FCC’s Gomez Comments on ABC-Disney Case After Public Comment Period Closes
FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez continues to address the Commission’s forcing ABC/Disney to go through an early license renewal for its eight owned-and-operated television stations ostensibly for “news distortion.” After the recent close of the public comment period in the matter, Gomez states, “When given the 
chance to weigh in on whether to allow the FCC to continue its campaign of censorship and control, the American public showed up in a big way, and the vast majority who spoke up delivered the same message. They believe in the value of their local news, they trust those who cover their communities, and they understand that the FCC has no business deciding who is a journalist and what counts as real news. A small number of partisan voices tried to hijack this process into a referendum on a network they dislike, but the public refuses to let local stations become collateral damage in the FCC’s political games. The FCC has no authority to police the ideological balance of the airwaves, and no matter what this Commission does next, the record now makes clear that this was never a genuine search for the public interest.”
Gomez’s press release adds, “In the docket covering the early license renewal proceeding, the agency received more than 150,000 comments. In the docket covering the FCC’s effort to unwind a more than two-decade old precedent recognizing the interview portion of ‘The View’ as a bona fide news program, the agency received nearly 80,000 comments. In both dockets, totaling more than 230,000 comments, the vast majority of commenters defended the stations and rejected the FCC’s attempt to use its licensing authority to punish constitutionally protected speech.”
dangerous and would allow two or three corporations to dominate local television news, reducing competition, independent journalism, and threatening religious broadcasters.” He noted that conservative organizations including CPAC, the National Religious Broadcasters, and the Zionist Organization of America oppose lifting these ownership limits. Ruddy also took the opportunity to address how broadcasters view the American people, saying, “Polling consistently shows Americans are far more center-right than portrayed by the legacy media. There is a growing disconnect between public opinion and media narratives.” 
local newsrooms, silence community reporting, and drive-up costs for the American families who depend on local stations for news and emergency alerts. A free and diverse media landscape depends on real limits on how much of the public airwaves any one company can control, and this FCC is now poised to allow local broadcasters to sell those airwaves off to the highest bidder. Congress set the 39 percent national ownership cap in federal law, and only Congress has the authority to raise or eliminate it. The Commission cannot waive away that limit simply because these corporate behemoths want to get out from under it.”
A political candidate sits down for a broadcast interview. The host asks questions. The conversation reaches into policy, personality, controversy, and campaign issues… just another day in the world of talk radio.
posture. ABC did not come to the Federal Communications Commission asking for anything. The Commission compelled ABC to file the Petition for Declaratory Ruling at issue here, directing the network to explain why the government. should not dictate which political candidates may appear on The View—even though the Commission itself resolved that very question in ABC’s favor more than two decades ago, ruling in 2002 that The View is a bona fide news program not subject to the equal opportunities requirement.
FCC officials. Gomez filed a petition for mandamus with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia seeking to compel action by the FCC on such petition. Instead, of responding to the mandamus petition, on June 22 the Commission filed its response and included a copy of an unpublished letter dismissing the News Distortion Petition that was signed by the Acting Chief of the Media Bureau on delegated authority.
the lines were cut again on Sunday, May 31 aafter a similar incident on April 19. Wendell tells the paper, “This time they must have used a cutting tool of some kind because it was a clean cut on the wire… I think it’s the same group that doesn’t like what’s going on at the radio station.” He adds, “It’s a federal offense because the station is licensed federally by the FCC,” and notes that “a conviction carried a fine of up to $250,000, up to 10 years in prison, and five years of probation.” 
requires Commission approval after a serious look into whether that arrangement serves the American public and protects our national security. Gomez states, “The American public deserves to know who owns the airwaves that carry their news. I am alarmed by what appears to be an effort to rubber stamp a financial structure that places nearly half of one of America’s largest broadcast and media companies into the hands of foreign governments with documented records of press suppression and a troubling willingness to silence journalists. There are serious, unresolved questions about how this foreign investment may jeopardize national security, and this Commission has a legal obligation to answer them before handing wealthy friends of this administration yet another Billionaire Buddy Bypass on a transaction that strikes at the heart of American journalism.” In her statement, Gomez points out that this deal involves sovereign wealth funds from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Abu Dhabi investing in a company that controls CBS broadcast stations, as well as major cable news operations including CNN. According to Paramount’s own filing, total foreign ownership of the combined company upon closing would reach approximately 49.5 percent. Nearly half of one of America’s largest broadcast and media companies would be in foreign hands.
