(Editor’s note: Nexstar Media Group, Sinclair and Hearst Television were contacted for comment for this article but declined.)

The Future of Television Initiative report, released in mid-January on advancing the transition from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0 has largely received praise from industry players, including many broadcasters and ATSC, but some have cast a wary eye or thrown shade not simply on the report but ATSC 3.0 itself.

Led by the National Association of Broadcasters, former Federal Communications Commission Chair Jessica Rosenworcel launched the initiative at the 2023 NAB Show. Its goal was to “establish a roadmap for a transition to ATSC 3.0 that serves the public interest,” Rosenworcel said at the convention.

What came out of the initiative was a report that was less of a road map and more of an airing of perspectives on the transition from a wide range of participants, all of which may one day inform FCC rulemaking.

“I think there was kind of this misperception among a lot of people that this [initiative] would solve all of the issues and everyone would come together,” Robert Folliard, senior vice president of government relations and distribution at Gray Media, said. “That was never going to happen, nor was it really the purpose.”

Rather, the document reported the conclusions of three working groups, one looking at issues related to backward compatibility, a second the conditions for completing the transition and a third at post-transition regulation.

Participants in each working group came from a diverse set of stakeholders. Among them were local TV broadcasters, broadcast groups and networks, representatives from low-power TV, satellite and cable providers, various trade associations, the Advanced Television Systems Committee (ATSC), consumer-electronics vendors, retailers and public-interest groups. The report not only presented consensus recommendations in each of the three areas but also summaries of participants’ perspectives offered on various topics upon which the recommendations were made.

“It [the report] was really just [a vehicle] to get everything out there, and I think it did a great job of that,” Folliard said. “It allowed everyone to stake out their positions, and to that extent, it was sort of mission accomplished.”

Creating the report also helped to educate many outside of broadcasting about ATSC 3.0 and the progress broadcasters, CE vendors and others have made, Pearl TV Managing Director Anne Schelle said.

“A lot of the entities were completely unaware of where NextGen TV stood,” she said. “Let’s go back six or seven years ago. They couldn’t understand and get their arms around even what NextGen TV was. They could never conceive of the fact that broadcasters would actually have launched [ATSC 3.0 transmission in] 76% of the United States, and on top of that, put out HDR and a cool application like the one [Start Over] from NBCU.”

Incremental Step
At the moment, the voluntary transition to ATSC 3.0 has created a “worst of all worlds” situation for broadcasters, Folliard said.

On the one hand, they cannot fully deliver all of the benefits of NextGen TV because of the FCC’s requirement to offer a substantially similar main-channel simulcast in 1.0, which limits how much TV spectrum can be devoted to 3.0 services. On the other hand, broadcasters must live with fewer potential 1.0 secondary channels than could otherwise be on air to accommodate the spectrum needed for 3.0. “That’s not a great place to be,” Foillard said.

The report addresses a possible sunset strategy in which the substantially similar requirement would be lifted. Doing so might enable a broadcaster to reduce its coverage footprint or enable the multiplexing of lower-resolution 1.0 channels to maintain legacy DTV service while freeing up additional spectrum for ATSC 3.0, ATSC president Madeleine Noland said.

“Right now, if you have a five TV-station partnership going where one stick is 3.0 and four sticks are 1.0, then the ratio is 80:20 in favor of 1.0,” she said. “If that could be reversed, then I think there could be a lot of great things broadcasters could do with 3.0.”

Not all broadcast participants favor lifting the substantially same requirement. “Ideally, any technological advancement or policy preserves viewers’ ability to receive the same content they receive today, both primaries and multicasts,” Kyle Walker, vice president of technology at Weigel Broadcasting, said. “If a technology change or policy makes it more expensive and harder to watch broadcast television, it would be challenging to support a transition.”

Weigel, which participated in the backwards compatibility working group, owns multiple diginets programmed as ATSC 1.0 subchannels by many broadcasters around the country, including MeTV affiliates in more than 200 markets.

“Antenna adoption is growing as free broadcast television is an attractive alternative and complement to pay TV and streaming,” he said. “Why make watching broadcast television more expensive and harder to watch for consumers?”

ATSC, which also participated in the backwards compatibility working group, valued the opportunity to explain why 3.0 is not backwards compatible, Noland said.

“It was important that ATSC was there to point out that ATSC 2.0 was a backwards-compatible system designed to bring many of the features that 3.0 brought,” she said. “We tried, but it was not a commercial success.”

“I think we were able to help people understand why the ATSC membership went in the direction of ATSC 3.0. The working group was important because it gave people the chance to revisit that history and see how it all fit together,” she said.

MVPDs
A major portion of the report was devoted to multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) and their perspective on carrying ATSC 3.0 signals. MVPDs expressed concern about several issues, such as the need to purchase new equipment and incur new costs to support 3.0, the need for the commission to update signal level requirements for broadcast signals delivered to principal headends, watermarking and other issues.

Responding via email to a request for comment on the report, Brian Dietz, senior vice president of strategic communications at NCTA–The Internet & Television Association, which represents the larger cable operators, underscored the role broadcasters must take in paying for the transition.

“We look forward to working with all stakeholders to ensure this process is consumer-driven and that neither consumers nor operators are unfairly made to bear the cost of the broadcast industry’s voluntary transition to a new technology,” Dietz said in the email.

Given the contentious relationship broadcasters and MVPDs have had over the years with respect to retransmission consent negotiations, it shouldn’t be surprising Dietz zeroed in on the expense of the transition, Gray’s Folliard said.

“You've got broadcast on one side and MVPDs on the other,” Folliard said. “You know, we don’t know what to do if we're not fighting each other. That’s just how it’s been for 30-plus years. It’s hard for us to see eye-to-eye on anything.”

However, not only do broadcasters recognize that a large percentage of their audience accesses TV via MVPDs, they also understand the importance of protecting retrans revenue. “We want to figure out the best way to make the pay TV experience as good as possible, because we obviously have a big stake in that with retrans revenue,” Foillard said,

“We want to make sure we're passing through as many [3.0] features to them and working with them, because they are incredibly important partners for us,” he said, pointing to the need to ensure 3.0’s AC-4 works on cable boxes as an example, and adding that ATSC and the Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) have roles to play in ensuring compatibility.

ATSC has a broad membership that includes both broadcasters and MVPDs, who have delivered and “overarching message,” said Noland.

“We hear over and over again in ATSC discussions that the technology should not dictate the business conversations taking place at retrans negotiations,” she said. “For example, the watermarks—especially the audio watermark. There’s a notion that this is something that will be forced through MVPDs. But when the watermarks first were being drafted years ago, we wrote a recommended practice that says if you want to erase or replace the watermark, here’s how to do it.”

“We’re not here to get in the way of what you want to have conversations about from a business point of view, and that's always been true,” Noland said.

The report, which took more than a year to draft, represents a “snapshot in time” of where things stood as each of the working groups examined their respective topics, said Pearl TV’s Schelle.

While she acknowledges MVPDs raised important issues in the report, NextGen TV has moved forward and addressed many of them. “We’ve already progressed pretty substantially [in the intervening time from when work was ongoing and the report was released],” she said. “A year and a half later, you see big changes. Some of the questions raised are being answered in the marketplace.”

“That’s an effort we actually worked on first. What are the things we can actually bring—the features and functions—[that] solve some problems in the cable environment?” she asks, rhetorically.

Schelle points to the availability of low-cost 3.0-to-1.0 consumer converters as another example of a concern raised in the report that is being addressed. “There's lots of options for consumers that didn't exist when we went from analog to digital. In terms of upgrade accessories [3.0 converter dongles], I believe we will see sub-$20 solutions. They may not offer all of the benefits of NextGen TV; that’s the consumer’s choice. But you will be able to get basic over-the-air service.”

While the report didn’t offer a specific roadmap to an ATSC 3.0 future, it gives newly appointed FCC Chair Brendan Carr an important tool to advance the transition, Folliard said.

“This is a springboard,” he said. “It’s teed up for Brendan Carr for action coming out of the commission,” he said.

“Broadcasters need the same flexibility and ability to upgrade that’s been given to the wireless industry. With that you’re going to see a world-class broadcast system, just like our world-class wireless system,” Foillard said. “If we want local programming and local broadcasting to survive, we can’t be stuck in amber along with laser disc technology.”

WASHINGTON—Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr has ended the agency’s consideration of a proposal from last year that sought to regulate so-called “bulk billing” broadband arrangements for entire buildings that might limit consumer choice.

Carr ended the effort by countering that the bulk billing programs actually enabled families living in apartments and other multitenant environments to pay lower prices for internet service.

“During the Biden-Harris Administration, FCC leadership put forward a ‘bulk billing’ proposal that could have raised the price of Internet service for Americans living in apartments by as much as 50%,” Carr said. “This regulatory overreach from Washington would have hit families right in their pocketbooks at a time when they were already hurting from the last Administration’s inflationary policies. That is why you saw a broad and bipartisan coalition of groups opposing the plan. After all, seniors, students, and low-income individuals would have been hit particularly hard."

In making the proposal in March of 2024, the previous FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel had argued that bulk buying deals forcing residents of a building to take broadband services from one provider both limited choice and potentially raised prices.

Carr's decision drew praise from ACA Connects, the industry group representing midsized and smaller cable operators.

With one day left in her term, outgoing Federal Communications Commission chair Jessica Rosenworcel leveled heavy criticism at the incoming Trump administration over the First Amendment and denied four current complaints filed against broadcasters.

The complaints against WPVI Philadelphia, WCBS-TV New York, WNBC New York and WTXF Philadelphia had all been filed within the past several months and involved a number of complaints, all stemming from what complainants perceived as biased coverage.

Three of the four complaints were filed by the Center for American Rights, which describes itself as a “non-profit public interest law firm.” In the case of ABC-owned WPVI, the Center accused the Philadelphia TV station for what it claimed was “news distortion” during the broadcast of the oresidential debate on Sept. 10, 2024. In WCBS’s case, the center accused CBS of biased editing during an Oct. 7 "60 Minutes" interview with Vice President Kamala Harris, then the Democratic presidential candidate. WNBC was also accused of biased coverage when Harris appeared on an episode of “Saturday Night Live” in October.

The fourth denial went to the Media and Democracy Project (MAD), a liberal organization that petitioned the FCC last year to deny the renewal of Fox-owned WTXF-TV due to Fox News Channel’ $787 million defamation settlement with Dominion Voting Systems last year. (Because networks don’t have broadcast licenses, the complainants use local affiliates as their targets.)

Rosenworcel’s likely successor, Brendan Carr, has also accused CBS of bias, and said the FCC will take that issue into account when it reviews the pending merger of network parent Paramount Global and Skydance.

He also told the AP last fall that Harris’s appearance on “SNL” was “a clear and blatant effort to evade the FCC’s Equal Time rule.”

At a Congressional hearing last September, Carr was noncommital when asked whether he would have pulled WPVI’s license because of perceived bias during the ABC News-sponsored presidential debate.

During the 2024 campaign, Rosenworcel frequently responded to such accusations of media bias, mostly from the right, and she repeated her arguments in the following statement:

“The First Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy. By restricting the government from making laws that impair freedom of speech, the First Amendment preserves our right to express ourselves. The freedom of the press in this country depends on it.

“Over the course of history, our government leaders have clashed with news organizations that cover their efforts. President John Adams, for instance, championed a law that made it illegal to print, utter or publish malicious statements about the federal government. President Nixon targeted the license renewals of two television stations that were owned by the newspaper investigating his involvement in Watergate.

“More recently this threat to the First Amendment has taken on new forms, as the incoming President has called on the Federal Communications Commission to revoke licenses for broadcast television stations because he disagrees with their content and coverage.

“It may seem quaint to draw attention like this to broadcast licenses, in an era when so many of us seek out information we want, when we want it, from where we want it, on any screen handy. But these stations remain a vital source of local and national news. And there is nothing antiquated about the idea that the FCC has a duty to respect the Constitution.

“Today, I have directed the FCC to take a stand on behalf of the First Amendment. We draw a bright line at a moment when clarity about government interference with the free press is needed more than ever. The action we take makes clear two things. First, the FCC should not be the President’s speech police. Second, the FCC should not be journalism’s censor-in-chief.

“The agency has before it four complaints and petitions that seek to curtail freedom of the press and undermine the First Amendment. They come from all corners—right and left—but what they have in common is they ask the FCC to penalize broadcast television stations because they dislike station behavior, content or coverage. The first asks that the FCC penalize a television station for the substance of the presidential debate on the basis that it was not a true news event. The second seeks to use the FCC to demand the release of the transcript of a news interview as a condition of continued broadcast licensing. The third asks that the FCC fine a television station regarding equal time for programming involving political candidates. The fourth seeks to have the FCC remove the license of a television station for the character shortcomings of its corporate ownership. In two Letters and two Orders, we deny all four filings.

“The facts and legal circumstances in each of these cases are different. But what they share is that they seek to weaponize the licensing authority of the FCC in a way that is fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment. To do so would set a dangerous precedent. That is why we reject it here.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. —Instead of taking up new regulatory issues in the FCC’s last open meeting before the start of the Trump administration, Federal Communications Commission chair Jessica Rosenworcel has set a tentative agenda for the Jan. 15 Open Commission Meeting that will feature a series of presentations by the agency’s senior bureau, office and task force staff.

Rosenworcel, a Democrat, has said she will resign on Jan. 20, when Republican President-elect Donald Trump is to be inaugurated. Trump has named current Commissioner Brendan Carr as the new FCC chair. When Rosenworcel resigns, the FCC will be divided evenly with two Republicans and two Democrats until a third GOP member is nominated by Trump and approved by the Senate.

During the meeting, commissioners will hear a series of presentations:

• Panel One—The commission will hear presentations on the agency’s work on expanding connectivity and access to modern communications.
• Panel Two—The commission will hear presentations on the agency’s work on making communications more just for more people in more places.
• Panel Three—The commission will hear presentations on the agency’s work on national security, public safety, and protecting consumers.
• Panel Four—The commission will hear presentations on the agency’s work on the future of communications.

