The conclusion of this paper from 2001 supports revoking the rules, or at least that the rules aren’t necessary for their stated goal of providing diverse opini

The conclusion of this paper from 2001 supports revoking the rules, or at least that the rules aren’t necessary for their stated goal of providing diverse opinions: "A Tale of Three Cities: “Diverse and Antagonistic” Information in Situations of Local Newspaper/ Broadcast Cross-Ownership" http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1286&context=fclj http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar... From the conclusion: This Article examined whether three existing newspaper/broadcast combinations in major markets provided information about the 2000 presidential campaign from "diverse and antagonistic sources." The results show clearly that they did provide a wide range of diverse information. In other words, the Commission's historical assumption that media ownership inevitably shapes the news to suit its own interests may no longer be true (if it ever was). The September 2001 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking demonstrated the Commission's interest in solid empirical evidence about newspaper/broadcast combinations. The evidence of the study reported in this Article suggests that the prohibition on newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership has outlived its usefulness.