commercial radio stations are set to increase by approximately 5% with proposed fees ranging from $395 for small-market Class D AM stations to as much as $25,000 for major market FM stations. The fees are based on population served and station class. For the smallest operators there is a silver lining as stations with a total regulatory fee liability of $1,000 or less for the year may be exempt.
host Jimmy Kimmel’s jokes aimed at the two. FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez issued a statement about the order, saying, “This is the most egregious action this FCC has taken in violation of the First Amendment to date. As part of its ongoing campaign of censorship and control, the White House called publicly for the silencing of a vocal critic, and this FCC has now answered that call. This is an unprecedented and politically motivated attempt to interfere with how broadcasters operate, and this unlawful overreach will fail. This should be a lesson to media companies that no amount of capitulation to this administration will buy them protection. The only choice is to stand up and stand firm in defense of the First Amendment.”
federal law. She says, “The FCC has once again chosen bureaucratic cover over public accountability. This merger was approved behind closed doors with no open process, no full Commission vote, and no transparency for the consumers and communities who will bear the consequences. A transaction of this magnitude, which includes new and novel issues before the FCC, demands open deliberation before the full Commission, not a quiet sign-off meant to avoid public scrutiny. Given the increasingly alarming pace of reckless media consolidation, the American public deserves to know how and why this decision was made.
pretends it has the power to control news coverage. In reality, the FCC has vanishingly little power over national news networks. It licenses local broadcast stations, not networks, and no licenses are up for renewal until 2028. Early renewal attempts are exceedingly rare, and the process is so demanding that any effort would almost certainly fail, especially given the well-documented First Amendment violations underlying these moves. These threats are grounded in neither reality nor law and would not survive judicial scrutiny, just as other recent attempts by this Administration to push beyond constitutional limits have repeatedly failed in court.
Carrier Bureau, helping implement the Act. In the webinar titled “30th Anniversary of the 96 Act: What Did We Learn?” panelists will explore how lessons from the past 30 years can drive innovation and competition for consumers today. Topics will include artificial intelligence, media, competition, convergence, access, and cybersecurity. The three separate panels will include Panel 1 looking at “The Legislative Process That Led to the Act; Panel 2 will address “FCC Implementation of the Act”; and Panel 3 will focus on “Today’s Challenges.” Interested parties can join online via the 
recent trends towards fragmentation facilitate or inhibit the ability of local broadcast television stations to meet their public interest obligations, including their production of local news and reporting? In what ways is the marketplace continuing to evolve and how will future changes impact consumer access to free over-the-air news and information, including public safety information?”
to television and radio programming. After the back-and-forth between The Late Show’s Stephen Colbert and CBS attorneys over the interview with U.S. Senate candidate U.S. Rep. James Talarico that did not air on CBS television but was pushed out on the show’s social media accounts instead, broadcasters – including news/talk radio programmers and hosts – may be confused about how the equal time rule is being applied.
FCC has no lawful authority to pressure broadcasters for political purposes or to create a climate that chills free expression. CBS is fully protected under the First Amendment to determine what interviews it airs, which makes its decision to yield to political pressure all the more disappointing. It is no secret that Paramount, CBS’s parent company, has regulatory matters before the government, but corporate interests cannot justify retreating from airing newsworthy content. The FCC is powerless to impose restrictions on protected speech, and any attempt to intimidate broadcasters into self-censorship undermines both press freedom and public trust. I once again urge broadcasters and their parent companies to stand firm against these unlawful pressures and continue exercising their constitutional right to speak freely and without government interference.”
Republican or Democrat. Often, Democratic candidates balk at being interviewed by conservative hosts for fear they will not get a “friendly” interview as their Republican opponent might have. Regardless, the law is about equal time, and the matter late night shows are dealing with is assuming they qualify for the “bona fide news” exemption that excuses them from the equal time rule. Chairman Carr’s position is there is no blanket exemption; it is taken on a case-by-case basis.
recommended proposals for the International Telecommunication Union’s World Radiocommunication Conference, which will be held in 2027. The World Radiocommunication Conference is a treaty-level forum held by the International Telecommunication Union (a United Nations agency) every three to four years in which countries decide on the allocation of frequency spectrum to allow the deployment or growth of all types of radiocommunication services such as wireless, broadcasting, satellite, and aeronautical services.
interview due to potential implications under the Federal Communications Commission’s “equal time” rule. The rule requires broadcast licensees to provide equal opportunities to legally qualified candidates for public office if one candidate is given airtime.
