In 1964, the FCC first adopted rules to restrict the duplication of programming on commonly-owned broadcast radio stations operating in the same geographic area.
The current version of the rule was adopted in 1992.
As of today, the rule’s end is on the way. And Democratic Commissioner Geoffrey Starks isn’t wholly pleased.
Perhaps a late shift to include both AM and FM stations is the reason.
BE SURE TO ‘LIKE’ RBR+TVBR ON FACEBOOK!
The Commissioners at their virtual August Open Meeting, held Thursday morning, voted in favor of an order that eliminates the radio duplication rule for AM stations … and FM stations.
This is a change from just three weeks ago, when the Commission signaled it would uphold the rule for FM stations.
And, with that shift, the Commission’s approval of this “modernization of media regulation” initiative wasn’t an unanimous one. For Starks, he concurred in part and dissented in part.
In late October 2019, the FCC’s Media Bureau moved forward with the introduction of MB Docket No. 19-310. With so much more competition and program diversity, which Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai says are the objectives of the radio duplication rule, the FCC sought input on whether or not the rule is still necessary or should be modified.
A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was drafted, and it focuses on 47 CFR § 73.3556
The R&O approved August 6 eliminates this section the Commission’s rules as applied to commonly owned radio stations operating in the same geographic area for radio service broadcasts.
In an October 2019 interview, Scott Flick, a partner with Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP in Washington, D.C., explained to RBR+TVBR that the rule the FCC is referencing only prohibits simulcasting where there is significant signal overlap and both stations are in the same service. What it does not involve are AM/FM simulcasts and rules allowing them.
Still, the erasure of the radio duplication rule concerns Starks.
“In opening this inquiry last year, we sought to determine whether the radio programming duplication rule ‘remains necessary to serve the public interest goals of competition, programming diversity, and spectrum efficiency that it was originally intended to foster.’ This decision relegates that inquiry to an afterthought,” he said.
Starks also takes issue with the revision to the report and order that was made, with an earlier version recognizing the need to retain the radio duplication rule for FM service, as it would “encourage the diversification of programming on commonly owned FM stations” and discourage spectrum warehousing, consistent with the stated goals of the rule.
“That is as true today as it was three weeks ago, but that language is gone,” Starks bemoaned.
Diversity is crux to Starks’ dissent, in part and noted, “I have concerns that today’s decision will undoubtedly make it easier and more cost-effective for large station groups to hoard local stations without any obligation to provide significant programming that meets local community needs. Moreover, I fear it will reward ownership consolidation and thus will likely exacerbate an already huge disparity in the number of media outlets owned and controlled by people of color and women, which often translates to a lack of locally relevant and diverse programming that addresses local needs and interests.”
As such, Starks concurs with the decision to grant relief for AM broadcasters. But, he dissents with the remainder of the decision.
“I have concerns that today’s decision will undoubtedly make it easier and more cost-effective for large station groups to hoard local stations without any obligation to provide significant programming that meets local community needs.” — Geoffrey Starks
In a media release, the FCC’s Republican majority said the Commission determined that eliminating the radio duplication rule “will help struggling stations stay on the air; afford broadcast radio licensees greater flexibility to address issues of local concern in a timely fashion, particularly in times of crisis; assist with format changes; facilitate a potential voluntary digital transition in the AM service; and ultimately allow stations to improve service to their communities.”
At the same time, the Commission also concluded that broadcasters “have no incentive to limit their appeal and thus their revenues by simulcasting the same programming on multiple stations for long periods of time so the benefits of providing additional flexibility outweigh any costs.”
This sentiment is echoed by Brad Deutsch, Office Managing Director and Principal at Foster Garvey, in a RBR+TVBR InFOCUS Podcast distributed Thursday.
RBR+TVBR sought comment from the FCC regarding the inclusion of FM radio service in its R&O just prior to Noon Eastern. A source close to the matter tells RBR+TVBR the inclusion of FM service in the R&O came as recently as Tuesday.
To little surprise, the NAB applauded the R&O’s passage.
In a statement, SVP/Communications Ann Marie Cumming said, “Given that there is no longer any rationale for imposing a ban on duplicating one’s radio signal, we appreciate the FCC’s decision to rescind the rule.”
That said, it is clear the decision was a party-line vote.
“We appreciate in particular the efforts of Commissioners [Mike] O’Rielly and [Brendan] Carr, who understood that the rule outlived its usefulness and that regulations in and of themselves come with a cost.”
