Industry News

FCC Approves Cumulus Bankruptcy Exit; Berner Promises No Cuts to News Staffs for Two Years

Cumulus has not released an official announcement yet but several outlets – including Editor and Publisher – are reporting that the Commission signed off on the license transfers from the old Cumulus to the new Cumulus yesterday (8/19). Interestingly, Cumulus CEO Mary G. Berner sent a memo to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr on August 14 in which she reaffirmed “Cumulus imgMedia’s longstanding commitment to operating its broadcast radio stations in a manner that serves the public interest, advances localism, supports public safety and responds to the needs and interests of the communities it is privileged to serve.” Additionally, Berner addressed the company’s newsrooms and wrote: “Preserving our coverage of newsworthy events, and their impact on our local communities, is exceedingly important to Cumulus Media. The stronger financial foundation that our financial reorganization will afford us is intended to preserve and strengthen, not diminish, our ability to serve local audiences. Consistent with that objective, we commit to maintaining our existing newsroom staffing levels for a minimum of two years following approval of the requested applications.”

Industry News

FCC’s Gomez Comments on ABC Suit

Following Tuesday’s news that ABC is filing suit against the FCC alleging a violation of its First Amendment rights, FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez comments on the matter. She states: “For months, the FCC has waged a campaign of imgcensorship and control against Disney’s ABC stations, using the threat of broadcast license revocations to punish a company for speech this administration doesn’t like. I have long called on companies to push back against this kind of government intimidation, and I’m glad Disney has shown courage and stepped up. This should be a welcome sign for every broadcaster who has felt the weight of this overreaching government pressure in silence.

“I am hopeful that this will mark the beginning of the end of this administration’s disregard for the Constitution and the law, and that the coming months will bring the costly legal defeat this agency has been asking for since it started down this path. It is time this administration understands that the Constitution does not bend to political convenience, and that the First Amendment protects the news and commentary Americans see on their screens even when those in power wish it didn’t.”

Industry Views

After Warning Talk Radio, ABC Sues the FCC

By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

 

imgABC warned that the FCC’s scrutiny of “The View” could reach talk radio. Now the eight ABC-owned television station licensees have taken the agency to court. But the immediate lawsuit is not asking a judge to decide whether “The View” qualifies as news.

Rather, it challenges the FCC’s decision to force those local stations into license renewal years ahead of schedule. On April 28, the FCC’s Media Bureau invoked a rule allowing early renewal when it considers that step essential to an investigation. The stations filed under protest, and on August 18 asked a federal court to halt the proceeding before the FCC can designate it for a hearing.

The FCC says it is investigating possible unlawful discrimination in ABC’s employment practices and whether the stations have served the public interest. ABC calls that explanation a pretext, pointing to public demands that it fires Jimmy Kimmel, threats against its licenses, criticism of its editorial decisions, and the separate proceeding involving “The View.” No license has been denied, and the FCC has not yet answered the lawsuit.

The ABC network does not hold one national broadcast license. Its local stations hold the licenses, and the same federal licensing structure covers terrestrial radio. An online-only show has no FCC broadcast license for the agency to call in.

ABC’s legal argument is that the process itself can punish speech. A costly, open-ended license proceeding may chill hosts, producers and programmers before a regulator ever issues a censorship order. For talk radio, the question is not whether you like ABC; it is whether the government may use threats to a station’s license to influence who gets booked, what gets asked, or which opinions reach the air.

