FCC Changes in 2025

[Santa fe]

Now that the new FCC is beginning to take shape, I believe we will see many changes for broadcasters.

All ownership caps will be eliminated as well as restrictions on foreign ownership. What filing requirements left from the last dereg will be dropped: public file requirements will be eliminated as well as ownership reports and community program assessments.

On the rules side, all local ID requirements and local origination requirements will be eliminated, paving the way for complete single origination programming. Procedures for sales, CP's, new stations, etc. will be greatly simplified, dropping detailed ownership reports and "character" requirements for licensees and easing many technical requirements.

However, it will be made harder for the public to challenge or file a complaint against a licensee. Much of this will be necessary as the FCC will likely be a target for downsizing, cutting many inspectors, ALJ's, staffers and clerks.

Most of the attention of the new FCC, I believe, will be directed toward issues regarding the internet, censorship and access.

 

[TheBigA]

Now that the new FCC is beginning to take shape, I believe we will see many changes for broadcasters.

All ownership caps will be eliminated as well as restrictions on foreign ownership.

Don't be so sure about that. I've been watching Carr's interviews very carefully, and I don't see him eliminating ownership rules or foreign ownership rules at all. Like all the people in his party, they have a distrust for big tech and big media. They're using the foreign ownership rules specifically to prevent Soros from buying into Audacy. If they cut any ownership rules, there will be a quid pro quo. We'll do something for you if you do something for us. That's how this incoming government works. That's why Tim Cook, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg are doing all these things. So no, Brendan Carr is NOT Ajit Pai. These new FCC people don't listen to broadcast radio, and they have no allegiances to it.

On the rules side, all local ID requirements and local origination requirements will be eliminated, paving the way for complete single origination programming.

There are no rules preventing iHeart or Audacy from operating like EMF or Sirius. They could eliminate all local origination, except that there's still money in local sales. So they need local offices and some local origination to do local sales. Not for FCC rules.

However, it will be made harder for the public to challenge or file a complaint against a licensee.

Carr wants to eliminate Section 230 of the communications act, or change its meaning, so it will be easier to sue broadcasters and social media sites.

Most of the attention of the new FCC, I believe, will be directed toward issues regarding the internet, censorship and access.

I agree with that. They already eliminated net neutrality, which is big for ISPs. The new 5th commissioner worked at Verizon and Qwest, so she's all for giving freedom to telecom to pay for infrastructure and wire the rest of the country up with internet access. On censorship, they want to "rein in big tech," which means getting rid of moderation rules. But they want to censor pornography and anything that promotes certain sexual behavior.

 

[Rusty Muck]

The full deregulation of radio came with a rider containing that language was inserted into the 1996 TCom Act after Tom Hicks successfully lobbied to have it inserted. With a R-controlled Congress and Senate, it totally can happen on the TV side... especially if Perry Sook and David Smith persuade some R congressman to insert it into a continuing resolution budget or completely unrelated bill that no one will really notice.

I pretty much expect full deregulation to happen, especially with companies clearly wanting to bail like INSP (or are deeply distressed and firing everyone, like the Byron Allen stations are). The people selling will be the real winners.

As for Carr, I can't blame him for his position after Ajit Pai tried in every way to help Sinclair buy the Tribune stations. He's playing it smart.

 

[TheBigA]

The full deregulation of radio came with a rider containing that language was inserted into the 1996 TCom Act

It wasn't "full deregulation." There are still pages of regulations we all follow every day, including ownership rules. If iHeart could buy more stations, you wouldn't have 98.7 available in NYC. Emmis is hoping for a slight relaxation. I expect it to be a selective relaxation. "You can buy one more station if you do us a favor."

These new republicans aren't traditional republicans. They don't like big media. Carr wrote a threatening letter to Bob Iger, and he's saying he's going to enforce "public interest" rules on broadcasters. He's talking about holding up the Paramount sale because of the 60 minutes interview, and also hold up the Comcast cable spinoff because of MSNBC.

 

[Rusty Muck]

These new republicans aren't traditional republicans. They don't like big media. Carr wrote a threatening letter to Bob Iger, and he's saying he's going to enforce "public interest" rules on broadcasters. He's talking about holding up the Paramount sale because of the 60 minutes interview, and also hold up the Comcast cable spinoff because of MSNBC.

This is not that different from the tough talking Trump and his people took between 2016 and 2018 when AT&T bought TimeWarner because of CNN. It happened anyway.

It will be no different here: a lot of huffing and puffing and public pillorying of those "biased" media outlets to make the base happy.

 

[TheBigA]

This is not that different from the tough talking Trump and his people took between 2016 and 2018 when AT&T bought TimeWarner because of CNN. It happened anyway.

It happened because they lost in court. Not because he gave up. He's still mad about it and they haven't recovered. Ultimately AT&T unloaded Warner and CNN, and they're better off for it. And then they helped launch a far right news service:

Special Report: How AT&T helped build far-right One America News

America’s top telecom giant nurtured OAN, the pro-Trump news channel now at the center of a bitter national divide over politics and truth.

www.reuters.com

The other part is that he will give attention to people like Brent Bozell, who is challenging the Audacy bankruptcy deal. So when the OP says it will be "harder to challenge a license," it depends on who is challenging. If it's Brent Bozell, they will be given full attention.

 

[exdjted]

All ownership caps will be eliminated as well as restrictions on foreign ownership.

