- The AM for Every Vehicle Act was scheduled for a US Senate vote this week through an expedited process
Michigan Becomes the Fifth State to Require Disclosure of the Use of AI in Political Ads
Another state has joined the list of those that require clear disclosure of the use of artificial intelligence (“AI”) in political ads, joining others that have addressed concerns about deep fakes corrupting the political process. Michigan’s Governor Whitmer just signed a bill that adds Michigan to 4 other states (Texas, California, Washington, and Minnesota) that have enacted laws requiring the clear identification of the use of AI in political ads. As many media companies are struggling with their policies on AI, and as the federal government has not acted to impose limits on the use of AI in political ads (see our posts here and here), it has been up to states to adopt rules that limit these practices.
The Michigan bill, H.B. 5141, applies to “qualified political advertisements” which include any advertising “relating to a candidate for federal, state, or local office in this state, any election to federal, state, or local office in this state, or a ballot question that contains any image, audio, or video that is generated in whole or substantially with the use of artificial intelligence.” A companion bill, H.B. 5143, defines “artificial intelligence” as “a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments, and that uses machine and human-based inputs to do all of the following: (a) Perceive real and virtual environments. (b) Abstract such perceptions into models through analysis in an automated manner. (c) Use model inference to formulate options for information or action.”
Continue Reading Michigan Becomes the Fifth State to Require Disclosure of the Use of AI in Political AdsThis Week in Regulation for Broadcasters: November 20 to December 1, 2023
- The FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau partially granted NAB and REC Networks’ waiver request (discussed in our
Cost of Living Increases Announced for Music Royalties Paid by Webcasters to SoundExchange and by Noncommercial Broadcasters to SESAC and GMR
In Federal Register notices published this week, the Copyright Royalty Board announced cost-of-living increases for two sets of music royalties. Webcasters, including broadcasters streaming their signals on the web or through mobile apps, will be paying more to SoundExchange for the public performance of sound recordings. In addition, noncommercial broadcasters affiliated with educational institutions, but not affiliated with NPR or CPB, will be paying more to SESAC and GMR for their over-the-air broadcasts. These changes go into effect on January 1, 2024. More information about each of these royalties is set out below.
The webcasting royalties that are increasing are those that are paid to SoundExchange by those webcasters making “noninteractive digital transmissions” of sound recordings (see our article here on the difference between interactive and noninteractive transmissions). This includes broadcasters who simulcast their over-the-air programming on the internet or through mobile apps (or through other digital means including smart speakers like Alexa, see our article here). The notice just published in the Federal Register sets out the computations that the Board used to determine the amount of the cost-of-living increase. Those computations led to a royalty rate for 2024 of $.0025 per performance for services that do not charge a subscription fee. A performance is one song played to one listener – so for one song paid to four listeners one time each, a webcaster pays a penny. For subscription services, the rate will be $.0031 per performance. This represents an increase from the 2023 rates of $.0024 for nonsubscription performances and $.0030 per performance for subscription stream.
Continue Reading Cost of Living Increases Announced for Music Royalties Paid by Webcasters to SoundExchange and by Noncommercial Broadcasters to SESAC and GMRDecember Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – Biennial Ownership Reports, Annual EEO Public File Reports, LPFM Filing Window, LUC Political Windows for 2024 Election, and More
Even with the holidays upon us, regulation never stops. There are numerous regulatory dates in December to which broadcasters need to keep in mind. Furthermore, as the 2024 presidential campaign is already underway, there are political advertising deadlines to watch out for. Here are some of the upcoming deadlines:
December 1 is the filing deadline for Biennial Ownership Reports by all licensees of commercial and noncommercial full-power TV/AM/FM stations, Class A TV stations, and LPTV stations. The reports must reflect station ownership as of October 1, 2023 (see our article here on the FCC’s recent reminder about these reports). The FCC has been pushing for stations to fill these out completely and accurately by the deadline (see this reminder issued by the FCC last week), as the Commission uses these reports to get a snapshot of who owns and controls what broadcast stations, including information about the race and gender of station owners and their other broadcast interests (see our article from 2021 about the importance the FCC attaches to these filings).
Continue Reading December Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – Biennial Ownership Reports, Annual EEO Public File Reports, LPFM Filing Window, LUC Political Windows for 2024 Election, and MoreGiving Back to the Broadcast Industry on Giving Tuesday
For the last few years at this time of the year, we’ve departed from our usual coverage of legal and policy issues to talk about something else – broadcasters giving back. With Giving Tuesday upon us, we wanted to urge our readers to consider ways to give back to our industry. I guess it is now a tradition, so we’ll do it again this year and suggest some of the many ways we can express our thanks to the industry in which we work. Broadcasters have long been known for their service to their communities, service benefitting individuals and groups across the country. While broadcasters are always giving back to their communities and should be celebrated for that, those of us who make our living in some aspect of the industry should recognize that there are plenty of ways for us to give back as well – both to those associated with the industry who have fallen on hard times, and to those who need assistance in obtaining education and training to enter the media industry we so appreciate. We should all be thankful for jobs, friends, and good fortune. But we should also ourselves give back where possible. In the broadcast industry itself, there are many groups doing good work.
