AM Radio

Subscribe to AM Radio via RSS

In the last few days, there have been a series of articles and alerts that have alarmed broadcasters and caused worry that fines would be coming their way for not updating and correcting any FCC Registration Number (FRN) associated with their operations.  While there is a new rule that went into effect recently that requires all users of the Commission Registration System (CORES) to update their FRN registrations within 10 business days of any change to the associated contact information, there has been no indication that there is any imminent widespread enforcement activity against broadcasters based on this new rule.  In fact, the rule does not materially change broadcaster’s obligations to keep their FCC records up to date – only putting a definitive time limit on an existing requirement that a broadcaster’s FRNs must be updated promptly. Thus, the new rule reinforces that broadcasters do have an obligation to update their information to comply with the rules, as outdated information could result in legal penalties – but panic is likely not in order.  Let’s look at this obligation.

CORES is used to set up the FRN that is necessary for most broadcast filings.  Broadcasters need an FRN to file any application, pay fees, and make other FCC submissions.  In connection with Biennial Ownership Reports (now on hold until at least June 2027, pending an evaluation of whether they really are necessary – see our article here), the FCC required FRNs not only for broadcast licensees, but also for all entities and individuals who hold attributable interests in such licensees.  The information to set up an FRN requires a taxpayer identifying number (TIN) or social security number (SSN), and it also includes information such as a contact person and their title, address, telephone number, and email. Continue Reading FCC Sets Requirement to Promptly Update FCC Registration Numbers – No Need to Panic, But Licensees Should Ensure All FCC Information Is Accurate and Up To Date

  • Funding for the FCC’s operations, as well as that of many other government agencies, expired at the end of the
…

Since the last opportunity for any applicant to file for FM translators in 2003, which resulted in thousands of applications and processing delays that still have not been totally eliminated (see, for instance, our articles here and here), the FCC has seemed hesitant to open another translator filing window.  The only opportunity to file for new translators since that 2003 window were the windows in the latter part of the last decade in which AM stations could file for FM translators that would be tied to those AM stations.  There have been rumors ever since that a new translator window would be opening – and now it appears that one is on its way – but it will be limited to applications by noncommercial broadcasters for new translators to operate in the Reserved Band (below 92 on the FM dial). 

The announcement of the coming window came by a draft Public Notice to be considered by the Commissioners at their next monthly open meeting on February 18.  The Notice to be considered at the February meeting would instruct the Media Bureau to open a window for the filing of new translators in the reserved band, reserved for use by noncommercial licensees (including Low Power FM stations).  Details as to when the window would be open, and other application filing procedures, will be set by the Media Bureau at some later date.  The principal issue tackled by the draft Public Notice is the question of how many applications any noncommercial operator can file in the upcoming window.Continue Reading Noncommercial Broadcasters Looking for FM Translators – A Window to File for New Translators is Coming Soon

  • The FCC’s Media Bureau released a Public Notice purporting to provide guidance directed to broadcast TV stations on whether the
…

The FCC’s Media Bureau, in a Public Notice released this week, provided guidance that changed the common interpretation of one of the fundamental principles of political broadcasting law for the last thirty years – that a candidate appearance on a regularly scheduled talk program subject to broadcaster control was not subject to equal opportunities claims if that program regularly interviewed newsmakers and political figures, where the program’s discussions were under the control of the program producer and not the candidate, and where the decisions as to guests were made on the basis of newsworthiness, and not for political considerations.  The Public Notice did not actually change these criteria for determining if a program is exempt.  As noted in a written statement released by Commissioner Gomez about this Public Notice, the policies underlying earlier decisions setting policy was not changed by the Notice.  What apparently has changed is the Commission’s reliance on the good faith judgement of the broadcaster as to whether a program is exempt, without the need for any prior FCC approval of the broadcaster’s determination.  Instead, the Notice makes clear that each case is different and relies on the facts of the particular case; that past precedents can only be relied on by the party that received an explicit determination that an exemption was proper; and that there is a real risk that the FCC will disagree with a determination made by a broadcaster that a program is exempt from equal time unless the broadcaster files for and receives a declaratory ruling from the FCC that a program is in fact exempt.

