May is one of the few months on the calendar where there are not routine FCC regulatory deadlines.  Yet there are still a number of important dates and deadlines this month (and early next) that broadcasters should note.  Some of those dates and deadlines are below.

On March 17, the migration of applications and forms from the FCC’s legacy filing portal CDBS to its newer portal LMS will continue. The FCC has announced the transition of many of the forms that had been filed in CDBS, but are now filed by email, to LMS.  Perhaps most significantly, this includes filings for Special Temporary Authority (and extensions to such authority and notices of the resumption of authorized operations.  See the FCC’s Public Notice on the transition for a complete list of the transitioning forms, notes on the procedures to be used for extensions of applications previously filed in CDBS, and other details.

Throughout May, broadcasters in several states should be aware of the opening of political windows tied to June and early July primary elections.  As a refresher, in the forty-five days before a primary election, broadcasters must extend to legally qualified candidates their lowest unit rate and continue to follow all other applicable political broadcasting rules.  So the lowest unit rate period will be in effect at some point this month for stations serving states that have primary elections in June and early July (and is already open for states with May primaries).  For a deeper dive on how to prepare for the political primary election season, see our post, here, which also includes a link to our comprehensive Political Broadcasting Guide.  Take a look at our 2022 Broadcasters’ Calendar to see if your state has an upcoming primary election (though confirm these dates locally as some dates have changed since the calendar was prepared – for instance, just this week, a court ordered the congressional primaries in New York state be postponed from June until August).
Continue Reading May Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters: LMS Migration of FCC Forms, Lowest Unit Rate Windows, EEO Audits, TV Auction, FM Antenna Rulemaking, and More

Last week, much was made of an FCC Media Bureau decision rejecting the “reasonable access” claim of a write-in candidate for a Congressional seat in Ohio against radio stations which, after initially running his spots, decided to pull those spots because he had not made a “substantial showing” of his candidacy.  Candidates for federal office (the US House of Representatives, the US Senate and for President) are entitled to buy reasonable amounts of commercial time on all broadcast stations, once those candidates are “legally qualified.”  In other words, commercial broadcast stations cannot refuse to run any ads for candidates for any federal elective office.  We wrote more about reasonable access here, including the considerations about how much time is “reasonable.”

In most cases, the question of whether a candidate is legally qualified for FCC purposes is a relatively simple one.  A station looks to see if that candidate has filed the required paperwork and qualified for a place on the election ballot in the district in which they are seeking office.  The case decided last week was one of the hard cases, where the candidate did not qualify for a place on the ballot but argued that he was a write-in candidate for the congressional seat.  The FCC has recognized that write-in candidates can be legally qualified so as to be guaranteed reasonable access and other protections afforded to candidates under FCC rules, including the right to not have their commercial messages censored by the station (see our posts here and here on the no censorship rule) – but they must make a substantial showing that their candidacy is legitimate.  The FCC has recognized that it would put broadcasters in an untenable position if anyone could, on a whim, declare that they are a write-in candidate and therefore be entitled to buy uncensored advertising time (at lowest unit rates in the 45 days before a primary or the 60 days before a general election – see our post here on lowest unit rates) on any commercial broadcast station that they wanted to.  So the FCC requires this substantial showing – and the adequacy of that showing was the issue in last week’s decision, and has been a question that other write-ins have faced in other elections in the past.
Continue Reading Reasonable Access and the Problem Candidate – FCC Declares a Write-In Candidate Not Entitled to Buy Radio Spots, But That May Not Be the End of the Story

Last week, the US House of Representatives passed the MORE Act which, if enacted, would take marijuana off the list of Schedule I drugs – those drugs whose possession and distribution is a federal felony, as is the use of the radio waves to promote their use.  As we have warned before (see, for instance, our article here published when an earlier version of this bill passed the House in 2020), because of the laws making the sale of marijuana a federal crime and prohibiting the use of radio waves to promote that sale, broadcast stations should think twice about any marijuana advertising, even in states where it has been legalized.  Thus, the passage of MORE Act through the House should not be taken as a sign to start running marijuana advertising on your broadcast station.

