Articles Posted in

Published on:

By , and

Pillsbury’s communications lawyers have published the FCC Enforcement Monitor monthly since 1999 to inform our clients of notable FCC enforcement actions against FCC license holders and others.  This month’s issue includes:

  • Unauthorized Oregon Radio Station Transfers Yield $16,000 Penalty
  • Consent Decree Over Upgrade of EAS Equipment Includes $1.1 Million Payment
  • Chinese Video Doorbell Manufacturer Draws Proposed Fine of $734,872 for Equipment Authorization Rule Violations

All in the Family: Unauthorized Oregon Station Transfers Between Mother, Daughter, and Sisters Result in Consent Decree and $16,000 Civil Penalty

The licensee of an Oregon AM station and its companion FM translator entered into a Consent Decree with the FCC’s Media Bureau to resolve the Bureau’s investigation into unauthorized transfers of control of the stations.  The Consent Decree follows a September 2024 Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL) and requires the licensee to pay a $16,000 civil penalty.

Under Section 310(d) of the Communications Act and Section 73.3540 of the FCC’s Rules, voluntary transfers of control of a broadcast license require prior approval by the FCC.  To determine whether control of a broadcast license has changed, the FCC considers “actual or legal control, direct or indirect control, negative or affirmative control, and de facto as well as de jure control.”  An analysis of de facto control, which is analyzed by the FCC under a totality of the circumstances test, looks at, among other things, the exercise of control over a station’s programming, personnel, and finances.  Surrendering control over programming, personnel, or finances transfers de facto control of a station.  The de facto control analysis also considers whether the other person or entity in question has held itself out to the public, the station staff, or both as being in control of the station.

In 2014, the sole member of the licensee LLC entered into a purchase agreement to sell the station to her daughter.  The agreement stipulated that the daughter would pay the purchase price through “sweat equity,” defined by the parties as providing accounting and administrative services.  Between September 2016 and February 2021, the daughter delivered enough “sweat equity” services to satisfy the purchase price, after which the licensee LLC filed Articles of Organization with Oregon listing the daughter as the sole member/manager of the licensee LLC.

In October 2021, the mother and daughter amended the purchase agreement to acknowledge that the daughter had fully performed under the agreement, but that “the purpose of the Purchase Agreement has been frustrated by the mutual mistake of the Parties, who acknowledge that the sale and transfer of the FCC licensee and the Station[s’] FCC license[s] should have been subject to the prior approval by the FCC in accordance with 47 U.S.C. § 310 and regulations promulgated thereunder.”  The amendment stated that transfer applications would be filed within ten business days of execution of the purchase agreement amendment, but the applications were not filed until February 2022. Continue reading →

Published on:

By , and

Beginning January 1, 2025, the FCC’s audio description requirements will expand to commercial television stations affiliated with ABC, CBS, FOX, or NBC in 10 additional Nielsen Designated Market Areas (DMAs): Johnson City-Bristol-Kingsport, Reno, Greenville-New Bern-Washington, Davenport-Rock Island-Moline, Tallahassee-Thomasville, Lincoln & Hastings-Kearney, Evansville, Fort Wayne, Johnstown-Altoona-State College, and Augusta-Aiken.  Audio-described programming is intended to make video programming more accessible to blind or visually impaired consumers by inserting “audio narrated descriptions of a television program’s key visual elements into natural pauses between the program’s dialogue.”

In October 2023, the FCC adopted the Audio Description Second Report and Order, which expanded the audio description requirements to all television markets.  As set out in the Order, 10 additional DMAs will be phased in each year through 2035 until all DMAs are subject to the audio description rules.

Under Section 79.3 of the FCC’s Rules, stations subject to the audio description requirements must provide at least 50 hours of audio-described programming per quarter during primetime or children’s programming, and an additional 37.5 hours of programming per quarter aired between 6 a.m. and 11:59 p.m. local time.  The requirement applies to any of a station’s programming streams, whether primary or multicast, if the stream is affiliated with ABC, CBS, FOX, or NBC.

The next deadline, January 1, 2025, will apply to DMAs 101 to 110, with markets 111 to 210 phased in through 2035 according to the below schedule. Continue reading →

Published on:

By and

Many television broadcasters were left scratching their heads last month when a longtime waiver associated with the FCC’s emergency information accessibility rules expired on November 26.  That confusion was resolved today, when the Media Bureau granted the National Association of Broadcasters’ (“NAB”) request for a retroactive extension of the waiver of the “audible crawl” rule for inherently graphical non-textual information.