Matthew B. Harrison is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

Industry News

Cumulus Media Q2 Net Revenue Down 9.7%

Cumulus Media – which is still awaiting approval from the FCC as it works to exit Chapter 11 reorganization – reports its operating results for the second quarter of 2026 and reveals net revenue of $167.9 million, a decline of 9.7% from the same period in 2025. The company reports a net loss of $9.2 million, down from the img$12.8 million net loss it reported for the same period in 2025. Breaking down the company’s revenue by segment, broadcast spot revenue was $81.5 million, down 10.6% from a year ago; network revenue was $21.4 million, a decline of 21.5% compared to 2025; and digital revenue was $38.7 million, basically flat compared to Q2 of 2025. Cumulus Media CEO Mary G. Berner comments, “We are pleased to report our second quarter earnings. With our plan of reorganization confirmed by the court and the FCC approval process well underway, we are positioned to emerge from Chapter 11 with a stronger balance sheet to capitalize on future market opportunities.”

Industry News

Zimmer Petitions FCC for Ownership Cap Exemption

Zimmer Communications files a request with the FCC to waive the ownership cap for its acquisition of four radio stations from Mid-West Family Broadcasting that includes sports talk KOSP, Springfield, Missouri “102.1 The Won” and three music brands. imgZimmer argues in its filing that relief from the ownership cap would not adversely affect competition in the Springfield, Missouri market and notes that if approved, its revenue share in the market would be 33.6% (up from its current 8.5%), while SummitMedia’s revenue share is currently 34.8%. Zimmer goes on to add that in terms of audience share, Zimmer would have 21.3% of the market’s audience compared to iHeartMedia’s 22.3%. Additionally, Zimmer points out that, if approved, 18 different owners would control stations in the Springfield market.

Industry News

Carr Congratulates Thumann Severs on FCC Nomination

President Donald Trump is nominating Danielle Thumann Severs for a seat on the Federal Communications Commission. She has served two stints at the FCC focusing on matters before the Wireline Competition Bureau, the Public Safety and Homeland imgSecurity Bureau, as well as the agency’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr states, “I want to congratulate Danielle on her nomination to serve as a Commissioner on the FCC.  Danielle is a dedicated public servant and has worked with skill and distinction on some of the most important matters before the agency.  Danielle has delivered policy wins across the FCC’s economic agenda – from bridging the digital divide and protecting consumers to advancing public safety.  With the advice and consent of the Senate, Danielle would make a terrific Commissioner.”

Industry News

Gomez Remains Outspoken About TV Cap Elimination

FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez is not backing away from her criticism of the Commission’s recent vote to eliminate the television ownership cap. On Friday (8/7), she stated: “The FCC’s decision to eliminate the 39 percent national audience reach cap is unlawful on its face. Congress set this cap in federal law, and only imgCongress can change it. I am not alone in that conclusion. Republicans with deep firsthand knowledge of this issue agree. Former FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly has been unequivocal that the FCC lacks authority to change the cap. Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who negotiated the 39 percent compromise, has stressed that Congress wrote the cap into law specifically to keep the FCC from changing it. And Senate Commerce Chair Ted Cruz has said he is skeptical a change can be made absent an act of Congress.”

Industry News

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 imgchance 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.”

Industry News

Newsmax CEO Warns Christian Leaders About Media Consolidation

Last Friday (7/17), Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy addressed the attendees at The FAMiLY Leader’s Family Leadership Summit in Des Moines. Among the topics Ruddy spoke about included the FCC’s move to abandon the 39% ownership cap for television stations. Ruddy warned that FCC chairman Brendan Carr’s plan “is imgdangerous 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.” See more about Ruddy’s speech at Newsmax here.

Industry News

Gomez: FCC Cannot Change Ownership Cap

After FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced the Commission votes to eliminate the cap on television station ownership, FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez issued a statement on the matter. She says: “This unlawful effort to hand control of the public airwaves to billionaire buddies of this administration will destroy imglocal 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.”

Industry Views

Who Gets to Decide If and Why a Guest is Newsworthy?

img

By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

imgA 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.

To the FCC, depending on the program and the circumstances, it may raise a different question: did the station give one legally qualified candidate a broadcast “use” of its facilities that now triggers equal opportunities for opponents? That question sits at the center of ABC’s dispute with the FCC over “The View,” and it deserves the attention of every broadcaster who books public officials, candidates, advocates, and political personalities.