The Open Meeting is scheduled to commence at 10:30 a.m. ET in FCC’s Commission Meeting Room, 45 L St. N.E., Washington. Open Meetings are livestreamed at www.fcc.gov/live.

WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission has unanimously adopted new rules to expand very-low-power device operations across all 1,200 megahertz of the 6-GHz band alongside other unlicensed and Wi-Fi-enabled devices.

Despite opposition from the National Association of Broadcasters and other parties who have argued that opening up the spectrum would create problems for fixed microwave links, satellite uplinks and broadcast auxiliary services that use this spectrum, the FCC has in recent years been opening up parts of the 6-GHz band.

Prior to the Dec. 11 vote to open up all 1,200 megahertz for very-low-power devices, the FCC expanded unlicensed use between 5.925 and 7.125 GHz, helping to usher in Wi-Fi 6E, set the stage for Wi-Fi 7 and support the growth of the Internet of Things.

Last October, FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel called for further expansion, which the NAB opposed. “As broadcasters’ extraordinary efforts to help the many communities impacted by Hurricane Helene demonstrate, it is critical for the commission to ensure that broadcasters have access to spectrum that will allow them to provide these essential services in times of crisis and without interference,” the NAB said in October.

In a Nov. 14 letter to the FCC, the NAB said it “has no objection to sharing spectrum used by broadcasters for critical electronic newsgathering with unlicensed operations if it can be shown that such operations will not cause harmful interference. But the record in this proceeding does not support that conclusion. We again urge the commission to avoid the risk to licensed uses of spectrum by accepting a measured compromise approach by reserving just 55 MHz of the 6-GHz band for licensed mobile use until real-world data are available to justify the removal of this reservation.”

In adopting the new rules, the FCC noted that they will bolster cutting-edge applications like wearable technologies and augmented and virtual reality, which will enhance learning opportunities, improve healthcare outcomes and bring new entertainment experiences.

The Report and Order permits the very-low-power (VLP) class of unlicensed devices to operate across 350 MHz of spectrum in the U-NII-6 (6.425-6.525 GHz) and U-NII-8 (6.875-7.125 GHz) portions of the 6 GHz band at the same power levels and technical/operational protections as recently approved for the U-NII-5 (5.925-6.425 GHz) and U-NII-7 (6.525-6.875 GHz) bands while protecting incumbent licensed services that also operate in the band.

These VLP devices will have no restriction on locations where they may operate and would not be required to operate under the control of an automatic frequency coordination system, the FCC said.

To ensure the risk of interference remains insignificant, the FCC said that the devices would be required to employ a contention-based protocol and implement transmit power control while prohibited from operating as part of a fixed outdoor infrastructure.

The FCC also argued that its new rules “will spur innovation by providing more capacity for emerging technologies and applications, such as augmented reality and virtual reality, in-car connectivity, wearable on-body devices, healthcare monitoring, short-range mobile hotspots, high accuracy location and navigation, automation and more.”

In a statement, Rosenworcel stressed the FCC’s efforts to provide unlicensed spectrum for applications like Wi-Fi has already produced enormous economic benefits. “ Wi-Fi alone will foster $769 billion in economic growth in 2024,” she said. “That number is projected to rise 21 percent in 2025 and as high as 67 percent by 2027 when the latest version of Wi-Fi will be in available in millions of devices.”

“Today we take the effort to support unlicensed activity in the 6 GHz band even further,” she continued. “We are opening up 350 megahertz of the 6 GHz band to small mobile devices operating at very low power. When you combine that with the 850 megahertz of the 6-GHz band that we made available for low-power use just a year ago, we are expanding access to 1,200 megahertz to help jumpstart the next generation of unlicensed wireless devices.”

“This 1,200 megahertz means unlicensed bandwidth with a mix of high capacity and low latency that is absolutely prime for immersive, real-time applications,” she added. “These are the airwaves where we can develop wearable technologies and expand access to augmented and virtual reality that will provide new opportunities in education, health care and entertainment. This is the unlicensed spectrum where the future happens—and with the 6-GHz band, the United States is leading the way.”

The Third Report and Order (FCC 24-125) was approved in an 5-0 Dec. 11 vote with chair Rosenworcel and commissioners Brendan Carr, Geoffrey Starks, Nathan Simington and Anna Gomez all approving. The order is available here.

WASHINGTON—Federal Communications Commission chair Jessica Rosenworcel said she intends to leave the agency on Jan. 20, when the Trump administration begins. Republican commissioner Brendan Carr was nominated this week and is widely expected to be approved.

Rosenworcel was named “acting” FCC chair after President Joe Biden took office in 2021, but was not approved until December of that year. During her term, she prioritized broadband access and equity, spectrum policies and advocated for network neutrality. She frequently clashed with fellow commissioners over these issues and was criticized for her lack of attention to reigning in Big Tech, particularly over free speech issues, a cause that Carr has vowed to address in the coming term.

She was a frequent critic of broadcasters’ transition to ATSC 3.0, over privacy, consumer protections and the lack of backward compatibility with 1.0. She did, however, propose the formation of the “Future of TV” initiative in the spring of 2023 to bring together consumer, manufacturing, broadcast and related industry advocates to hammer out a path forward for the transition. The NAB has sponsored a series of meetings for the group but no report has been issued.

She issued the following statement: “Serving at the Federal Communications Commission has been the honor of a lifetime, especially my tenure as chair and as the first woman in history to be confirmed to lead this agency. I want to thank President Biden for entrusting me with the responsibility to guide the FCC during a time when communications technology is a part of every aspect of civic and commercial life.Taking the oath of office on the street outside of the agency during the height of the pandemic, when so much of our day-to-day moved online, made clear how important the work of the FCC is and how essential it is for us to build a digital future that works for everyone.

“I am proud to have served at the FCC alongside some of the hardest working and dedicated public servants I have ever known. Together, we accomplished seemingly impossible feats like setting up the largest broadband affordability program in history—which led to us connecting more than 23 million households to high-speed internet, connecting more than 17 million students caught in the homework gap to hotspots and other devices as learning moved online, putting national security and public safety matters with communications front and center before the agency, and launching the first-ever Space Bureau to support United States leadership in the new Space Age.

“I also want to thank my husband, daughter, and son for their support throughout my time at the FCC. Public service is not without sacrifice, and I am looking forward to spending more time with my family and rescue pup in the days ahead.”

WASHINGTON—The FCC has launched a formal proceeding to review the quality of support that cable, broadband, satellite TV, and voice service providers give their customers.

The notice of inquiry (NOI) seeks information on current customer-service practices and to collect data that will make it easier for consumers to easily cancel subscriptions, talk to live customer-service representatives, easily consent to or decline automatic service renewals and improve the accessibility of customer service engagement among other things, the FCC reported.

The launch of the NOI was strongly supported by FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, and panned by Republican-appointed commissioners.

The FCC approved the measure in a 3-2 party-line vote.

“We can and should expect consistent, transparent, and helpful customer service from the communications companies that provide so many services that are so vital in our day-to-day lives,” Rosenworcel said. “No one should get stuck in a doom loop trying to cancel a subscription or just get a human being to help resolve their service problems.”

In launching the effort, the FCC said it seeks to build a public record on the current state of customer support and explore ways it can further protect families and businesses that rely on these critical services.

The FCC said the NOI will examine the following areas:

• Simple Cancellation: Providing more cancellation options and better disclosure of cancellation practices at the point of sale and on bills.
• Automatic Renewal of Service: Ensuring providers obtain explicit customer consent for broadband and voice service providers before automatically renewing a service and/or increasing prices after a trial or promotional period expires.
• Access to Live Representatives: Helping to avoid bouncing consumers from one call menu list to another in a time-consuming effort to obtain resolution.
• Installation, Outage, and Service Calls: Extending cable operator installation, outage, and service call rules to also apply to satellite TV, voice, and broadband services.
• Individuals with Disabilities: Improving the accessibility of customer service resources for individuals with disabilities.
• Expanded Cable Customer Resources: Updating current cable operator customer-service requirements to reflect marketplace and technology changes.
  

Additionally, the notice explores whether to harmonize the FCC’s existing cable operator customer-service rules with requirements for voice, broadband, and direct broadcast satellite (aka satellite TV) consumers, the FCC said.

The FCC also reported that the Notice is part of a broader government effort, “Time is Money,” to crack down on everyday headaches that waste consumer time and money.

In response, commissioner Brendan Carr issued a scathing partisan attack on the NOI and the Biden-Harris administration, arguing that “the Biden-Harris Administration’s communications policies are failing to deliver for the American people.”

“We should recommit as an agency to the tried and true playbook of freeing up spectrum and eliminating regulatory barriers to deployment,” Carr said. “Instead, the administration has started blaming others for its own record. Today’s Notice of Inquiry is a case in point …. [i]n many cases, the actions explored by the NOI would require the FCC to go well beyond the bounds of our authority under the Communications Act. Indeed, much of what the FCC considers here would fit more appropriately within the scope of the Federal Trade Commission’s jurisdiction. In fact, the FTC has opened up a proceeding to look at these types of things already. We should leave those cross-cutting consumer protection issues to the nation’s lead consumer protection agency—the FTC. We should color within the lines drawn by the Communications Act. And we should focus our time and resources on policies that will help bring more Americans across the digital divide. Because today’s decision focuses instead on the Biden-Harris administration’s efforts to deflect attention away from the necessary course correction, I dissent.”

CBS has responded to attacks against what critics have labeled the network’s “news distortion” in editing its interview with Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee.

Critics—led by former President Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for president—contend that the Oct. 14 interview was “deceptively edited” and have called for a release of the transcript. Trump himself called on the FCC to revoke CBS’s broadcast license on his Truth Social social-media platform last week:

“ ‘60 Minutes’ is a major part of the News Organization of CBS, which has just created th Greatest Fraud in Broadcast History,” Trump wrote. “CBS should lose its license, and it should be bid out to the Highest Bidder, as should all other Broadcast Licenses, because they are just as corrupt as CBS — and maybe even WORSE!”

That prompted this response from CBS:

“Former President Donald Trump is accusing ‘60 Minutes’ of deceitful editing of our Oct. 7 interview with Vice President Kamala Harris. That is false.

“‘60 Minutes’ gave an excerpt of our interview to ‘Face the Nation’ that used a longer section of her answer than that on ‘60 Minutes.’ Same question. Same answer. But a different portion of the response. When we edit any interview, whether a politician, an athlete, or movie star, we strive to be clear, accurate and on point. The portion of her answer on ‘60 Minutes’ was more succinct, which allows time for other subjects in a wide-ranging, 21-minute-long segment.

“Remember, Mr. Trump pulled out of his interview with ‘60 Minutes’ and the vice president participated.

“Our long-standing invitation to former President Trump remains open. If he would like to discuss the issues facing the nation and the Harris interview, we would be happy to have him on ‘60 Minutes.’”

FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel also responded to Trump’s criticism, saying the regulator “does not and will not revoke licenses for broadcast stations simply because a political candidate disagrees with or dislikes content or coverage. While repeated attacks against broadcast stations by the former President may now be familiar, these threats against free speech are serious and should not be ignored. As I’ve said before, the First Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy.”

This is the third time Rosenworcel has responded to threats against broadcasters during the 2024 campaign season. In September, in response to Trump’s call for ABC to lose its broadcast license over Trump’s accusations that the network’s broadcast of his Sept. 10 debate with Harris was “rigged,” Rosenworcel said, “the First Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy,” adding, “the FCC does not revoke licenses for broadcast stations simply because a political candidate disagrees with or dislikes content or coverage.”

Rosenworcel also had to step in after Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’s administration sent a “cease and desist” letter to TV stations in the state that aired campaign ads supporting an amendment that would enshrine the right to an abortion in Florida, calling the ads both “false” and “dangerous.”

“The right of broadcasters to speak freely is rooted in the First Amendment,” Rosenworcel said. “Threats against broadcast stations for airing content that conflicts with the government’s views are dangerous and undermine the fundamental principle of free speech.”

The Center for American Rights (CAR) has filed a formal complaint with the FCC against WCBS-TV New York for engaging in significant and intentional "news distortion" in the broadcast of Vice President Kamala Harris’ interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation’ and "60 Minutes" on October 5 and 6, 2024.

The conservative nonprofit CAR filed the complaint on Oct. 16. Prior to that, it had filed complaints against ABC News with both the FCC and the Federal Election Commission (FEC) regarding ABC’s handling of the Sept. 10 presidential debate between Democratic candidate Harris and former Presidnent Donald Trump, the Republican candidate.

The editing of the “60 Minutes” interview with Harris has drawn fire from Republicans and conservative commentators because CBS aired different responses from Harris on that show and on “Face the Nation” to a question about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The controversy and the complaint by CAR has also drawn comment from Republican FCC commissioner Nathan Simington, a Trump appointee, who gave an interview to Fox News Digital on the subject.

"The commission acts on complaints about distortion, not complaints about editorial positions,” Simington told Fox News Digital. “And so, what this claim is alleging is that an act of distortion took place. And so, if you look at the FCC statute -- Section 326 of our statute says that the commission doesn't have the power of censorship over broadcast signals and the commission has generally summarized its own position as saying that we need documentary evidence of deliberate distortion that would be sufficiently strong to require an inquiry."

"And in fact, in a prior proceeding on this matter, we gave the example of substituting a yes answer to one question or a no answer to an entirely different question," he continued. "So, the Commission has certainly contemplated the possibility of distortionary reporting taking place via splicing. That's one reason I don't think that this complaint is facially ridiculous, and it would not be inappropriate for the commission to take it up."

FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel, who has repeatedly criticized attempts to revoke broadcast station licenses based on political speech, has opposed efforts to take away CBS station licenses over the editing of the Harris interview. On Oct. 10, she issued a statement after repeated calls by former President Trump to revoke the licenses of broadcast stations for political reasons.

