lead a cross-agency team at the FCC to examine the information 
needs of communities in the digital age. 
The communications landscape has changed dramatically with the entry and widespread 
use of broadband – on computers, on smartphones, on tablets. We asked: what's the state 
of play, and are there recommendations for how to ensure that communities in the 21st 
century have the news and information they need and want?
I’m pleased that, thanks to Steve Waldman and a remarkable team at the FCC, the 
Commission released an in-depth and thoughtful report this past June on the information 
needs of communities in the broadband age.  
On behalf of Steve and the team, I’m especially proud that the report has drawn praise 
from a wide range of sources, including a long list of journalism school deans (thank you, 
Dean Callahan).  In addition, experts from across the spectrum of viewpoints – leaders 
2
from the academy, from business, and from consumer groups – praised its thorough, fair-
minded and lucid analysis.  
And even better, this report has sparked discussion and has already spurred action among 
stakeholders throughout this ecosystem.  
I’ll speak more about that in a minute.  
But first, I’d like to briefly highlight three reasons why I think this report is so important. 
First, it describes how new technology is creating a new world of opportunity to 
empower journalists and citizens, and to keep the public informed like never before.  
Much is going well when it comes to the Internet and journalism.  Digital innovations 
have made the gathering and distribution of news and information faster, less expensive 
and more democratic. One example: Digital innovations have opened up new 
opportunities for tribal communities to preserve and share their culture and history in
ways never before possible. In our nation’s history, we have never had a greater 
opportunity to realize our founding vision of a vibrant democracy bolstered by a strong 
free press and informed citizens.
So the first contribution of the report is its focus on the opportunities of new 
technologies.  
The second is its focus on the challenges.  
Foremost is the disruptive impact the Internet and economic pressures have had on local 
news-gathering.  This report describes compellingly the deficits in the media system –
most especially an emerging gap in local news reporting that has not yet been fully filled 
by digital media. This matters tremendously. If citizens don’t get local news and 
information, the health of our democracy suffers. The less quality local reporting we 
have, the less likely we are to learn about problems and misdeeds, whether they are 
schools that fail children, hospitals that mistreat patients, or factories that pollute the 
water.
But the report did not just stop at describing problems. It suggests thoughtful and 
practical initiatives that help address the challenges it identifies.  It does so recognizing 
the essential constraints of the First Amendment, particularly vital in this area of news 
and information.  
And indeed, many of the suggestions are for non-governmental actors – a strength of the 
report.  As Steve has put it, government is “not the main player in this drama.” 
To be sure, there are important areas where government can make a positive difference.  
And Steve and his team developed a creative set of recommendations for government, the 
private sector and nonprofits that can help make success possible for the journalists and 
entrepreneurs that are trying to seize the opportunities of the digital revolution.  
At the FCC, we’ve recently implemented one of the report’s recommendations – purging 
the Fairness Doctrine from our books.  In addition, I’ve asked the Media Bureau to move 
ahead with the recommendation to give religious and other noncommercial broadcasters 
3
more flexibility to raise money for charities in their communities or around the world.  
And I’ve asked the Media Bureau to develop and move forward on a plan to advance the 
report’s principles related to disclosure.   
In this Internet age, of course the public information in the “public file” kept by 
broadcasters should be online, not in filing cabinets. And as we’ve heard from thoughtful 
leaders in both the broadcasting and public interest communities, there should be a 
streamlined and non-burdensome online mechanism for broadcasters to disclose key 
information about their service to their communities.  
As I mentioned, the report has stimulated action among outside stakeholders. I’m 
delighted to hear Dean Callahan’s announcement about the new initiative by many of the 
nation’s top journalism schools.  Funded by the Knight Foundation, this initiative will 
carry forward the issues raised in this report.  
Other groups are announcing constructive steps as well.   The Council on Foundations is 
moving ahead with an effort to make detailed recommendations to the IRS about 
potential tax changes to remove obstacles to nonprofit media innovation.  A significant 
group of newspapers, local broadcasters, and web-based news providers have all 
endorsed the report's suggestion that the federal government target a greater portion of its 
existing advertising spending toward local media. And Carolina Academic Press has 
decided to publish the report as a book to help get it wider circulation.   
I’m looking forward to hearing from representatives of media companies and public 
interest groups today.  While they may differ on some of the details, they have come to 
support the basic framework for broadcaster transparency, as I’ve indicated.  This is a 
significant development.  I want to applaud both the leading broadcasters represented 
here and the public interest groups for your constructive and positive approach to this 
topic. I believe this will benefit American communities and the broadcasters that serve 
them. 
Finally, we continue to make strides on a fundamental recommendation of the report –
achieving universal broadband access for all Americans.  
The report has no more important recommendation.   The principle of universal access to 
information, and the recognition of its necessity, goes back to the early years of our 
republic, and has been a constant throughout our history.  In 1832, newspapers accounted 
for 95% of the weight carried by the Postal Service, and those newspapers received a 
discount for postage. The primary news delivery mechanisms of the 20th century –
newspapers, radio, and TV – were all universal. The emerging news delivery mechanism 
of the 21st century – broadband Internet – of course must be too. 
Ubiquitous broadband – wired and wireless – is an economic imperative for the United 
States.  Our broadband economy is a bright spot in these challenging economic times. 
The broadband economy is growing and creating jobs.  It is helping not only new 
businesses grow and compete, but also empowering existing businesses to expand their 
markets on new platforms.   
That’s true of existing news and media businesses as well, more and more of which are 
innovating on new platforms, seeking to reach their audiences however they are choosing 
to read, watch or interact.  
4
And the larger the online and mobile broadband markets, the more of a return on 
investment news companies can achieve.
Ubiquitous broadband is essential not only for a healthy economy, but for a healthy 
democracy.  As recent events overseas have powerfully confirmed, real-time, two-way 
interactive communications are essential in the 21st century to the fundamental rights of 
expression and assembly, and essential to an informed citizenry.  
There’s much we have to do to achieve universal and ubiquitous broadband.  
We must unleash more spectrum for mobile broadband, helping drive continued growth 
in a thriving part of our economy, and helping avoid consumer frustration over dropped 
connections and higher prices.  
And we must close the broadband deployment and adoption gaps in the U.S. Right now, 
about 20 million Americans live in areas without broadband infrastructure, and 100 
million Americans don’t subscribe to broadband at home. 
At the FCC we’re in the homestretch of our effort to modernize the Universal Service 
Fund, the program that ensured affordable telephone access for every American in the 
20th century, but that now needs to be transformed for a broadband world.  
Improving broadband infrastructure and increasing broadband access will drive our 
overall economy, and will help inform and educate everyone in our country.  Increasing 
broadband access will provide specific benefits to news entrepreneurs and businesses 
seeking to make the math work in these challenging and changing times.  
Getting to 100 percent broadband adoption from today’s level would represent a 50 
percent increase in the online audience in the United States.  The larger the online 
market, the greater the scale – and the more likely a news and information business can 
succeed online.  
The bottom line: Thanks to Steve Waldman and his team, the FCC has issued a thorough 
and thoughtful report that deepens our understanding of how technology is affecting the 
information needs of our communities – a roadmap and a set of practical and First 
Amendment-friendly recommendations that fill real gaps and improve the news and 
information landscape. 
I also thank Bill Lake for his leadership of the Media Bureau and the excellent staff of the 
Bureau, not only for the excellent assistance they provided in the development of the 
report, but for the work they are doing and will continue to do to move forward on its 
recommendations.
It is my privilege now to turn it over to Steve Waldman and Bill Lake. I look forward to 
this morning’s panels.