FCC Opens Investigation into NPR and PBS

[xmtrland]

Read more from NPR.
Trump's FCC chief opens investigation into NPR and PBS

The New York Times
F.C.C. Chair Orders Investigation Into NPR and PBS Sponsorships

 

[TheBigA]

Already being discussed in exhaustive detail here:

https://radiodiscussions.com/threads/carr-orders-investigation-into-npr-and-pbs-over-underwriting.775025/post-6788209

The fact is that the FCC doesn't regulate NPR and PBS, and neither of those companies own any stations. What he really meant to say is he's opening an investigation into non-commercial radio stations. But that doesn't have the same political appeal. So he has announced the results and purpose of the investigation before it begins. What do lawyers call that? Prejudice.

 

[Weiserguy]

This Carr seems to come from the factory with prejudice as a standard feature.

 

[TheBigA]

This Carr seems to come from the factory with prejudice as a standard feature.

The FCC always enforces the non-com rules on stations. Just last year they fined WBAI for breaking their non-com rules. There have been several fines imposed over the years. But this is a targeted investigation aimed strictly at NPR and PBS, not anyone else. It doesn't include American Public Media, for example, or other national program suppliers. It doesn't include Pacifica or other independent non-coms. This investigation, at least as outlined in this letter, is targeted at these two organizations that the FCC doesn't regulate. The letter was then sent to congress with the intent to defund these two organizations. The problem is that congress doesn't fund NPR or PBS directly. The money goes to CPB, and CPB was completely left out of the loop. So this letter is a big legal problem for the FCC on many fronts. If I'm a civil servant in the enforcement division, I'm completely blind-sided by this, and at a loss as to how to carry this out.

The other problem the FCC has is enforcement. As a result of the Supreme Court's Chevron decision last year, there's a big question about the ability of a government agency to impose fines. In fact, Commissioner Nathan Simington has refused to approve any FCC fines on stations or pirates citing the Chevron decision. None of the other commissioners signed on to this letter. I wonder how they plan on enforcing whatever conclusions they reach.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

This Carr seems to come from the factory with prejudice as a standard feature.

The FCC always enforces the non-com rules on stations.

It's so quaint to keep stating how any government agency actually cares what the rules are anymore. Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s plan to transform the government, calls for defunding public broadcasting and what we're witnessing now are the steps being taken by Trump's FCC operative to execute that plan.

 

[TheBigA]

what we're witnessing now are the steps being taken by Trump's FCC operative to execute that plan

If you read what he's saying, it goes beyond government funding.

 

[TheBigA]

Speaking of the FCC, while not related to the NPR investigation, the LA Times reports that the FCC is demanding that CBS News turn over the 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris. This interview is the subject of a current lawsuit by the president. The fact that the FCC is making this demand is very much outside the traditional authority of the FCC:

FCC demands CBS News turn over ‘60 Minutes' interview amid Trump lawsuit

The latest development comes as Paramount Global lawyers engaged in preliminary talks to settle the lawsuit Trump filed in October over his objection to edits to the '60 Minutes' interview with Harris.

www.latimes.com

CBS News has confirmed this reporting and they say they will comply:

CBS News to comply with FCC demand for "60 Minutes" transcript and video

The FCC sent a letter of inquiry demanding the "full, unedited transcript and camera feeds" from an interview with Kamala Harris.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[TexasTom]

I watch a fair amount of programming from PBS, so I'm comfortable in stating that Carr's investigation against PBS/NPR is as politically motivated as the one against CBS -- and both seem to be lacking in any regulatory justification.

As I understand the rules, the distinction that noncommercial stations have to be careful of is that underwriting or sponsorship announcements may not include a "call to action". Obvious examples of such improper calls to action would include urging viewers to visit a website, go to a retail location, or even call for more information. Creating a sense of urgency ("limited time offer") would also violate the rules. Never have I seen an underwriting announcement on PBS that comes at all close to any of those things.

Note that I'm not saying that noncommercial stations don't violate those rules -- just that PBS doesn't. And I would be shocked if NPR wasn't equally careful.

 

[TheBigA]

As I understand the rules, the distinction that noncommercial stations have to be careful of is that underwriting or sponsorship announcements may not include a "call to action".

Apparently, Carr has a different understanding of the rules. Here's what Carr says in his letter:

Federal law prohibits any NCE station from running commercial advertisements. More specifically, Section 399B of the Communications Act prohibits an NCE station from airing commercials or other promotional announcements on behalf of for-profit entities. For-profit entities that contribute funds to NCE stations may receive on-air acknowledgements, but the FCC has long held that these underwriting announcements are for identification purposes only.

So his interpretation is if the announcement says anything more than corporate name, it's a commercial.

 

[TexasTom]

Apparently, Carr has a different understanding of the rules. Here's what Carr says in his letter:

So his interpretation is if the announcement says anything more than corporate name, it's a commercial.

That's not how it has been interpreted in the past, so Carr is just randomly reinterpreting regulations -- and probably not doing so on a consistent basis, because I have a feeling he'll be much looser in his interpretation of the rules for noncommercial religious stations.