“While repeated attacks against broadcast stations by the former President may now be familiar, these threats against free speech are serious and should not be ignored,” she said. “As I’ve said before, the First Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy. The FCC does not and will not revoke licenses for broadcast stations simply because a political candidate disagrees with or dislikes content or coverage.”

Rosenworcel has also previously spoken out against efforts by political candidates or government officials to influence the content shared by broadcast stations. Following the Presidential debate in September, she rejected calls by Trump to revoke ABC’s licenses. She has also warned against threats by Florida state officials against broadcast stations.

In its FCC complaint, CAR said that CBS aired conflicting responses in the two broadcasts when the same question was posed to Harris regarding Netanyahu.

These discrepancies, CAR argued, amount to deliberate news distortion—a violation of FCC rules governing broadcasters' public interest obligations. The complaint demands CBS release the unedited transcript of the interview to set the record straight.

“This isn’t just about one interview or one network,” CAR President Daniel Suhr said. “This is about the public’s trust in the media on critical issues of national security and international relations during one of the most consequential elections of our time. When broadcasters manipulate interviews and distort reality, it undermines democracy itself. The FCC must act swiftly to restore public confidence in our news media.”

CAR has also filed complaints against ABC News with both the FCC and FEC for what it claims are “clear sponsor favoritism in the Harris-Trump debate broadcast by ABC News on September 10, 2024.” In that complaint, CAR argued, “ABC’s moderators unfairly targeted former President Trump while providing Vice President Harris a free pass on factual inaccuracies.”

The FCC complaint against WCBS-TV can be found here.

TV Tech has reached out to CBS for a comment on the complaint.

WASHINGTON—FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel said the agency will launch an official inquiry into how data caps impact consumers and competition.

The FCC launched the proceeding after it received nearly 3,000 comments from consumers about broadband provider-imposed caps on how much data they can download and how those limits affect people’s lives.

“For most people in the United States, rationing their internet usage would be unthinkable and impractical,” Rosenworcel said in a statement. “But for millions, limitations on how much data they can use online is a constant concern. And many are not happy about it.

“Restricting consumers’ data can cut off small businesses from their customers, slap fees on low-income families and prevent people with disabilities from using the tools they rely on to communicate,“ she continued. “As the nation’s leading agency on communications, it’s our duty to dig deeper into these practices and make sure that consumers are put first.”

In addition to issuing a notice of inquiry into the practice, the FCC also posted hundreds of consumer stories about the impact of data caps. Rosenworcel, a Democrat, had previously launched a portal for consumers to submit their stories so the FCC could hear from households and businesses impacted by limits on broadband usage.

The FCC released excerpts from the posted comments:

• “We have had to unplug our modem to prevent going over our data cap. We have to take our kids to find public wifi to complete their school work. We can't afford $190 a month for unlimited internet.” —Arkansas
• “[Provider] has a data cap on our internet and I provide telemedicine services with video for low-income patients … There is no other high-speed provider in my area that is able to provide reliable internet for me to see patients so I have no choice but to bear the excessive costs they are charging.”—Michigan
• “[Provider] data cap is too low for my family. It sits somewhere around 1.3TB/month. In order to have that high of a data cap, I’m required to purchase the fastest internet speed offered. On top of that, I have to pay either $10/100GB over my cap, or $40 extra/month to make my data cap 5TB/month. So the advertised price of $75/month become $115. It is unfair.”—New Mexico
• “We are a family of 6 and limited resources we have kids in school and 1 in high school that requires a lot of online work also some of our work requires remote work and with a data cap is difficult to budget it in we are forced to use [provider] since its the only provider we have in my area and forced to pay for unlimited or otherwise get penalized to use more data.”—Arizona
• “I am disabled and as such home 24/7 most days. My home internet usage is 2tb a month. During the pandemic [provider] waved the data cap on ACP plans. Since ACP expired my Internet bill increased from $20 to $50 and I now have a data cap of 1.25tb. As a result I have to rely on my phone's hot spot. I've also connected my TV to the public Wi-Fi in my city which is much slower but helps me save data.”—Iowa

The FCC reported that consumers can read these and other stories and submit their own comments here.

The Commission also released a notice of inquiry which launches a formal proceeding so the FCC can solicit public comments from those impacted by data caps. All comments can be submitted and accessed by the public at fcc.gov/ecfs (Docket No. 23-199).

The notice seeks input on the current state of data caps and whether they cause harm to competition or consumers’ ability to access broadband internet services, the FCC said.

The commission will explore why data caps continue to persist despite an increased consumer need for broadband and providers’ demonstrated technical ability to offer unlimited data plans.

The notice specifically seeks comment on current trends in consumer data usage; the impact of data caps on consumers; consumers’ experience with data caps; how broadband subscribers are informed about caps; the impact of data caps on competition; and the FCC’s legal authority to take action.

In response to the effort, Republican commissioner Brendan Carr issued a dissenting statement, saying the inquiry is a step towards imposing price controls on the internet and the FCC lacks the statutory authority to regulate prices.

“In its decision to reinstate utility-style, Title II controls on the Internet, the FCC promised to forbear from all forms of price controls—namely, both ex ante and ex post rate regulation,“ Carr said. ”The first crack in this commitment emerged immediately when the agency allowed New York’s price-control law to move forward without the Commission stating the obvious—New York’s law is plainly preempted by the Communications Act and FCC precedent. And with today’s Notice of Inquiry, the FCC itself starts down the path of directly regulating rates. It does so by seeking comment on controlling the price of broadband capacity (“data caps”). Prohibiting customers from choosing to purchase plans with data caps—which are more affordable than unlimited ones—necessarily regulates the service rates they are paying for.

“Today’s NOI is legally infirm, too, for want of statutory authority,” Carr added. “Indeed, the [6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals] has stayed the FCC’s Title II decision, which is based on the same claims of authority that the FCC invokes today.”

WASHINGTON—The controversy over a Florida ballot measure that would enshrine the right to an abortion into the state’s constitution has spilled over to the FCC.

Following reports that TV stations in Florida received letters from the Florida Department of Health threatening to bring criminal charges against the stations for airing political ads supporting Amendment 4, FCC chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has issued a statement strongly condemning the threats.

“The right of broadcasters to speak freely is rooted in the First Amendment,” Rosenworcel, a Democrat, said. “Threats against broadcast stations for airing content that conflicts with the government’s views are dangerous and undermine the fundamental principle of free speech.”

The cease and desist letter from the Department of Health was received by WCJB-TV Gainesville and other stations for airing an ad supporting ballot measure that would protect abortion rights by adding them to the state constitution.

The state currently has a ban on abortions with very limited exceptions after six weeks. The ad tells the story of a pregnant cancer patient who said she had to leave the state to get an abortion needed to save her life.

“The doctors knew that if I did not end my pregnancy, I would lose my baby, I would lose my life,” the woman said in the ad. “And my daughter would lose her mom. Florida has now banned abortion even in cases like mine. Amendment 4 is going to protect women like me. We have to vote ‘yes.’ ”

Prior to the letter, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, had been attempting to block the ballot measure and had been spending public money on ads defending the six-week abortion ban that the ballot measure would overturn.

The letter to stations escalated that battle saying the ad was both “false” and “dangerous.”

If the stations didn’t stop airing the ad, the Department of Health threatened to prosecute them for violating sanitary nuisance laws typically used to prosecute people for things like overflowing septic tanks.

The full text of the Department of Health letter can be found here.

WASHINGTON—FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel today proposed new rules to expand very-low-power device operations in additional spectrum in the 6-GHz band alongside other Wi-Fi-enabled devices. In recent years, the agency has expanded unlicensed use between 5.925 and 7.125 GHz, helping to usher in Wi-Fi 6E, set the stage for Wi-Fi 7 and support the growth of the Internet of Things.

“Opening up access to the airwaves without licenses makes it possible to innovate without permission and to develop low-power wireless technologies that change the way we live and work,” Rosenworcel said. “We are making more spectrum available to bolster this growing ecosystem of cutting-edge applications like wearable technologies and augmented and virtual reality that will help businesses, enhance learning opportunities, improve healthcare outcomes and bring new entertainment experiences.”

Though broadcasters initially opposed the use of unlicensed low-power devices in the 6-GHz band due to interference—particularly with wireless ENG tech—the FCC voted in 2020 to open the entire band to low-power devices. In the interim, tech advances such as enhanced interference mitigation measures and changes in usage patterns have lessened such opposition. Nevertheless, the SBE issued a warning to broadcasters earlier this year when the commission publicized its intentions.

NAB also opposed the proposal and issued the following statement:

“While we have not seen the draft item on circulation, it would be extremely disappointing if the Commission were engaged in yet another spectrum giveaway to Big Tech without adequately protecting the spectrum broadcasters are currently using to provide breaking news coverage. As broadcasters’ extraordinary efforts to help the many communities impacted by Hurricane Helene demonstrate, it is critical for the Commission to ensure that broadcasters have access to spectrum that will allow them to provide these essential services in times of crisis and without interference.”

The proposed Report and Order would, if adopted, permit the very-low-power (VLP) class of unlicensed devices to operate across 350 MHz of spectrum in the U-NII-6 (6.425-6.525 GHz) and U-NII-8 (6.875-7.125 GHz) portions of the 6 GHz band at the same power levels and technical/operational protections as recently approved for the U-NII-5 (5.925-6.425 GHz) and U-NII-7 (6.525-6.875 GHz) bands, while protecting incumbent licensed services that operate in the 6 GHz band.

These VLP devices would have no restriction as to where they may operate, nor would they be required to operate under the control of an automatic frequency coordination system. To ensure the risk of interference remains insignificant, the devices would be made to employ a contention-based protocol, implement transmit power control and be prohibited from operating as part of a fixed outdoor infrastructure.

The FCC said its actions in the 6-GHz band for VLP devices “provides greater flexibility while fostering unlicensed innovation.”

“These devices operate at very low power across short distances and provide very high connection speeds, which are ideal for the types of high-data-rate, cutting-edge applications that will both enrich consumer experiences and bolster the nation’s economy,” the commission said.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—As Hurricane Helene moves towards making landfall in Florida on Thursday evening as a Category 3 hurricane, Federal Communications Commission chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has outlined some of the efforts that the FCC is making to ensure that people have access to emergency information and that communications networks remain as functional as possible. 

Those efforts include activating the Disaster Information Reporting System, monitoring communications outages and working with broadcast associations, wireless carriers, and other communications providers in the expected path of Hurricane Helene.

“As Hurricane Helene prepares to make landfall on the Gulf Coast, the FCC continues coordinating with our government partners and industry to help keep communications networks as fully functional as possible,” Rosenworcel said. “We’ve activated our Disaster Information Reporting System for areas in Florida, the Carolinas, and Georgia, so we can closely monitor communications outage data in the coming days and work to support restoration and recovery efforts.  We have also activated our Mandatory Disaster Response Initiative, which requires wireless providers to work together to reduce outages for the public.  We’ve deployed FCC staff to conduct surveys of communications services in targeted areas and to provide on-the-ground support, which will help federal and state agencies to assess the post-landfall impacts to vital communications services and infrastructure. Agency staff has also reached out to broadcast associations, wireless carriers, and other communications providers in the expected path of Hurricane Helene.  For communities directly in the path of the storm, please heed the instructions of your local officials and sign up to receive additional emergency alerts and warnings.  Our collective efforts now can save lives.”

The FCC also urged residents of the affected areas to charge their wireless phones, laptops, or tablets and follow other communications tips available on the FCC’s website to stay connected with family and friends. That information is available at www.fcc.gov/emergency.    

In addition the agency reported that the FCC’s Operations Center is available 24/7 to assist public safety, government, and communications industry stakeholders with emergency communications needs.  

Updates from the FCC related to Hurricane Helene are available at www.fcc.gov/helene.  

WASHINGTON, D.C.—FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr has come out against a proposal by FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel that the FCC should require disclosure of AI-created content in political ads airing on TV and radio. 

“The FCC’s attempt to fundamentally alter the rules of the road for political speech just a short time before a national election is as misguided as it is unlawful,” Carr said in a statement. 

“There is no doubt that the increase in AI-generated political content presents complex questions, and there is bipartisan concern about the potential for misuse,” Carr said. “But none of this vests the FCC with the authority it claims here. Indeed, the Federal Election Commission is actively considering these types of issues, and legislators in Congress are as well. But Congress has not given the FCC the type of freewheeling authority over these issues that would be necessary to turn this plan into law.”

Carr also argued that the proposal for new FCC regulations “can only muddy the waters.  AI-generated political ads that run on broadcast TV will come with a government-mandated disclaimer but the exact same or similar ad that runs on a streaming service or social media site will not?  Consumers don’t think about the content they consume through the lens of regulatory silos. They just view content on screens. Will they conclude that the absence of a government warning on an online ad means that the content must be real?  I don’t see how this type of conflicting patchwork could end well. Unlike Congress, the FCC cannot adopt uniform rules.

“Indeed, the FCC can only tilt the playing field,” he added. “Applying new regulations to candidate ads and issue ads but not to other forms of political speech just means that the government will be favoring one set of speakers over another.  And applying new regulations on the broadcasters the FCC regulates but not on their largely unregulated online competitors only exacerbates regulatory asymmetries.  All of this confirms that the FCC is not the right entity to consider these issues.”

Carr also stressed that the proposal raises some thorny administrative issues. “What does it mean to have `AI-Generated Content’ in a political ad?” he noted. “Is it everything?  Is it nothing?  Lawyers will undoubtedly end up telling their clients to just go ahead and slap a prophylactic, government-mandated disclosure on all political ads going forward just to avoid liability.”

The Rosenworcel proposal, which has been circulated to other colleagues at the agency, specifically said it was not intended to ban or restrict the use of AI-content in ads. 

Carr argued, however, that “I am also concerned that it is part and parcel of a broader effort to control political speech. Is the government really worried that voters will find these ads misleading in the absence of a regulator’s guiding hand? Or is the government worried that voters might find these ads effective?  Imagine going after President Lyndon Johnson for his 1964 `Daisy Girl' ad because voters might think that the child actually died in a nuclear strike. The type of government intervention envisioned by this plan would only do more harm than good.” 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—As concerns grow about the potential impact of fake AI-generated photos and videos being used to influence elections, Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel is proposing that the agency require that the public be informed when AI-generated content is aired in political ads on radio and TV. 

