• 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

WaPo Piece on Brendan Carr

.
TheBigA said:
There are lots of factors involved in purchasing stations that are often unavailable to minorities. One is access to funding. SBA loans aren't available to buyers of radio stations. That's one thing the FCC hasn't been able to understand. Now it won't matter anymore. It's been interesting watching the way Tavis Smiley has been handing the funding of KBLA. It's unconventional, and fortunately he's working with a seller who is working with him.
Click to expand...
KBLA is a terrible example, though. It is about horrible dog station, with a dreadful and restrictive directional pattern. It is at the end of the AM dial where nearly nobody goes any longer, and it is an AM to begin with.

Beyond that, the FCC is not the “agent of change” needed to enhance minority ownership of radio or TV. If anything, changes in SBA and related agency rules are needed.

And the SBA for a long time has not financed stations due to the high portion of intangibles that make up the price of a station. That applies to anyone, ethnicity or gender being irrelevant
 
DavidEduardo said:
Beyond that, the FCC is not the “agent of change” needed to enhance minority ownership of radio or TV. If anything, changes in SBA and related agency rules are needed.
Click to expand...

Apparently the FCC can be whatever the chairman wants it to be. If he wants it to investigate public broadcasting or threaten news divisions, then that's what it does. My point about minority broadcasting is that it's been part of the FCC agenda for over 30 years, and has mostly been a failure and an annoyance. Nobody is sad to see it go. I don't expect to see any department or agency in this government make any changes to improve minority ownership. Those days are over.
 
Next on the schedule for FCC's Brendan Carr: A payola investigation, started by Senator Blackburn:

www.insideradio.com

Senator Wants Concert Arrangements Between Radio And Artists Examined.

The FCC is being asked to investigate allegations of payola violations. No cash is said to be changing hands, but Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) says stations offering more airtime for
www.insideradio.com www.insideradio.com

radioink.com

Blackburn Pushes FCC to Ban Free Artist Performances for Radio - Radio Ink

In a January 30 letter to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) seeks to outlaw free live artist performances for radio.
radioink.com radioink.com

She believes radio stations are engaging in payola, so she wants the FCC to investigate. In the process, she also wants to force her new royalty on radio stations.
 
TheBigA said:
Next on the schedule for FCC's Brendan Carr: A payola investigation, started by Senator Blackburn:

www.insideradio.com

Senator Wants Concert Arrangements Between Radio And Artists Examined.

The FCC is being asked to investigate allegations of payola violations. No cash is said to be changing hands, but Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) says stations offering more airtime for
www.insideradio.com www.insideradio.com

radioink.com

Blackburn Pushes FCC to Ban Free Artist Performances for Radio - Radio Ink

In a January 30 letter to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) seeks to outlaw free live artist performances for radio.
radioink.com radioink.com

She believes radio stations are engaging in payola, so she wants the FCC to investigate. In the process, she also wants to force her new royalty on radio stations.
Click to expand...
Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!
 
CNN did an interview with Carr on the CBS 60 Minutes issue. They asked why it was necessary for the FCC to demand this video. He said in order to "adjudicate an issue of news distortion," seeing the original was necessary. The problem with that answer, in my view, is that the lawsuit wasn't filed with the FCC, and the FCC doesn't have a statutory role to adjudicate news distortion. There is nothing in the communications act for such a role. This was clearly an over-reach. Here's the CNN article:


The fact is that the FCC is only investigating certain companies, and ignoring others. So the question of fairness comes up.
 
The FCC Chairman has now threatened Jimmy Kimmel:

www.yahoo.com

Trump FCC Chair Threatens ABC With Punishment Over Jimmy Kimmel’s Charlie Kirk Comments

FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatened Jimmy Kimmel over his "concerted effort to lie to the American people" by claiming Charlie Kirk's killer was a Trump supporter
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com

“What people don’t understand is… broadcasters are entirely different than people who use other forms of communication. They have a license granted by us at the FCC, and what comes with it is an obligation to operate in the public interest,” Carr added.
Click to expand...

The issue seems to be Carr's interpretation of "public interest." He believes that he can now use speech in terms of being in the public interest. That's a big jump. Previous FCCs have had trouble getting that kind of thing past the courts. Even when the speech is deemed obscene. Kimmel isn't a journalist. He's an entertainer. TV & radio entertainers lie to the public every day. They aren't threatened by the FCC.

I don't know what he thinks he can do. He can't revoke their license over speech. The supreme court has questioned whether regulatory agencies can impose fines. Perhaps he could sue, but that takes a lot of time. It sounds to me like saber rattling.
 
TheBigA said:
The FCC Chairman has now threatened Jimmy Kimmel:

www.yahoo.com

Trump FCC Chair Threatens ABC With Punishment Over Jimmy Kimmel’s Charlie Kirk Comments

FCC Chair Brendan Carr threatened Jimmy Kimmel over his "concerted effort to lie to the American people" by claiming Charlie Kirk's killer was a Trump supporter
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com



The issue seems to be Carr's interpretation of "public interest." He believes that he can now use speech in terms of being in the public interest. That's a big jump. Previous FCCs have had trouble getting that kind of thing past the courts. Even when the speech is deemed obscene. Kimmel isn't a journalist. He's an entertainer. TV & radio entertainers lie to the public every day. They aren't threatened by the FCC.

