Chapter 1: The Proposed Legislation

As an enthusiastic supporter of community media, the recent proposal from Massachusetts lawmakers to implement a fee on streaming services like Netflix, Hulu, and Disney+ piqued my interest. This initiative could be revolutionary, potentially rescuing numerous local stations from financial distress while simultaneously ensuring that viewers can access a variety of independent and local perspectives.

Community media, often referred to as public, educational, and governmental (PEG) programming, serves as a non-commercial platform created by and for local communities. It encompasses a diverse array of topics, including local news, arts, culture, education, and civic engagement. This media form empowers marginalized groups—such as immigrants, seniors, youth, and people of color—by offering them a voice to share their narratives. Additionally, it promotes media literacy and civic involvement by providing training and resources for individuals interested in producing their own content.

The funding for community media primarily originates from cable revenue fees, which cable providers pay to municipalities for utilizing local infrastructure to deliver services. These funds are then allocated to community media centers, which manage the PEG channels and provide essential support for content creation. However, with the increasing shift towards streaming services, these fees have significantly declined, jeopardizing the financial stability of community media.

Jonathan Grabowski, the executive director of Marshfield Community Television and a board member of MassAccess—an organization that advocates for community media—reported that cable subscriptions in Massachusetts have dropped over 30% since 2012. Concurrently, community media centers have experienced nearly a 60% decrease in funding during the same timeframe. He remarked at a July 13 hearing on the proposed bill that “community media centers in Massachusetts face an untenable situation where demand for services is increasing, yet funding is dwindling.”

The pandemic highlighted the crucial role of community media, as many local meetings and events transitioned online. Seventy percent of MassAccess member organizations noted a significant uptick in local meeting coverage since 2020, adapting to hybrid public meeting requirements during the pandemic. Community media also provided essential information and resources to help residents navigate the health and economic challenges posed by the crisis.

This context makes the proposed legislation, dubbed the “Act to Modernize Funding For Community Media Programming,” both timely and sensible. It aims to impose a 5% fee on streaming providers based on their gross annual revenue in the state, directing a portion of these funds to municipalities to support community media centers. This initiative would not only help maintain existing community media infrastructure but also promote growth and adaptation through new technologies.

Massachusetts could become the first state to allocate fees from streaming services explicitly for community media support, according to David Gauthier, president of MassAccess and executive director of Winchester Community Access & Media. He emphasized that “this bill is about modernizing our funding model for community media to continue providing essential services to our communities.”

Moreover, the bill would require streaming providers to include PEG channels in their service offerings, akin to cable providers. This would enhance the visibility and accessibility of community media content for viewers without cable or antenna access, fostering collaboration between streaming platforms and community media centers.

However, the proposal has faced opposition. Some streaming providers argue that the fee would be unjust and burdensome, claiming it would infringe on federal laws and complicate interstate commerce.

Nonetheless, these arguments seem unpersuasive. Streaming services utilize public infrastructure, such as the internet, which is partially taxpayer-funded and government-regulated. They also compete with cable providers by offering similar content to overlapping audiences. Additionally, there is no definitive federal law preventing states from taxing streaming services, provided it does not discriminate against interstate commerce. Currently, several states impose some form of digital tax on streaming services, but Massachusetts would be the first to earmark these funds specifically for community media.

I believe this initiative is commendable and hope the bill passes, setting a precedent for other states. Community media is a vital component of our democracy and society, deserving of our support and recognition, especially at a time when local journalism is declining and misinformation is rampant. By taxing streaming services to fund community media, we can ensure a diverse and independent media landscape that reflects and serves our communities.

Chapter 2: Impact of Community Media

The first video titled "Planning Board 4/9/2024" discusses community media initiatives and their significance in local governance and public engagement.

The second video titled "MBTA Communities Act Meeting March 21 2024" showcases the role of community media in fostering civic engagement and awareness in local communities.