Broadcasters, along with virtually every other business, are supposed to have a bulletin board someplace in their place of business, accessible to employees, where all sorts of notices, many required by Federal law, are posted.  Sometimes the posting requirement has been expanded to include posting on a company intranet, if that is a common way of communicating with employees.  As set out in detail in an Advisory from our Davis Wright Tremaine Labor and Employment Group, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has just gotten into the act, requiring that all employers subject to the NLRA (the National Labor Relations Act), by November 14 of this year, post a notice alerting employees about their rights under the NLRA.  I’m told that included in NLRA coverage is virtually every company but for those with less than $100,000 in revenue or those who are public-sector employers.  The requirement covers employers who are unionized at the present time, as well as those that are not.  So any way that you look at it, most broadcasters will have the obligation to post this notice.  For more information about this requirement and the controversy that surrounds it, read our firm’s Advisory here.  Broadcasters, be ready to comply! 

The FCC just issued a Report to Congress concerning the access of television viewers to in-state television stations.  This report was requested by Congress as part of STELA (the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act), which extended the compulsory license for direct to home satellite television operators (DISH and DirecTV) – a license which gives them copyright clearances to retransmit all the programming transmitted by the broadcast television stations that they make available as part of their service packages.  Congress also requested a Report from the Copyright Office on the need for the compulsory license – a report also issued this week, which we will write about in another article.  The issue of access to in-state television stations has been a controversial issue, as several Congressmen have sought (and in a few cases actually received) legislative authority for cable providers to carry out-of-market television stations on cable systems serving areas in one state that are part of television markets where the television stations come from a different state.  The report refers to these areas as "orphan counties."  Once legislative authority was granted in one state, many other bills popped up in Congress trying for the same relief in their state – causing concern that the existing television markets (or Designated Market Areas or "DMAs", designated by the Nielsen Company) might be undermined.  To see what impact such changes would have, Congress requested this report from the FCC.

The report for the most part does not make recommendations, but instead simply provides information about the service provided to US television viewers, the potential options for bringing an in-state service to all viewers, and the issues that such proposals would raise. Perhaps the most interesting fact revealed by the report is that 99.98% of all US television households already have access to an in-state television station, either over-the-air or through a Multichannel Video Programming Distributor (e.g. cable or satellite TV system), so this is a very isolated issue.  However,when the FCC sought comments on the issues discussed in the report, a number of individuals in particular DMAs responded about situations where they could not get access to in-state television stations and asked that something be done.  The report assesses the implications of any action that could be taken.

Continue Reading FCC Issues Report to Congress on Access to In-State Television Programming

The Commission’s recent Order establishing the rules and time line for low power television stations to convert to DTV has now been published in the Federal Register, meaning that most of the new rules regarding the conversion of low power television stations to digital television are now in effect.  As we wrote about extensively here,on July 15, 2011, the FCC adopted a Report and Order regarding the transition of low power television stations (LPTV), TV translator, and Class A low power stations to digital.  As set forth in that Order, September 1, 2015 will be the hard date for the conversion of all remaining analog LPTV stations to digital. The Order adopts the specific procedures, rules, and timing of the digital conversion for those stations, and with Friday’s publication in the Federal Register, those rules are now in effect, with two exceptions.  The extension of the "ancillary and supplementary" rules to LPTV permittees operating pursuant to an STA is still awaiting OMB approval, as is the requirement that stations that have not yet taken steps to convert to digital must notify the FCC of their digital transition plans.  This second requirement will force stations to consider their digital future and share their transition plans with the Commission.  Once the OMB approves the collection of information inherent in that requirement, that part of the new rules will go into effect, and the FCC will announce the timing and requirements by a further public notice.

The FCC’s DTV LPTV Order also established December 31, 2011 as the deadline for all LPTV and TV translator stations operating on out-of-core channels — that is Channels 52 to 69 — to cease operation. Any station that operates outside the core that does not already have a construction permit for a core band operation must file for a construction permit for the core band by September 1, 2011. Given that today is August 30th, hopefully out-of-core stations have their ducks in a row and are already on file, or preparing to file displacement applications to move into the core.  The FCC states that there will be no hardship extensions of the December 31 deadline – meaning that such stations must terminate operations no later than December 31 of this year no matter what. 