The agency stressed that the proposal does not call for any prohibition of such content, only the disclosure of any AI-generated content within political ads.

The FCC said that Rosenworcel has shared a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with her colleagues at the agency that would initiate a proceeding that recognizes consumers’ right to know when AI tools are being used in the political ads they view.

If adopted, the FCC said that this proposal would increase transparency by:

• Seeking comment on whether to require an on-air disclosure and written disclosure in broadcasters’ political files when there is AI-generated content in political ads,
• Proposing to apply the disclosure rules to both candidate and issue advertisements, 
• Requesting comment on a specific definition of AI-generated content, and
• Proposing to apply the disclosure requirements to broadcasters and entities that engage in origination programming, including cable operators, satellite TV and radio providers and section 325(c) permittees.

"As artificial intelligence tools become more accessible, the Commission wants to make sure consumers are fully informed when the technology is used,” said chairwoman Rosenworcel.  “Today, I’ve shared with my colleagues a proposal that makes clear consumers have a right to know when AI tools are being used in the political ads they see, and I hope they swiftly act on this issue.”

In announcing the proposal the FCC said that the use of AI is expected to play a substantial role in the creation of political ads in 2024 and beyond, but the use of AI-generated content in political ads also creates a potential for providing deceptive information to voters, in particular, the potential use of “deep fakes” – altered images, videos, or audio recordings that depict people doing or saying things that did not actually do or say, or events that did not actually occur.

The FCC said that the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act provides the Commission with authority regarding political advertising. There is also a clear public interest obligation for Commission licensees, regulatees, and permittees to protect the public from false, misleading, or deceptive programming and to promote an informed public – and the proposed rules seek to achieve that goal, the agency said. 

If adopted, this proposal would launch a proceeding during which the Commission would take public comment on the proposed rules, which wouldn't take effect until the com

Ishan Mehta, Common Cause Media and Democracy program director applauded the idea of requiring disclosure of AI-generated content in political ads. 

"Americans expect and deserve to know whether the content they see on our public airwaves is real or AI-generated content – especially as the technology is increasingly being used to mislead voters," Mehta said. "This rulemaking is welcome news as the use of deceptive AI and deepfakes threaten our democracy and is already being used to erode trust in our institutions and our elections. We have seen the impact of AI in politics in the form of primary ads using AI voices and images, and in robocalls during the primary in New Hampshire."

Given those pressures, Mehta added that "we commend the FCC and Chair Rosenworcel for this work to require disclosures for AI-generated content in political ads. It is imperative that regulations around political advertising keep pace with the onward march of new and evolving technologies. We urge Congress and other agencies like the FEC (Federal Election Commission) to follow the FCC’s lead and take proactive steps to protect our democracy from very serious threat posed by AI. That is why we have previously filed comments with the FEC urging the agency to amend its regulation on `fraudulent misrepresentation' to include `deliberately false Artificial Intelligence-generated content in campaign ads or other communications.'”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has announced that the Commission will vote during its April Open Meeting on April 25 to restore Net Neutrality, which she said would bring back a national standard for broadband reliability, security, and consumer protection. 

If adopted, the proposal would ensure that broadband services are treated as an essential resource deserving of FCC oversight under Title II authority, Rosenworcel said. 

Broadband providers, the wireless industry, cable operators and telcos have vigorously opposed the effort to regulate broadband services under Title II authority.  It has also been criticized by the FCC's Republican commissioners. 

“The pandemic proved once and for all that broadband is essential,” she said. “After the prior administration abdicated authority over broadband services, the FCC has been handcuffed from acting to fully secure broadband networks, protect consumer data, and ensure the internet remains fast, open, and fair.  A return to the FCC’s overwhelmingly popular and court-approved standard of net neutrality will allow the agency to serve once again as a strong consumer advocate of an open internet.”

More specifically, the Rosenworcel argued that if adopted, the FCC proposal would:

• Return A Popular Net Neutrality Protections. The FCC would once again play a key role in preventing at the federal level broadband providers from blocking, slowing down, or creating pay-to-play internet fast lanes, the FCC said.  
• Provide Oversight Of Broadband Outages – When households and businesses lose internet service, consumers often expect that the FCC might either be able to help the restoration or at least have information about the outage.  By restoring the FCC’s Title II authority over internet service providers, the FCC will bolster its ability to require these companies to address internet outages.  Without such authority, the FCC cannot require companies to report broadband outages, cannot collect outage data, and lacks the authority to even consider ways that it can help protect against and recover from internet service outages. 
• Boost Security Of Broadband Networks – In this digital age, there are new and emerging digital threats.  Without broadband oversight, the FCC is unable to fully monitor and respond to such national security concerns.  For example, without reclassification, the FCC is limited in its authority to direct foreign-owned companies deemed to be national security threats to discontinue any domestic or international broadband services under Sec. 214 – as the agency has done with telephone services.  In addition, without reclassification, the FCC has limited authority to incorporate updated cybersecurity standards into network policies.  
• Increase Consumer Protections – Net Neutrality protections would increase the tools the FCC has available to protect consumer data and respond to evolving consumer threats.  Updated rules could mean broadband providers could not sell your location data, among other sensitive information.  This would empower the agency to protect consumers from other harmful practices.
• Restore A Widely Accepted National Standard – When the previous FCC stepped back from Net Neutrality protections, the court said states could step in.  Despite these efforts by individual states to provide robust oversight in response to the prior administration’s retreat from authority, we need a national standard to keep internet access fast, open, and fair.  A national standard is also broadly popular: eighty percent of Americans support open internet policies, the FCC said in a release announcing the vote. 

Those arguments have been challenged by broadband providers, cable companies, telecos and the wireless industry in filings with the FCC opposing Title II regulation of the internet. 

The FCC said that the chairwoman will circulate her proposal to her fellow Commissioners for their review.  As is the general practice, a public draft of the proposal – officially a Declaratory Ruling, Order, Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration – will be made public on Thursday on FCC.gov.  At the Commission’s April 25 Open Meeting, the Commissioners will consider and vote on the proposal.  The meeting will be open to the public and streamed live at www.fcc.gov/live. 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Federal Communications Commission chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has made changes to her leadership team with the formal departure of Deena Shetler from her team and the announcement that Sanford Williams will serve as deputy chief of staff. 

“Nobody knows the ins-and-outs of this agency like Deena Shetler,” said Rosenworcel in a statement announcing the changes. “She did an amazing job helping navigate issues involving regulatory fees that are complex and difficult and a whole bunch of I.T. issues that you don't hear about because she made them work well.  If it was complicated and required savvy about how to get things done in this building, Deena was the first person we went to. I want to thank Deena for her service and helping Commissioner Gomez get her office up and running. I'm really grateful she was part of my team. She made a big difference while she was.”  

“Of course, nobody can truly replace Deena.  However, I need someone to fill her position and fill some of those tasks,” she continued. “I'm happy to announce I will be appointing Sanford Williams to be my new deputy chief of staff.  He's going to work with my chief of staff to help facilitate day-to-day operations of my office and the commission.  He has worked at the FCC for almost 25 years and is currently a special advisor in my office.  I look forward to working with him in this new capacity.”

Williams has worked in various roles at the FCC since 1999.  Most recently he served as a special advisor to the chairwoman and deputy managing director in the Office of Managing Director.  

He is currently a lecturer of law at UCLA Law School.  Sanford was elected to the Manassas City, Virginia School Board in 2010 and served as a member until 2021, and the chair from 2018-2021.  Williams graduated from Cornell University where he earned an undergraduate degree in Operations Research and Industrial Engineering and a Master’s in Business Administration from the Johnson School of Management.  He earned his law degree from the University of Virginia School of Law where he was a member of the Virginia Law Review.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—During a November 30  House Energy and Commerce Communications and Technology subcommittee hearing, FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel indicated that Congressional action may be needed to give the FCC authority to regulate streaming and reclassify vMVPDs so they are subject to the same rules as traditional pay TV cable and satellite operators. 

Given the difficulties in getting anything passed through the current highly polarized Congress, those comments are a potential setback for the NAB and station groups who have been pushing the FCC to reclassify vMVPDs like Sling TV, YouTube TV and Fubo TV. 

The reclassification would allow station groups to directly negotiate retransmission deals with vMVPDs, a change from the current system of having the owners of the major broadcast networks handle those deals. This, they argue, would boost retransmission fees and provide stations with more money for local news. 

The networks and vMVPDs under the banner of Preserve Viewer Choice Coalition have opposed the change, saying it would stifle innovation and that there is little evidence that new rules would produce more money for local news. 

During the subcommittee hearing on FCC oversight, Representative and Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA5), argued that that only Congress has the ability to regulate streaming in her opening remarks, “We recently sent a letter to chair Rosenworcel, cautioning against refreshing the record to apply outdated, decades old regulations to an evolving media marketplace. Since I haven’t received a response, I will reiterate my concern and firm view that changes to laws that govern the media marketplace need to be done by Congress, not by the FCC.”

Later in the hearing McMorris Rodgers followed up and directly asked Jessica Rosenworcel about the issue. “Earlier this year, chairman Latta and I sent you a letter urging you not to reopen the 2014 proceedings on vMVPDs. At the last oversight hearing you stated and I quote, ‘the Commission’s authority extends only to what Congress provided in the 1984 Cable Act and the 1992 Cable Act…’ Because you acknowledged that the FCC does not have the legal authority to regulate vMVPDs, do you commit to not taking any action on this issue?”

In response, Rosenworcel said “I think that our duties and authority in this area are constrained by the 1984 Cable Act and the 1992 Cable Act… That’s why I think the request to incorporate virtual service providers is complex, doesn’t fit neatly in the law. We are combing over the record and trying to understand adjacent copyright issues to figure out a way forward, but I think fundamentally this is an issue where those who want us to act are going to have to come to Congress.”

Preserve Viewer Choice Coalition spokesperson Bryce Harlow after the hearing concluded said, “Chairwoman Rosenworcel was extremely clear again today on the FCC’s ability to regulate streaming services; congress is the only one that can regulate streaming video in the manner that large station groups seek. Her thoughtful remarks reaffirm her prior sentiments and are a win for streaming viewers across the country whose ability to access high-quality and affordable content we’re fighting hard to protect.”

In response to the FCC chair's testimony, the Coalition for Local News, which is backed by station groups, noted that in 2014 Rosenworcel had taken a different position on the issue. 

"We appreciate FCC Chair Rosenworcel’s words about the importance of localism, but words are not enough at a time when the failure to modernize rules for the streaming era threatens the long-term viability of local news," the group said in a statement. "In 2014, the FCC recognized its authority to modernize the rules to include streamers. But the right place to start is to re-open the existing record so that industry participants can help the FCC and Congress understand how the market has changed. There is no question of the FCC’s authority to take that action. It’s time to end the delay, which only serves the interests of media giants, and instead move this process forward by refreshing the record to ensure the future of local broadcast."

Chair Rosenworcel’s earlier 2014 statement can be found here. 

WASHINGTON—FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel is circulating a proposal that would provide incentives to local TV and radio stations that invest in and prioritize local programming. 

“There’s something special about when you hear a local voice on the airwaves or see a familiar face on your television set in the evening.  Over time we’ve come to trust those voices and they provide an important service to these communities,” said Chairwoman Rosenworcel.  “We want to recognize that dedication when it comes time for license renewals and transactions and this proposal does just that.”

Although details have not been released, the NPRM would allow the FCC to prioritize the processing of applications for license renewal or for assignment or transfer of license filed by radio and TV broadcast stations that provide locally originated programming.  

The NAB applauded the move.

 “The FCC is right to acknowledge the vital role local broadcast stations play in connecting and informing their communities, especially at a time when misinformation runs rampant online and newspapers are shuttering, local broadcasting remains one of the most trusted sources of news and information, NAB spokesman Alex Siciliano told TV Tech sister brand Radio World. “We look forward to learning more about this proposal.”

FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel's proposal to revive net neutrality rules produced mixed, mostly predictable, reactions from consumer and industry groups with the NCTA and the senior Republican appointee on the agency Brendan Carr opposing the idea while some Democratic party lawmakers and consumer groups applauded the move. 

The NAB declined to comment on the proposal. 

Rosenworcel made the proposal shortly after Anna Gomez was sworn in as an FCC commissioner, ending a lengthy deadlock. 

U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation said that the new Democratic majority would allow the FCC to take action on key consumer priorities, including restoring net neutrality protections gutted under the Trump Administration.

“With the swearing in of Anna Gomez, the FCC finally has the power to take action on the priorities important to the American people, from delivering on net neutrality and expanding affordable broadband access to strengthening local news,” Sen. Cantwell said. “I’m looking forward to working with the Commission to accomplish an agenda that puts consumers first.”

Cantwell also noted that a recent poll by the University of Maryland found that 72 percent of Americans support reinstating net neutrality and that she has been a leading advocate to protect and restore net neutrality rules. Last year, Sen. Cantwell co-sponsored the Net Neutrality and Broadband Justice Act to accurately classify broadband internet access as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act, giving the FCC the appropriate authority to reinstate net neutrality protections.

In contrast, Commissioner Brendan Carr, the senior Republican on the FCC issued a statement citing a study by former President Obama’s lawyers on internet regulation that found the effort to impose Title II regulation “would be struck down” by the courts and was a “serious mistake.” 

“The two respected lawyers—who represented the federal government before the Supreme Court during the Obama Administration—expressly lauded the goals of net neutrality,” Carr said in a statement. “Nonetheless, they concluded that Title II regulation of the Internet `would be struck down’ and `would be a serious mistake.’ I agree with President Obama’s lawyers.”

