Story is paywalled, but Bloomberg is reporting that Brendan Carr is about to announce an end to TV ownership caps:
Should we assume this would apply to radio as well?
Should we assume this would apply to radio as well?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Brendan Carr eliminating TV ownership caps?
- Thread starter Mediafrog+
- Start date
Here's another version of the story, and radio isn't in the story.
FCC Chairman Proposes Repeal Of National Ownership Cap
The commission will vote in August on whether to repeal the cap.
deadline.com
However, the FCC approved the waiver for Connoisseur in San Francisco.
According to the story, the FCC will vote in August.
I just don’t see how they could dump the TV cap while leaving the radio constraints in place.Here's another version of the story, and radio isn't in the story.
FCC Chairman Proposes Repeal Of National Ownership Cap
The commission will vote in August on whether to repeal the cap.
However, the FCC approved the waiver for Connoisseur in San Francisco.
According to the story, the FCC will vote in August.
Wonder if there would be an attempt to ram new legislation through congress before the midterm elections in order to seal this into law?
The 39% coverage cap doesn't apply to radio. That's what he's eliminating.
Here is the rule he is seeking to eliminate:
FCC Moves to End Cap on National Broadcast Ownership
FCC Moves to End Cap on National Broadcast Ownership
variety.com
The Federal Communications Commission signaled it will vote on August 6 to repeal the longstanding cap on ownership of TV stations, replacing a limit that keeps owners from controlling stations in more than 39% of markets with a case-by-case review of transactions that might come before regulators.
“Today, national programmers can distribute their programming to 100 percent of the country –either through their own streaming services or through deals they cut with nationwide ‘virtual cable companies,’ like YouTubeTV. The cap no longer constrains their control over distribution in this respect,” said FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr in an op-ed published by Brietbart. “Nor does the cap limit other players in today’s media market. Cable channels like MSNOW can reach 100 percent of the country. Social media sites from Bluesky to X can reach 100 percent of the country. Netflix can reach 100 percent too. Same with podcasts and all other forms of digital content.”
A decision to eliminate the cap might have immediate consequences. Nexstar, one of the largest owners of TV stations in the U.S., has been barred from completing its recent acquisition of Tegna, a smaller TV station owner, on the grounds that the transaction would give Nexstar too much control over local TV properties across the country. Nexstar also owns national outlets like the CW broadcast network and the NewsNation cable-news outlet.
This isn't good. It will eventually lead to television stations going off the air and one company owning all the stations in a market. The article mentions that there will still be a transaction review, but that will stop from this happening.
It maybe a dying market, but I still don't see how it will save it.
It maybe a dying market, but I still don't see how it will save it.
Last edited:
Here's more detail from RadioInsight:
radioinsight.com
Lance points out the contradiction:
Which gets back to what I've been saying: The Communications Act is unconstitutional under the current operation of the FCC. The intent of the Act was that broadcasting would be regulated by an independent agency. The FCC is no longer independent.
Carr talks about distrust in the media, but the fact is that the public has even less trust in government.
Meanwhile trust in media is at 28%. The trust factor in media depends on the outlet. The trust factor in government is about this administration.
FCC To Vote To Remove Television Ownership Caps; No Changes To Radio Yet
Brendan Carr's FCC will begin the process of removing ownership limits by first targeting the current 39% population limit on
radioinsight.com
Lance points out the contradiction:
Which gets back to what I've been saying: The Communications Act is unconstitutional under the current operation of the FCC. The intent of the Act was that broadcasting would be regulated by an independent agency. The FCC is no longer independent.
Carr talks about distrust in the media, but the fact is that the public has even less trust in government.
Meanwhile trust in media is at 28%. The trust factor in media depends on the outlet. The trust factor in government is about this administration.
Last edited:
If that’s the case that will affect the outcome of the current lawsuits related to the Paramount-WB merger and the Tegna-Nexstar merger given that there states that issued lawsuits directed at antitrust issues over those mergers.
FCC rules are not the same as law. A new administration could come in and reverse the policy, just as it did with net neutrality.
But the real issue is the constitutionality of the communications act itself if the FCC administering it is a political agency making subjective decisions about speech based on the president's agenda, and the commissioners can be fired without cause by the president.
True, but, in this case, there already would likely have been great consolidation which the flick of a pen wouldn't undo.
I think this is the correct move considering the economics for broadcast TV.
The last time the FCC tried to do something like this was under Kevin Martin in 2007. Congress came in under Trent Lott and reversed it.
Dorgan, Lott team to take on FCC big media rules
From Free Press: At a Senate Commerce Committee hearing today, Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) and Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) announced plans to introduce legislation that would halt the Federal Communications Commission’s rush to gut longstanding media ownership rules. The bipartisan “Media Ownership...
thecherrycreeknews.com
John McCain also got involved:
John McCain and the FCC media ownership fight
A battle in the Senate is forming over the FCC's media ownership rules...
arstechnica.com
McCain voted against the 1996 Telecom Act too. There was a time when repubs were opposed to big media.
The world has changed dramatically. Could Congress try to intervene if they win both houses? Possibly, if that's the fight they want to take on among others. But I wouldn't be sure that it would matter regardless of the rules as written. It is advisable not to underestimate SCOTUS's zest for supporting the administration. If it comes down to a division of powers battle, the high court seems very likely to look for ways to side with the administration.
The "maverick" thing was perhaps overdone, but there is no one left in the party who would play the McCain-esque role. Anyone who has stood up in even the most mild ways to Commander Bone Spurs has been primaried or isn't seeking re-election. There is no comparison to McCain.
Yeah, there was. And they rail against it when "big" means not fawning enough. But "big" is just fine when it's supporting their cause with no pretext of balance.John McCain and the FCC media ownership fight
A battle in the Senate is forming over the FCC's media ownership rules...
McCain voted against the 1996 Telecom Act too. There was a time when repubs were opposed to big media.