Changing the city of license of a broadcast station was made more difficult by the FCC’s rural radio order.  That order, about which we wrote here, imposed substantial obstacles on broadcasters attempting to move their stations from rural areas into urbanized areas – making such moves difficult if not impossible in many cases.  However, in two recent cases, the FCC clarified that decision so as to permit some changes to be made without the substantial new showings. Specifically, these cases permit the move of stations from one city within a market to another in the same market, or from one urbanized area to another, without doing the complex showing that might otherwise be required.

The rural radio decision had changed the an FCC policy that had favored, in allocations decisions, a first transmission service (i.e. the first station licensed to a community) to a large community within an urbanized area over a service to a less populous community, even if that community was outside an urbanized area.  After the rural radio decision, there was a presumption that service to any community within an urbanized area was service to the entire urbanized area – so a first service to a suburban community, instead of being treated as the first transmission service to that community, was treated as if it were the 20th (or 30th or 40th,depending on the number of stations in the entire market) service to the urban area.  Thus, the proposal would routinely not be entitled to a preference over a new service to a community outside of the urban area in the absence of a complex and convincing "Tuck showing" that analyzed a number of factors to show that the suburban community was independent of the central city in the urban area and that the proposed station would really meet the needs of this independent community, not of the whole urbanized area.  In one decision released last month, the FCC made clear that a move from one city within an urbanized are to another within the same urbanized area did not need this Tuck showing, as both were considered part of the same community for allocations purposes.  In a variation on that theme in a case released last week, the FCC’s staff held that a move of a station from one urban area to an adjacent urban area did not require the showing.  Presumably this was because each urban area would have dozens of services, so that loss of one service in one market and the gain in another would be inconsequential.  Seemingly simple decisions, but ones that can save applicants significant time and trouble when filing city of license change applications for stations that are already located within urbanized areas. 

The FCC just issued a public notice extending the comment deadline in its proceeding to determine how to process the FM translator applications pending from the 2003 FM translator window so as to not unduly preempt opportunities for new LPFM stations.  Comments were originally due to be filed today, but the deadline has now been extended to September 6, based on transportation and communications concerns in light of the disruptions caused by Hurricane Irene.  Reply comments will now be due on September 20.  We summarized the issues in this proceeding here and here.   Many are awaiting the conclusion of this proceeding – including those who have had an 8 year wait for the processing of FM translator applications from the 2003 Window as well as those looking forward to the opening of a window for applications for new LPFM stations.  Presumably, this short delay in the comment deadline will not unduly delay this highly contested proceeding, as the Commission will no doubt have many technical and legal issues to resolve, some stemming need to interpret the meaning of the Local Community Radio Act enacted by Congress late last year.

How do you secure a loan to an FCC broadcast licensee? This was the issue discussed by a case released by the Commission last week – addressing the FCC’s policies prohibiting a station creditor from foreclosing on a broadcast license and also restricting the sale of a “bare license.” While this case involved an action for collection by a judgment creditor, it is instructive as to how any broadcast creditor, including a lender to a broadcast licensee, should act to secure loans or other financial obligations of a broadcaster, and how the creditor can exercise its rights in the event of a default. It is also instructive as to how to proceed to enforce a loan obligation to any FCC licensee – in the broadcast services or in the other services regulated by the FCC.  As the FCC has a long-standing policy prohibiting a lender from taking a security interest directly in an FCC license, lenders need to pay careful attention in documenting loans and in enforcing security agreements upon defaults to make sure that their interests are protected. 