“First, the two senior Obama Administration alums are correct that, in their words, an FCC decision classifying broadband internet access service as Title II telecommunications service would ‘bring about an enormous and transformative expansion in [the agency’s] regulatory authority . . . over the national economy.’  Continuing, they rightly state that regulating the Internet as a Title II utility service `would vastly expand the Commission’s authority and would transform the way a federal agency regulates a vitally important element of our economy and the personal and social lives of hundreds of millions of Americans.’”

“Second, President Obama’s lawyers are correct in stating that any decision by the FCC to apply Title II, utility-style regulations to the Internet `would be struck down by the Supreme Court’ under the major questions doctrine, as West Virginia v. EPA makes clear. Indeed, as the two appellate lawyers succinctly put it last week, the legal question `is an easy one.’”

“As a former General Counsel of the FCC myself, I would encourage my Commission colleagues to heed the judicious guidance offered by these top lawyers from the Obama Administration and focus the FCC’s work on the numerous, important subjects that Congress has authorized the Commission to address—from rural broadband and public safety to spectrum and national security—rather than pursuing the Biden Administration’s unnecessary and unlawful plan for exerting government control over the Internet,”  he concluded. “Heading down the path to Title II would not only push vital FCC matters onto the back burner, it would knock many of them off the stove altogether.”

In a statement Republican-appointed Commissioner Nathan Simington noted that "it has now been nearly six years since we repealed the net neutrality rules, and as far as I know, no one has died yet, nor have any other of the solemnly predicted catastrophes come to pass."

Simington also joined Commissioner Brendan Carr in expressing some doubts about the use of Title II to rein in potential abuses by ISPs but focused much of his attention on big tech companies who would profit from the revival of net neutrality rules.

These big tech companies have funded “an obsession” with net neutrality that obscured the real issue, which is an attempt by big tech “to monopolize…the internet economy” and make sure “they and only they are allowed to reap the massive profits of the internet ecosystem," Simington said in a statement.

The misleading net neutrality debate around “free speech was just the public front for what was really a campaign of industrial lawfare,” by big tech and large streaming companies, he argued.

Michael Powell, president and of the CEO, NCTA – The Internet & Television Association that is backed by cable operators also slammed the plan. 

“The FCC has made clear its desire to launch new net neutrality rules, surfacing new ever-shifting rationales,” Powell said. “The original justification for accessing sweeping Title II authority has become obviously thin. ISPs continue to invest heavily, build ever-faster networks, and have kept those networks open. For two decades, there has been only one two-year period in which the FCC applied Title II to the internet, yet the internet has been open throughout because it makes business sense to offer it that way.”

“The proposed rules may complicate, if not deeply upset, our collective efforts to bring internet to rural and unserved communities,” he concluded. “These rules set out very heavy regulations that complicate the calculus of deploying networks in expensive, risky, and hard-to-serve markets. The FCC’s actions only add to that burden, and we fear net neutrality will lead to net fatality.”

Powell also predicted that “this will be a drawn out, messy proceeding with lots of wasted expense to get rules that might not survive the next election and are unlikely to pass constitutional muster when they reach the Supreme Court, which they inevitably will.”

Support for the idea came from consumer groups like Common Cause that have long backed the idea. 

Michael Copps, former FCC Commissioner and Common Cause special adviser backed the proposal by arguing that “to allow a handful of monopoly-aspiring gate-keepers to control access to the internet is a direct threat to our democracy. Anyone hoping to be a full participant in our society must have access to an open internet that serves the people’s needs. So much of our lives now takes place online that without an internet serving the public interest, we are short-changing ourselves and our country. Congratulations to FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel for her courageous leadership to bring net neutrality back.”

Ishan Mehta, Common Cause Media and Democracy Program director also supported the move. “The Internet has fundamentally changed how people are civically engaged and is critical to participating in society today,” Mehta said. “It is the primary communications platform, a virtual public square and has been a powerful organizing tool, allowing social justice movements to gain momentum and widespread support. We look forward to the reinstatement net neutrality protections, and the control of the Internet returning to the American people instead of Internet providers.”

"The repeal of Net Neutrality during the Trump Administration left access to broadband unregulated and consumers unprotected,” Meta added. “As a result we saw broadband providers throttle popular video streaming services, degrade video quality forcing customers to pay higher prices for improved quality, offer service plans that favor their own services over competitors, and make hollow, voluntary, and unenforceable promises not to disconnect their customers during the pandemic.”

WISPA, which has approximately 1000 members who provide fixed broadband connectivity, and include equipment suppliers, support services, and other industry partners and stakeholders criticized the idea.

“Though details remain to be seen, such a move to reimpose twentieth-century utility-style rules are not needed at this time,” said Louis Peraertz, vice president of policy for WISPA – Broadband Without Boundaries. “The marketplace has thrived in the very absence of such regulation. Low prices, capex output, and technological and service innovation abound. Further, more customers than ever receive broadband, with this number growing each day. Smaller ISPs in particular should not be saddled with burdensome regulations. WISPA has long stood against common carrier regulation of its members’ services. Though Title II would allow access to poles, conduits and rights-of-way for broadband providers – something not automatically granted to ISPs today – its cost, and what it augurs for the future of regulation, outweigh that benefit.  And if the FCC is concerned about the patchwork of state laws, that can be resolved through federal preemption that relaxes regulatory burdens, not increases them.”          

“Quite simply, Title II is for a bygone time, not for a time when companies are actively competing for broadband customers and the government is prepared to provide billions in funding for broadband deployment,” he continued. “That noted, we look forward to learning more and working with the Commission and other stakeholders on this important matter, which, ultimately, we believe demands legislation from Congress.”

Nearly six years after the FCC repealed net neutrality, the commission is preparing to revive the concept, which regulates the internet to ensure equal access to both enterprise and consumers. 

In a speech to the National Press Club today, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said the commission would make details of its proposal public on Thursday and cited the impact of the Covid pandemic—and how the lack of universal broadband access made life more difficult for citizens who had no or poor access to high speed broadband—as among the reasons for bringing net neutrality back. 

“[The pandemic made] it crystal clear that broadband is no longer just ‘nice to have,’” the chairwoman said, ”it is essential infrastructure for modern life. No one without it has a fair shot at 21st century success. We need broadband to reach 100% of us and we need it to be fast, open and fair.”

The announcement of the proposal comes a day after Anna Gomez, the seventh and final commissioner was officially sworn in. Gomez, a Democrat, will most likely be the tie-breaker if and when the proposal comes up for a vote. 

In 2015, after more than a decade of debate over net neutrality, the FCC, under the Obama administration, adopted rules that would enforce openness and equal access to broadband under the net neutrality concept. Those rules however were repealed two years later under the chairmanship of Ajit Pai and upheld by an Appeals Court in 2018.

In her comments today, Rosenworcel said the repeal of net neutrality, “put the FCC on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of the law, and the wrong side of the American public.”

“It was not good then, and it makes even less sense now,” she said. “It determined that this infrastructure—which the pandemic proved is so essential for modern life—needs no oversight, and I think that's just wrong.”

Calling the proposal “a first step,” the chairwoman said that she will invite public comments about how restoring Net Neutrality rules “can help ensure Internet access is fast, open and fair.”

“We will need to develop an updated record to identify the best way to restore these policies and have a uniform National Open Internet standard,” she said.

The proposal will call for using Title II in FCC rules to reclassify the internet as an “essential service,” placing authority to place internet regulation under the commission’s purview. 

“Reclassification of broadband as a Title II service would make the FCC’s work more efficient and effective, and consumers more confident that their internet access is fast, open and fair,” she said.  

The chairwoman continued: “Title II is the part of the law that gives the FCC clear authority to serve as a watchdog over the communications marketplace and look out for the public interest. Title II took on special importance in the net neutrality debate, because the courts have ruled that the FCC has clear authority to enforce open internet policies if broadband internet is classified as a Title II service and providing a strong foundation for net neutrality rules is a good reason to support classifying broadband internet as a Title II service.”

Repealing net neutrality has not only hindered more equitable access to broadband, it has also led to numerous concerns over cybersecurity, emergency services, robocalls and privacy, Rosenworcel said. She also noted that when the rules were repealed, advocates for repeal said that states could replace national rules, but that is not a well thought out solution. 

“When you are dealing with the most essential infrastructure in the digital age, we benefit from having a national policy,” she said.

Rosenworcel took issue with those who think the repeal of net neutrality has had no identifiable impact on equitable broadband access.  

“They say nothing bad has happened, but again, states stepped into the void created by the FCC retreating from net neutrality,” she said. “I think it's time for Washington to step back in with a national policy to make sure internet access is fast, open and fair.” 

The previous fight over net neutrality led to threats both physical and verbal, including a bomb threat during an FCC hearing. Rosenworcal had a warning for both sides of the issue who might want to make their thoughts known outside of the usual comment process. 

“I recognize that those who go to these extremes are not listening to or reading these remarks,” she concluded. “But those of you who set the tone for the debate, make some noise, raise a ruckus, but keep it in the lines.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The FCC has issued new updates to the status of the communications infrastructure in Hawaii in the wake of devastating wild fires that show ongoing improvements in communication systems. 

Along with the updates, FCC chair Jessica Rosenworcel provided a detailed update on the Commission’s plans to help the local communities recover from the disaster.

In a statement on the FCC's response Rosenworcel noted that broadcasters are "continuing to operate and share important community updates and news."

“Having worked for Senator Inouye, I experienced firsthand the kindness and collective spirit of Aloha that guides the people who call Hawai’i home,” Rosenworcel said. “The agency has staff on the ground in Maui assessing the impact on communications services and infrastructure to help local, state, and federal authorities to identify how to best support restoration and emergency response. We have been issuing daily public communications status reports that track the restoration progress, with 17 out of 21 cell sites now restored, the Maui 911 call center now functional, and broadcasters continuing to operate and share important community updates and news.  Also, over 10,000 cable and wireline subscribers have had service restored, but more work remains. We will continue to work closely with local, state, and federal partners as families and residents all over the island begin to rebuild and recover from these devastating wildfires.”

More specifically, the FCC outlined a number of steps it is taking to help communities impacted by the Maui wildfires: 

• Deploying FCC staff to Hawaii to determine the impact to public safety and emergency alerting communications capabilities. 
• Enabling wireless providers to deploy temporary microwave stations to the affected area to support wireless service.
• Monitoring the operational status of communications services and infrastructure on Maui and coordinating with government partners, industry, and public safety to support their restoration efforts. 
• Enabling the County of Maui to use additional frequencies to support public safety communications.
• Activating a tailored version of its Disaster Information Reporting System to obtain targeted, granular communications status information to aid emergency responder decision-making.   
• Posting updates—including reports on the operational status of communications—on a dedicated webpage (www.fcc.gov/HawaiiWildfires), which also includes tips for the public when communicating during an emergency.
• Supporting FEMA and Hawaii disaster operations through spectrum coordination activities. 
• Performing remote High Frequency Direction Finding (HFDF) scans to determine and share operational status of AM stations that support public safety communications.
• Assisting carriers with transportation logistics and state processes to expedite communications restoration activities. 
• Supporting Urban Search and Rescue Operations by issuing Special Temporary Authority (STA) to operate equipment required by search personnel.
• Engaging federal, state, and local officials on the ground to determine priority needs, provide situational awareness, and share expertise to inform decision-making and the implementation of communications services.
• Extending filing and regulatory deadlines for licensees and applicants in Hawaii so they can focus on the response.
• Engaging with FirstNet to assist with movement and placement of assets to support public safety officials’ field engagements.
• Lastly, the FCC’s Operations Center is available 24/7 to assist public safety and industry with communications needs related the response and restoration on Maui. 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Federal Communications Commission chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel marked the 30th anniversary of the FCC first being given Congressional authority to run spectrum auctions by once again appealing to Congress to renew the authority. 

Five months ago, a deadlocked Congress allowed the spectrum authority to expire for the first time in the agency’s history

The House approved reauthorization in February but the Senate failed to pass the resolution amid disagreement on military spectrum needs.

“FCC spectrum auctions have fueled American growth for three decades,” Rosenworcel said. “The agency has held 100 auctions and in the process raised more than $233 billion for the United States Treasury. It’s not just that these auctions are a good deal; they are a big reason why the United States leads the world in wireless innovation. They are also an essential part of our economic and national security. The current lapse in spectrum auction authority is unprecedented and it puts this leadership at risk. With the World Radio Conference now only months away, it is vital that this authority is reauthorized as soon as possible.”

WASHINGTON—FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has announced that she has circulated to her colleagues a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would try to better understand the challenges related to distribution and supply in the video market, especially as it relates to independent programming.   

The move comes at a time when many aspects of the video creation and distribution business remain highly concentrated and a number of players, including broadcasters, would like to see regulators allow even more consolidation. 

In announcing the circulation of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the FCC noted that one of the Commission’s primary statutory objectives with respect to multichannel video programming is to foster a diverse, robust, and competitive marketplace for the delivery of such programming. 

In today’s video landscape, consumers have many video programming platforms to choose from and competition among distributors of video programming continues to evolve, the FCC said. 

Nevertheless, the FCC added that stakeholders continue to raise concerns that certain marketplace practices by distributors may hinder independent video programmers from reaching consumers across all video platforms. These practices may also deprive consumers of access to their choice of diverse programming—one of the benefits of enhanced competition in the video marketplace, the FCC said. 

If adopted, this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would initiate a new proceeding to seek comment on the current state of the marketplace for diverse and independent programming, the FCC announced. 

Specifically, the item would seek comment on the obstacles faced by independent programmers seeking multichannel video programming distributor carriage and carriage on online platforms, how this impacts consumers, and the action the Commission may take to alleviate such obstacles so that its policies can promote competition in the marketplace consistent with our statutory responsibilities, the FCC said. 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The FCC has released another revision of its broadband access maps that found nearly 330,000 additional locations not served by high speed broadband services.  That boosts the total underserved broadband locations for homes and businesses to about 8.3 million. 

The new maps released on May 30 revise those issued in November. 

FCC chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel wrote in a blog post that the revised maps mean “the FCC is taking another step forward in its iterative effort to develop the best and most accurate broadband maps ever built in the United States. This is a big one.”