This is not an article about whether anyone likes “The View.” That is the wrong question. The better question is whether the government should decide, after the fact, that a long-running interview program no longer qualifies as a bona fide news interview program because regulators dislike, distrust, or second-guess its guest selection.

The Equal Opportunities Rule, often called “equal time,” is not the Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine is gone. However, equal opportunity requirements remain part of broadcast law. In general terms, when a broadcast station permits a legally qualified candidate to “use” its facilities, opposing legally qualified candidates for the same office may be entitled to comparable opportunity, unless an exemption applies.

One such exemption covers bona fide news interviews.

That exemption matters because it allows broadcasters to cover politics without turning every meaningful candidate interview into a scheduling trap. The law recognizes that a news judgment is different from a campaign favor. A host may interview a candidate because that candidate is newsworthy, controversial, powerful, interesting, or central to a public issue, not because the station has endorsed the campaign.

ABC’s argument is that “The View already cleared that hurdle more than two decades ago, when the FCC treated it as a bona fide news interview program. ABC now says the Commission has forced the issue back onto the table and is effectively asking whether the government should dictate which candidates the program may feature. That is why ABC’s filing points beyond daytime television and directly toward talk radio.

Talk radio should not dismiss that warning. The format routinely features candidates and officeholders without immediately inviting every opponent. Sometimes the reason is obvious: one guest is in the news and the others are not. Sometimes the reason is practical: a candidate accepts and the opponent declines. Sometimes the reason is editorial: the host believes one interview will better serve the audience.

Those are normal programming judgments. But if regulators start looking behind those judgments for partisan motive, the risk changes. The question becomes less “Was this guest newsworthy?” and more “Can you prove to the government that your reason was acceptable?” That is a dangerous shift for any medium built around editorial discretion.

This does not mean broadcasters should panic or stop booking candidates. It does mean stations, networks and programs should tighten their habits. Know when a guest is a legally qualified candidate. Understand when an appearance may count as a use. Keep clean records. Preserve the editorial reason for the booking. Make sure producers and hosts know the difference between a campaign appearance, a news interview, and paid political time.

The larger warning is simple: broadcast talk is regulated speech in a way podcasts, YouTube shows, and most streaming programs are not. That distinction already matters for indecency, sponsorship identification, public files, political files, and license obligations. Now it may matter again in the heart of the format itself: who gets invited to talk.

The government should not sit in the producer’s chair. But broadcasters should not pretend the chair is invisible. The best protection is not silence. It is disciplined editorial judgment, documented in real time, applied consistently, and defended as what it is: the broadcaster’s constitutional role in deciding what is newsworthy for its audience.

Matthew B. Harrison is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

Industry News

ABC Responds to FCC About its Targeting “The View”; Says Talk Radio Could Be Next

ABC states in the opening paragraphs of its filing with the FCC that the Commission’s targeting of “The View” over its guest bookings is not consistent and ultimately threatens talk radio as well. The petition states: “These Reply Comments arise from an unusual imgposture. 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.

“Members of the public then submitted tens of thousands of comments in the proceeding, the overwhelming majority urging the Commission to respect the broadcaster’s editorial independence. These Reply Comments respond to that record. The commenters are right to be concerned. The First Amendment does not permit the government to sit in an editor’s chair. Yet that is the seat the Commission now proposes to take—deciding which broadcast programs qualify as legitimate news and, for those it finds wanting, compelling them to surrender their airtime to guests they never chose to feature.

“Today, the program in the Commission’s sights is The View. The principle in the balance is far larger: whether a federal regulator may override a broadcaster’s editorial judgment about whom to interview—a judgment the Constitution commits to broadcasters and their audiences, not to the state. Nothing about The View that the law cares about has changed since the Commission last answered that question more than two decades ago. The program remains regularly scheduled, remains under ABC’s control, and remains driven by the same lodestar—newsworthiness—that has long led it to interview the day’s most consequential figures, from Presidents and Senators to Supreme Court Justices. What has changed is not the program but the political climate around it.

