FM Radio

Subscribe to FM Radio via RSS

Every four years, the FCC is supposed to conduct a review of its local broadcast ownership rules – the rules that govern the number of radio or television stations in a market in which one person or entity may have an “attributable” interest (some form of control rights defined under very complicated FCC attribution rules). The FCC is supposed to do this regular assessment of these local ownership rules to determine if they continue to be necessary in the public interest as a result of changes in competition.  The last quadrennial review, which commenced in 2018, was not completed by the FCC until December 2023 when it released an order that, for all practical purposes, concluded that there had been no changes in the competition faced by broadcast stations.  In the 2023 order (which we summarized here), the Commission actually tightened the rules for television stations, and it left the rules for radio unchanged despite the significant competition from digital media that had exploded since the last review was completed (see for instance our article here on the explosion of digital competition and its effect on over-the-air radio).  Appeals of the 2023 decision were only resolved in July (see our article here).  With the decision on the appeal complete, the FCC Chair this week announced that the next Quadrennial Review would now begin in earnest. 

The next review, the 2022 Quadrennial Review, was actually started in late 2022 (even before the 2018 review was completed) with the release of a Public Notice (see our article here).  But that Public Notice only asked very general questions about the state of competition in the broadcast industry, and the previous administration took no further action after releasing the Public Notice.  This week, FCC Chairman Carr, in his blog post setting out the issues to be considered at the FCC’s September 30th regular monthly meeting, stated that a 2022 Quadrennial Review Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would be on the agenda.  That announcement was followed with a public draft of the NPRM that will be considered at the September 30 meeting.  While it is possible that some changes may be made in the draft, in practice these drafts are generally adopted with few significant modifications.  Thus, we now have an idea of the issues to be considered in the 2022 Review.Continue Reading FCC Begins Quadrennial Review of its Local Ownership Rules for Radio and TV – Should the FCC Relax Broadcast Ownership Rules Based on Competitive Factors?

The Federal Trade Commission last week announced that it was dropping its appeal of a court decision which put on hold an FTC order adopted during the Biden administration which banned noncompete agreements in all industries across the country (see our note here). This ban was a concern to many in the broadcast industry as it would allow station employees, including on-air talent, managerial employees, and others with access to sensitive competitive information to freely move from station to station within a broadcast market.

But the FTC’s decision to drop the appeal of the court’s rejection of the nationwide ban does not mean that the FTC has abandoned all concerns about the use of noncompete agreements.  Instead, the FTC issued a Request for Information seeking public comment on the use of noncompete agreements, seeking information on a variety of issues including why an employer may use noncompete agreements, typical salary ranges of employees subject to these agreements, their terms or limitations, and harms imposed on employees by these agreements.  Comments are due November 3.  The FTC also announced plans to pursue concerns about such agreements on a case-by-case basis.Continue Reading FTC Drops Appeal of Court’s Rejection of Nationwide Ban on Noncompete Agreements – To Pursue Individual Cases Where Noncompetes are an Unfair Trade Practice

As we noted in our weekly summary of regulatory activity of interest to broadcasters, the FCC on Friday released a number of public notices and fact sheets providing details of how broadcasters are to pay their annual regulatory fees. Included among the public notices was one setting the deadline for paying the regulatory fees as September 25th. The FCC’s filing system is open now so fees can be paid at any time prior to the September 25th deadline. The failure to pay fees by that deadline will result in a 25% penalty.  Interest will also accrue on late payments, as well as collection fees.  Thus, late payments are costly. 

Fees for each television station are set out in the FCC’s Report and Order setting those fees (in a table in Appendix F, pages 52-95 of the order – fees are established based on a station’s population coverage, so each station is assigned a specific fee).  Radio stations can look up their fees in a “look up database” that is available through a link that was set out in the Media Bureau Fact Sheet released on Friday. Broadcasters should check their fees carefully to make sure that they are paying the expected amount and are submitting payment for all of their affected facilities.  Remember, fees are based on a station’s facilities on October 1, 2024, the beginning of the last fiscal year.  For broadcasters with earth stations, those fees are set out in the Space Bureau Fact Sheet. Continue Reading Annual Regulatory Fees Due by September 25 – FCC Releases Public Notices and Fact Sheets on Paying Those Fees

Updated, 9/9/25 to correct typo in opening date for the filing of applications for new LPTV and TV translator stations in the second bullet below.

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past two weeks, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how…

Last Friday, the FCC released its Order adopting the regulatory fees to be paid by broadcasters and other regulated entities at some point before the October 1 start of the federal government’s new fiscal year.  The Commission slightly increased fees for TV stations by 1.2% from last year (from $0.006598 to $0.006674 per population served)…

It is time for our look at September’s regulatory dates and deadlines to which broadcasters should be paying attention – and the deadline that probably is most important to all commercial broadcasters is not yet known.  That, of course, is the deadline for the payment of annual regulatory fees – which must be made before the federal government’s October 1 start of the new fiscal year.  We expect an announcement of the final decision on the amount of those fees for various broadcasters, and the deadlines for payment, in the next few days.  Keep on the alert for that announcement. 

