Discussion of FCC, copyright, advertising and other legal issues of importance to radio and television broadcasters and other media companies
Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.
Yesterday’s big news across the broadcast press was that Gigi Sohn, who had for well over a year been the nominee of the Biden administration to fill the open seat at the FCC, withdrew her name from consideration. This may have been in reaction to circulated stories that there were several Democratic Senators who still were not committed to vote for her nomination without whose support she could not have been confirmed. Until the Biden administration can make another nomination and have that nominee go through the confirmation process in the Senate, the FCC will continue to have two Democratic Commissioners and two Republican ones, potentially stalling action on some rulemaking matters where there is a partisan split on the pending issue. We wrote in January in our look at the issues pending before the FCC about some of the issues that the FCC could face in 2023. In light of the seeming extension of the partisan divide on the FCC, we thought that we would again highlight some of the issues likely to be affected by the current state of the Commission.
But it is first worth noting that, merely because there is a partisan split among the Commissioners, this does not mean that nothing of significance will happen at the FCC. As we wrote yesterday, the TEGNA merger was designated for hearing, potentially leading to its demise. This was done not by an action of the Commissioners, but instead by its Media Bureau. Interpretations of FCC authority in specific cases by the Media Bureau, the Enforcement Bureau or other lower-level bureaus and offices within the Commission can be just as impactful on any specific company as are the big policy decisions made by the Commissioners themselves. Just as the TEGNA designation could have significant ramifications for broadcast dealmaking if its conclusions are taken to their logical ends, Bureau-level decisions can set day-to-day policy on many issues if the Commission itself cannot make broader decisions through their rulemaking process.…
Early this year, we provided our look into the crystal ball to see what was on the FCC’s agenda for broadcasters in the coming year. Yesterday, the FCC published in the Federal Register its own list – its Semiannual Regulatory Agenda – listing an inventory of the matters at the FCC awaiting Commission action. The…
It’s a new year, and it’s time to look ahead at what Washington may have in store for broadcasters this year. The FCC may be slow to tackle some of the big issues on its agenda (like the completion of 2018 Quadrennial Review or any other significant partisan issue) as it still has only four Commissioners – two Democrats and two Republicans. On controversial issues like changes to the ownership rules, there tends to be a partisan divide. As the nomination of Gigi Sohn expired at the end of the last Congress in December, the Biden administration was faced with the question of whether to renominate her and hope that the confirmation process moves more quickly this time, or to come up with a new nominee whose credentials will be reviewed by the Senate. It was announced this week that the administration has decided to renominate her, meaning that her confirmation process will begin anew. How long that process takes and when the fifth commissioner is seated may well set the tone for what actions the FCC takes in broadcast regulation this year.
Perhaps the most significant issue at the FCC facing broadcasters is the resolution of the 2018 Quadrennial Review to assess the current local ownership rules and determine if they are still in the public interest. As we wrote last week, the FCC has already started the 2022 review, as required by Congress, even though it has not resolved the issues raised in the 2018 review. For the radio industry, those issues include the potential relaxation of the local radio ownership rules. As we have written, some broadcasters and the NAB have pushed the FCC to recognize that the radio industry has significantly changed since the ownership limits were adopted in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and local radio operators need a bigger platform from which to compete with the new digital companies that compete for audience and advertising in local markets. Other companies have been reluctant to endorse changes – but even many of them recognize that relief from the ownership limits on AM stations would be appropriate.…
The new year brings a series of regulatory deadlines in January and a February 1 license renewal deadline that broadcasters should take note of. As in 2022, the FCC will remain vigilant in making sure that its deadlines are met, so the following items should not be overlooked or left until the last minute.
The…
Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.
…
Even with the holidays upon us, regulation never stops. There are numerous regulatory dates in December to which broadcasters need to pay heed to avoid having the FCC play Grinch for missing some important deadline.
December 1 is the deadline for license renewal applications for television stations (full power, Class A, LPTV and TV translators) licensed to communities in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Renewal applications must be accompanied by FCC Form 2100, Schedule 396 Broadcast EEO Program Report (except for TV translators). Stations filing for renewal of their license should make sure that all documents required to be uploaded to the station’s online public file are complete and were uploaded on time. Note that your Broadcast EEO Program Report must include two years of Annual EEO Public File Reports for FCC review, unless your employment unit employs fewer than five full-time employees. Be sure to read the instructions for the license renewal application and consult with your advisors if you have questions, especially if you have noticed any discrepancies in your online public file or political file. Issues with the public file have already led to fines imposed on TV broadcasters during this renewal cycle.
December 1 is also the deadline by which radio and television station employment units with five or more full-time employees licensed to communities in Alabama, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota, and Vermont must upload Annual EEO Public File Reports to station online public inspection files (also, the FCC has issued an extension that permits stations in Florida that suffered the effects of Hurricane Ian to upload their Annual EEO Public File Reports by December 12). This annual EEO 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 a station’s website, if it has a website.
Continue Reading December Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – License Renewals, EEO Reports, Rulemaking Comments on Foreign Government Programming and EAS, and More
Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.
…
In speaking to many broadcast groups around the country in the last few months, I have found that many broadcasters are totally confused by the FCC’s rules requiring that they seek certifications from anyone buying programming time on their stations (or providing programming for free in exchange for that programming being broadcast on the station). These certifications must indicate that the programmer is not a “foreign government entity,” a term that includes any foreign government or foreign-government owned entity, an agent of a foreign government, or someone who has been paid by a foreign government to produce the program. As we noted (see our articles here and here), the rules requiring these certifications went into effect on March 15, 2022 for any new agreements effective after that date, and September 15, 2022 for obtaining certifications from programmers who were already on the air as of March 15. Now, the FCC has asked in a Second Notice of Proposed Rulemaking whether it should expand these obligations to identify foreign government-backed programming. In addition, a bill has been introduced in Congress that would authorize the FCC to impose the obligation it attempted to impose on broadcasters initially – that they check databases maintained by the Department of Justice (the Foreign Agents Registration Act database) and by the FCC to confirm the accuracy of the certifications obtained from programmers as to whether or not they are agents of foreign governments (see our article here on the Court decision rejecting the requirement that broadcasters check these databases).
When I am speaking at broadcast association meetings across the country, I am almost always asked why the FCC is seeking this information. The FCC decided that it had to act in this area when, in a couple of high-profile cases in major markets, program time was being purchased by entities that represent foreign governments – with Russian and Chinese news and information programming being of the most concern. When these instances were highlighted by other US government agencies and through political complaints, the FCC felt that it had to act. I don’t think that many broadcasters would have concerns if the rules were limited to situations where a foreign government is in fact buying program time or doing a time brokerage agreement, with the intent of airing its slanted news to US citizens, with such programming being required to be identified to the public as being sponsored by an entity related to a foreign government. But the concern that many have raised is that the FCC’s requirements impose significant burdens on broadcasters and programmers even in instances where there is no doubt that companies buying time on broadcast stations are not posing any threat to US interests. …
Continue Reading FCC Seeks Comments on Tighter Requirements for Broadcasters to Identify Foreign Government Sponsored Programming – And A Bill Introduced in Congress – What Does It Mean for Broadcasters?
Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.
…