“The Commission has trained its attention on daytime and late-night television—programs perceived as unfriendly to the current administration—while leaving untouched the vast landscape of talk radio, where candidates routinely appear without their opponents. A rule pressed against one set of speakers and quietly suspended for another, along lines that track the administration’s political preferences, is not evenhanded regulation. The record here reflects a widespread and well-founded concern that it is not.”

Industry News

FCC’s Gomez Critical of Dismissal of Petition to Repeal News Distortion Policy

Federal Communications Commission commissioner Anna M. Gomez is criticizing a summary dismissal of a Petition for Special Relief with the Commission seeking a repeal of the Commission’s news distortion policy filed last fall by a bipartisan group of former imgFCC 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.

Gomez writes, “The Commission has increasingly used its regulatory authority as a cudgel against broadcasters whose coverage it dislikes rather than as a neutral enforcement tool, and license renewals and merger approvals have been treated as leverage over editorial judgment rather than as the objective processes the Communications Act requires them to be. This is not an isolated tactic, and the Commission has repeatedly reached for rarely used or long dormant authority to discipline broadcasters it views as critical, including reviving a license renewal mechanism that had not been invoked in over half a century apparently to target a single company’s news coverage. This includes repeated reliance on the previously rarely invoked news distortion policy at issue here.  That pressure has had a real effect, and station groups and local broadcasters across the country have asked my office what topics are now considered too risky to cover, a question that should never need to be asked in a country with a First Amendment. When a federal agency with the power to grant or revoke broadcast licenses starts weighing in on editorial content, the chilling effect reaches far beyond any single station or story, and it is compounded here by the Commission’s choice to resolve this particular petition through an unpublished staff letter rather than a public vote of the full Commission.

“The Commission regularly uses delegated authority to get the work of the Commission done, issuing licenses, seeking comment, granting rule waivers, etc. These are instances where the bureaus and offices of the agency take actions consistent with established Commission precedent.  Delegated authority allows the Commission to operate efficiently.

“Delegated authority, however, can be abused to shield significant actions from judicial review as only final Commission actions can be appealed.  That is what appears to be happening in this instance and the consequences for our democracy are serious.  The Commission has repeatedly used the Media Bureau to take actions that are inconsistent with longstanding Commission precedent that violate both the Communications Act and the First Amendment.

“I am cognizant that my dissent on the substance will not change the outcome of the News Distortion Petition by the Commission.  Not providing the Commissioners with an opportunity to vote on this important petition, however, shields the Commission’s actions from critical judicial review.  Accordingly, I stand ready to vote on an order addressing the issues raised in the News Distortion Petition to facilitate the timely advancement of this matter to a final appealable order that will allow the appellate review process to move forward without unnecessary delay.”

Industry News

Gardner, Massachusetts Talk Station Vandalized for Second Time; Owner Offering $40k Reward

The owner of north-central Massachusetts news/talk outlet WGAW, Gardner is doubling the reward he’s been offering for information leading to the person or persons who cut the station’s transmission lines for the second time in a two-month period. Steve Wendell tells The Gardner News the reward is now $40,000. He believes imgthe 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.” See The Gardner Newscoverage here.

Industry News

Gomez Urges Review of Paramount-Warner Bros. Merger

FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez is calling on the FCC to “conduct a full, independent, and rigorous review of the foreign ownership interests embedded in the proposed Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery merger.” Noting that under federal law, foreign governments and their representatives are prohibited from owning the licenses of CBS’s television stations and any indirect foreign ownership above 25% imgrequires 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.

Industry News

Radio License Holders May Face 5% Hike in Fees

Radio license holders may see regulatory fees rise after several years of decreases. The proposed 2026 FCC annual regulatory fees for imgcommercial 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.