The November maps represented a major upgrade in detail from the FCC’s earlier broadband maps, which were based on census blocks, which “overstated service nationwide,” Rosenworcel said. “It also provided a less than accurate picture of unserved communities because it lacked the kind of granular data policymakers need if they want to address the digital divide.

“For context on how much more granular this is than what came before, in our current mapping effort the Commission identified over 114 million locations where fixed broadband could be installed compared to data from just 8.1 million census blocks in our prior maps,” Rosenworcel wrote. 

Since then, the FCC has been receiving feedback from consumers, states, localities, Tribes and other stakeholders that led to revisions in the current maps released on May 30. 

Commenting on the improvements to the maps since November, which “helped to identify nearly 330,000 more unserved locations,” Rosenworcel added that “stakeholders have stepped up to provide lots of information and challenges to our data. Our mapping team has reviewed challenges to availability data for more than 4 million locations. Over 75% of those challenges have already been resolved and the majority have led to updates in the data on the map showing where broadband is available. At the same time, the new map also reflects a net increase of more than one million new serviceable locations, as compared to the November 2022 pre-production draft.”

To make those improvements, the FCC “met individually with representatives from every state at least once, and, in total, hosted over 200 individual sessions with state, local, and Tribal governments,” she wrote. “We also responded to more than 7,600 technical assistance requests from internet providers and challengers.”

WASHINGTON—Two Republican members of Congress are asking the acting Inspector General to open an investigation into what they term FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel’s “unprecedented” actions against the proposed merger of Standard General and Tegna, specifically, Rosenworcel’s decision to have the deal reviewed by an Administrative Law Judge. 

With just one week left before the deal expires on May 22, after which financing will run out, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, and Committee Ranking Member Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) wrote to Sharon Diskin, Acting Inspector General for the FCC to look into the factors that led to Rosenworcel’s decision. This comes after the two Congresspersons sent a letter to the FCC Chair in April asking that she respond to their concerns about whether the FCC was acting in good faith after referring the case to the judge.

"No less than five aspects of that decision and the circumstances surrounding it suggest that it was motivated by a biased desire to defeat the Standard General-Tegna transaction. If that is true, then the FCC is serving as a partisan cudgel, rather than fulfilling its mission to ensure a robust and competitive market,” they told Diskin.

The proposed $8.6 billion merger of Standard General and Tegna has been in regulatory limbo since it was announced more than a year ago. While advocates claim that the merger would result in a more diverse ownership structure and help support local journalism, critics claim the opposite would in fact happen, with consolidation reducing competition and automation threatening jobs. 

Cruz and McMorris Rodgers accused the FCC of dereliction of duty during the approval process, favoring input from opponents over advocates. 

“We understand that during the Department of Justice’s months-long review of the Standard General-Tegna transaction, FCC staff repeatedly informed Standard General that if and when the DOJ’s review concluded, they would present the applicants with any concerns, allowing the applicants time to address them,” they wrote. “Yet after the DOJ completed its review without mounting any challenges, the FCC went radio silent: reportedly, in the three months prior to issuing the HDO (hearing designation orde), the Media Bureau either declined or ignored Standard General’s sixteen attempts to engage with it. During this same period, the FCC, including the Media Bureau, had at least eight meetings with individuals and entities who opposed the Standard General-Tegna transaction.”

They also noted what they considered the commission’s unprecedented decision to have the merger reviewed by the commission judge.  

“The decision to refer such a large transaction to an ALJ without a Commission-level vote is itself extraordinary. This is the first time the FCC has designated for an ALJ hearing a transaction of this size that no antitrust regulator has challenged,” they wrote. “Neither of the FCC’s two justifications for doing so—the potential effect on station jobs and retransmission consent rates—has ever before been asserted as a basis for blocking a broadcast license transfer. Moreover, the Commission’s own internal standards limit the Media Bureau from taking such novel action on delegated authority.”

They also criticized the commission’s delay tactics, as well as receiving erroneous and incomplete information from commission staff and Rosenworcel’s refusal to provide an adequate response to their previous letter.

Cruz and McMorris Rodgers asked Diskin to review all communications between FCC commissioners and their staffs regarding the merger as well as those from the applicants and opponents, which could have resulted in what they termed “obstruction of congressional oversight.”

They also want to know whether there were any other similar media transactions that have taken place since the deal was announced that might have impacted retransmission consent or industry consolidation. Finally, they want to know why Rosenworcel did not respond to their concerns raised in the April 5 letter. 

LAS VEGAS—During a speech at the 2023 NAB Show FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel announced a new public-private initiative led by the NAB to help with the rollout of NextGen TV, aka ATSC 3.0.

“Today, we are announcing a public-private initiative, led by the National Association of Broadcasters, to help us work through outstanding challenges faced by industry and consumers” said Rosenworcel at the NAB Show.  “This Future of Television initiative will gather industry, government, and public interest stakeholders to establish a roadmap for a transition to ATSC 3.0 that serves the public interest.  A successful transition will provide for an orderly shift from ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0 and will allow broadcasters to innovate while protecting consumers, especially those most vulnerable.”   

NextGen TV broadcasts currently cover about 60% of the country and industry figures like Sinclair president and CEO Chris Ripley believe it will hit 80% by the end of the year. But the standard is not compatible with the existing ATSC 1.0 broadcasts and few consumers have 3.0 compatible sets. 

In a meeting with the FCC in January, the NAB described the rollout as "stalled" and ask the FCC to set up a taskforce to help speed up the rollout. 

“The Future of TV” initiative will work to identify a roadmap to orderly transition ATSC 1.0 to ATSC 3.0-based services as smoothly as possible for consumers, the FCC said. 

The Future of TV initiative is a public-private partnership led by NAB and working closely with the FCC, consumer groups, and others.  Working groups are expected to focus on addressing backwards compatibility and its impact on consumers; the final conditions needed to complete the national transition to ATSC 3.0; and consideration of the post-transition regulatory landscape.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The NAB has announced that Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel will address broadcasters and attendees at the 2023 NAB Show on April 17, 2023 in Las Vegas. 

The Chairwoman’s remarks will take place on NAB Show’s main stage following a “fireside” chat between NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt and Univision’s Gabriela Teissier at 9 a.m. PT.

"We are thrilled to have Chairwoman Rosenworcel joining us again this year at NAB Show,” said NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt. “With the FCC sitting at the forefront of so many critical issues facing our members today, this will provide a unique opportunity for broadcasters across the country to hear directly from the Chairwoman on her thoughts on the state of the industry and her vision for the future."

Chairwoman Rosenworcel became FCC chair following her Senate confirmation for another five-year term in December 2021. She is the first woman to permanently serve as chair in the agency’s almost-100-year history. 

Chairwoman Rosenworcel has a wealth of communications experience, as she was first confirmed as an FCC commissioner in May 2012 after serving as senior communications counsel to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. Chairwoman Rosenworcel previously worked at the FCC for the Wireline Competition Bureau and as a senior aide to Commissioner Michael Copps.

Chairwoman Rosenworcel holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics and English literature from Wesleyan University and a J.D. from the New York University School of Law.

WASHINGTON—In his 2023 State of the Union address, President Biden called out corporations for charging what he referred to as “junk fees” that he estimated cost Americans hundreds of dollars per month, and has even proposed a “Junk Fee Prevention Act” to crack down on the practice. 

In concert with the President’s initiative, the FCC today proposed a new rule that it says will help consumers better understand the myriad fees that make up their monthly pay-TV bills. 

The new customer service protections would require cable and satellite TV companies to specify the “all-in” price clearly and prominently for video programming service in their promotional materials and on subscribers’ bills. 

Specifically, cable and DBS providers would be required to state the total cost of video programming service clearly and prominently, including broadcast retransmission fees, regional sports programming, and other programming-related fees, as a prominent single line item on subscribers’ bills and in promotional materials.

The commission says the proposal aims to eliminate what it terms “the misleading practice” of describing these video programming costs as a tax, fee, or surcharge. This updated “all-in” pricing format will allow consumers to make informed choices, the FCC said, including the ability to comparison shop among competing providers and to compare programming costs against alternative programming providers, including streaming services.

“Consumers deserve to know what exactly they are paying for when they sign up for a cable or broadcast satellite subscription.  No one likes surprises on their bill, especially families on tight budgets,” said Chairwoman Rosenworcel.  “We’re working to make it so the advertised price for a service is the price you pay when your bill arrives and isn’t littered with anything that resembles junk fees.  Not only will this reduce cost confusion and make it easier for consumers to compare services, but this proposal will also increase competition among cable and broadcast satellite providers through improved price transparency.”

This consumer protection effort is the latest in the Commission’s price transparency and increased competitiveness initiatives, including the forthcoming roll-out of the nation’s first Broadband Nutrition Label, which requires broadband providers to display easy-to-understand labels to allow consumers to comparison shop for broadband services.

A group representing Filipino Americans is expressing its support for the merger of Standard General and Tegna broadcast groups, saying the deal will “enhance minority media ownership in a transformative way.”

The FCC is currently reviewing the deal which would see Standard General acquire Tegna for $8.6 billion in debt and would create a combined group of 64 TV stations in 51 U.S. markets. Opponents to the merger cite concerns over how consolidation would impact the stations’ news operations. Supporters claim opposition is partly based on ethnic bias, in particular against Asian Americans, because Standard General is lead by South Korean immigrant Soo Kim, who was called “a well respected voice and business leader in the Asian Pacific Islander (AAPI) community,” by Kelly Coldiron, executive director of the National Federation of Filipino-American Associations.

In the letter to Chair Jessica Rosenworcel, Coldiron noted how Kim’s backstory of moving to the U.S. from South Korea, allowed him and his family to pursue “the American dream.” 

“[Kim] built a successful career investing in companies that have produced thousands of jobs and with his passion for broadcast journalism he has turned struggling news stations around and increased focus on local news,” Coldiron told the FCC.

“Diversity matters especially when it comes to local news,” Coldiron continued. “Mr. Kim understands the dreams, struggles, and passions of the AAPI community. Under his leadership Standard General and Tegna will have the financial resources required to create new community partnerships and bring diverse perspectives to local news coverage. I applaud the excellent work that the FCC has done under your Chairmanship to advocate for issues impacting minority communities. Supporting the largest minority-owned broadcasting company will add to this legacy and send a positive message of inclusion and opportunity to communities across America."

WASHINGTON—Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel provided an update today on the agency’s efforts to support the operation and restoration of communications services in the path of Hurricane Ian:

“All of us have our eyes on Hurricane Ian, which caused catastrophic destruction in Florida and is now bearing down on Georgia and South Carolina as another landfall looms.  At the same time, Puerto Rico is still recovering from Hurricane Fiona, with many still left without power,” said Chairwoman Rosenworcel.  “Our thoughts are with those whose lives have been upended.  We have committed our resources now and for the long haul to help ensure communications recover and are rebuilt in the communities affected by both storms.”

The FCC has been coordinating closely with FEMA, CISA and other government partners, including officials in Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, as well as communications providers in preparation for the storm, and now also during its aftermath, through actions including:

• Establishing a website at www.fcc.gov/ian prior to landfall as a centralized location for all FCC information related to Hurricane Ian, including emergency communications tips in multiple languages; communication status reports; and additional content.
• Deploying staff to perform surveys and assessments of spectrum usage in targeted areas, which will help federal agencies assess the post-landfall impact to broadcasters and public safety communications.
• In coordination with FEMA and other government partners, activating its Disaster Information Reporting System for counties impacted by Hurricane Ian in Florida, and soon within Georgia and South Carolina.
• Publishing the first comprehensive assessment of Hurricane Ian’s post-landfall impact on communications networks in the affected areas and providing daily updates to both government partners and the public.
• Launching an initiative to share communications outage information reported to the FCC with state, federal, territorial, and Tribal nation agencies upon authorization. This can improve their situational awareness, enhance the ability to respond more quickly to outages affecting their communities, and help save lives. 
• Engaging in daily coordination with Federal, state, and local partners, and staying apprised of participating wireless providers' implementation of the Wireless Network Resiliency Cooperative Framework, such as roaming and mutual aid, as well as encouraging similar actions by other industry segments (including broadcasters, wireless and wireline carriers, satellite operators, trade associations, and others).  
• Working with federal partners to promote coordination between the communications and power sectors, which is critical during recovery efforts.
• Distributed multilingual PSAs containing emergency communications tips to broadcasters in the path of Hurricane Ian.  
• Issuing waivers to support the continuity of service and assessing the need for other regulatory assistance that may be helpful.

In addition to the above efforts, the FCC staff deployed to the affected areas continue to perform post-landfall, on-site surveys of communications services and infrastructure and assist with coordination and oversight of communications restoration. 

 WASHINGTON—Federal Communications Commission chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has announced changes to her staff and some adjustments to the policy portfolios for select legal advisors.  

As part of those changes the chairwoman announced that starting July 11, Carmen Scurato will serve as the chairwoman’s legal advisor for consumer and public safety issues.

In addition, David Strickland will now serve as legal advisor, media.  Ethan Lucarelli will serve as legal advisor for wireless and international issues.  Ramesh Nagarajan will serve as legal advisor for wireline and enforcement related issues.  

“Keeping our telecommunications networks safe and protecting consumers takes on elevated urgency as new threats emerge from all sides, explained chairwoman Rosenworcel in a statement. “I’m excited to welcome Carmen to the FCC as I know we will all benefit from her deep and varied experience working on behalf of consumers and the public. I also want to thank David, Ethan, and Ramesh, for their continued service to the Commission. We have complex challenges to tackle as an agency, but I’m confident we have the necessary expertise to confront them successfully.”

