In an issue packed meeting scheduled for December 18th, the Federal Communications Commission will vote on one of its media ownerships rules, to the dismay of the agency's two Democrats.

"This is a huge mistake," Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein said in a public statement posted on the agency's Web site today. "The FCC should have heeded the calls of Congress and the American people to conduct a credible process on an issue of this importance to our very democracy. That means providing a meaningful opportunity for public input, rather than the callous disregard exhibited thus far."

For the last two months FCC Chair Kevin Martin has publicly advocated an FCC rule change that would allow entities to own a newspaper and a television station in the top 20 U.S. urban markets. Critics in Congress and elsewhere have accused Martin of rushing the decision. They have also asked that he publish the exact text of the proposed change for public comment before bringing the matter to a vote, something Martin has refused to do.

"We have been engaged in internal discussions to try to get our processes back on track," Copps and Adelstein's statement concludes. "We wish those discussions had led to better results. At this point, given the lateness of the hour, we hope that either we can turn this around internally, or that Congress can save the FCC from itself."

Sometimes I get interviewed on the radio about some subject related to the Federal Communications Commission. Invariably the host asks me the same question: "What can the public do about this matter?"

In response I rattle off the names of some good groups to contact: Free Press, the Benton Foundation, the Media Access Project, The Prometheus Project, etc, etc, etc.

After which the host invariably adds with a perky, helpful tone: "And you can also contact the FCC at dub dub dub dot fcc.gov. Right?"

"Er, uhum, rite . . ." I mumble, and hope that we move on to the next question quickly.

You see, I never tell civilians that they can contact the FCC on some matter, because they usually can't. Go to fcc.gov now and see for yourself.

Are you there? As you can tell, the home page of the site is a blizzard of links and options. After a minute or so you'll notice a link on the left: "Contacting the FCC."

But if you go to that page, you'll find no easy way to reach the Commission on a specific issue. Sure, there are e-mail links to the commissioners, but I can't seriously promise anyone that they will read, much less respond, to something Jane Q. Public e-mails them, because the chances are that they won't.

"Don't prevent states from fixing my cell phone problems," someone who signed their name "Donald Trump" wrote to the Federal Communications Commission in June of 2005.

"Here, hold my hairpiece for a minute while I take this call from California—" the filing continues. "what? You think cell phones should be regulated somehow? Disclosure? Costs? You crazy? Hell, I'll NEVER allow California to do any such thing! . . . YOU'RE FIRED!"

Did Paris Hilton file with the FCC?
Only her hairdresser . . .

As someone who searches for and reads FCC proceeding statements a lot, I run into many FCC filings signed by people who comment as celebrities, noted historical figures, or even as dirty words. Most, but not all, are creatively mangled Web form comments provided by public interest groups on specific issues.

"I'm a dead Communist, but I don't want to pay more for my telephone service!" declared "Leon Trotsky" in an FCC statement submitted in March of 2005.

The executives of four top media companies have sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission warning the agency not to implement "ill considered and unjustified government interventions" in the cable industry.

"We are alarmed at recent press accounts and public statements by FCC officials purporting to find undue concentrations of market power that would justify a wide range of government interventions into the media market place," wrote execs from News Corporation, the Walt Disney Company, Viacom, and NBC Universal on November 20th.

The four content giants delivered the missive to the FCC a week before the agency prepared to vote on whether to accept data suggesting that cable had surpassed the "70/70" rule—cable TV providers have reached 70 percent of households and 70 percent of households subscribe.

Once that threshold is passed, Federal law says that the FCC can pass additional regulations insuring greater diversity in cable transmitted video content. The Commission did not accept the data, but has required all cable companies to submit detailed stats on their subscriber levels over the next two months.

One month before the government starts issuing discount coupons for set top boxes that can convert your old analog TV set into a digital ready receiver, some San Francisco Bay Area stores may be ready to handle the traffic. But most are not.

I spent the morning doing a quickie readiness survey of the San Francisco region. I called a bunch of Target, Best Buy, and Circuit City stores and asked them two questions: "Will you be selling those digital converter set top boxes for analog TV sets soon?" and "Will you be taking those discount coupons that the Department of Commerce plans to give out for the boxes?"

"Digital set top boxes? Converters? What?" a salesperson I called at the Target in Fremont replied. After a few more seconds of confusion, he transferred our call over to a manager, who assured me that Target would be selling the converters and honoring the coupons, "when the time comes."

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a letter today warning that the U.S. analog-to-digital TV or "DTV" transition schedule "faces challenges that could affect the outcome of the program."

Specifically, the GAO says that TV retailers may not be able to start selling converter set top boxes to the public by January 1st, 2008, as planned.

"Retailers told us that March or April of 2008—3 to 4 months after consumers can begin requesting coupons—is a likely time frame for retailers to be ready to participate in the program," the document explains.

Marc Goldstein of the GAO's Physical Infrastructure Issues division sent the letter to John Dingell, Chair of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on November 19th. The GAO released the communication today.

The United States has set February 17th, 2009 as the last day of analog TV broadcasting. After that date all television stations in the United States and its territories must transmit via digital signals.

One thing is for certain: the cable industry is a leading cause of statistics.

Take yesterday's Federal Communications Commission decision assessing the extent of cable's national reach. At first the FCC tentatively concluded that cable video providers have collectively passed the hoped-for or dreaded "70/70" threshold: when cable systems with 36 or more live-and-in-use channels can be accessed by 70 percent of U.S. households and 70 percent of those households subscribe to them.

Once this goal post has been passed, the 1984 Cable Act permits the agency to regulate cable in order to promote greater programming diversity.

Yesterday's announcement noted that the FCC had long ago resolved that cable breached the first half of the 70/70 formula. But now the Commission stated that, for the first time, "we find that based on data from Warren Communications News, the second prong benchmark [the access prong] has been met at 71.4 percent."

But maybe not, the Notice added, given that "other data sources do not demonstrate that the second prong has been met."