If you want to understand Medill’s dean, John Lavine, I can point to Senate testimony that will help.

Addressing the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation last Nov. 8, Lavine encouraged officials to support a Federal Communications Commission rule change that would allow corporations to own both a newspaper and a television or radio station in the same market. (The proposal was passed on Dec. 18.)

In the biggest cities, the FCC has granted exceptions to the rule for years. In Chicago, for instance, the Tribune Company owns the Chicago Tribune, RedEye, WGN 9 and WGN radio.

But in most cities, cross-ownership like this is prohibited, and for good reason. Besides leading to layoffs, which ought to concern all journalism students, media consolidation has proved beneficial for executives’ wallets but detrimental to democracy because it puts control over the news into fewer hands. Reducing competition means companies have less incentive to provide the best product. And since every media owner is biased, having fewer of them gives each more power to manipulate what the public learns.

The dean has about a half-dozen arguments for why this would help journalism, but they are misguided. One is that bigger companies have more resources and can provide more news. But on Dec. 17, The New York Times wrote that research has shown the opposite. Not that this matters, because more news doesn’t mean better news, and the FCC’s regulations have nothing to do with quantity. Rather, they are about nurturing competition and a diversity of voices.

Another argument Lavine posits is that newspapers are dying, and the only way to save them is to give owners more freedom to expand. But decreasing competition is hardly the solution for print media’s woes, since profit margins at most papers are doing just fine: They average 17 percent, higher than at most Fortune 500 companies, according to Bill Moyers of PBS.

Media competition is a moral issue that transcends partisanship. Dozens of organizations, including the National Organization for Women, the National Rifle Association and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, disagreed with the rule change. So did politicians on both sides of the aisle, like Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), who co-sponsored a commendable bill to postpone relaxing the rules.

Lavine’s stance on this issue has everything to do with Medill: It reflects a preference for corporate profits when they are pitted against good journalism. In his statement to the Senate, the dean said he was testifying as a journalist. This was spin, as was his argument that media consolidation is good for journalism. Lavine’s loyalties are not with journalism students, but with the CEOs of their future employers.

Medill senior David Spett can be reached [email protected].