I don't know what he thinks he can do. He can't revoke their license over speech. The supreme court has questioned whether regulatory agencies can impose fines. Perhaps he could sue, but that takes a lot of time. It sounds to me like saber rattling.
Click to expand...
Nothing to see here. Nothing at all.
 
I agree that ulterior motives are in play.

We all know why Nexstar is kowtowing to Chairman Carr. They want the commission's blessing to acquire Tegna.

Disney perhaps has some business matter it intends to bring before the FCC, FTC or DOJ soon.

I guess vile remarks against homeless people such as those made by Brian Kilmeade on Fox & Friends last week are undeserving of rebuke in Chairman Carr's eyes.
 
davideduardo said:
There is a saying in Spanish "Cuando el río suena, es que piedras trae." That means "when the river makes noise, it is carrying rocks". There is obviously something behind this move by ABC:
Click to expand...
The rocks in this case would be the pretty clear way in which Carr threatened the licenses of ABC affiliates if they didn't "do something" about Kimmel.

Now I've got to note that changes to the Communications Act in the 1980s and 1990s have set a very high bar for the FCC to be able to revoke or fail to renew the license of a broadcast station -- but I'm guessing that the law notwithstanding, the FCC could still make life pretty miserable for a licensee that they choose to harass. And while the licensee might eventually prevail in the resultant court appeals, that can take multiple years and cost millions of dollars. And, in Nexstar's case, it would almost certainly tank the deal to buy Tegna.
 
thedesk.net

Free speech groups accuse FCC Chairman Carr of weaponizing agency

Nearly two dozen civil rights and media advocacy groups have accused FCC Chairman Brendan Carr of violating the First Amendment by interfering in news operations.
thedesk.net thedesk.net



Here is more on Chairman Carr and the backlash he is facing.


Nearly two dozen civil rights and media advocacy groups have endorsed a letter sent to Federal Communications Commissioner (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr, accusing him of weaponizing the agency to fulfill certain political goals since his promotion earlier this year.

In a joint letter sent to the FCC on Tuesday, the organizations condemned what they described as Carr’s “unprecedented weaponization” of the agency’s licensing authority against major television networks. The groups urged Carr to “affirm unequivocally” that the FCC will not act as a political enforcement arm or interfere with broadcasters’ editorial independence.

The letter was endorsed by 22 groups, including the Freedom of the Press Foundation, the National Urban League, the NAACP and the Latino Community Foundation.

The groups complain about an increase in targeted attacks against the news media by President Donald Trump, who has long complained about unfavorable news coverage. Over the past year, he has squeezed out multi-million dollar judgments from news organizations by suing them.
Click to expand...
 
thedesk.net

FCC Chairman Carr issues veiled threat against TV broadcasters

FCC Chairman Carr says broadcast licenses could be revoked if TV stations fail to uphold their public interest obligations.
thedesk.net thedesk.net

Here is more on Chairman Carr and his current stance on Broadcast licenses. Which always means the Network owned stations or local affiliates in cases we have mentioned so far here. In the article they discussed Chairman Carr’s role in getting Jimmy Kimmel on hiatus by Disney when that took place.
 
When Carr makes these threats, they're basically empty. The Supreme Court last year issued a ruling that called into question the ability of agencies to issue penalties without a jury trial

frostbrowntodd.com

Supreme Court Curtails Agencies’ Authority to… | FBT Gibbons

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, 144 S. Ct. 2117 (June 27, 2024) In Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, the U.S. Supreme Court
frostbrowntodd.com frostbrowntodd.com

So what this means is the FCC can't just revoke licenses on their own. They don't have that power. It was a conservative court that issued that ruling, and the FCC can't pick and choose the rulings that court makes. That means in all of the various investigations the FCC is pursuing, against NPR, CBS, Audacy, Comcast, and Disney, they can't impose a fine or any penalty. Executive agencies don't have that power. It's up to courts to decide.
 
Larry said:
Since when does this administration care about the fact they don’t have the power to do something??
Click to expand...

That's why Carr keeps making these threats. But if the time comes when he actually has to do something, it will become more complicated than it might appear. He knows that, because before he left the FCC, Commissioner Nathan Symington would always vote against any penalties, and would bring up the court decision. It may also be why he left.
 
FCC;s Brenden Carr rejects the claim that he is using the agency to threaten broadcasters:

www.insideradio.com

FCC’s Carr Rejects Claims Broadcast Probes Are Meant To Intimidate.

The FCC has opened multiple investigations into radio and TV broadcasters under Chair Brendan Carr. While critics say the unresolved cases are meant to pressure stations, Carr said this week
www.insideradio.com www.insideradio.com

What he hasn't explained is why he sent letters announcing his investigation into non-commercial broadcasting to NPR and PBS, rather than to the stations he was investigating. It was an inappropriate letter sent to companies he doesn't regulate. The letter ended with his personal option that the networks shouldn't receive federal money, and sent copies of the letter to congress. It was, as Gomez said, an act of intimidation. It had the desired effect, because congress ultimately rescinded all federal funding.

He also didn't address the fact that his investigation into KCBS is based on the fact that George Soros is an investor in Audacy, and Carr has already met with congress about targeting Soros in some way. It's not about the public interest. It's about targeting certain US citizens who are enemies of the administration.
 


Back
Top Bottom