Tag: threats

FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez is petitioning the National Association of Broadcasters president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt to get behind broadcasters’ concerns about the Commission’s threats to investigate stations for news distortion or broadcast hoax for airing polling data “this Administration happens to dislike.” In a letter to LeGeyt, Gomez writes, “This Administration is running a coordinated, government-wide effort to reshape the media into its sanctioned messenger, and the Federal Communications Commission has become one of its most active instruments… The Commission’s own guidance is clear on this point. Enforcement of the news distortion policy requires proof that a broadcaster deliberately distorted a factual report on a significant event, not a minor or incidental one, and courts have recognized that the policy draws a firm line between deliberate distortion and mere inaccuracy or differences of opinion.”

Gomez also pointed to the issue of the equal opportunities rule noting that guidance has been settled on the matter for decades. But she says that acting without input from the full Commission and beyond its authority, the Media Bureau rewrote that settled guidance. “This agency does not get to redefine the public interest standard as whatever happens to serve the political interests of whoever is in power. That standard was written into the law to protect the audiences these stations are licensed to serve, not the officials who regulate them. A broadcaster reporting in good faith, whether covering widely available polling data, booking a candidate based on newsworthiness, or airing political advertising in compliance with the law, should know that it is fulfilling that obligation rather than violating it.”

She wraps up by writing: “Despite NAB staying largely quiet through the first year of this censorship and control campaign, I want to acknowledge that you have not stayed completely silent, and for that I am grateful. Your organization spoke up against the FCC’s unprecedented early license renewal order, and I do not take that for granted given the position NAB itself occupies. But I would not be doing my job if I did not say plainly that the volume of that response has not yet matched the scale of what your members are facing. An industry confronting a coordinated effort to turn licensing authority into leverage over election-year coverage needs more than a couple of tempered statements. Your members deserve to hear from their leading voice with the same clarity and urgency that their First Amendment rights, and their bottom line, call for.”  You can read the whole letter here.