Lenders cannot foreclose directly on a license when a broadcaster defaults on its obligations, as the FCC has made clear that a license is not a property right that can be used for security. The FCC has said that a license is not subject to “mortgage, security interest, or lien, pledge, attachment, seizure, or similar property right.”   As the license cannot be attached, to get at the value of the license if there is a default and the debtor won’t cooperate in a voluntary foreclosure, the Lender has to go to court and have a receiver or trustee appointed to oversee the assets of the debtor. An involuntary transfer to a trustee or receiver pursuant to a court order can be approved by the FCC expeditiously on a “short form” (Form 316 in the broadcast services) transfer application. Once appointed, the trustee can sell the sell the station (pursuant to FCC approval on a subsequent "long-form" application) and distribute the proceeds to the creditors. In the case decided last week, the actions of the local court that was attempting to enforce the rights of the creditor gave the Commission pause.

Continue Reading Securing a Loan to a Broadcaster – Part 1 – FCC Case Clarifies How a Creditor Enforces Its Rights After a Default

Yesterday, the FCC released its Report and Order (available here) reinstating its “video description” rules, which require that certain broadcast stations and nonbroadcast networks provide audio narration of the action depicted in the video portion of the television programming.  The Commission originally adopted such rules back in 2000, but they were subsequently vacated by the D.C. Court of Appeals for lack of sufficient authority.  This past year, Congress rectified that lack of authority by enacting the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA), which was signed into law last October. DWT previously discussed the FCC’s rulemaking to reinstate the video description rules back in March (available here), and has now released a further advisory on the newly adopted rules available here.

In a nutshell, the rules require large-market broadcast affiliates of the top four national networks, and cable operators and DBS providers with more than 50,000 subscribers, to provide programming with audio-narrated descriptions of a program’s key visual elements, beginning mid-2012. While the FCC originally proposed to require full compliance by Jan. 1, 2012, the R&O pushes that date back six months, to July 1, 2012.  Highlights  of the reinstated video description rules are as follows:

  • Broadcast affiliates of the top four national networks—ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC—located in the top 25 television markets as determined by Nielsen as of Jan. 1, 2011, must provide 50 hours per calendar quarter of prime-time and/or children’s programming with video descriptions. 
  • The list of the top 25 television markets are those determined by Nielsen as of Jan. 1, 2011. To the extent a station in a top 25 market becomes newly affiliated with a top-four network, it must start providing video description in the same manner as current ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC affiliates in the top 25 markets, beginning no later than three months after finalizing the new affiliation agreement.
  • Going forward, the video description requirements will extend to major network broadcast affiliates in the top 60 markets beginning July 1, 2015. Rankings for the top 60 markets at that time will be based on Nielsen ratings as of Jan. 1, 2015. 

Continue Reading FCC Releases Order Reinstating Television Video Description Rules

There has been much focus on emergency communications recently, with the East Coast earthquake re-igniting the debate over FM-enabled mobile phones, and with Hurricane Irene forcing stations to gear up for emergency coverage in the coming days.  But even without these unusual events, the emergency communications world has been much in the news, given the current requirement for broadcast stations to be ready for the new Common Alerting Protocol ("CAP"), an Internet-based alerting system, by the end of September, and with the first-ever test of the National EAS system scheduled for November.  The CAP conversion date has recently been the subject of debate in a number of FCC filings – and there seems like a good chance that the September 30 deadline will be delayed – if for no other reason than the fact that the FCC has yet to adopt final rules for the equipment required for such compliance.  The National Test, however, should go on as scheduled.  More on all of these subjects below.

First, the coming hurricane should prompt stations to be ready for potential emergency operations.  The FCC in the past has publicized its Disaster Information Reporting System (DIRS).  Stations can voluntarily register with DIRS to give the FCC a contact person to assess damage after the storm, and to notify the FCC of the need for any aide that the Commission might be able to provide.  During the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, I was personally involved in discussions with FCC personnel who coordinated with other government agencies to get clearance for diesel tanker trucks to gain access to restricted area to deliver fuel to a client’s radio station that was still operational (on generator power) providing emergency information to Mississippi’s Gulf Coast. The FCC personnel can be of great assistance in such situations, so DIRS registrations may be worth considering.  The FCC’s website also provides helpful information about planning for disaster recovery  and about hurricanes specifically.  FCC emergency contact information is also on their site.