the Lakeland-Winter Haven, Florida market from Hall Communications. The deal includes news/talk WLKF-AM (but not its current FM translator W244BJ at 96.7 MHz) country WPVC, and adult hits WONN-AM and its translators W296CS at 107.1 FM and W240DB at 95.9 FM. MARC Radio says it expects the deal to close in May, pending FCC approval.
clear on what this is. This is government intimidation, not a legitimate investigation. Like many other so-called ‘investigations’ before it, the FCC will announce an investigation but never carry one out, reach a conclusion, or take any meaningful action. The real purpose is to weaponize the FCC’s regulatory authority to intimidate perceived critics of this Administration and chill protected speech. That is not how a free society operates. The First Amendment protects the right of daytime and late-night programs to cover newsworthy issues and express viewpoints without government interference. I urge broadcasters and their parent networks to stand strong against these unfounded attacks and continue exercising their constitutional rights without fear or favor.”
that wasn’t part of anything in that decision. It was focused on the potential misreading of precedents on the broadcast TV side. Of course, as you know, the rule applies to broadcast, radio and TV, but that one was focused on those TV precedents.” The memo to broadcast TV was relative to the 1996 bona fide news interview exemption that came about in the wake of an interview Jay Leno did with then-California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on “The Tonight Show.” The FCC Media Bureau ruled that “The Tonight Show” did not have to give Schwarzenegger’s opponent equal time because that interview segment qualified as a bona fide news interview. This matter doesn’t seem to be a big one for news/talk radio since news/talk stations are viewed as news outlets, on top of the fact that most talk radio hosts would love the opportunity to interview candidates with whom they might not personally agree. 
The plague of pessimism about the future of radio is fueled internally by radio employees. Doomsayers are logically found in the sales department. All day, salespeople meet with buyers. A buyer’s job is to negotiate a lower price by arguing radio’s negatives. The wall of negativity thrives within the work environment of a seller. Tough. But there is little or no reason for pessimism.
fundamentally changed with respect to our political broadcasting rules. The FCC has not adopted any new regulation, interpretation, or Commission-level policy altering the long-standing news exemption or equal time framework. For decades, the Commission has recognized that bona fide news interviews, late-night programs, and daytime news shows are entitled to editorial discretion based on newsworthiness, not political favoritism. That principle has not been repealed, revised, or voted on by the Commission. This announcement therefore does not change the law, but it does represent an escalation in this FCC’s ongoing campaign to censor and control speech.
serve in the public interest, the FCC yesterday issued a Guidance on Political Equal Opportunities Requirement for Broadcast Television Stations. While the memorandum is written to television stations, it obvious applies to radio stations as well. The memo ultimately addresses the 1959 order that exempts broadcasters from providing equal time to qualified candidates on any: (1) bona fide newscast; (2) bona fide news interview; (3) bona fidenews documentary (if the appearance of the candidate is incidental to the presentation of the subject or subjects covered by the news documentary); or (4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events (including but not limited to political conventions and activities incidental thereto). Programs such as “The Tonight Show” and “The View” are cited as entertainment shows in which an interview segment can qualify as a bona fide news interview. Regarding this, the memo concludes with two important paragraphs:
the way the commission is operating. She took issue with FCC Chair Brendan Carr’s interpretation of how the Commission should ensure that licensees operate in the public interest. She stated, “For months, this FCC has asserted an apparent roving mandate to police speech that this Administration does not like, invoking an undefined and unchecked concept known as the ‘public interest’ standard.
made clear, broadcasters are different than every other distributor of media. Specifically, broadcasters are required by both the Communications Act and the terms of their FCC-issued licenses to operate in the public interest. This sets them apart from cable channels, podcasts, streaming services, social media, and countless other types of distributors that have no public interest obligation. The FCC’s broadcast hoax rule, its news distortion policy, its political equal opportunity regulation, its prohibition on obscene, indecent, and profane content, its localism requirements — all of those and more apply uniquely to broadcasters. Congress has instructed the FCC to enforce public interest requirements on broadcasters. The FCC should do exactly that.” Carr added, “To ensure that broadcasters can meet their public interest obligations, the FCC has taken a number of actions, including seeking public comment for the first time in more than 15 years on the relationship between the large, national programmers on the one hand and the many local broadcast television stations on the other. Comments in that proceeding suggest that many local broadcasters are concerned that the national programmers have amassed enormous power and influence in recent years and have made it more challenging for local broadcasters to fulfill their public interest obligations. The FCC is going to continue its efforts to empower local broadcasters to meet their public interest obligations.”