The FCC’s Media Bureau, in a Public Notice released this week, provided guidance that changed the common interpretation of one of the fundamental principles of political broadcasting law for the last thirty years – that a candidate appearance on a regularly scheduled talk program subject to broadcaster control was not subject to equal opportunities claims if that program regularly interviewed newsmakers and political figures, where the program’s discussions were under the control of the program producer and not the candidate, and where the decisions as to guests were made on the basis of newsworthiness, and not for political considerations.  The Public Notice did not actually change these criteria for determining if a program is exempt.  As noted in a written statement released by Commissioner Gomez about this Public Notice, the policies underlying earlier decisions setting policy was not changed by the Notice.  What apparently has changed is the Commission’s reliance on the good faith judgement of the broadcaster as to whether a program is exempt, without the need for any prior FCC approval of the broadcaster’s determination.  Instead, the Notice makes clear that each case is different and relies on the facts of the particular case; that past precedents can only be relied on by the party that received an explicit determination that an exemption was proper; and that there is a real risk that the FCC will disagree with a determination made by a broadcaster that a program is exempt from equal time unless the broadcaster files for and receives a declaratory ruling from the FCC that a program is in fact exempt.

This discussion all stems from the Equal Opportunities requirement in Section 315 of the Communications Act.  This is commonly referred to as the “equal time” rule.  Under the statute and the FCC’s rule adopted to implement the statute (Section 73.1941), stations who allow one candidate to “use” their station by allowing that candidate to appear on the air must provide equal opportunities to other candidates for the same office by allowing them to buy equal amounts of time (for advertising and other purchased time) or to get comparable time for free when the candidate’s appearance is not paid.  In adopting Section 315, Congress recognized that there were certain appearances of a candidate on a broadcast station that should not trigger equal time.  It specifically exempted four categories of programming from the equal time requirement, declaring them to not be “uses” by a candidate – (1) bona fide newscasts, (2) bona fide news interviews, (3) bona fide news documentaries when the candidate’s appearance is incidental to the subject of the documentary, and (4) bona fide coverage of a news event (including political conventions).  The issue discussed in the Public Notice primarily stems from the exemption for news interview programs. Continue Reading FCC Media Bureau Tells Broadcasters that Candidate Appearances on Talk Programs Could Subject Them to Equal Time Demands – More Review of Such Programs Expected From the FCC

The deadline for candidates in Texas to file for a place on the March 3 primary ballot was this week.  Deadlines for filing to become a qualified candidate in other states will follow soon for other primaries that occur in March, and then throughout the first part of 2026.  As a result, broadcast stations and cable companies across the country will be dealing with all of the FCC political rules that become important once you have legally qualified candidates.  Even before the deadline for candidates to file for their place on the ballot, stations are dealing with buys from potential candidates, PACs, and other third-party groups looking to establish positions for the important 2026 elections. Spending on political advertising is sure to increase as the new year rolls around, and some suggest that it could rival or even exceed the record amounts spent in prior elections. What should broadcast stations be thinking about now to get ready for the 2026 elections?

The week before Thanksgiving I did a webinar for over 20 state broadcast associations on these issues (check with your state association to see if they have access to an archived copy of that webinar).  We have also written about some of the issues that broadcasters should already be considering in our Political Broadcasting Guide (which we plan to update shortly). But there are many issues that broadcasters need to consider now.  Some of those are discussed below.Continue Reading Getting Ready for the 2026 Election – Steps Broadcasters Should Be Taking Now to Avoid Legal Issues with Political Broadcasting

With the 2024 election looming, broadcasters are already receiving requests for political advertising time, from PACs and other issue groups, and from both established candidates and newcomers eager to make an early splash to enhance their public standing.  Some of these potential buyers advance unique policy positions and, sometimes, unusual ad buying strategies.  How are broadcasters to deal with these early political ad buyers? 