As we’ve previously detailed, the “audible crawl” rule requires TV stations and other video programming distributors to use a secondary audio stream to aurally present any emergency information that is presented visually (e.g., in an on-screen crawl) in non-newscast programming.  Ever since the rule went into effect on May 26, 2015, however, the FCC has granted a limited waiver for inherently graphical information—think Doppler radar and weather maps—acknowledging it is not yet technologically feasible for broadcasters to aurally convey such information.

On November 15, 2024, the National Association of Broadcasters (“NAB”) filed a Petition for Rulemaking asking the FCC to amend the rule and clarify that the requirement to audibly present inherently graphical non-textual emergency information applies only if a station is not already displaying a text crawl that shares the same or similar information depicted in the on-screen graphic (which the station would, under existing rules, be required to make aurally available).  The FCC issued a public notice seeking comment on NAB’s petition on November 25, 2024.  The public notice did not extend the existing waiver, which subsequently expired on November 26, leaving broadcasters to decide whether to continue airing such inherently graphical information without providing an audible crawl, or to cease airing such information altogether. Continue reading →

Published on:

By

One thing about being part of a heavily regulated industry—you know well in advance most of the regulatory obligations and deadlines you’ll be facing in the year ahead.  While that brings no solace to broadcasters, it does lend a certain level of predictability to an often unpredictable industry.

For more decades than most of us can remember, Pillsbury’s Communications Practice has published its annual Broadcasters’ Calendar detailing filing deadlines facing broadcasters in the coming year.  As the Calendar itself warns, however, these obligations can expand or contract (though expansion has unfortunately been the historical norm), and deadlines can appear, disappear, and move with great rapidity.

Broadcasters have therefore long known that you start the year with the Broadcasters’ Calendar close at hand, while keeping an eye on CommLawCenter and the industry trades to see what obligations and deadlines will be added, subtracted, or altered over the course of the year.

Thus it has been, and thus shall it always be.

Some years are more likely than others to bring surprises, however.  With Trump 2.0 arriving upon the scene and new leadership coming to the FCC in January, the winds of change are likely to blow particularly hard in 2025.  Broadcasters are hoping those winds will be at their backs, bringing long overdue deregulation before social media giants drive broadcasters over the same ledge that the remaining newspapers cling to by their fingertips.

While broadcasters are admittedly nervous regarding soon-to-be Chairman Carr’s comments about reinvigorating the public interest standard for broadcasters given that the phrase has lost all meaning under recent Commissions, his clarification that his focus rests primarily upon the national networks rather than local broadcasters has brought a limited degree of relief.  Still, broadcasters will need to keep a close eye on regulatory developments in 2025, which promises to be a very eventful year.

So keep the 2025 Broadcasters’ Calendar close at hand in the coming year, and hope that the 2026 edition will be appreciably thinner.

Published on:

By , , and

At its final Open Meeting of 2024, the FCC on December 11 adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) seeking comment on the elimination or updating of several rules applicable to broadcast stations, as well as other changes intended to clarify ambiguities and to make the rules consistent with current procedures.

The NPRM covers minor rule updates, including:

  • Replacing references to the Consolidated Database System (CDBS), with references to the Licensing Management System (LMS);
  • Updating Form Names;
  • Updating inconsistent terminology referring to the Table of Assignments/Allotments;
  • Removing obsolete television Incentive Auction rule language; and
  • Consolidating rules for petitions to deny under Section 73.3584.

The FCC is also proposing to codify existing Commission interpretations and practices into the rules.  For example, the NPRM proposes to:

  • Codify the current practice of interpreting Section 73.870(e) to mean that LPFM minor modification applications received on the same day will be treated as simultaneously filed;
  • Update Section 73.807 to reflect the existing interpretation of the term “authorized” station as including construction permittees in addition to licensees;
  • Codify when applicants for new NCE FM, NCE TV, or LPFM construction permits must give local public notice of their applications; and
  • Codify the existing interpretation of the “Signature Rule” (Section 73.3513) allowing “directors” of corporations to sign FCC applications, and to expand the universe of who may sign an FCC application on behalf of a corporation, partnership, or unincorporated association to include a “duly authorized employee.”

With respect to more substantive revisions, the NPRM is proposing to: Continue reading →