As 2021 began, the NAB formally objected to a FCC Petition for Reconsideration of a Commission Report and Order that effectively eliminates the radio duplication rule for AM stations … and FM stations.
The petition was filed by three groups, who have come together to challenge the sudden re-inclusion of FM stations in the R&O, approved in August 2020.
Last week, the trio of groups submitted a joint “final consolidated reply” — as did a fourth group that’s been a NAB antagonist.
BE SURE TO FOLLOW RBR+TVBR ON FACEBOOK!
The threesome fighting the NAB are low-power licensee advocate REC Networks, the musicFIRST Coalition, and the Future of Music Coalition.
For REC, musicFIRST and the FMC, eliminating the rule for FM stations will lead to a reduction in programming diversity and “encourage corporate radio owners to hoard spectrum.”
NAB General Counsel and EVP/Legal and Regulatory Affairs Rick Kaplan disagrees with that assertion.
In a reply to Kaplan’s Petition for Reconsideration objection, the three groups’ Calabasas, Calif.-based legal counsel, Rachel Stilwell, insists that the Commission grant its petition and reverse its R&O with respect to the FM portion of the radio duplication rule.
Their main beef with the lobbying group of choice for America’s broadcasters? “The NAB’s argument fails to take into account that larger corporate owners of FM radio stations could engage in widespread local duplication of FM programming in the wake of this needlessly drastic rule change, if the FM portion of the Rule is not reinstated. Such widespread duplication of programming would necessarily harm the public interest in program diversity at local market levels.”
Thus, the Commission should reinstate the FM portion of the Rule. Then, the groups say, the FCC should monitor waiver applications for local FM duplication of programming in order to determine how often, and under what types of circumstances, owners seek relief from the rule designed to protect the public interest in programming diversity on local FM airwaves.
A final reply to the opposition for reconsideration was also filed by Common Frequency, a group largely associated with Prometheus Radio Project — the plaintiff in the FCC cross-ownership rule remand appeal the U.S. Supreme Court will take the next several months to decide, following its January 19 oral arguments.
Common Frequency takes issue with an ex parte filing from the NAB and a “harmless administrative error” it argues is not.
“The Commission must grant the Petition by reversing, rescinding or re-opening the Rule
Making to ensure due process to and public input from parties, such as Common Frequency, who were shut out as a result of the false flag indexing and the lack of timely, accurate and proper public notice of NAB’s ex parte communications,” says Michael W. Richards, counsel to Common Frequency.
The matter will now be considered by a balanced 2-2 FCC, likely headed on an interim basis by Democrat Jessica Rosenworcel.