Industry News

Gomez Criticizes FCC’s “Campaign of Censorship”

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr is ordering a review of Disney’s ABC TV O&Os two years before their licenses are up for renewal. The order states the reason is violation of the Commission’s “unlawful discrimination” policy through ABC’s diversity, equity and inclusion practices. Critics of the move believe the real reason Carr is ordering the investigation is President and First Lady Trump’s anger over late night imghost 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.”

Industry News

FCC Commissioner Gomez Criticizes “Unlawful” Nexstar-Tegna Merger

FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez issued a statement on Friday (3/20) after the FCC’s Media Bureau approved the Nexstar/TEGNA merger, which Gomez notes violates the existing 39% national ownership cap inimg 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.

“Local journalism is under extraordinary strain. Across the country, newsrooms are being consolidated, reporters laid off, and editorial decisions made far from the communities broadcast stations are licensed to serve. The Nexstar/TEGNA merger will accelerate exactly that trend, concentrating broadcast power in fewer corporate hands, shrinking independent editorial voices, and prioritizing national business interests over local needs. Nexstar has already begun cutting newsrooms throughout the country, and as these billion-dollar companies grow even larger, their increased negotiating leverage will drive up fees that translate into higher monthly bills for those families who can least afford them. The consequences of this rubber stamp approval will be felt in living rooms and newsrooms across the country, resulting in fewer voices, less competition, and higher costs for consumers.”

Industry News

Gomez Calls Out FCC’s “Intimidation Tactics”

FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez responds to FCC Chairman Brendan Carr’s recent statements tying broadcasters’ public service obligations to reporting about the Iran conflict and warning them about airing “hoaxes and news distortions.” She writes: “Once again, this FCCimg 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.

“The concern over the chilling effect of these actions, however, is very real. Over the past year, this FCC has attacked the media as part of a years-long campaign by this Administration and its allies to discredit factual, independent coverage while blaming the press for growing public distrust. Meanwhile, it is the FCC’s own credibility and public trust that are rapidly eroding.

“Out of the many politically motivated FCC investigations targeting perceived government critics, not a single one has resulted in an enforcement action. This follows a well-established pattern of threatened investigations, broadcast license revocations, and regulatory harassment aimed at pressuring broadcasters and their corporate parents to comply or capitulate in advance. We cannot give this FCC more power than it has. Broadcasters, journalists, and the public should recognize these empty threats for what they are and fight to defend the First Amendment against any attempt to control or intimidate the press.”

Industry News

FCC Commissioner Gomez to Host ’96 Telecomm Act Anniversary Webinar

On Tuesday (3/17) at 12:00 noon ET, FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez will host a webinar featuring panel conversations with communications and technology policy experts who lived through the creation and implementation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. That year, Gomez served as a legal advisor in the FCC’s Commonimg 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 FCC Events Webpage or visit https://www.fcc.gov/news-events/events/2026/03/30th-anniversary-96-act-webinar-what-did-we-learn. No registration required.

Industry News

FCC Seeking Public Comments on Sports Broadcasting Practices and Marketplace Developments

The FCC’s Media Bureau is asking for the public’s comments on the current state of sports broadcasting. In making the announcement, the Commission says, “Many games are still available for free over broadcast TV, but there has been a surge in recent years of games going behind the paywalls of various streaming services.  While this can increase the number of games and sports available to fans, many consumers today find it more difficult to find the events they want to watch and are now paying to sign up for one or more video distribution platforms that consumers can find difficult to navigate.”

With that said, it is asking for consumers to “address the current and emerging trends in the distribution of live sports programming.  How does the present marketplace benefit or harm consumers?  How does theimg 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?”

NAB president Curtis LeGeyt issued the following statement in response: “NAB thanks Chairman Carr for his leadership in examining the rapid changes in the sports broadcasting marketplace and what they mean for American viewers and local communities.