As it turns out, Broadcast Law Blog wrote about this very subject fifteen years ago:

Underwriting announcements can identify the sponsor, say what the business of the sponsor is, and give a location (seemingly including a website address). But the announcements cannot do anything that would specifically encourage patronage of the sponsor’s business.

That's clearly more than just "identification purposes only", as Carr claims. That said, reading the link I see the prohibition does go beyond "calls to action"; qualitative statements and price information are also prohibited. And the length of the announcement can also be an issue.

 

[TheBigA]

Meanwhile at the Pentagon, four mainstream media outlets have been kicked out, including NPR:

Pentagon removes major media outlets, including NBC News, from dedicated workstations as part of a new 'rotation program'

NBC News, The New York Times, NPR and Politico must vacate their office spaces in two weeks for other news organizations — including at least one that did not request to be added.

www.nbcnews.com

The new outlets rotating in are One America News Network — which will take NBC News’s spot — the New York Post, Breitbart News Network and HuffPost.

Back in T-45, NPR was kicked out of the State Department. Breitbart and One America were also added to the White House.

The main things they lose are their ability to ask questions at briefings and easy access to the press secretary.

 

[b-turner]

Underwriting is tricky on radio and even more so on television. The FCC has made statements that a person cannot appear happy or excited when involved with the product shown could be interpreted as an inducement to buy. When writing spots, it is good to look at each word from more than one angle and to literally ask why a word or detail is included.

As was told to me, the FCC creates Underwriting Rules and they interpret them.

 

[TheBigA]

As was told to me, the FCC creates Underwriting Rules and they interpret them.

Same with the indecency rules. Which is why they end up going to court to defend those rules. Same thing here. But the letter has no specific examples of where either company has broken any rules. Just informing them they he is opening an investigation to find an infraction. A hunting expedition.

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

We been down this road before if the investigation was about how local public media stations are running their underwriters part sure. But this is a pattern we mentioned on other threads on how local NPR and PBS affiliates are the most reliable way to provide news content around the country and how the funding affects journalism directly.

 

[BruceB]

The FCC always enforces the non-com rules on stations. Just last year they fined WBAI for breaking their non-com rules. There have been several fines imposed over the years. But this is a targeted investigation aimed strictly at NPR and PBS, not anyone else. It doesn't include American Public Media, for example, or other national program suppliers. It doesn't include Pacifica or other independent non-coms. This investigation, at least as outlined in this letter, is targeted at these two organizations that the FCC doesn't regulate. The letter was then sent to congress with the intent to defund these two organizations. The problem is that congress doesn't fund NPR or PBS directly. The money goes to CPB, and CPB was completely left out of the loop. So this letter is a big legal problem for the FCC on many fronts. If I'm a civil servant in the enforcement division, I'm completely blind-sided by this, and at a loss as to how to carry this out.

The other problem the FCC has is enforcement. As a result of the Supreme Court's Chevron decision last year, there's a big question about the ability of a government agency to impose fines. In fact, Commissioner Nathan Simington has refused to approve any FCC fines on stations or pirates citing the Chevron decision. None of the other commissioners signed on to this letter. I wonder how they plan on enforcing whatever conclusions they reach.

Not always. The Classical station in Dayton has what amounts to a full on ad for a local Subaru dealership. Even giving the hours for the service department. They have been doing this for at least the two years I have been listening.

 

[TheBigA]

Not always. The Classical station in Dayton has what amounts to a full on ad for a local Subaru dealership. Even giving the hours for the service department. They have been doing this for at least the two years I have been listening.

So that's a specific station violation. That's not what this investigation is about. He didn't have a specific violation. He's basically pulling over a driver for no reason, and then doing a full vehicle search for drugs. Rather than fine a station for a violation, he's using it as a pretext to defund the entire system.

 

[b-turner]

Underwriting may include hours (including service department). Now, if they say 'their convenient hours' then you break the rules.

 

[TheBigA]

One thing I'll add: CPB is pre-funded through 2026. That's also part of the law to protect CPB from purely political actions. But as we've seen, just because congress appropriates the money doesn't mean it will actually get to the intended agency.

CPB Statement on Congress’ Passage of Funding for Public Media

WASHINGTON, D.C. (March 23, 2024) — Patricia Harrison, President and CEO of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), issued the following statement today after the House and Senate passed the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024. The bill provides $535 million for CPB in Fiscal...

cpb.org

Congress is currently going through the budgeting process right now, with a deadline set for mid-March.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

Courtesy of John Gorman on FB, "History repeats itself."

 

[TheBigA]

To put this in context, all federal agencies are on the chopping block right now. We know that. The federal government wants to go out of business. The FCC is no different from the EPA. They'd like it all to shut down. Carr knows that, and he's looking out for his agency. He's not going to get funding for things like local inspectors to clamp down on pirate radio stations. That's not going to get funding. But if he can come up with a pretext to shut down NPR, that will get his agency funding from this congress. The FCC isn't going to get funding to investigate interference on the AM band. The FCC isn't going to get funding for more translators or LPFM. That's not going to keep them employed. This kind of thing will.