AM radio (and broadcast radio in general) received strong support from Congressional representatives during this week’s hearing before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Communications and Technology subcommittee. Significant time was spent on recognizing AM radio’s important role  in the emergency communications network, both in delivering emergency alerts from the EAS system and in conveying additional information of importance to the public through news and public affairs programming (see the initial statement of J Chapman, a broadcaster based in Indiana who testified on behalf of the AM industry, and the statement of an official of the New Jersey State Police, who talked about the importance of AM in providing emergency information).  Virtually all the representatives urged car companies to retain AM in cars.  Despite this widespread support, some of the legislators expressed reluctance to adopt a legal mandate to require AM in cars, particularly representatives who have philosophical reservations about the government mandating business decisions.  That position was of course highlighted by the testimony of the representative of the automotive industry.  In the day’s discussion of these questions, some clues to the future of entertainment in the car may have emerged.

AM and public safety advocates at the hearing argued that AM radio needed to be protected.  They emphasized that AM provides the backbone of the emergency alert system due to the ability of high-powered AM stations to cover vast distances unimpeded by terrain obstacles. Even the sole representative of the automobile industry on the panel agreed that, at this point, over the air radio provides the best and most reliable source of free emergency alerts. The additional contextual information provided by news/talk AM stations was also emphasized, as stations can go beyond simply delivering a government issued emergency alert by providing in its programming the details and relevant context in any emergency.  While not central to the discussion, especially in the later parts of the hearing, there was also talk of the importance of providing a free audio service to the public for more than just emergency programming, particularly a service that often programs to underserved groups.  Protecting the investment of radio operators was also mentioned, as removing AM from cars would vastly decrease the potential audience for most of these stations. The desire to continue providing service to the public from AM stations was the broadcaster’s vision of the future of entertainment options in the car.Continue Reading The Congressional Hearing on AM Radio – A Look at the Future of Audio Entertainment in the Car?

Though school is out for many, the FCC does not take a summer recess.  Instead, regulation continues.  While the pace of new FCC regulatory issues for broadcasters has slowed, perhaps pending the confirmation of a new Commissioner and the return of the FCC to full strength, there are still regulatory matters in June worth watching.  Some are routine, others look more to the future – but all are worth watching just the same. 

One of the routine regulatory deadlines comes on June 1, as it is the deadline for Radio and Television Station Employment Units in Arizona, District of Columbia, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming with 5 or more full-time employees to upload to their online public inspection file their Annual EEO Public File Report. A station employment unit is a station or cluster of commonly controlled stations serving the same general geographic area having at least one common employee.  For employment units with 5 or more full-time employees, the annual report covers hiring and employment outreach activities for the prior year.  A link to the uploaded report must also be included on the home page of a station’s website, if it has a website. Continue Reading June Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – EEO, Rulemaking Comments, AM Congressional Hearings, and More

This week, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking containing its proposal for the annual regulatory fees to be paid by broadcasters in September of this year.  The annual fees are paid by all entities that the FCC regulates to reimburse the government for the cost of FCC operations.  The FCC decides how much each industry pays based on the percentage of the FCC’s workforce which is dedicated to regulating that industry.  In recent years, there has been significant debate over the amount of fees paid by broadcasters, with broadcast interests arguing that the FCC’s allocation of its workforce overestimated the number of employees working on broadcast matters.  In the proposal released this week, the FCC appeared to agree, allocating to other industries the work done by certain employees who were at least partially counted against broadcasters in the past.  This resulted in a proposal for the total fees to be paid by broadcast interests to decrease from the $62.07 million paid in 2022 to $55.68 million for 2023. 

The Commission will take comments on the proposed allocations and come up with final numbers late in the summer.  In recent years, the final order setting the fees has been released right around the Labor Day weekend.  Fees are typically paid in mid to late September (because they must be paid before the new fiscal year begins on October 1).Continue Reading FCC Seeks Comments on Proposed Annual Regulatory Fees – Proposal Includes a Decrease in Fees To Be Paid By Broadcasters

The fear that AM radio will disappear from the car has been high on broadcasters’ lists of concerns in recent months as several car makers, including Ford, have suggested that receivers would be dropped from new models.  The issue was addressed last weekend in a front-page story in the Washington Post.  It has been highlighted by recent Congressional letters to car makers urging them to continue to include AM in cars for many reasons, including the ubiquity of the signals even in rural areas and the importance of AM for conveying emergency messages throughout the country.  Now, there is a legislative proposal to require that AM be included in cars.  Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), along with Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), and J.D. Vance (R-Ohio), members of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, and Representatives Josh Gottheimer (NJ-05), Tom Kean, Jr. (NJ-07), Rob Menendez (NJ-08), Bruce Westerman (AR-04), and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA-03) introduced the AM for Every Vehicle Actwhich would require that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration conduct a rulemaking proceeding, to be completed within one year, to mandate that AM be included in all cars sold in the US as a standard feature, without any additional cost to new car buyers.  In addition, until the effective date of the new rule, before any car could be sold without an AM radio, the seller would need to have “clear and conspicuous labeling” to inform any buyer that the car does not have an AM radio. 

