Allow Sirius / XM merger!

Although I support almost all of Common Cause's causes, this is one that I think you are wrong about for a couple of reasons. For starters, the analogy between radios in cars and televisions in homes is not particularly meaningful. Car owners don't have the same interest in radio that home owners have in television; listening to the radio in one's car is more a function of having to be in the car for the purpose of transportation than choosing to be in the car for the purpose of entertainment, so your analogy that satellite radio is like cable is somewhat less than accurate.  Second, unlike television owners, car radio owners have free access to a plethora of AM and FM stations that offer a wide variety of information and entertainment options; home owners without cable or satellite typically have only a handful of broadcast stations to choose from.  Remember, too, that the "public interest" choices that you (reasonably and responsibly) advocate for that are required of cable providers as a condition of their licensing, aren't available to people who don't subscribe to cable. (And, as you surely know, aren't widely viewed even by cable subscribers.) But, most importantly, unless the proposed Sirius/XM merger is allowed to go through, it is not likely that either company will ultimately be profitable enough to succeed in the marketplace. Satellite radio is a niche alternative entertainment medium that requires purchase and installation of optional equipment. Neither company has achieved sufficient market penetration to guarantee the success of their format; absent consolidation, it is more likely than not that both will fail, and that would be more of a tragedy than allowing their merger.

Finally, blocking the merger on the basis of your "slippery slope" argument fails because of the uniqueness of the merger. There is not a sufficient similarity between satellite radio and any other media enterprise for a media empire to successfully make the argument that because Sirius and XM were allowed to merge, so should they. Newspapers, cable companies, and local broadcasters are all very different from satellite radio. Because of its status as a niche product, neither killing satellite radio nor allowing it to fluorish will have any impact on the success or failure of any other form of media content delivery, nor should allowing the merger be a dispositive reason for other proposed media mergers. Media mergers are typically done as a way to control viewers' (or listeners', or readers') access to information while simultaneously increasing the profitability of their owners. Because satellite radio is a nationally distributed media, allowing Sirius and XM to merge only increases the choices to those who choose to subscribe to the service, it doesn't reduce them. If you want to advocate for including some sort of public service programming (NPR or PRI, for example) as one of the choices, you have my support, but you'd better check with the folks at NPR (or PRI) first, to make sure that this is an option that they support!

In the meantime, although I thank you for your concern about media mergers and the consolidation of empires, I believe that this is the rare case where consolidation does not represent a danger to any sort of freedom or liberty, nor does it stifle anyone's voice or perspective. Rather, it provides the most likely avenue for profitability for a fledgling niche product, which represents that medium's best (and, likely, only) chance for survival.