Last week, the FCC released its long-expected decision on foreign government sponsored programming.  As you will recall, in 2022, the FCC adopted rules that required enhanced sponsorship identifications when program time bought (or, in the FCC’s words, “leased”) on broadcast stations was sponsored by a foreign government or an agent of a foreign government.  In addition, it required broadcasters to verify whether program buyers were agents of foreign governments, both by getting certifications from program buyers as to whether they represented foreign governments and by checking a Department of Justice database (compiled under the Foreign Agents Registration Act) to see if the buyer was registered as a foreign agent (see our articles here and here).  When a court threw out the requirement that broadcasters check those databases (see our article here), the FCC responded with a Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing that, instead of the FARA research, broadcasters needed to obtain a 13-paragraph certification as to whether any program buyer was a foreign government entity, and to include in the public file all such certifications, regardless of the response (as opposed to the existing requirement only obligating the broadcaster to put certifications in the public file when they indicated that the buyer was in fact an agent of a foreign government) (see our articles here and here on that proposal).  In the order released last week, the FCC decided not to require that enhanced certification (or the requirement to put negative responses into the public file), but instead came up with an unexpected addition to the requirement – that certifications must be obtained not just from buyers of program time, but also from buyers of advertising spot time, if the advertisers are not promoting commercial products and services. 

The order simplifies the certification requirement from the detailed multi-page certification in complex legalese that had been proposed in the Second Notice.  Instead, the FCC offers a relatively short certification (contained in Appendix D of the order) for program buyers to sign, with two basic questions – whether any foreign government entity ( a foreign government, a foreign political party, or an agent of one of those groups) is the purchaser of the programming; and whether the purchaser or any producer of the programming is being paid by a foreign government entity.  In the vast majority of cases, we expect that the answer to both questions will be “no.”  In the event that a programmer or program producer is an agent of a foreign government, then an additional question applies, requiring that the programmer provide the licensee appropriate sponsorship identification information for the enhanced on-air sponsorship identifications and for the required public file disclosure obligations.  Even using this FCC form questionnaire is not necessary, if the licensee can obtain that information using different words.  So, in at least some instances, broadcasters may be able to continue to use their existing certification language. Consult your attorney to see if the language you are using will comply with what the FCC will require when this order becomes effective. 

Continue Reading FCC Releases Decision on Broadcaster’s Obligations to Identify Foreign Government Sponsored Programming – There is Some Good News, and Some Bad News Affecting Issue Ads

With the verdict in the first criminal case against former President (and now candidate) Trump having been released, we can envision a whole raft of attack ads likely to be airing before the November elections.  The verdict is likely to also increase political divisions within the country, and potentially fuel many other nasty attack ads to be aired in political races from the top of the ballot to the local races that appear toward its end.  The use of artificial intelligence in such ads raises the prospect of even nastier attack ads, and its use raises a whole host of legal issues beyond defamation worries, though it raises those too (see our article here on defamation concerns about AI generated content, and our recent articles here and here about other potential FCC and state law liability arising from such ads).  Given the potential for a nasty election season getting even nastier, we thought that we would revisit our warning about broadcasters needing to assess the content of attack ads – particularly those from non-candidate groups. 

As we have written before, broadcasters (and local cable companies) are forbidden from editing the message of a candidate or rejecting that ad based on what is says except in extreme circumstances where the ad itself would violate a federal criminal law and possibly if it contains a false EAS alert (see, for instance, our articles herehere and here).  Section 315 of the Communications Act forbids a broadcaster or a local cable operator from censoring a candidate ad.  Because broadcasters cannot censor candidate ads, the Supreme Court has ruled that broadcasters are immune from any liability for the content of those ads.  (Note that this protection applies only to over-the-air broadcasters and local cable companies – the no censorship rule does not apply to cable networks or online distribution – see our articles here and here)  Other protections, such as Section 230, may apply to candidate ads placed on online platforms, but the circumstances in which the ad became part of the program offering need to be considered. 

Continue Reading Trump Verdict Raises Concerns About A Nasty Election Campaign Getting Nastier – Looking at a Broadcaster’s Potential Liability for Attack Ads

Though school is out for many, the FCC does not take a summer recess.  Instead, regulation continues.  In addition to the regular EEO Annual Public Inspection File Report deadline for broadcasters in a number of states, there are several comment deadlines in June on issues that directly impact broadcasters – as well as the FCC’s regular monthly Open Meeting when it will consider a draft Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that, if adopted, would make significant revisions to its rules for Class A, LPTV, and TV translator stations.  And, as this is an election year, there are several political deadlines this June that broadcasters must be aware of. 

June 3 (as the 1st is on a weekend) is the deadline for radio and television station employment units in Arizona, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming with five or more full-time employees to upload their Annual EEO Public File Report to their stations’ online public inspection files (OPIFs).  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 five 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 each station’s website, if the station has a website.  Be timely getting these reports into your public file, as even a single late report can lead to FCC fines (see our article here about a recent $26,000 fine for a single late EEO report).

The filing of the Annual EEO Public File Reports for radio and television station employment units with eleven or more full-time employees triggers a Mid-Term EEO Review that analyzes the last two Annual Reports for compliance with FCC requirements.  June 1 is the beginning of the Mid-Term EEO Review for radio station employment units in Michigan and Ohio andfor television station employment units in the District of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia.  Additionally, radio stations located in those states that are part of station employment units with five or more full-time employees must indicate in their OPIFs, when they post their Annual Report, whether their employment unit has eleven or more full-time employees, using a checkbox now included in the OPIF’s EEO folder.  This allows the FCC to determine which station groups need a Mid-Term Review.  See our articles here and here on Mid-Term EEO Review reporting requirements for radio stations.

Continue Reading June Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – EEO Public File Reports, Rulemaking Comments, Political Deadlines, and More
  • The FTC announced that it will hold a 45-minute webinar on May 14 at 11:00 a.m. ET to provide an

While May is one of those months that does not have any routine, scheduled FCC filing deadlines, there are still a number of regulatory dates and deadlines for broadcasters that are worthy of note.  As detailed below, this includes comment deadlines in several FCC rulemaking proceedings, a response deadline for broadcasters caught in the first random EEO audit of 2024, and the effective date of the FCC’s order allowing FM boosters to originate limited amounts of programming (when interested parties can file for experimental authority to begin such programming).  As always, remember to keep in touch with your legal and regulatory advisors to make sure that you don’t overlook any other regulatory deadlines we may have missed here or ones that are specific to your station.

May 6 is the deadline for radio and television stations listed in the EEO audit notice released by the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau last month to upload their audit responses to their online public inspection files.  The FCC randomly audits approximately 5% of all broadcast stations each year regarding their EEO compliance.  Audited stations and their station employment units – which are commonly owned stations serving the same area – must provide to the FCC their last two years of EEO Annual Public File Reports and documentation demonstrating that the stations did everything that is required under the FCC’s EEO rules.  See our article here for more detail on EEO audits and how seriously the FCC takes broadcasters’ EEO obligations.

Continue Reading May Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – EEO Audit Responses, Comment Deadlines on Emergency Broadcasting Matters, Effective Date for Zonecasting with FM Boosters, LUC Windows, and More