First, it is important to remember that this bill was passed only in the House of Representatives.  Without also being approved by the Senate and being signed by the President, the House’s action had no legal effect.  Because of the way that Congress works, if the bill does not pass the Senate in the current legislative session, which ends in the first few days of January 2023, the whole process must start over again – bills do not carry over from one Congressional session to another.  So, if Senate action is not forthcoming this year, a new Congress would have to start with a new bill, and a new House of Representatives and a new Senate would both have to vote to adopt the legislation.   The MORE Act passed the House with few Republican votes, so if the composition of the House changes next year, that may not bode well for this legislation if it does not pass the Senate this year.
Continue Reading House of Representatives Passes MORE Act to Remove Marijuana from Schedule I – Don’t Rush to Start Airing Pot Ads Yet

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The US House of Representatives, in a bipartisan vote, passed the MORE Act, a bill to decriminalize marijuana at the

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, and two important deadlines in the week ahead, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The FCC Enforcement Bureau this week announced its latest round of random

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, and a look ahead at an important deadline next week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • New FCC sponsorship identification rules that impose obligations on almost

The FCC this week announced that broadcasters must now comply with new rules designed to identify when programming is run on U.S. stations that was provided by a foreign governmental entity pursuant to a lease of airtime.  While this seems like a narrow purpose, the new rules will impose a burden on broadcasters.  Because of First Amendment considerations, the FCC cannot totally prohibit the broadcast of such programming, but it adopted this rule to ensure that audiences are informed about programming backed by a foreign government.  The NAB and other groups have appealed the FCC’s rules, and that appeal is pending.  The court also denied a request to delay the requirements of the new rules from going into effect.  Thus, broadcasters must begin to comply with the rules now.

The FCC’s rules require broadcasters to make a very specific sponsorship identification disclosure in programming aired under an agreement for the lease of airtime if that programming has been supplied by a “foreign governmental entity” (defined in the rule), or if anyone involved in the production or distribution of that programming aired pursuant to the lease agreement (or a sub-lease) qualifies as a foreign governmental entity.  A foreign government entity is defined by the FCC rule (Section 73.1212(j)) to “include governments of foreign countries, foreign political parties, agents of foreign principals, and United States-based foreign media outlets.”  The rule goes on to give other specific definitions of these terms.
Continue Reading New Rules on the Identification of Foreign Government-Provided Programs Affects All Broadcasters – Now in Effect  

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, and a look ahead to events of importance next week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The Media Bureau this week released the first of what

Yesterday, I wrote about the history of the NCAA’s assembling of the rights to an array of trademarks associated with this month’s basketball tournament.  Today, I will provide some examples of the activities that can bring unwanted NCAA attention to your advertisements or broadcasting of advertising.  But, first, I will discuss yet one more issue that should be considered.

Endorsements by Individual Student-Athletes

After many years of litigation, in July 2021, the NCAA suspended its policy prohibiting college athletes from profiting from their names, images and likenesses (“NIL”) (or their right of publicity) without losing their eligibility.  However, there is no national set of rules as to what is permissible.  Rather, the right of publicity is governed by state law.  Moreover, colleges and universities still have the right establish some rules or standards.  For example, although student-athletes can now get paid to endorse a commercial product, they are not automatically entitled to use any NCAA or school trademarks.  Thus, a college basketball player may not be authorized to wear their uniform in advertising unless the school has granted permission.  Can the player wear a uniform with the school colors, but no names or logos?  Can the player endorse an alcoholic product?  Answers will vary state by state and school by school, so it will be extremely important to check with experienced counsel before running any advertising that involves college players.

Now, back to the game …
Continue Reading NCAA Tournament Advertising:  Use of Trademarks and … One More Thing (2022 Update – Part 2)