“Consumer access to premier games through free, over-the-air television has long been a cornerstone of the American sports fan experience. As distribution becomes more fragmented across streaming services and paywalls, fans face higher costs and greater confusion just to follow the teams they care about. Local broadcasters provide the widest reach for live events, bringing fans together to celebrate their favorite teams.

“As the Commission evaluates these marketplace trends, it is important to ensure that local stations have a fair opportunity to compete for premium sports rights. That includes modernizing outdated ownership restrictions that limit broadcasters’ ability to achieve the scale necessary to compete in today’s media marketplace. We look forward to participating in this proceeding and providing real-world insight into how disruption in the media landscape is affecting viewers and local stations.”

Industry News

Colbert-Talarico Interview Draws Attention to Equal Time Rule as FCC Commissioners Disagree About its Interpretation

It’s no surprise to regular TALKERS readers that FCC Chairman Brendan Carr and Democratic Commissioner Anna M. Gomez disagree – at least to some degree – on how the equal time rule should be appliedimg 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.

For her part, Gomez issued the following statement: “This is yet another troubling example of corporate capitulation in the face of this Administration’s broader campaign to censor and control speech. The imgFCC 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.”

As far as news/talk radio is concerned, TALKERS editors have pointed out that in most cases, talk radio stations and their hosts are usually happy to have any qualified candidate be interviewed – whetherimg 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.

Industry News

FCC’s Carr Appoints Two to World Radiocommunication Conference Advisory Committee

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announces his appointments of George John and Kimberly Baum as chair and vice chair of the Commission’s World Radiocommunication Conference Advisory Committee.  The advisory committee was re-chartered on January 21 with the mission of providing the Commission with advice, technical support, and 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.

Industry News

CBS Pulls Planned Colbert Interview with Texas Senate Candidate Amid FCC Equal-Time Concerns

A planned interview between “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” and Texas State Rep. James Talarico, a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate, was pulled from broadcast at the last-minute last night (2/16) after CBS executives cited concerns related to federal broadcast regulations.

Colbert talked about the decision during the show’s opening monologue, telling viewers that network attorneys had advised against airing theimg 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.

Historically, late-night talk shows have relied on exemptions to the rule, including classifications as “bona fide news interviews” or entertainment programming. However, recent statements from FCC leadership have prompted renewed scrutiny.

imgFCC Chairman Brendan Carr has indicated that the Commission is reviewing how those exemptions are applied, particularly in the context of high-profile entertainment programs that feature political figures. While no formal rule change has been adopted, CBS reportedly acted out of caution, concerned that airing the interview could trigger equal-time obligations for opposing candidates.

Colbert said CBS had initially instructed him not to reference the decision on air, a directive he chose to disregard. During the broadcast, he explained the network’s reasoning to viewers and criticized the uncertainty surrounding the FCC’s current posture on candidate appearances.

The interview itself was recorded but not broadcast on CBS. Instead, it was released online through The Late Show’s digital platforms. The FCC’s equal-time rules apply to over-the-air broadcasters but do not extend to online streaming or social media platforms, allowing the interview to be distributed outside the broadcast context.

Colbert took the opportunity to point out what he characterized as uneven regulatory treatment across media platforms, noting that political commentary on talk radio continues without comparable intervention. The FCC has not announced any new enforcement actions related to talk radio or late-night television programming.

Neither CBS nor the FCC issued formal statements Monday night addressing the specific decision. Carr has not publicly commented on the Colbert episode but has previously stated that the Commission is obligated to ensure consistent application of federal communications law.

The incident has renewed debate within the media industry over how equal-time rules should apply in a fragmented media landscape where political discourse routinely occurs across broadcast, cable, and digital platforms.

Industry News

MARC Radio to Acquire Talker WLKF, Lakeland and Music Outlets from Hall Communications

MARC Radio Group is buying three radio stations head on five signals inimg 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.