AM Radio

Subscribe to AM Radio via RSS
  • President Trump this week issued an Executive Order instructing various government agencies to take steps to move marijuana from Schedule
…

Yesterday, we saw President Trump issue an Executive Order instructing various government agencies to take steps to move marijuana from Schedule I (an illegal controlled substance with no medical uses and a high degree of potential abuse) to Schedule III, which includes many other drugs, such as ketamine and Tylenol with codeine, that require a prescription and FDA approval. While a rescheduling to Schedule III may have an impact on research and on marijuana’s medical uses, broadcasters need to continue to take a very cautious approach to marijuana advertising while the details of any possible changes unfold, as it is likely that, even after any rescheduling that makes marijuana a Schedule III drug, advertising will still be restricted under federal law.

While many states have, as a matter of state law, legalized medical and even recreational marijuana use, there is still concern for broadcasters accepting advertising for its sale and use.  As we have noted many times before (see, for example, our articles here, here, and here), there is a concern that the sale and distribution of marijuana, even when legal under state law, remains a felony under federal law. Under 21 USC § 843 (b) and (c), to use communications facilities, including radio and the internet, to facilitate any sale of any federally controlled substance is a felony.  This should be of particular concern to broadcasters, which are federally regulated.  If the FCC is faced with a complaint about a broadcaster “facilitating” the sale of marijuana through running advertising – an act illegal under federal law – the FCC might feel a need to take action against the broadcaster. Continue Reading President Trump Issues Executive Order to Remove Marijuana from Schedule I – Concerns about Broadcast Advertising Remain

Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the American Music Fairness Act bill which proposes to adopt a new music royalty to be paid by over-the-air radio stations.  The royalty would be payable to SoundExchange for the public performance of sound recordings.  This means that the money collected would be paid to performing artists and record labels for the use of their recording of a song.  This new royalty would be in addition to the royalties paid by radio stations to composers and publishing companies through ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and GMR, which are paid for the performance of the musical composition – the words and music to a song. This legislation is very similar to a bill introduced in the last Congress (see our article here), and is another in a string of similar bills proposing to establish a broadcast performance royalty that have been introduced in Congress over the last decade.  See, for instance, our articles here, here, here and here on previous attempts to impose such a royalty.

This past week’s hearing featured three witnesses.  A broadcast station owner from eastern North Carolina, Henry Hinton, spoke on behalf of broadcasters warning of the impact that such a royalty would have on the economics of broadcasting and the public service that broadcast radio stations provide.  His written statement is here, and a podcast where he further explained his testimony is here.  Michael Huppe, the CEO of SoundExchange, testified in support of the royalty arguing, among other things, that the US was an outlier in not imposing this royalty on broadcasters, and that the broadcast industry should not be able to make its tens of billions of dollars off of artist’s work without compensating them (that revenue figure must have been meant as a historical one, as even he admitted that total revenue for the radio industry was only $14 billion – and some of that comes from talk radio that presumably would not be affected by this royalty).  His statement is here.  Also testifying was Gene Simmons, the frontman of the legendary band Kiss, who argued that this legislation was needed to compensate the next generation of artists so that they get paid for radio play.  His statement is here.  The hearing was contentious at times as most of the committee members in attendance were supporters of the royalty (though at least 25 Senators and close to a majority of the House have signed on to an NAB resolution opposing the royalty).  The entire hearing can be viewed on the Committee’s webpage here.Continue Reading Congressional Hearing on American Music Fairness Act Proposing New Music Royalty on Radio Stations – What is Being Considered

  • The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau entered into a Consent Decree with a public broadcaster to resolve an investigation into whether false
…

Using the EAS alert tones without a real emergency has led to several FCC fines in recent years – including many fines in the hundreds of thousands of dollars (see, for instance, our articles here, here, and here).  This week, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau released a Consent Decree with a noncommercial radio group (American Public Media Group, Minnesota Public Radio d/b/a American Public Media, and Southern California Public Radio)  to settle an investigation into the use of these tones in a BBC program about chasing tornadoes that ran on the group’s stations, and on other public broadcasting stations around the country to which the group syndicated the program.  As part of this decree, the group agreed to pay $86,400 to the government.  According to the decree, the program included two instances where EAS tones were used, and pieces of NOAA tornado warning alert audio were also aired.  In total, 46 stations associated with the group, and about 500 other stations that received the program from the group, ran these tones. 

