WFCO Fine for airing prohitibed ads

[del_griffith]

The FCC doesn’t want to drive non-com WFCO, Lancaster, Ohio out of business… so it’s lowering the fine for running prohibited commercials inside football games from $7,500 to 6 grand, mostly because of its history of good behavior. It’s also offering Lancaster Educational Broadcasting Foundation an installment plan. There’s an object lesson here for pleading poverty – don’t just submit “net income” financials, to convince the Commission you deserve a break. They want to see gross revenues. Christian teaching WFCO (90.9) pleads its case by citing low cash reserves, and says it would “most likely have to cease operations” if it was forced to pay the full amount at once.

The bigger question is, was this fine based on a complaint? And if so, who made the complaint? Typically the FCC doesn't go around listening to non-coms to see if they are airing prohibited commercials (I'm assuming call to action ads or in some other way don't meet non comm criteria) so my guess is someone initiated the action.

I read somewhere that the prohibited commercials ran during Capital University football games. Who would have a dog in the hunt for carrying those games enough to make a complaint?

 

[V.Riley]

That is a hefty fine even with the lower amount. Unless the format of the stations was "Football" I think I'd opt out of running any more football games on that station. Then again 6 grand is a heck of a lot of money to my pockets, maybe not the case with them.

 

[markbohach]

The bigger question is, was this fine based on a complaint? And if so, who made the complaint? Typically the FCC doesn't go around listening to non-coms to see if they are airing prohibited commercials (I'm assuming call to action ads or in some other way don't meet non comm criteria) so my guess is someone initiated the action.

I read somewhere that the prohibited commercials ran during Capital University football games. Who would have a dog in the hunt for carrying those games enough to make a complaint?

For the record- I wasn't the one who made a complaint. Even though (in my opinion and interpretation of the rules) they are way over the line on their "sponsorships" most of the time- including the advertising for political candidates.

However, there are a few people around the area who have grumbled about this station over the years. One publishes a local newspaper. I'm not saying it was one of them but somebody likely notified the FCC,
since it was likely a complaint that triggered the investigation and subsequent fine.

Now that the FCC has been made aware of the situation, they will likely keep an ear on the station from time to time via the Detroit field office. The last thing a station wants is a "willful and repeated" violation.

They are currently on the air asking for donations.

 

[del_griffith]

Mark: I wouldn't think you would. I think the key is Capital University games. Is it someone who wants to carry them (I understand the Capital agreement is a pay to play proposition) or someone upset that they were carried the games and it bumped a favorite program.

I really think the underlying reason is specifically related to the Capital games. Otherwise, they could have cited virtually any other daypart.

 

[skippertthomas]

Believe it or not, if the rules have not changed, political ads that are requested by viable candidates are not considered for profit spots on NCE or LP licenses.. We HAD to offer air time to a few local candidates that came to us in Florida in the late 80's... The FCC told us we did not have to market and go out and seek those spots, but we could not refuse them, based on lowest underwriting rate and had to air any candidate though we might not agree with their position.. Has this changed? Most candidates do not seek putting ads on these NCE LP's due to a strong political leaning of many of the audiences.... Our occurance happened in 1989...

 

[gabigley1]

Nothing is posted on the FCC website about this WFCO fine. Also, nothing found during a google search on this topic, except this thread.

I'm streaming them now and noticed they have a live and local morning talk show. At least they are providing some local produced local programing.
They say need need twenty thousands dollars in donations to stay on the air.

 

[gabigley1]

I found the FCC documents on this topic. Click here: http://search2.fcc.gov/search/index...earch+request.x=11&Submit+search+request.y=10 and then click on the first few links. This wasn't in the usual place I look for such things on the FCC web page. When all else fails,
use the "Search" function on the FCC page.

From what I head yesterday morning, they do a good very job of serving their community of license. That may be one on the other reasons the FCC is easy on
them.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[gabigley1]

I found the FCC documents on this topic. Click here: http://search2.fcc.gov/search/index.htm?job=search and then search for WFCO. This wasn't in the usual place I look for such things on the FCC web page. When all else fails, use the "Search" function on the FCC page.

From what I head yesterday morning, they do a good very job of serving their community of license. That may be one on the other reasons the FCC is easy on
them.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[markbohach]

Here is a link to the Lancaster Eagle Gazette story on this-

http://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/article/20090804/NEWS01/908040316

 

[techie2]

Since I am doing sports for a station that is a non-comm license, I checked the FCC documents to see what the language was that drew the fine. I'm one of several eyes that review the language in any new underwriting spots that we run...so I'm always checking the EB pages to see what sort of spot language is drawing enforcement action. I definitely understand the fine...the transcripts in there were definitely "over the line."

It looks like the station sold the airtime to a third party that was handling the production for Capital, and didn't review any of the content...and the production outfit ran full-out agency-type spots supplied by the advertisers on their feed. We have to watch this for some syndicated shows we have that are produced in commercial and non-commercial edits. Have to make sure to download the right copies or commercials would be running.

At least the FCC was willing to work with them on paying the fine, and I think the station has realized the error of their ways and learned a hard lesson.

Believe it or not, if the rules have not changed, political ads that are requested by viable candidates are not considered for profit spots on NCE or LP licenses.. We HAD to offer air time to a few local candidates that came to us in Florida in the late 80's... The FCC told us we did not have to market and go out and seek those spots, but we could not refuse them, based on lowest underwriting rate and had to air any candidate though we might not agree with their position.. Has this changed? Most candidates do not seek putting ads on these NCE LP's due to a strong political leaning of many of the audiences.... Our occurance happened in 1989...

You're right...NCE licensees are required to provide air time to candidates, and the station has very few rights to edit any of the content they may put on the air. I think the station can edit bad language, but not much else. Of course, one would run a big disclaimer before broadcasting this material!
We had this happen once where a minor candidate pulled out this rule on the Class D college station I worked at while in school. Had the college legal dept. look at it and said we had to put him on the air.

 

[del_griffith]

But again, who had the beef and file the complaint?