NAB Offers Mixed Response To Key Eighth Circuit Ruling

0

The NAB is “extremely pleased” that the FCC’s top-four prohibition has been struck down by a federal appeals court, but is downbeat about the court’s decision to abide by every other rule reinforced by the 2018 Quadrennial Review — released in the waning days of the Biden Administration.


The response from NAB President/CEO Curtis LeGeyt is tied to a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit vacating key portions of the FCC’s 2023 order stemming from its 2018 Quadrennial Review. While the association gives a big thumbs’ up to the Eighth Circuit’s decision to vacate the FCC’s “arbitrary and outdated top-four prohibition,” the NAB is “disappointed that the court stopped short of addressing the decades-old radio ownership restrictions that defy economic reality and weaken broadcasters’ ability to compete, invest in local journalism and serve their communities.”

But, there’s hope given the current regulatory climate and shift in leadership at the Commission from Jessica Rosenworcel to current Chairman Brendan Carr. LeGeyt said Carr “has long been a champion for empowering local stations, and we look forward to working with this FCC to modernize its local radio ownership rules and ensure local broadcasters can thrive in the communities they serve across the nation.”

Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the FCC is required to review its broadcast ownership rules every four years and repeal or modify any that are no longer in the public interest due to marketplace competition. In December 2023, the FCC issued its long-delayed order completing the 2018 Quadrennial Review.

In the NAB’s view, “Rather than modernize its ownership rules to reflect the current media landscape, the Commission retained every existing regulation, including those affecting local radio.” It further tightened the television ownership rule known as the ‘Top-Four Prohibition’ by extending it to low-power TV stations and digital multicast channels. The tightening of the rule and the rule itself were vacated by the court.