The bill would also require the Government Accountability Office to study whether there was any other available technology to replicate the reach and effectiveness of AM in delivering emergency alerts to the public.  Any alternative system would have to reach 90% of the population of the US.  The study would also need to review the cost of any alternative system.  The GAO would brief the appropriate Congressional committees about the study within one year and deliver the report to Congress within 180 days of the briefing, presumably to allow Congress to reassess any mandate imposed by this Act.  The FCC’s role in the process is limited.  The FCC is to coordinate with NHTSA in their rulemaking to mandate AMs in cars, and with the GAO in its study.  But it is the transportation safety issues that are driving this push to mandate AM in cars, not issues in the FCC’s jurisdiction.Continue Reading AM For Every Vehicle Act Introduced in House and Senate to Mandate AM Radio in Cars

  • The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau released a Public Notice announcing that EEO Mid-Term Reviews for radio and television stations will start

Yesterday, in our article about the recent FCC random audit of the EEO performance of over 200 radio and TV stations, we noted that the FCC also reviews the EEO performance of broadcasters in connection with complaints, license renewal applications, and at the midpoint of the license period of most TV stations and larger radio operations.  The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau, in a Public Notice released yesterday, reminded us that this Mid-Term Review process is about to begin.  The FCC will be reviewing the performance of larger radio clusters in Maryland, DC, Virginia, and West Virginia, who are required to upload their Annual EEO Public Inspection File reports to their online public file by June 1.  While it is sometimes hard to believe how quickly time has passed, stations in these states are now at the mid-point of their licenses, as their last license renewal applications were filed on or before June 1, 2019. 

The FCC’s Mid-Term EEO review in the past was conducted through the filing of a Form 397 Report.  That report required that a licensee attach the last two years of EEO Public Inspection file reports and provide a contact person for EEO compliance at the station “employment unit” (a cluster of commonly controlled stations serving the same geographic area sharing at least one employee).  In 2019, the FCC did away with that report, finding that the employment reports were already available in station online public inspection files (and that the person responsible for EEO was already identified in the materials submitted with the station’s last renewal application)(see our article here).  So instead of filing a form, the FCC will simply review what is already in the public file.  But the Mid-Term review is only required for larger radio groups, which required the FCC to implement a settings update in their online public files.Continue Reading More FCC EEO News – FCC Reminds Broadcasters that EEO Mid-Term Reviews to Begin in June

At the end of April, we noted in our weekly summary of regulatory actions for broadcasters that the FCC had issued its first EEO audit notice for 2023 (available here), this time targeting over 200 radio and TV stations.  Those stations, and the station employment units (commonly owned stations serving the same area) with which they are associated, must provide to the FCC (by uploading the information to their online public inspection file) their last two years of EEO Annual Public File reports, as well as backing data to show that the station in fact did everything that was required under the FCC rules.  The response to the April audit is due to be uploaded to the public file of affected stations by June 8, 2023. 

While we noted the release of the audit notice, we thought that we should post our customary article describing the audit requirements and the basics of the FCC EEO rules as a reminder to all stations as to their general FCC EEO obligations.  The FCC has promised to randomly audit approximately 5% of all broadcast stations each year. As the response (and the audit letter itself) must be uploaded to the public file, it can be reviewed not only by the FCC, but also by anyone else with an internet connection anywhere, at any time.  The recent fine imposed on Cumulus Media for a late upload of a single EEO Annual Public File Report (see our article here) and the FCC’s pending consideration of the return of the EEO Form 395 reporting on the race and gender of all station employees (see our article here), shows how seriously the FCC takes EEO obligations. So, whether you are on the list or not, this is a good time for broadcasters to review what is generally required by the FCC’s EEO rules.Continue Reading Reminder About Broadcasters’ FCC EEO Obligations After the April’s First 2023 Audit of Station Performance