At the same time, the Commission also voted 3-2 to impose a 30 percent national audience cap on cable companies. Both votes were along party lines, with Republican commissioners Deborah Taylor Tate and Robert McDowell supporting Martin, also a Republican, and Democrats Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein opposing the proposals.

In a statement released following the vote, Martin said that his proposals are designed to promote "competition, diversity, and localism."

"I believe a vibrant print press," Martin said, "is one of the institutional pillars upon which our free society is built. In their role as watchdog and informer of the citizenry, newspapers often act as a check on the power of other institutions and are the voice of the people. Allowing cross-ownership may help to forestall the erosion in local news coverage by enabling companies to share these local news gathering costs across multiple media platforms."

Reactions Opposing the Rules

Consumer advocacy and media watchdog groups believe that Martin has actually ignored the voice of the people on this issue. "The FCC has defied will of people and Congress in its rush to push through these new regulations," argued Jen Howard, assistant communications director for Free Press, a nonpartisan media reform group.

"Hundreds of thousands of people filed statements in opposition to the proposed changes," said Howard, "and at the eight hearings held by the FCC around the country, the vast majority spoke against greater media consolidation ."

The FCC vote is also getting a cool reaction on Capitol Hill. Four days before the FCC's votes, a bipartisan group of 26 U.S. Senators sent a letter to Martin, protesting the fact that he gave the public just 28 days to comment on his proposals, and vowing legislative action.

"When you proposed a new rule on the effects of communication towers on migratory birds," the senators wrote, "you allowed for a 90-day comment period. How could you decide to allow 90 days for a migratory bird rule and then shortchange the public on the media-ownership rule?"

Howard pointed out that, earlier Wednesday, a media ownership bill was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives to overturn the FCC's actions. A similar bill is pending in the Senate.

Court Cases Likely

This is the FCC's second attempt in recent years to relax the ownership rule. An earlier proposal, spearheaded by then-FCC Chair Michael Powell, was invalidated by the federal courts. Howard said that she expects that this new action will challenged in court as well.

"The Media Access Project has threatened legal action over this proposal," Howard said, "and we will certainly join them in opposing this vote in court."

Even if Martin's initiative survives both Congressional and court action, the new ownership rule might have limited impact. In order for a business to own both a broadcast station and a newspaper in the same city, several conditions must be met. The city must be in the top 20 media markets nationwide, at least eight independent media outlets must remain after the transaction, and the television station in question cannot be among the top four in the market.

Media analysts suggest that the number of companies meeting those conditions is quite small.