Carmen Scurato joins the Chairwoman’s office from Free Press where she served as associate legal director and senior counsel covering telecommunications, privacy, and technology issues.  Previously, she was the vice president of policy and general counsel for the National Hispanic Media Coalition, where she led a policy team focused on advancing the communication needs of the Latinx community.  She has served on the FCC’s Consumer Advisory Committee, the American Library Association’s Public Policy Council, and participated in the Aspen Institute Conference on Communications Policy.  Earlier in her career, Mrs. Scurato worked with the Department of Justice in both the Civil Frauds section, specializing in False Claims Act investigations, and in the Office of Legislative Affairs.  A native of Puerto Rico, Mrs. Scurato received her undergraduate degree from New York University and her law degree from Villanova University.

Prior to David Strickland’s role in the Chairwoman’s office, he served as assistant bureau chief in the Enforcement Bureau, managing consumer protection, privacy, and media enforcement matters.  David also served as assistant division chief in the International Bureau, where he worked on a variety of satellite, telecommunications policy, and spectrum-related issues.  Before joining the FCC, he was an attorney in private practice, specializing in litigation and antitrust issues.  David is a graduate of the University of Virginia and Harvard Law School. 

Preceding his service in the Chairwoman’s office, Ethan Lucarelli worked as the legal and policy advisor to the Bureau Chief of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.  Previously, Ethan was director of regulatory & public policy at Inmarsat, a global satellite communications company, and an attorney in the Telecommunications, Media, and Technology group at law firm Wiley Rein LLP.  Ethan also is a professorial lecturer in Law at the George Washington University Law School, teaching courses in Telecommunications Law and Scholarly Writing.  Ethan earned his JD with highest honors from George Washington University Law School and a Bachelor of Science in Communications from the University of Illinois.

Before serving as a Legal Advisor to Chairwoman Rosenworcel, Ramesh Nagarajan was the deputy division chief of the Competition Policy Division within the Wireline Competition Bureau. He also served as a law clerk to United States District Judge James D. Whittemore in the Middle District of Florida.  Ramesh began his legal career practicing antitrust and competition law at O'Melveny & Myers LLP.  Before attending law school, he served as a Legislative Assistant to Representative Lois Capps.  He is a graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School. 

With its long hiatus in the rearview mirror, the NAB Show returned in April to Las Vegas, conveying an upbeat feel and a sense that things are returning to normal—or, at least a new normal where COVID is just an inconvenient part of life. (One need look no further than the COVID testing stations at the LVCC and the proof-of-vaccination/negative-COVID-test admittance policy for evidence of that.)

As is tradition, the president and CEO of NAB and chairperson of the FCC held a fireside chat at the start of the show—the first time for both Curtis LeGeyt, who took charge of the association in January, and Jessica Rosenworcel, whom the Senate confirmed as chairperson in December. 

Regarding ATSC 3.0, Rosenworcel made four important points broadcasters would be wise to consider: 

• The FCC chairperson recognizes the need for special temporary authorities to address 3.0 “bumps in the road” and commended Media Bureau Chief Holly Saurer for “sitting down with any broadcaster who comes in and says, ‘You know, I’ve got a problem with my 3.0 signal in the way I need to work in my marketplace’” and making sure broadcasters have the “space to experiment and innovate.”
  
• Rosenworcel acknowledges that rule changes may be necessary to advance 3.0 and expressed a willingness to work with broadcasters on finding solutions. Pointing to those who have sought rule changes to address 3.0 and multicasting as an example, she told broadcasters to “come to us, tell us what you’re seeing. Tell us what’s working and where there might be a hurdle in our rules that we should figure out how to fix.”
  
• The chairperson views current period with 3.0 as an “experimental” phase. Referring to the FCC’s “framework” for NextGen TV in which 1.0 continues and broadcasters voluntarily work together to put 3.0 on air in local markets, she said, “…[W]hat that does is it gives broadcasters the opportunity to experiment with this technology, develop use cases, try to figure out what services work at scale.”
  
• Rosenworcel also wishes to deal with the inherent incompatibility of 3.0 and 1.0. “You know, the standard is still not backwards-compatible with existing receivers and televisions, and that’s going to be something we need to address.”

From where I sit, these are the important takeaways from the fireside chat. Rosenworcel gets high marks for expressing the agency’s desire to work with broadcasters on STAs and rule changes needed to advance NextGen TV deployment. 

The broadcast industry needs to do a better job of conveying where it is with the 3.0 rollout. In my mind—and likely the minds of the consumer electronics manufacturers onboard the NextGen TV bandwagon with 100 or more 3.0 models, the industry is transitioning, or has transitioned, from the “experimental” phase to deployment. The word “experiment” makes it seem like packing it in is a possibility.

Lastly, is backwards compatibility really on the table? I thought that was settled. If I were a pessimist, I might view that comment as a red flag that could be used as an excuse to extend the 1.0 sunset timeframe indefinitely or even as a reason to end the “experiment.” If I were an optimist, I could see it as a hint that someone in Washington is toying with the idea of a coupon program for 3.0-to-1.0 set-top boxes for all of those existing DTV households. 

But I’m a realist, hoping for the latter, concerned about the former and, at the end of the day, cautiously thinking the chairperson may have misspoken or been jetlagged. Time will tell. 

The FCC should conclude its long-overdue, congressionally mandated quadrennial review of whether its media ownership regulations are necessary in the public interest, National Association of Broadcasters CEO Curtis LeGeyt told FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel earlier this month according to an FCC filing.

A politically tied FCC is unlikely to approve reregulation of broadcasters and so far there has been no movement on a Senate confirmation vote on Gigi Sohn, the Democratic nominee who would break that tie.

In a meeting with Rosenworcel, as well as fellow Democrat Commissioner Geoffrey Starks, LeGeyt and other NAB executives said it was past time to wind up the 2018 review. 

They said that some delay was understandable given that the Supreme Court had heard an appeal of the FCC's broadcast reg rollback, but now that that decision was "far back in the rearview mirror," the FCC needed to wrap it up.

NAB recognized that could be problematic without a full commission, so said it was urging Rosenworcel to complete the rulemaking ASAP after a full commission is seated, but that if that does not happen "in the near term," it needs to finish up anyway.

Back in June 2021, the FCC officially restored the deregulatory media ownership order adopted by the Republican majority under former chairman Ajit Pai, a decision reversed by an appeals court before that reversal was reversed by the Supreme Court. But the FCC had also sought comment to "update the public record" on media ownership for the overdue quadrennial review.

That could give a Democratic-controlled FCC the opening to re-regulate broadcasters if the record suggests to them that is necessary.

In November 2017, a politically divided FCC voted to eliminate the newspaper-broadcast and the radio-TV cross-ownership rules; allow dual station ownership in markets with fewer than eight independent voices after the duopoly, creating an opportunity for ownership of two of the top four stations in a market on a case-by-case basis (the FCC did not call it a waiver); eliminate attribution of joint sales agreements as ownership; and create an incubator program.

Those changes had been blocked by the Third Circuit, which remanded the decision back to the FCC for a better justification of the decision. The Supreme Court ultimately reversed that decision, holding that the decision was not arbitrary and capricious and that the FCC's conclusion that the rules were no longer in the public interest was reasonable.

Of course that would not prevent a Rosenworcel-led FCC from re-regulating broadcast ownership when there is a Democratic majority on the commission. 

WASHINGTON D.C.—The Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee has voted to approve Jessica Rosenworcel‘s nomination to another term at the Federal Communications Commission.

The vote moves the nomination to a full vote in the Senate. If approved by that vote, Rosenworcel would be the first woman to be the non-acting chair of the FCC.  

At the same hearing, the Committee also advanced Biden’s nomination for the FTC, Alvaro Bedoya, to a full Senate vote. 

WASHINGTON—The Federal Communications Commission is considering updating its political programming and recordkeeping rules for broadcast licensees for the first time in 30 years.

Acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said two specific changes are designed to comply with statutory requirements and account for modern campaign practices.

The August commission meeting agenda has been released. It includes a notice of proposed rulemaking that, first, would revise the definition of “legally qualified candidate for public office.” If ultimately passed, this proposal would update the list of activities that may be considered in determining whether an individual running as a write-in has made a “substantial showing” of their candidacy. It would add use of social media and the creation of a campaign website to the list.

“At the time our current rules were drafted, social media and campaign websites did not exist,” the draft NPRM states. “Media coverage of recent campaigns on the national, state and local levels indicates that the use of social media has become an activity that bona fide candidates routinely use to solicit support, financial contributions and votes. Recent articles reveal that bona fide political campaigns use major social media platforms to advertise, connect with supporters, and fundraise, and that such engagement in social media use, for example, by creating a Twitter or Facebook account, typically increases donations for new politicians … In addition, social media platforms enable political campaigns to build support by disseminating campaign updates and targeting advertisements to potential voters, and they provide sophisticated tools to regularly measure user engagement.”

The draft NPRM also would also revise the FCC’s political recordkeeping rules to conform with the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 to include any request for the purchase of advertising time that “communicates a message relating to any political matter of national importance” (i.e., issue ads) and specify the records that must be maintained. The commission said the current rule language does not reflect the federal law on this question.

If this NPRM is approved in August, these proposals would then be opened for public comment before the FCC would take action. In addition to radio and TV stations, the changes would apply to cable system operators, Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) service providers and Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service licensees.

The commission noted that it had not has done a formal review to update the political programming and recordkeeping rules in 30 years.

A PDF of the draft NPRM is available on the Radio World website.

WASHINGTON—FCC Acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel is looking for help from broadcasters to get the word out about a new FCC program designed to give broadband support to those in need of it.

During a speech at the NAB’s State Leadership Conference, Rosenworcel acknowledged the trusted role that broadcasters have in sharing information in their communities, emphasized in the last year, calling broadcasters the place people turn to for “the latest and greatest.”

Rosenworcel wants to capitalize on that role of broadcasters to help spread the word about the new Emergency Broadband Benefit program, which is launching this week. The program is designed to help eligible households ensure they are and can stay connected to broadband so that they can have reliable internet access. Under the program, eligible households will receive up to $50 per month for broadband service, and those on tribal lands can received up to $75 per month.

“People won’t receive this help if they don’t sign up. And that’s where you come in,” Rosenworcel said. “We need trusted voices like yours to let people know that support is available and how to get it.”

The FCC has created a press section on its website where broadcasters can find shareable information about the program and participating internet providers.

“If you can help us spread the word about the Emergency Broadband Benefit and get people signed up, we can help make paying those bills a little bit easier during these historically hard times,” Rosenworcel added.

Rosenworcel’s full speech from the NAB SLC is available online. More information on the Emergency Broadband Benefit program is available on the FCC website. 

WASHINGTON—Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) wants the FCC under Acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel to investigate the recent rise of complaints related to the CALM Act, and hopefully have the commission go a step further than it did under former FCC Chairman Ajit Pai when it comes to enforcement.

The CALM (Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation) Act, which Eshoo wrote and was enacted in 2010, is designed to regulate the volume of broadcast, cable and satellite commercials compared to other programming, with the goal of preventing commercials from being significantly louder. The FCC was directed to issue regulations for the bill.

In a letter from Eshoo to Rosenworcel, she details how she originally contacted Pai on July 21, 2020, requesting information about new complaints related to the enforcement of the CALM Act. She said his response, sent on Aug. 11, 2020, indicated that while the FCC has received “thousands of complaints,” it has never brought an enforcement action as a result. Pai also said that CALM Act complaints were increasing in the first half of 2020.

Eshoo cited a recent press report from Insider using more recent data that shows complaints have increased from April 2020 through February 2021. The article says that “2021 is poised to be the worst year since the initial rollout” of the CALM Act.

“It is for these reasons that I ask the FCC investigate the rise in the loudness of TV advertising complaints and take enforcement actions as appropriate,” Eshoo wrote.

The FCC previously updated its enforcement of the CALM Act in 2014 (then under former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler), implementing a new measurement algorithm that disregarded quiet or silent parts of commercials, which was proving to be a loophole with advertisers trying to use silence to offset loudness and lower the average volume of a commercial.

WASHINGTON—The FCC has clarified its position in regards to the ongoing dispute between Hulu and Sinclair Broadcast Group over carriage of certain regional sports networks, with Acting FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel saying that the commission is not able to wade in to help with any negotiations.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) wrote a letter in January to execs of The Walt Disney Company, which owns Hulu, and Sinclair, about the desire to end the dispute that has seen 21 Sinclair-owned RSNs unavailable on the Hulu + Live TV service, which threatens to cut off more than 100,000 Ohio Hulu subscribers' access to local sports content. In the letter he asks that the FCC monitor and help facilitate a resolution.

“As the coronavirus pandemic continues to worsen and more sports venues close their doors to fans, it is more important now than ever that we foster community, hope and social connection by offering Ohioans and communities across the country reliable access to local sporting events,” wrote Sen. Brown.

However, Rosenworcel pointed out in a response dated Feb. 16 (released by the FCC on Feb. 25) that the FCC’s program carriage rules only allow it to govern negotiations between third-party video programming vendors and multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs). Hulu + Live TV is a non-MVPD over-the-top linear video provider, Rosenworcel explained, meaning the FCC does not have jurisdiction over carriage disputes.

“Nevertheless, I share your interest in the parties continuing to negotiate in good faith and hope they will come to agreement to minimize any disruption to Hulu + Live TV subscribers,” Rosenworcel wrote.

TV Tech’s sister publication Multichannel News reports that there have been some talks to revive the effort previously led by Tom Wheeler when he was FCC chair to classify OTT platforms as MVPDs, especially as the role of streamers has grown in recent years. 

WASHINGTON—FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel has been appointed as the acting FCC chairwoman by President Joe Biden. She takes over the role after former chairman Ajit Pai resigned on Jan. 20.

“I am honored to be designated as the acting chairwoman of the Federal Communications Commission by President Biden,” Rosenworcel said. “I thank the president for the opportunity to lead an agency with such a vital mission and talented staff. It is a privilege to serve the American people and work on their behalf to expand the reach of communications opportunity in the digital age.”

Rosenworcel, who was originally appointed to the FCC by President Barack Obama in 2012, is one of two Democrats on the FCC board, along with Commissioner Geoffrey Starks. Commissioners Brendan Carr and Nathan Simington are Republicans. Pai was also a Republican.