This discussion all stems from the Equal Opportunities requirement in Section 315 of the Communications Act.  This is commonly referred to as the “equal time” rule.  Under the statute and the FCC’s rule adopted to implement the statute (Section 73.1941), stations who allow one candidate to “use” their station by allowing that candidate to appear on the air must provide equal opportunities to other candidates for the same office by allowing them to buy equal amounts of time (for advertising and other purchased time) or to get comparable time for free when the candidate’s appearance is not paid.  In adopting Section 315, Congress recognized that there were certain appearances of a candidate on a broadcast station that should not trigger equal time.  It specifically exempted four categories of programming from the equal time requirement, declaring them to not be “uses” by a candidate – (1) bona fide newscasts, (2) bona fide news interviews, (3) bona fide news documentaries when the candidate’s appearance is incidental to the subject of the documentary, and (4) bona fide coverage of a news event (including political conventions).  The issue discussed in the Public Notice primarily stems from the exemption for news interview programs. Continue Reading FCC Media Bureau Tells Broadcasters that Candidate Appearances on Talk Programs Could Subject Them to Equal Time Demands – More Review of Such Programs Expected From the FCC

Mitchell Stabbe, our resident trademark law specialist, today takes the controls of the blog for his annual look at the legal issues in Super Bowl advertising and promotions (see some of his past articles here, here, here, and here).  Take it away, Mitch:  

The 2026 NFL Playoffs have had more down-to-the-wire games this year than ever before.  Consequently, television viewership ratings for these extraordinarily exciting games have been extremely high and interest in the remaining games and the upcoming Super Bowl LX are expected to set records.

Consequently, the value of Super Bowl-related advertising will also be higher than ever and the NFL is therefore likely to be particularly concerned about ensuring that only authorized licensees benefit from advertisements and promotions that draw attention through the use of the SUPER BOWL® and related NFL-trademarks.  Accordingly, following are updated guidelines about engaging in or accepting advertising or promotions that directly or indirectly reference the Super Bowl without a license from the NFL.

More than ever, the Super Bowl means big bucks.  It is estimated that, with the new contract which took effect in 2024, the NFL will be paid an average of over $2 billion per year for broadcasting and streaming rights through 2032, including the right by different media companies to broadcast the Super Bowl on a rotating basis.Continue Reading Tiptoeing on the Sidelines: 2026 Update on Super Bowl Advertising and Promotions

  • The House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Communications & Technology Subcommittee held an FCC oversight hearing.  The hearing featured written
…
  • FCC Chairman Carr announced that the FCC will be considering two orders concerning foreign ownership requirements, including those for broadcasters,
…

2026 has begun, so it is time to look at the regulatory dates of importance to broadcasters in the new year.  Later this week, we will look ahead at some of the broadcast issues likely to be tackled by the FCC and Congress in this new year.  But today, we will look at dates and…

Today, we would normally publish our look back at the prior week’s regulatory activity of importance to broadcasters but, as we noted last week, we are taking this week off and will publish a summary of the regulatory activity during the two week holiday period next Sunday.  But, as the start of a new month is upon us, we instead offer our regular look ahead at regulatory dates and deadlines for January.   

With each New Year, there are a host of new regulatory deadlines to keep broadcasters busy.  In January, this includes some recurring FCC deadlines like Quarterly Issues/Programs lists for all full power broadcasters, and a host of other quarterly obligations that are not as widely applicable.  For TV broadcasters, the month brings obligations including the annual children’s television reports on educational and informational programming and a public file certification on commercial limits, as well as the extension to stations in 10 additional markets of the audio description requirements. 

In addition to comments in rulemaking proceedings described below, January brings some new obligations.  For commercial broadcasters streaming audio programming on the Internet, there are new SoundExchange royalties that cover performances made on and after January 1, and a requirement for a higher minimum fee due at the end of the month.  There is also a freeze that will be imposed on applications for major changes by existing LPTV stations and TV translators related to a window that will open in March, the first window in well over a decade for the filing of applications for new LPTV stations. 

Let’s look at some of the specific dates and deadlines for broadcasters in January, starting with the routine deadlines that come up every January, and then moving to some of new obligations for 2026.  After that we provide January deadlines for comments in rulemaking proceedings (including reply comments on proposed changes to the FCC’s ownership rules and initial comments on proposals to speed the ATSC 3.0 conversion), a look at lowest unit rate windows that open in January for 2026 elections, and finally a few deadlines in early February.Continue Reading January 2026 Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – Quarterly Issues/Programs Lists, Children’s Television Programming Reporting, New Webcasting Royalties, Expansion of Audio Description Requirements, Comment Deadlines, Political Windows, and More