Who Owns The Media?

What problems are raised by the media ownership patterns described on this site?
When focusing on a topic like this, I narrowed my research down to one report, The Politics and Policy of Media Ownership. On June 2, 2003 the Federal Communications Commission voted controversially to relax broadcast ownership limits after completing a mandatory review of its regulations. It was a striking change in the structure of the media system. The decision opened up cross-media ownership in the same market, inviting newspapers and broadcasters to operate under one roof in every major city. It also permitted a substantially increased media concentration in local and national television markets. The new rules would permit one company in one city to own three television stations, eight radio stations, the daily newspaper, and the cable system. This market condition leans toward favoring larger firms.

Public response to the new rules was greatly negative. In the last six months of 2003, the FCC waged a campaign to reverse the rule changes made. The policies and regulations, which shape the media system, became political issues for the American people.


Are the criticisms raised in the following article valid?
The criticisms are definitely raised in the following article. Regarding if those criticisms are valid or not; wellI'm not too convinced. "Two things are disconcerting. One is, there's disproportionate amount of profits being reported offshore. And then, even for the profits that are reported onshore, they're paying less than 35 percent," said Martin Sullivan, a contributing editor for Tax Analysts. They aren't paying the amount of taxes that they should be paying because they are taking advantage of the various loopholes that exist in the corporate tax structure. Carney does state in this article that these loopholes being described are legal in order to reduce their tax burden. It is that statement that makes me question that validity of the criticism in the article.
In a statement, General Electric said that it "pays what it owes under the law and is scrupulous about its compliance with tax obligations in all jurisdictions." The company claims that its zero-dollar tax bill is largely a result of losses at its financial arm, GE Capital, die to the Wall Street meltdown. This statement always brings up awareness. GE is claiming that they aren't doing anything that is illegal. So how can this huge corporate business be criticized if the law is permitting what they are doing to keep their taxes lower?