Prior to joining the FCC, Rosenworcel served as senior communications counsel for the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. Before entering government, she practiced communications law in D.C.

It has been reported that Rosenworcel is a candidate to shed the “acting” label and take over as full-time chairwoman of the FCC, though no official nomination has been made by President Biden.

NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith released this statement regarding Rosenworcel taking over as acting chairwoman:

“NAB applauds Jessica Rosenworcel on her selection by President Biden as acting chair of the FCC. She is a dedicated and experienced public servant who has demonstrated great aptitude in leading communications policy during her tenure at the commission. We look forward to working with her and her fellow commissioners on regulatory policies that help local radio and TV stations serve the public interest.” 

SAN FRANCISCO—Soon after the 2020 election was called for Joe Biden, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced plans to step down from the FCC. The new administration will give Democrats a new opening to work on their priorities, which will likely include net-neutrality rules, universal broadband access and a perhaps a redirection of the Pai-led Modernization of Media Regulation initiatives, whose goal is to reduce what the commission has called unnecessary regulation.

Or, as Chris Lewis with Public Knowledge put it: a change in approach is drastically needed by the new FCC. 

“If the COVID pandemic taught us anything, it’s just how disastrous it has been to have an FCC that has removed its own authority over broadband,” said Lewis who is president and CEO of the public interest group. 

Democratic FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel is considered a candidate to replace Pai, as is Commissioner Geoffrey Starks, former Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, who stepped in as acting chairwoman during the Obama administration, and Gigi Sohn, former advisor to FCC Chair Tom Wheeler. 

One of the most important issues facing the industry now is redefining the video marketplace so that there is a clear recognition of the state of competition.  

“Broadcasters not only compete with themselves, but also big tech, big telecom, big cable, etc.,” Hoffman said. “It is preposterous to keep regs based on a quaint notion of ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox and new networks, when the market is so much more, with much bigger players.” 

But Rob McDowell, former FCC commissioner and now a partner with Cooley LLC, said broadcasters will have to accept the fact that a Biden-Harris FCC is not likely to give them regulatory relief as they face more competition from internet companies. 

“However, the Supreme Court will rule in the Prometheus appeal before the end of June and that could restore the FCC’s 2017 media ownership order, which relaxed rules such as regarding combinations of the two of top four stations in a market,” he said. “If that’s the case, look for some broadcasters to take advantage of such opportunities.”

WASHINGTON—The FCC today won a court ruling that upholds its 2018 order nullifying net neutrality rules, unanimously agreeing with the commission’s classification of broadband internet access as a Title I “information service,” as part of its justification for dropping the rules.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C. did make two exceptions in its decision, however. It said the commission did not prove that it had the legal authority to prevent states from imposing any rules more stringent than the FCC’s 2018 order. It also remanded the decision back to the commission, noting that the FCC failed to examine the implications of its order for public safety as well as what reclassification would mean for regulation of pole attachments or how it would affect the commission’s “Lifeline Program,” which provides communications discounts to low income consumers.

The court used the “Chevron principle” in agreeing with the commission’s classification of broadband as an “information service.” The Chevron principle allows federal agencies to clarify a Congressional statute if it is considered ”reasonable.”

“Applying these principles here, we hold that classifying broadband internet access as an ‘information service’ based on the functionalities of DNS and caching is ‘a reasonable policy choice for the [Commission] to make,’” the court said.

The court also disagreed with opponents of the commission’s decision, who said the FCC’s use of the term “public switched network” must be understood as if Congress had used the phrase ‘public switched telephone network.’” The court said that the term “public switched network” can be used to describe a telecommunications system that uses both telephone numbers and IP addresses.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai hailed the decision.

“Today’s decision is a victory for consumers, broadband deployment and the free and open internet. The court affirmed the FCC’s decision to repeal 1930s utility-style regulation of the internet imposed by the prior Administration,” he said in a statement. “The court also upheld our robust transparency rule so that consumers can be fully informed about their online options. Since we adopted the Restoring Internet Freedom Order, consumers have seen 40% faster speeds and millions more Americans have gained access to the internet. A free and open internet is what we have today and what we’ll continue to have moving forward. We look forward to addressing on remand the narrow issues that the court identified.”

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, who opposed the FCC’s original order, said in a tweet that the fight for net neutrality is “not over.”

WASHINGTON—The FCC has officially launched its 2018 Quadrennial Review of the its media ownership rules to determine whether they “are necessary in the public interest as the result of competition” and to “repeal or modify any regulation [the Commission] determines to be no longer in the public interest.”

The rules subject to this quadrennial review obligation include the Local Radio Ownership Rule, the Local Television Ownership Rule, and the Dual Network Rule. The Local Radio and Local Television Ownership Rules limit the total number of broadcast radio and television stations, respectively, that may be commonly owned in a media market. The Dual Network Rule prohibits a merger between or among the Big Four broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC).

In its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the commission said it was seeking comment on whether the three rules continue to serve the public interest or whether they should be modified or eliminated in light of changes to the media marketplace. In addition, the notice seeks comment on three proposals relevant to promoting diversity in the broadcast industry. The statute specifically excludes the national television ownership cap from the quadrennial review.

[Read: FCC To Kick Off Quadrennial Broadcast Reg Review Next Month]

The national ownership rules pertaining to the 39% cap on national audience reach or the UHF discount from that cap, are not part of the inquiry because they are not part of the rules that Congress requires the commission to review.

In a statement, Chairman Ajit Pai said “our rules must keep pace with the modern media marketplace,” noting that, for example, the commission’s elimination of the newspaper-radio cross-ownership rule in 2017 has helped media enterprises such as Colorado’s “Grand Daily Junction Sentinel” expand its reach by allowing it to acquire a radio station group in Grand Junction.

“I recently met Jay Seaton, who runs the ‘Daily Sentinel,” Pai said. “He told me that this transaction will help him disseminate news across more formats and appeal more to advertisers [revenue from which can be poured back into the busines]). As he put it, ending the cross-ownership ban was ‘15 years overdue.’””

Four of the five commissioners concurred with the launch of the review with Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel dissenting, saying the review is inadequate.

Emphasizing the importance of localism, competition and diversity in the broadcast ownership marketplace, Rosenworcel said much of the review “hits the mark” but misses it in other aspects.

“To the extent this rulemaking offers thoughtful reform, I approve,” she said. “But in other aspects, I dissent. It fails to honestly assess the impact of too many changes we propose on the values of localism, competition, and diversity that have informed this agency’s media policies in the past—and I believe should still inform our efforts in the future.“

Pai responded that he was “disappointed” with Rosenworcel’s dissent but that Congressional rules require the commission to include the Dual Network Rule.

“Whatever one’s opinion of it, refusing to include [the Dual Network Rule] in our quadrennial review would have violated the law,” Pai said. “As a result, a request to remove it from the Notice doesn’t constitute a good-faith attempt to reach consensus but rather gives the appearance of looking for an excuse to dissent for political reasons.”

NAB said the review is timely in light of the increasing crowded media marketplace.

"NAB looks forward to participating in the FCC’s congressionally-mandated quadrennial review of broadcast media ownership rules,” the association said in a statement. “We are not seeking wholesale elimination of these regulations, but rather a modernization that reflects today’s fiercely competitive marketplace. We trust the Commission will update these rules with an understanding that free and local broadcasting now competes head-to-head with powerful Internet, pay TV and audio companies that didn't exist when many broadcast ownership rules were first written."

WASHINGTON—At this year’s NAB Show, the Federal Communications Commission will be out in full strength. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioners Michael O’Rielly, Brendan Carr and Jessica Rosenworcel will participate in four separate sessions, April 7 – 12 in Las Vegas. Commissioner Mignon Clyburn is not scheduled to attend.

Chairman Pai will deliver remarks at the “We Are Broadcasters Celebration” Tuesday, April 10, 3–4:15 p.m. The new event celebrates local radio and TV stations’ role in communities and “commitment to innovation that enables broadcasters to better serve listeners and viewers,” according to the announcement.

[Rep. Greg Walden to Speak at 2018 NAB Show Opening]

Designated chairman by President Donald Trump in January 2017, Pai had previously served as commissioner at the FCC, appointed by President Barack Obama and confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate in May 2012.

Remember that Pai notably canceled an appearance at January’s CES, reportedly after threats to his safety over his position on Net Neutrality.

Commissioners O’Rielly, Carr and Rosenworcel will address three sessions within the NAB Show Business of Broadcast Conference, April 8–11, including a Law and Policy Q&A with the FCC and Capitol Hill, which is open to NAB members only.

WASHINGTON—FCC Democratic Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel this week criticized the current proposal for voluntary adoption of the ATSC 3.0 standard (also referred to as “NextGen TV”), and thinks the commission should take more time to consider the ramifications.

While citing the advantages of higher resolution, more interactivity and improved emergency alerting capabilities the NextGen TV standard offers, Rosenworcel warned that such a move will have a financial impact on consumers.

“I fear the agency is about to rush this standard to market without understanding the consequences for consumers,” the commissioner said in a speech before the U.S Conference of Catholic Bishops. “This new standard is not backwards-compatible with current television devices. In the near term, with the standard voluntary, the cost of implementing it will be added to consumer cable and satellite bills. In the longer term, it means everyone will need to buy a new television.”

Rosenworcel said that rather than be a “boon” for consumers, that if adopted as it stands, the standard would amount to “a tax on every household with a television,” and urged the commission “to go back to the drawing board and find a way to smooth the transition to this new standard in a way that better serves the public interest.”

Perhaps tied to the proposal, Rosenworcel also criticized the pending Sinclair-Tribune merger. Sinclair has been a strong proponent of the NextGen TV standard and cites the standard as one of the reasons for acquiring the station group, which would allow Sinclair to reach more than 70 percent of U.S. television households and give the standard the critical mass it would need for success.

However, Rosenworcel’s concerns about the merger aren’t tied to the NextGen TV standard, but rather what the concentration of station ownership would do to localism, diversity and competition.

“The bottom line is we are not going to remedy what ails our media with a rush of new consolidation,” she said. “We are not going to fix our inability to ferret fact from fiction by doubling down on a single company owning ever more of our public airwaves.” 

Editor's Note: The NAB released a statement from NAB Executive Vice President of Communications Dennis Wharton:

“Unfortunately, Commissioner Rosenworcel misunderstands the goals and asks of broadcasters. We simply want to compete on equal footing with national wireless and pay TV providers who routinely upgrade services in the telecom ecosystem.

“NextGen TV will allow local TV stations—including our public TV brethren—the ability to offer ultra HDTV programming, emergency alerts that save lives, and live TV on mobile devices. This will be free and local programming innovation that the FCC routinely supports, and that tens of millions of consumers will enjoy.”

For a comprehensive list of TV Technology’s ATSC 3.0 coverage, see our ATSC3 silo.

WASHINGTON—The number of FCC commissioners is once again officially back to five as the swearing in ceremony for President Trump nominees Brendan Carr and Jessica Rosenworcel took place on Friday, Aug. 11. Carr will be serving his first term as a commissioner, while Rosenworcel was renominated after previously serving as FCC commissioner under Tom Wheeler.

Brendan Carr

“It is a tremendous honor and privilege to serve as a Commissioner of the FCC,” said Carr in a released statement. “I have had the privilege of working at the agency for over five years, and that experience has instilled in me a deep appreciation for the FCC’s work and its talented staff. Whether it is promoting broadband deployment, maintaining the United States’ leadership in wireless, or advancing public safety, I look forward to hitting the ground running and working with my colleagues at the Commission to serve the public interest.”

Jessica Rosenworcel

“I firmly believe that the future belongs to the connected,” Rosenworcel said in her statement. “No matter who you are or where you live, you need access to modern communications to have a fair shot at 21st century success. That’s why the Commission’s work is so important and I think the President and the United States Senate for this opportunity. I pledge to fight to make sure that the public interest is served and everyone across this country has access to the best, most reliable communications in the world.”

WASHINGTON—The FCC is back up to full strength, and Chairman Ajit Pai expressed pleasure that the Senate has confirmed Brendan Carr and Jessica Rosenworcel.

Jessica Rosenworcel

“I congratulate Brendan and Jessica on their confirmations,” said Pai in a statement.“As I know from working with each of them for years, they have distinguished records of public service and will be valuable assets to the FCC in the years to come. Their experience at the FCC makes them particularly well-suited to hit the ground running. I’m pleased that the FCC will once again be at full strength and look forward to collaborating to close the digital divide, promote innovation, protect consumers, and improve the agency’s operations.”

Brendan Carr

The commission has been down to three members since the Trump administration took office. Rosenworcel, a Democrat, is returning now to the commission, where she served from 2012 through the end of last year. Carr, a Republican, was general counsel of the FCC and previously was lead advisor to Commissioner Pai on wireless, public safety, and international issues.

There had been some haggling this week on the Hill over whether Carr should be confirmed for one year or six.

This story originally appeared on TVT's sister publication Radio World. 

WASHINGTON—After some reports had hinted at the possibility, President Donald Trump has said that he intends to nominated Jessica Rosenworcel to a five-year term and a return engagement as a Democratic FCC commissioner. Rosenworcel previously served on the commission from 2012 to 2016. She was previously renominated by former President Obama, but it was withdrawn after his term ended.

For the full story, visit TVT’s sister publication B&C.

WASHINGTON—The senate has packed its bags and headed home for the holidays, and that could mean the end of Democratic FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel’s change for reconfirmation. There are still opportunities that could see Rosenworcel still keep her spot with the commission, though it would most likely have to be through unanimous consent. If Rosenworcel is not reconfirmed President-Elect Donald Trump will pick a new chair.

Read the full story on TV Technology’s sister publication, Multichannel News.

WASHINGTON—The holds issued by Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) on the re-nomination of Democratic FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel have been lifted. Sources indicate that conversations between Markey and Rosenworcel that signaled a commitment to proceeding on remaining items before the commission were key to the senators lifting the hold on Rosenworcel’s possible second term.

For the full story, check out TVT’s sister publication B&C.