Continue Reading Hurricanes and Earthquakes – Emergency Communications In the Spotlight With CAP Conversion and National EAS Test Coming Soon (Though, For CAP, Maybe Not As Soon As We Thought)

We wrote about FCC Chairman Genachowski’s announcement of the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine as part of the FCC’s repeal of 83 media related rules.  Well, the full text of the repeal was released today, and the Fairness Doctrine really was the only real headline.  For broadcasters, all of the other deleted rules were even less relevant than the Fairness Doctrine (which had been effectively dead for almost 25 years before it was repealed).  10 of the 83 deleted rules dealt with the "broadcast flag", an FCC rule for digitally watermarking DTV programming so that copies could be identified by their source – rules that were thrown out years ago by the Court of Appeals as exceeding the FCC’s authority.  Another 57 of the "deleted" rules are rules that are still fully on the Commission’s books – just in a different section of the rule book.  Decades ago, most broadcast rules were moved out of Part 1 of the FCC rules (which deals with general FCC procedures) to Part 73 (which sets out the substance of the rules for broadcasters).  This week’s action merely deletes the 53 rules that remained in Part 1, where the entire text of the deleted rule was to refer the reader to the corresponding rule section in Part 73, where the substantive rules still reside and are still fully enforced (including matters such as the FCC’s EEO rule).  So, when the FCC claims that 83 rules were deleted, that really is not saying much.  These non-substantive changes, combined with the almost meaningless deletion of the Fairness Doctrine rule (see our article on that deletion) don’t bring any regulatory relief, on a day to day basis, to any broadcaster.

Congress is apparently not content with these rule changes.  In a press release  issued this week, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Fred Upton, and the chair of its subcommittee on Communications and Technology, Greg Walden, welcomed the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine, but stated that they looked forward to additional deregulation pursuant to the President’s Executive Order asking agencies to reduce regulation to stimulate the economy.  The release also suggested that the FCC should only adopt rules after the rules were proposed and fully subject to public comment and fully reviewed to determine their effectiveness and their economic effect.  The Congressmen suggested that the FCC had not always done that.  Wonder what regulations they were thinking about?  I’ve got my thoughts (perhaps rural radio or even the decision by former Republican FCC Chairman Kevin Martin to amend the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rules following a decision-making process recently criticized by the Third Circuit).  Any nominations from our readers?

In 2009, the FCC adopted a uniform deadline for all commercial broadcast licensees to file an FCC Form 323 Biennial Ownership Report.  The due date for that report was supposed to be November 1 of that year, but was postponed until July of 2010 when problems popped up with the new forms.  The next Biennial Ownership reporting date was scheduled to be November 1 of this year (two years after the originally scheduled date for the first report to use the new form) – but the FCC today issued a Public Notice postponing the filing deadline for one month, to December 1.  This delay was justified so as to give broadcasters, especially those with many media interests held in different companies, more time to complete what can be a cumbersome process of filling out all of the reports and exhibits that need to be submitted.  Reports need to be filed by December 1, but all information still needs to be reported as of October 1 of this year – a standard reporting date that will remain constant each year to give the FCC a snapshot of the composition of ownership in the broadcast world.

The revised ownership report filing processwas adopted so that the FCC could get an accurate report on the ownership of broadcast properties by minorities and women, a goal that has taken on added significance in light of the Third Circuit Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Prometheus Radio Project v FCC, rejecting the FCC’s efforts to diversify ownership in the media through the use of a system giving preferences to qualified entities, i.e. small businesses.  As we wrote last month, the Court found that the FCC’s goal was to promote minority and female ownership, which was not fostered by its concentration on small businesses.  One of the issues on which the Court faulted the FCC was the lack of information about the current broadcast ownership interests of minorities and women, so that the FCC could do a "Adarand study" as to whether there are effects of past discrimination reflected in the current ownership of broadcast stations that need to be remedied by affirmative action efforts based on race or gender.  These new ownership reports are designed to help to provide that information.

Continue Reading FCC Extends Filing Date to December 1 for 2011 Form 323 Biennial Ownership Report – New Significance After Prometheus Court Decision