The use of EAS tones without a real emergency (or in connection with an authorized test) violated Section 11.45 of the Commission’s rules.   As noted in the Consent Decree, the Commission believes that the use of simulated or actual EAS Tones for non-authorized purposes—such as commercial or entertainment purposes—can lead to dangerous “alert fatigue” where the public becomes desensitized to the alerts, questioning whether the alerts are for a real, imminent threat or some other cause. Moreover, the broadcast of these EAS Tones could result in false activations of the Emergency Alert System, as any stations that monitor a station that runs a false alert may have their own EAS equipment triggered – theoretically cascading the alert throughout the system.Continue Reading $86,400 Penalty on Noncommercial Broadcaster for Use of EAS Tones in Programming When No Emergency Existed

The deadline for candidates in Texas to file for a place on the March 3 primary ballot was this week.  Deadlines for filing to become a qualified candidate in other states will follow soon for other primaries that occur in March, and then throughout the first part of 2026.  As a result, broadcast stations and cable companies across the country will be dealing with all of the FCC political rules that become important once you have legally qualified candidates.  Even before the deadline for candidates to file for their place on the ballot, stations are dealing with buys from potential candidates, PACs, and other third-party groups looking to establish positions for the important 2026 elections. Spending on political advertising is sure to increase as the new year rolls around, and some suggest that it could rival or even exceed the record amounts spent in prior elections. What should broadcast stations be thinking about now to get ready for the 2026 elections?

The week before Thanksgiving I did a webinar for over 20 state broadcast associations on these issues (check with your state association to see if they have access to an archived copy of that webinar).  We have also written about some of the issues that broadcasters should already be considering in our Political Broadcasting Guide (which we plan to update shortly). But there are many issues that broadcasters need to consider now.  Some of those are discussed below.Continue Reading Getting Ready for the 2026 Election – Steps Broadcasters Should Be Taking Now to Avoid Legal Issues with Political Broadcasting

  • The FCC’s Media Bureau announced that the deadline for broadcasters to comply with the new foreign sponsorship identification requirements has
…

Even with the holidays upon us, there are many regulatory dates for broadcasters in December and early January.  That is particularly true this year, now that the federal government shutdown has ended and the FCC is playing catch-up on regulatory deadlines.  As we discuss below and in more detail here, many of these revised dates for the submission of documents that would have been due during the shutdown will fall in the month of December. 

But before we dive into the December dates, one item that broadcasters can scratch off their calendars this month is the Biennial Ownership Report, which would have been due December 1.  In August, the FCC’s Media Bureau waived the filing requirement while the FCC considers whether to even continue the requirement for the filing of these reports (see our discussion here).  Broadcasters now have until June 1, 2027 to file the report unless the FCC concludes its review before that date and announces a different filing requirement.  The Media Bureau made clear that ownership reports required at other times (e.g., after the consummation of an assignment or transfer of broadcast station licenses or after the grant of a new station’s construction permit) are still required.  It is simply the Biennial Report required from all full-power broadcasters and from LPTV licensees that is on hold. 

Here are some of the upcoming dates and deadlines in December that you should be watching:

December 1 is the extended deadline for all full power and Class A television stations and full power AM and FM radio stations, both commercial and noncommercial, to upload their Quarterly Issues/Program lists for the third quarter of 2025 to their Online Public Inspection Files (OPIFs).  These lists were originally due October 10 but could not be filed by stations due to the government shutdown.  The lists should identify the issues of importance to the station’s service area and the programs that the station aired between July 1 and September 30, 2025, that addressed those issues.  These lists must be timely uploaded to your station’s OPIF, as the untimely uploads of these documents probably have resulted in more fines in the last decade than for any other FCC rule violation.  As you finalize your lists, do so carefully and accurately, as they are the only official records of how your station is serving the public and addressing the needs and interests of its community.  See our article here for more on the importance that the FCC has, in the past, placed on the Quarterly Issues/Programs list obligation.Continue Reading December 2025 Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – Post-Shutdown Deadlines, EEO Public File Reports, Comment Deadlines, Political Windows, and more

  • The FCC and the FCC’s Media Bureau released several Public Notices (here, here, here, and here
…