One that bears mention is the Broadcasters Foundation of America, which provides relief to broadcasters and former broadcasters who have, for one reason or another, fallen on hard times – whether that be for health reasons or because of some other disaster that has affected their lives. The Foundation deserves your consideration. More about the Foundation and its service, and ways to contribute, can be found at their website, here.
Continue Reading Giving Back to the Broadcast Industry on Giving TuesdayReminder: Deadlines Next Week for Biennial Ownership Reports and Filings to Preserve and Protect Broadcast Auxiliary Operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz (13 GHz) Band
Even after yesterday’s deadline for filing ETRS Form Three in connection with the nationwide test of the Emergency Alert System back in October, there are two more deadlines coming next week that broadcasters should bear in mind. As you prepare to celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday, don’t forget these FCC deadlines. Most broadcasters have received plenty of notice about the December 1 deadline for Biennial Ownership Reports. The FCC has been pushing for stations to fill these out completely and accurately by the deadline (see this reminder issued by the FCC just yesterday), as the Commission uses these reports to get a snapshot of who owns and controls what broadcast stations. The reports also provide information about ownership diversity as they request information about the gender, race, and ethnicity of attributable owners. The reports are required for all full-power stations (both commercial and noncommercial stations are covered) and for LPTV stations. For more about the biennial ownership report filing requirement and the importance that the FCC puts on these reports, see our 2021 article here.
A deadline that has not received as much publicity is the November 29 deadline for users of the “13 GHz” spectrum to certify to the FCC that their systems are being used where licensed, or to file applications to modify the systems to accurately reflect their current use. The spectrum, which includes operations from 12.7 to 13.25 GHz, is used by some broadcasters for Electronic News Gathering and for Studio Transmitter Links. There may be other broadcast auxiliary uses beyond ENG and STLs that are also conducted in this band, so check your operations to see if a filing is required.
Continue Reading Reminder: Deadlines Next Week for Biennial Ownership Reports and Filings to Preserve and Protect Broadcast Auxiliary Operations in the 12.7-13.25 GHz (13 GHz) BandThis Week in Regulation for Broadcasters: November 13 to November 17, 2023
- The NAB and REC Networks, an LPFM advocacy organization, jointly requested an extension of the December 12, 2023 deadline for
This Week in Regulation for Broadcasters: November 6 to November 10, 2023
- The FCC has until December 27th to comply with a court order requiring the agency to conclude its still-pending
Meta to Require Labeling of Digitally Altered Political Ads (Including Those Generated By AI) – Looking at the Rules that Apply to Various Media Platforms Limiting Such Policies on Broadcast and Cable
Facebook parent Meta announced this week that it will require labeling on ads using artificial intelligence or other digital tools regarding elections and political and social issues. Earlier this week, we wrote about the issues that AI in political ads pose for media companies and about some of the governmental regulations that are being considered (and the limited rules that have thus far been adopted). These concerns are prompting all media companies to consider how AI will affect them in the coming election, and Meta’s announcement shows how these considerations are being translated into policy.
The Meta announcement sets out situations where labeling of digitally altered content will be required. Such disclosure of the digital alteration will be required when digital tools have been used to:
- Depict a real person as saying or doing something they did not say or do; or
- Depict a realistic-looking person that does not exist or a realistic-looking event that did not happen, or alter footage of a real event that happened; or
- Depict a realistic event that allegedly occurred, but that is not a true image, video, or audio recording of the event.
The Meta announcement makes clear that using AI or other digital tools to make inconsequential changes that don’t impact the message of the ad (they give examples of size adjusting, cropping an image, color correction, or image sharpening) will be permitted without disclosure. But even these changes can trigger disclosure obligations if they are in fact consequential to the message. In the past, we’ve seen allegations of attack ads using shading or other seemingly minor changes to depict candidates in ways that make them appear more sinister or which otherwise convey some other negative message – presumably the uses that Meta is seeking to prohibit.
This change will be applicable not just to US elections, but worldwide. Already, I have seen TV pundits, when asked about the effect that the new policy will have, suggesting that what is really important is what other platforms, including television and cable, do to match this commitment. So we thought that we would look at the regulatory schemes that, in some ways, limit what traditional electronic media providers can do in censoring political ads. As detailed below, broadcasters, local cable companies, and direct broadcast satellite television providers are subject to statutory limits under Section 315 of the Communications Act that forbid them from “censoring” the content of candidate advertising. Section 315 essentially requires that candidate ads (whether from a federal, state, or local candidate) be run as they are delivered to the station – they cannot be rejected based on their content. The only exception thus far recognized by the FCC has been for ads that have content that violates federal criminal law. There is thus a real question as to whether a broadcaster or cable company could impose a labeling requirement on candidate ads given their inability to reject a candidate ad based on its content. Note, however, that the no-censorship requirement only applies to candidate ads, not those purchased by PACs, political parties, and other non-candidate individuals or groups. So, policies like that adopted by Meta could be considered for these non-candidate ads even by these traditional platforms.
Continue Reading Meta to Require Labeling of Digitally Altered Political Ads (Including Those Generated By AI) – Looking at the Rules that Apply to Various Media Platforms Limiting Such Policies on Broadcast and Cable