Below is our summary of the other dates affecting broadcasters this September, including the effective date of the Emergency Alert System’s (“EAS”) new Missing and Endangered Persons event code, comment and other pleading deadlines in several FCC proceedings, the deadline for affected broadcasters to file their responses to the FCC’s August 2025 EEO Audit Letter, in addition to several political file window dates.

September 8 is the effective date of the new EAS Missing and Endangered Persons event code to be used by all EAS Participants, including broadcast stations.  In August 2024, the FCC adopted a Report and Order creating a new EAS event code for persons over the age of 17 who are missing or abducted from states, territories, or tribal communities (known as Ashanti Alerts), but delayed its effective date to provide EAS Participants with enough time to update their EAS systems to use the code.Continue Reading September 2025 Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – FCC Regulatory Fees, Political Windows, EAS Event Code, Rulemaking Comment Deadlines, and more

  • The Radio Music License Committee announced settlements with both ASCAP and BMI of rate court litigation over the royalties to
…

This week it was announced that the Radio Music License Committee, the organization that represents the commercial radio industry in its negotiations with performing rights organizations over the public performance rights in musical works (the musical compositions – the words and music to any song), had entered into settlement agreements with both ASCAP and BMI to settle rate court litigation over the amount of royalties to be paid by the industry for the period from 2022 through 2029.  Rate courts, pursuant to the antitrust consent decrees under which both ASCAP and BMI operate, determine reasonable rates for music licensed by ASCAP and BMI if parties cannot voluntarily negotiate deals for the use of that music.  Agreements between RMLC and both ASCAP and BMI expired at the end of 2021, so the commercial radio industry has been paying interim rates at the level of the prior agreements since January 1, 2022.  Now both organizations have reached deals with RMLC for the rates for the next three years, and those deals include a “true up” for the difference between the old rates and the new rates for the period from 2022 through the end of 2024. 

The rates for BMI are increasing from approximately 1.7% of a station’s revenue to the following levels:

  • 2.14% for 2022 and 2023,
  • 2.26% for 2024,
  • 2.19% for 2025
  • 2.20% for 2026, 2027, 2028, and 2029

The agreements also contain details about lower rates for stations that have significant talk or other non-music programming, and definitions of what constitutes “revenue” that is subject to royalties.  Under the BMI agreement, the difference between the rates from 2022 to the end of 2024 under the prior agreement (2024 being the last full year for which station revenues have been reported) and that specified in the new settlement must be made up by monthly payments over the next 18 months, starting with payments in October 2025. 

While the ASCAP rates have not been made public, we can assume that the increase is not as large as that for BMI, as BMI announced their rate increase as being one of “historic” size.  But the ASCAP announcement does reference an increase.  Stations should learn the details of that increase from private correspondence from ASCAP or the RMLC in the near term.  Why would RMLC agree to these rate increases?Continue Reading BMI and ASCAP Enter into Agreements with Commercial Radio Industry – Music Royalty Rates Going Up Retroactive to 2022

…

In our recent post on the FCC’s first EEO audit of the Carr administration at the FCC, we expressed surprise that the audit was released, thinking that the Commission might move to revise the EEO rules and put enforcement of the current rules on hold, just as it has done with the Biennial Ownership Reports.  In the remainder of our article, we went on to discuss the audit as if it was simply asking for information to review the FCC’s EEO rules as they have been enforced for the last 20 years.  But thanks to another attorney who more closely reviewed the language of the FCC’s audit letter and alerted me to changes in these letters, we now know that the audits actually go beyond the issues previously reviewed by the FCC – and seek out information about programs that favor one race, ethnicity or gender in hiring and other employment evaluations.  The audits now seem to be aimed in part at seeking out the types of “invidious” DEI programs – Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion — that the current administration has labeled as discriminatory in and of themselves in transactions involving the biggest players in the communications industry.  The FCC now seems to be looking for evidence of these DEI programs at all broadcast stations, just as they are seeking to root out and end these policies in other industries throughout the country.

In looking closely at the new audit letters, the Enforcement Bureau has added four paragraphs requiring the audited station to respond to various DEI questions. First, section 2(b)(vi)(a) of the letter asks about any complaints made by employees either internally to station management or externally to relevant authorities of “any bias, sensitivity or any other matters related to race, color, religion, national origin or sex.”  While that wording is not the clearest, it appears that this question is looking for complaints alleging that employment decisions were improperly made with a bias or other preferences favoring persons of a particular race, ethnicity, religion or gender.  In the past, only complaints of discrimination that led to disfavoring persons based on those qualities were reported.  Plus, in the past, only complaints to government agencies were reported.  Here, information about internal complaints and how such complaints were dealt with by the station are requested, as is information as to internal station policies of how such complaints should be treated.Continue Reading A Closer Look At the FCC’s First EEO Notice of 2025 –  New Questions to Root Out DEI Issues