Each broadcaster needs to discuss the issues that arise with these early political ads, both internally with their business teams and with their outside FCC counsel or in-house legal advisor.  The first question to ask is whether a station even wants to run these ads.  Ads from non-candidate buyers do not need to be run by stations but, if run, will likely impose some political file obligations on stations to the extent that they discuss candidates, potential candidates, or electoral and political issues (for more on political file issues, see our articles here, here, and here, and this video discussion that I did for the Indiana Broadcasters Association). Continue Reading Broadcaster’s Legal Considerations for Early Season Political Ads

We have been receiving numerous calls from broadcasters about “franking” ads from Congressional representatives running for reelection.  Congress each year allows its members to spend certain amounts of money to communicate with their constituents.  This was traditionally done through mailings, which Congressional representatives could send through the US mail without any postage charges (hence the name “franking” deriving from a French word for “free”).  This privilege was later extended to allow the representatives to use broadcast media, but stations are paid for such spots.  These franking messages cannot be used for political messages, and the messages cannot be run during the 60 days before any election.  They tend to talk about how Congressional staff can help constituents with problems accessing government benefits or about how government programs can help residents in their districts.  But just because the messages are not in and of themselves political does not mean that the messages do not have implications under the FCC’s political broadcasting rules.

These franking ads are almost always voiced by the representative (for radio) or have a visual appearance of the representative (for TV).  If the representative is running for reelection, and has qualified for a place on the ballot (for a primary or general election) or will run as a bona fide write-in candidate (see our post here about write-in candidates), then the ads can have FCC political broadcasting implications.  As with any other appearance of a legally qualified candidate on the air outside an exempt program (exempt programs being news or news interview programs or documentaries not about the candidate – see our article here), the recognizable voice or image of a candidate is a “use” by that candidate that triggers equal opportunities for opposing candidates. As we wrote here about advertisers who appear in their company’s commercials and then decide to run for political office, those uses need to be noted in a station’s political file (providing all the information about the sponsor, schedule and price of the ad, as you would for any pure political buy). The use would also trigger equal opportunities, meaning that any opposing candidate can request an equivalent amount of airtime.  But that does not necessarily mean that a station needs to reject these franking ads.
Continue Reading Watch for Congressional “Franking” Ads in the Last Weeks Before the Pre-Election Period – The FCC Political Broadcasting Implications

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, and a look ahead to events of importance next week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The Media Bureau this week released the first of what

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • Global Music Rights (GMR) and the Radio Music Licensing Committee (RMLC) announced that enough broadcasters had agreed to GMR licensing

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The FCC adopted two items of interest to broadcasters that were on the agenda for its January 27 Open Meeting.

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The FCC issued a Public Notice urging all communications companies to take steps to ensure the security of their facilities

The FCC, at its January 27 monthly open meeting, will be voting on the adoption of two relatively minor changes to its political broadcasting rules.  While some press reports suggested that the changes would expand the FCC’s jurisdiction into online political advertising, in fact the draft of the FCC’s Report and Order released last week shows that the two rules at issue deal exclusively with over-the-air political advertising.  Moreover, as we wrote here when the proposals were first advanced for public comment, the changes to be adopted are almost ministerial clean-ups of FCC rules, having little substantive effect on the current political sales practices of most broadcasters.

These two rule changes are likely to be adopted at the end of the month by a 4-member FCC that is still evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.  The first one deals with the showing that needs to be made by a write-in candidate to show that the candidate is “legally qualified” and thus entitled to take advantage of the FCC’s political broadcasting rules. The second change would conform the FCC’s rules to the already existing statutory provisions that require broadcasters to include, in their online public files, information about the sale of advertising time to non-candidate buyers who convey a message on a matter of national importance, i.e., a federal issue ad.
Continue Reading FCC Plans to Adopt Two Minor Changes to its Political Broadcasting Rules – What is Being Changed?

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the last week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

  • The FCC this week announced that it will vote on two items of interest to broadcasters at its next Open