David Oxenford Conducts Seminar for Utah Broadcasters on Political Broadcasting, FCC EEO Rules and Other Legal Issues Facing Radio and Television Broadcasters

On February, 18, 2010, David Oxenford conducted a seminar for the Utah Broadcasters Association on legal issues that affect radio and television broadcasters.  First, David summarized the various broadcasting legal and policy issues pending before the FCC and Congress.  David's PowerPoint presentation is available here.  Broadcasters interested in Washington issues that may affect them this year may also want to read our blog post from early January where we presented our legal predictions for 2010.

David then conducted a refresher course on political broadcasting issues that may arise in this election year.  His PowerPoint on political issues for broadcasters can be viewed here.  Broadcasters wanting more information on the FCC's political broadcasting rules and policies should review the Davis Wright Tremaine Political Broadcasting Guide.  A discussion of the issues for broadcasters raised by the recent Citizen's United case is available here.

Finally, David discussed recent developments in enforcement of the FCC's EEO policies.  The PowerPoint used in this session can be seen here .  Our Advisory on EEO rules and policies is available here, with forms and recordkeeping suggestions attached to that memo.  Our most recent EEO Public Inspection File Report advisory, with a model report attached, is available here.  Finally, our description of one of the recent FCC fines for noncompliance with the EEO policies is available here

What a Difference A Renewal Makes - FCC Admonishes Two Broadcasters for EEO Violations, Fines Would Have Followed if Renewals Had Not Recently Been Granted

In two decisions released this week by the FCC, here and here, two large broadcast group owners were admonished for failures to comply with the FCC’s EEO rules. In both cases, failures to widely disseminate information about job openings in one market were discovered by the FCC in the course of random EEO audits that selected these stations for review. In both cases, the Commission determined that the violations were serious, and imposed reporting conditions (essentially subjecting the stations to an FCC audit of their EEO annual public file reports every year for the next 3 years). And in each case, the FCC would have fined the stations for their violations, but the Commission moved too slow, as in both cases, license renewals were granted between the time of the violations and the EEO audit.  Under provisions of the Communications Act, the Commission cannot fine a station for action that occurred during a prior renewal term - so the grant of the renewals cut off the possibility of a fine in these cases.

These actions highlight the importance of complying with the Commission’s EEO rules, which we have summarized in our EEO Guide, here. In particular, in both cases, the station groups had not widely disseminated information about job openings, as required by the rules. Wide dissemination requires the use of recruitment sources designed to reach all groups within a community to allow their members to learn about the job openings at the station. The Commission's aim is to bring into the broadcast workforce employees representing diverse groups within a community rather than hiring all their employees from traditional broadcast sources.  In these cases, the stations had used only corporate websites, on-air announcements, and word of mouth recruiting. No outside sources, or sources reasonably likely to reach the entire community, were used by the broadcasters, hence the admonition and the reporting conditions. 

So, is a broadcaster never justified in relying on its own airwaves as its sole recruitment tool? In most cases, as not everyone in a community is likely to listen to one owner’s broadcast stations, it cannot reasonably be assumed that the use of the airwaves would reach the entire community.  While the FCC, in the Order adopting the EEO rules, did say that the use of a major newspaper read throughout the community might be sufficient as a source to reach all groups within the community, most broadcasters face competition, rarely being in a situation where they have the overall market reach of the monopoly daily newspaper (even though most broadcasters might argue that it is far more likely that ads on their stations will be heard and remembered than it is that a classified ad somewhere in a newspaper will be read by a potential employment candidate – especially one who may not be actively looking for work, but who might be intrigued by the possibility of a broadcast career and consider pursuing an open broadcast position). Nevertheless, under the current EEO regulations, broadcasters must design their EEO programs in such a way so as to be theoretically targeting all groups within a community.

In addition, it is important to note that one of these decisions involved Entravision, a broadcaster specializing in Spanish-language programming. It is probably reasonable to assume that the broadcaster had an ethnically diverse workplace, attracting Hispanic-American employees. However, the new EEO rules are designed not to measure the race or ethnicity of the broadcast station’s workplace, but instead to measure its efforts to reach out to the entire community and all groups within that community (not just racial and ethnic minorities) to bring new people from these diverse groups into the broadcast workforce. Thus, stations that may have racially or ethnically diverse workforces should not consider themselves exempt from the requirements of the rules. 

As the Commission has committed to randomly audit 5% of all broadcast stations annually, and to also audit cable television systems which are subject to similar EEO rules, these cases are significant in demonstrating that the Commission’s EEO rules must be strictly observed, or serious consequences may ensue. So assess your EEO program now to assure that it is in compliance with the Commission’s rules. 

Another Round of FCC EEO Audits

The FCC today announced another round of EEO audits of broadcast stations throughout the country.  The FCC's Public Notice of the audits, and the list of the stations that are affected, can be found here.  Broadcasters should review this list carefully, both by call letter and licensee name, as we have noted situations where the FCC's list of licensee names used in this audit is not accurate, even though the licensee is correct elsewhere in the FCC's databases.  The audit letters were dated June 12, and responses are due in 30 days.  These letters usually require answers to an extensive list of questions, as well as the submission of supporting documentation to show a licensee's compliance with the FCC's EEO rules over the last two years.  We have written a Guide to the FCC's EEO requirements, which can be found here, to help broadcasters assure their compliance with these rules.  Whether or not a broadcaster is on this audit list, this opportunity should be used to review your EEO compliance, as the Commission conducts these audits on a regular basis - so you could be next. 

FCC Issues Clarification of Mid-Term EEO Report Obligations of Broadcasters

As we reminded broadcasters earlier this month, the first filings of FCC Form 397, the Broadcast Mid-Term EEO Report, will be due to be filed at the FCC on June 1.  This report is filed 4 years after the due date for filing of a station's license renewal application, and is to be filed by all radio station employment units with more than 10 full time employees, and all TV station employment units with five or more employees.  The first reports are due on June 1 by radio groups in Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia.  Every two months thereafter, stations in a different group of states will need to file their Mid-Term reports.  Last week, the FCC released a Public Notice clarifying some aspects of the filing process.

The Public Notice addressed two principal issues - (1) what happens when radio station clusters and their associated station employment units include stations in different states with different filing deadlines, and (2) what happens when employment units include both radio and television stations in the same state.  For radio employment units with stations in different states, the FCC reminds broadcasters that they should have made an election about which state's filing deadline to use back in 2003 when the current EEO rules were adopted, and they should have been using that election for each of their public file reports since then.  That same election would control the filing deadline for the Mid-Term report. 

The issue about co-owned radio-television combinations arise as radio stations in a state filed their renewals one year before TV stations in the same state.  Thus, the mid-point of their renewal terms fall a year apart.  The FCC has concluded that for such radio-TV combinations, the filing date for the television station will control.  In other words, the radio-TV combination would file a year after all the non-affiliated radio stations in the same state submit their Mid-Term report, on that date 4 years after the TV renewal was to have been filed. 

Our comprehensive memo on the FCC's EEO requirements can be found here.  Our most recent memo summarizing the yearly filing requirement for station's public file report, and providing a model for that report, can be found here.  As we've reported, here, the FCC has recently fined stations for less than full compliance with the EEO rules, indicating that they are tightening enforcement of these rules.  As the filing of the Mid-Term Report offers the Commission another opportunity to discover instances of noncompliance, stations should be using whatever time is available between now and the due date for filing in their states to insure that their EEO practices are in full compliance with the FCC's expectations.