The caps won't be eliminated, but eased. What is likely to happen is that there will be a filing that gets held up because of an AM contour overlap, and the case will go to court, where it won't be contested by the FCC, thereby tacitly softening the cap. There will be smaller markets where you may see some deals go through that allow an extra station over the market limit, but these will likely start in smaller, unrated markets where the FTC and DOJ will look past the 50% market cap. This will only be smaller markets to start. The fight for ownership cap relief in Top 100 markets is still a long way off. The FCC won't hold a meeting and do away with the cap. It will be through not contesting court decisions and allowing Congress to get involved.

Foreign ownership restrictions going away? Look up the definition of xenophobe. Then look at Carr's remarks again.

On the rules side, all local ID requirements and local origination requirements will be eliminated, paving the way for complete single origination programming. Procedures for sales, CP's, new stations, etc. will be greatly simplified, dropping detailed ownership reports and "character" requirements for licensees and easing many technical requirements.

No. Eliminating local ID requirements and local origination flies in the face of Carr's remarks that local interests are more important than national, and that broadcasters have to operate in the public interest. Ownership reports will still be required. What the FCC will most likely eliminate are the EEO reports regarding gender or race.

Your statement about how sales and CPs for new stations will be greatly simplified shows that you have never dealt with the FCC in any capacity. The FCC will continue to look closely at who's buying any station, and getting a CP issued for a new station is a years-long process. You can't just wish things into existence.

Any changes to the local ownership caps are coming first through the courts, then Congress, and finally the FCC. It's much easier to comply with a court ruling or a law passed by Congress, than by having to invite public discourse and discussion through comment periods before acting years down the road.

 

[Rusty Muck]

The other part is that he will give attention to people like Brent Bozell, who is challenging the Audacy bankruptcy deal. So when the OP says it will be "harder to challenge a license," it depends on who is challenging. If it's Brent Bozell, they will be given full attention.

Until they actually do something to that effect, it's all postulating and grandstanding to make the right-wing base happy and gives off the illusion of "being tough". Been through this rodeo before.

Comcast shutting down MSNBC in order to spin off their cable channels? To be quite frank, they probably WANT to do that but need cover to do so. It's hardly a secret that Cesar Conde has antipathy towards that channel; it doesn't factor at all in Comcast's long-term plans and is injuring the reputation of NBC News among the red state affiliates. Win-win for all parties.

Corporate Polish Meets Partisan Reality for NBC’s News Chief

Cesar Conde, a leader with an M.B.A. but a limited journalism background, is facing the toughest scrutiny of his career.

www.nytimes.com

 

[TheBigA]

Until they actually do something to that effect, it's all postulating and grandstanding

Did you read the OP? Same thing could be said about that. Until they actually deregulate, we still have to follow them.

Comcast shutting down MSNBC in order to spin off their cable channels?

Where did you get that? Not from me.

 

[Rusty Muck]

Did you read the OP? Same thing could be said about that. Until they actually deregulate, we still have to follow them.

Not arguing about that. Just too cynical for my own good.

Where did you get that? Not from me.

The implications (in general, not from anything you said) are that Comcast could be stuck with dead or dying cable channels they don't want in any way solely because they also want to ditch MSNBC. Who does that benefit?

Shut down MSNBC and the problem goes away.

 

[TheBigA]

Shut down MSNBC and the problem goes away.

That's what people said about CNN. But they don't know the finances. Comcast isn't shutting down these channels, they're spinning them off. Two different things. There is still money to be made from MSNBC. They've created a very smart podcasting unit and have other revenue streams to live from. MSNBC is in much better shape than radio companies like Cumulus or Beasley. They could learn about revenue diversification from them. I don't know what role the government will have in the spin-off, but it will happen regardless.

 

[gr8oldies]

It happened because they lost in court. Not because he gave up. He's still mad about it and they haven't recovered. Ultimately AT&T unloaded Warner and CNN, and they're better off for it. And then they helped launch a far right news service:

Special Report: How AT&T helped build far-right One America News

America’s top telecom giant nurtured OAN, the pro-Trump news channel now at the center of a bitter national divide over politics and truth.

www.reuters.com

The other part is that he will give attention to people like Brent Bozell, who is challenging the Audacy bankruptcy deal. So when the OP says it will be "harder to challenge a license," it depends on who is challenging. If it's Brent Bozell, they will be given full attention.

When was the last successful license challenge that had anything to with content? I'm thinking Red Lion

 

[Rusty Muck]

When was the last successful license challenge that had anything to with content? I'm thinking Red Lion

WLBT had their license revoked because they were owned by virulent racists that failed to serve the public interest. Others like WMJX in Miami and WIFE in Indianapolis were forced off the air because of deceptive content. And KDND technically was done in with the "hold your wee for a Wii".

And while Insane Broadcasting's quartet of AMs in St. Louis died because they lied about who controlled the stations, the operator and shadow owner was a convicted felon who just happened to be a virulent racist.

 

[gr8oldies]

WLBT had their license revoked because they were owned by virulent racists that failed to serve the public interest. Others like WMJX in Miami and WIFE in Indianapolis were forced off the air because of deceptive content. And KDND technically was done in with the "hold your wee for a Wii".

And while Insane Broadcasting's quartet of AMs in St. Louis died because they lied about who controlled the stations, the operator and shadow owner was a convicted felon who just happened to be a virulent racist.

I don't know why I didn't think of WIFE (free ads for Vance Hartke as part of it as I recall), and WMJX with the Bermuda Triangle hoax. I kinda forgot about the St. Louis stations.