FCC Chair Carr Underscores Broadcasters’ “Public Interest” Duty
During last week’s testimony before the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, FCC Chair Brendan Carr addressed, among other things, broadcasters’ obligation to serving the public interest. This comes as he is being accused by critics of using the power of the Commission to influence content. Carr testified, “The FCC is
working to empower local broadcasters to serve the public interest and meet the needs of their communities. As Congress, the Supreme Court, and the FCC have all 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.
“Television broadcasters have this public interest obligation because the government has given them the unique privilege of using a scarce national resource – the public airwaves – and in doing so has necessarily excluded others that might want to broadcast their own programming over that same spectrum. That is why they are required to serve, not just their own narrow interest, but the public interest, including the needs of their local communities.
“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.”
Amendment protects journalistic choices from government intimidation. Nevertheless, this FCC has deployed a vague and ineffective News Distortion policy as a weapon to stretch its licensing authority and pressure newsrooms. The First Amendment is a pillar of our democracy. As federal regulators, we must respect the rule of law, uphold the Constitution, and ensure that a free press is never subjected to regulatory interference by the FCC.” The FCC’s News Distortion Policy was created in 1949 and has been criticized from time to time over the years. It has rarely been invoked until now. A Petition for Special Relief before the FCC signed by 11 people, including former FCC Chairman Thomas E. Wheeler, asks that the Commission repeal the news distortion policy. They cite case law, saying, “In Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, the Supreme Court, applying the First Amendment, reaffirmed that the government has no role in ‘un-biasing’ the media. In direct contradiction to that decision, the news distortion policy seeks to mold the speech of private broadcasters to the FCC’s own view of what is correct, complete, and accurate news. The First Amendment forbids the government from embarking on such a project.”