Multiple Ownership Rules

Subscribe to Multiple Ownership Rules via RSS

Only three weeks ago, we published an article on the FCC’s request for public comment to update the record in the 2018 proceeding looking at whether to change the 39% national cap on the ownership of television stations. That request for comments was published in the Federal Register yesterday, setting the deadline for comments. Comments are due August 4, 2025 and reply comments are to be filed by August 22. Although we published our look at the issues in this proceeding only a few weeks ago, we thought that we would republish it for those who may have missed it. Here is what we said on June 26:

Last week, the FCC released a Public Notice requesting comments to refresh the record compiled in 2018 in a proceeding that proposed to review the TV national ownership cap.  That cap limits any company from having attributable interests in full-power TV stations that reach more than 39% of the nationwide TV audience.  That 2018 proceeding was begun (with a late December 2017 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking)  to assess whether the FCC should raise the cap, and also to explore whether it has the power to do so (see our article here).  This week’s Public Notice, released by the FCC’s Media Bureau, not only seeks information about the questions raised in 2018, but it also poses a number of new issues reflecting the concerns of the current Commission. 

The Public Notice is not seeking comment on the local broadcast ownership rules that govern how many TV (and radio) stations one owner can have in any market.  Those issues are separately considered in the FCC’s Congressionally-mandated Quadrennial Reviews, where every four years the FCC must justify that the local ownership rules remain necessary in the public interest as a result of competition.  The Commission should be considering the local rules this year, as it is in the fourth and final year of the Quadrennial Review cycle for 2022, and also possibly because of the results of the pending appeal of the 2018 Quadrennial Review (see our article here) – a decision in that appeal could be released at any time.  The 39% national TV ownership cap was adopted by Congress and is not specifically subject to the Quadrennial review – hence the questions that were raised in the 2018 proceeding about the FCC’s authority to review these rules.Continue Reading Comment Dates Set on the FCC Request to Update the Record on the 39% National TV Ownership Cap

  • Olivia Trusty was sworn in as an FCC Commissioner, restoring the Commission’s quorum just before its regular monthly Open Meeting. 
…

Last week, the FCC released a Public Notice requesting comments to refresh the record compiled in 2018 in a proceeding that proposed to review the TV national ownership cap.  That cap limits any company from having attributable interests in full-power TV stations that reach more than 39% of the nationwide TV audience.  That 2018 proceeding was begun (with a late December 2017 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking)  to assess whether the FCC should raise the cap, and also to explore whether it has the power to do so (see our article here).  This week’s Public Notice, released by the FCC’s Media Bureau, not only seeks information about the questions raised in 2018, but it also poses a number of new issues reflecting the concerns of the current Commission. 

The Public Notice is not seeking comment on the local broadcast ownership rules that govern how many TV (and radio) stations one owner can have in any market.  Those issues are separately considered in the FCC’s Congressionally-mandated Quadrennial Reviews, where every four years the FCC must justify that the local ownership rules remain necessary in the public interest as a result of competition.  The Commission should be considering the local rules this year, as it is in the fourth and final year of the Quadrennial Review cycle for 2022, and also possibly because of the results of the pending appeal of the 2018 Quadrennial Review (see our article here) – a decision in that appeal could be released at any time.  The 39% national TV ownership cap was adopted by Congress and is not specifically subject to the Quadrennial review – hence the questions that were raised in the 2018 proceeding about the FCC’s authority to review these rules.Continue Reading FCC Asks for Public Comment on Proposal to Update the 39% National Ownership Cap for Television

  • The Senate voted 53-45 to confirm Olivia Trusty as an FCC Commissioner on a largely party-line vote.  As a result
…

It was just a few weeks ago when we posted our article talking about how June would bring a Republican majority to the FCC, speculating as to what deregulatory issues would be on the Chairman’s agenda.  Last Wednesday morning, I was on a video call with a broadcaster’s association’s Board of Director, passing along the same message.  Only minutes after I left that call, the news came Republican Commissioner Simington had announced his departure from the FCC effective last Friday.  Shortly thereafter, Commissioner Starks, the Democrat whose planned departure was to have given the Republicans a majority on the FCC, announced that last Friday would also be his departure date.  Suddenly, the FCC had only two Commissioners – one Democrat and one Republican – not even enough for the quorum necessary to do business in the normal course.  So thoughts of quick action on changes to the FCC’s ownership rules or on the many deregulatory Delete, Delete, Delete proposals that have been made seem to be on hold for the moment.  What is likely to happen?

First, it must be remembered that already pending is the nomination of Republican Olivia Trusty to the Commission seat that was vacated when Jessica Rosenworcel left her role as Chair of the FCC upon the change in administration.  Trusty has had a confirmation hearing and was approved by the appropriate Senate committee. All that stands between her and a seat on the FCC is approval by the full Senate – which would then provide the FCC with a quorum and a Republican majority.  But, watch as there could be delays in that confirmation process. Continue Reading FCC Loses Two Commissioners and a Quorum – What Does It Mean for Broadcasting?

  • FCC Commissioners Simington and Starks both announced that they were leaving the FCC as of June 6.  Starks stated at
…

At Thursday’s FCC monthly open meeting, FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks announced that it would be his last meeting.  In March, he said that he would be departing soon, so the announcement that he would be gone before the FCC’s next scheduled open meeting on June 26 was not a surprise.  But as one of two remaining Democratic FCC Commissioners, even though the nomination of Olivia Trusty as the third Republican Commissioner has not yet been approved by the Senate, this announcement guarantees that Chairman Carr will have a Republican majority in time for next month’s open meeting.  With that majority, what issues affecting broadcasters might be affected?

Probably highest on the list is the broadcast ownership rules.  We noted in our recent article on the ownership rules that the FCC had not yet released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking teeing up the issues that it expected to address in its 2022 Quadrennial Review – even though that review needs to be completed this year so that the 2026 review can begin on time.  As both Chairman Carr and Republican Commissioner Simington have recently been quoted as acknowledging that the current ownership rules are antiquated and in need of change to allow local broadcasters to compete with the plethora of new digital competition, a Republican majority may well make it possible for a proposal for aggressive relaxation of the rules to be advanced soon – something that might not have been possible had the Commission been locked in its partisan deadlock.Continue Reading A Republican FCC Majority Coming Soon as Commissioner Starks Announces Imminent Departure – What Broadcast Issues May be Affected? 

  • President Trump signed an Executive Order purporting to end federal subsidies for NPR and PBS provided through the Corporation for
…