THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING

FCC overlooks diversity issue

Email|Print| Text size +
March 9, 2008

It's troubling that the Federal Communications Commission chairman visited Cambridge, on Feb. 25, but failed to address the single-most important issue in today's communications landscape: the startling decrease of minority media ownership and the FCC's pattern of antidiversity policies. ("FCC chief says Net providers can't block access 'arbitrarily,' " Feb. 26.)

It has become increasingly apparent that this FCC is not addressing the needs of people of color.

The FCC has passed media-concentration rules that allow multinational companies to push local and minority media stations out of business and has sought new rules that hand over precious space on cable television to special interests. And it is trying to railroad through rules that will "weed out" minority programming.

This shocking pattern has raised enough eyebrows that the civic community, minority activists, and leaders in Congress are united in calling for the FCC to stop its war on media diversity. It is a shame that this troubling record was not on the agenda at last week's FCC hearing in Cambridge.

Karen L. Payne
President
NAACP-Boston Branch

Baby advice off the mark
I was saddened and upset to read the recent article entitled "Want to have a baby? Now's the time" by Penelope Trunk (March 2). As women, we are constantly inundated with the facts that many women defer their careers, retirement savings, and understanding about investments to have children.

We are told countless women do not know the first thing about financial matters, since they are busy taking care of their families and leave these matters up to their husbands. I had always come to the conclusion that this was a bad thing; that we, as women, should take a more proactive stance on our careers, saving for retirement, and taking care of ourselves financially.

In this day and age with divorce rates so high, it is vital to make career and financial stability of the utmost importance and not just rely on our husbands to take care of us. However, then I read Penelope Trunk's article, and was shocked to see her suggest that in all actuality it is more important to have a husband before you are 30, or you are doomed to a depressed and meaningless existence.

I am not married, am fast approaching 30, and I have no children. And yet I am very proud of myself for having a wonderful job, being a homeowner on my own with no help from a male, and have built up quite a savings. Children may be a joy to have, but a great many women find happiness in their careers and in knowing that they can take care of themselves later in life.

Sarah Chiappetta
Cambridge

Men also face fertility issues
In response to Penelope Trunk's article about why women should not delay too long into their mid-30s to have children (putting their careers first) due to infertility concerns, it should be noted that men also have to face similar concerns.

Male infertility is a little talked about but equally serious problem in our society. The myth of men being able to father children well into their 80s must give way to realities such as: chromosomal damage to sperm as men age causing birth defects such as Down Syndrome, undiagnosed hormonal conditions causing testicular failure, genetic disorders like Klinefelter's Syndrome, and many more that affect men's reproductive health.

A man's biological clock ticks just as loudly as a woman's and the sooner men realize that they too must get serious at a younger age, if they want to have children, the better their chances of success will be. The road of infertility is paved with much heartbreak - men should be as concerned about these issues as they are about their careers.

If you're a couple struggling with infertility, organizations like Resolve of the Bay State (resolve ofthebaystate.org) can help.

J. Petricelli
Brighton

Letters intended for publication should include the writer's name, address, and daytime phone number. All letters are subject to editing. E-mail letters to business@globe.com; fax to 617-929-3183; or mail to Business Letters, The Boston Globe, P.O. Box 55819, Boston, MA 02205-5819.

more stories like this

  • Email
  • Email
  • Print
  • Print
  • Single page
  • Single page
  • Reprints
  • Reprints
  • Share
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Comment
 
  • Share on DiggShare on Digg
  • Tag with Del.icio.us Save this article
  • powered by Del.icio.us
Your Name Your e-mail address (for return address purposes) E-mail address of recipients (separate multiple addresses with commas) Name and both e-mail fields are required.
Message (optional)
Disclaimer: Boston.com does not share this information or keep it permanently, as it is for the sole purpose of sending this one time e-mail.