FCC Chairman Brendan Carr told CNBC on Friday that when it comes to deciding whether to allow the broadcast of the execution of a man convicted of a terror attack in 2009, he will let the person who announced the decision to do so have the final say.

Last week Sec. of Defense Pete Hegseth announced that he would allow the execution of former Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan—who killed 13 unarmed people and wounded 32 others in a 2009 mass shooting at Fort. Hood—would be made available for public viewing, including on a live stream.

"We'll make sure that people are able to watch it, that it's public," he told a right-wing news outlet o Oct. 8. "Because people need to understand that there are serious consequences for these types of things."

When asked about this on CNBC Friday, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr expressed confidence in the SecDef.

“My understanding is it’s not on broadcast TV, so I don’t think there’s a role for the FCC one way or the other,” he said. “But I trust Secretary Hegseth. He’s implemented the laws and the regulations that are relevant to the Department of War, and I think he’s doing a great job, and I trust that he’s making the right call on these issues.”

Carr added that ultimately we’re going to defer to Secretary Hegseth and his decisions on how to move forward with this.”

The last public state sanctioned public execution in the U.S. was in 1936 when the hanging of a Black man accused of rape drew a crowd of up to 20,000 in Kentucky. The only countries that now allow public viewing of executions include Afghanistan, Iran, Yemen, North Korea, and Somalia.

Vice President JD Vance on Friday expressed skepticism that the public execution would go forward adding that “I’m not going to be watching it.”

One Army officer told CNN that Hegseth’s plans are wrong and could cause lasting damage to the country’s military,

“It takes away everything America stands for when we do public executions,” he told told CNN. “The generational harm caused by allowing troops in uniform to stand in front of a man in a wheelchair and watch him get shot to death is irreparable.”

Republicans including Sen. John Curtis of Utah have also come out in opposition On a social media post, Curtis wrote that "a civilization erodes when it cultivates an appetite for executions as a form of entertainment."

President Trump on Saturday said that while he said Hasan deserves the death penalty, he hadn't made up his mind yet on allowing it.

“There are two thoughts: Don’t show it and show it, because you know by showing it, maybe other people won’t be doing what he did,” Trump told reporters outside the White House. “So I’ll make a decision ultimately. I know what the military would like to do, but we’ll make a decision.”

The papacy—which opposes the death penalty on moral grounds—weighed in on the news on Friday with Cardinal Parolin stating that such plans for a public execution are unacceptable. “It is truly incomprehensible that anyone would want to resort to this method in this day and age,” he said.

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a request from Nexstar Media Group that could allow a DirecTV lawsuit against the nation’s largest TV station group to proceed, according to Reuters.

At issue is a 2023 complaint from DirecTV accusing Nexstar of colluding with Mission Broadcasting and White Knight to fix the prices of retransmission consent fees in markets where both Nexstar and either Mission or White Knight own a Big Four station.

DirecTV alleged that Mission and White Knight shared a common negotiator who was, in fact, an agent of Nexstar. It also claimed that this negotiator improperly shared confidential rates and other financial information with Nexstar, and that the three defendants coordinated their respective blackout dates and media responses. The satellite operator claimed that the station goups' actions resulted in channels that went dark for approximately 1 million of its customers.

A federal district court dismissed the case in 2024, but in December 2025, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York affirmed DirecTV had standing to sue under antitrust laws and could prosecute its claims against Nexstar and its sidecars.

Nexstar has argued that it would only be liable for price fixing if the other party ended up paying the inflated price.

In its case before the Supreme Court, Nexstar argued that the December 2025 ruling conflicts with decisions from other federal courts; DirecTV claimed that there was no conflict. It also argued that the 2nd Circuit’s decision could broaden liability issues.

Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and George Whitesides (D-Calif.) have called for an investigation into President Donald Trump’s use of taxpayer funds to produce and distribute ads that promote the administration just weeks ahead of the midterm elections, Politico reported.

In a letter to the Government Accountability Office and the Office of Special Counsel, the congressmen asked the GAO to investigate the “source, accounts, and total amount of taxpayer funds used by the Executive Office of the President to produce and distribute this advertisement across major television markets and official White House social media channels.”

Raskin, currently the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee could potentially lead a Congressional investigation if Democrats take control of the House, which is widely expected next month.

In their letter, Whitesides and Raskin also asked the Office of Special Counsel to determine if the ads “paid for by millions of dollars of taxpayer funds, constitute a violation of the Hatch Act, and determine who should be held accountable.”

The ads, which began running on Sunday, promote what Trump calls his administration's “successes,” declaring that “America will never be a Communist country,” and end with the phrase “paid for by the U.S. government.”

“These ads constitute an illegal use of taxpayer funds, perhaps best demonstrated by the fact that they are virtually identical to the ones Donald Trump used during his 2024 presidential campaign, and in fact use the same footage and the same inept ideological messaging,” they wrote.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr dismissed such concerns over the ads. When asked about them this week during a press conference, the chairman said, “there’s nothing in there that strikes me as out of the ordinary or that would merit any sort of FCC review,” adding: “There are groups on the left that have long worked and pushed to weaponize the FCC’s license-renewal process. I’m sure they’ll do it again in the future. Again, with respect to these, they are normal PSAs that don’t raise any red flags.”

Several senators are accusing the administration of diverting $20 million from Customs and Border Protection to “bankroll the obscene political ads,” an accusation confirmed by an official and a top Republican senator to NBC News.

The White House also dismissed such concerns.

A spokesperson described them as “public service announcements,” despite the timing, saying such ads are a reminder to viewers “to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad. The ad is educational and unapologetically patriotic. We should be proud of our country.”

LOS ANGELES—California Gov. Gavin Newsom today signed the Community NEWS Act, a bill incentivizing newsrooms to hire and retain journalists.

The bill, supported by the SAG-AFTRA union, offers qualified news organizations a refundable employment tax credit of $20,000 for each of the first five full-time journalists hired and $15,000 for each additional full-time journalist hired, in addition to $7,500 for part-time journalists and a stackable $15,000 credit for new hires.

“Governor Newsom’s signing of the Community NEWS Act is a huge win for the quality journalism needed to build a healthy, informed society,” said SAG-AFTRA president Sean Astin. “Thank you Gov. Newsom, Assemblymember Chris Ward and AB 2222’s allies in the California Legislature for making the policy changes necessary to ensure continued access to the news and information that keeps our democracy thriving.”

Passage comes more than a year after Congress approved the Rescissions Act of 2025, which eliminated $1.1 billion in funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, a longstanding source of grants for local PBS and NPR affiliates. These cuts have prompted staffing reductions and programming changes at stations across the country, leaving many to explore alternative funding strategies.

According to the 2026 Local Journalist Index, local journalist employment has fallen more than 80% since 2002.

Supporters of the act have argued that tax credits could help slow the decline of local news coverage by making it more economically viable for outlets of all sizes to employ professional reporters and storytellers. Vermont, Illinois, New York and New Mexico have incentivized support for local news.

More information is available on Newsom’s website and the SAG-AFTRA website.

The Federal Communications Commission has approved a “satellite spectrum abundance” order that it says will open “massive” additional spectrum for better connectivity.

It makes available 1,000 megahertz of spectrum in the 12 GHz and 42 GHz bands for connectivity services, “including even faster satellite broadband.”

The commission provided the details in a fact sheet about the changes published earlier this month.

Chairman Brendan Carr has said that this action will assure that “consumers continue to benefit from competitive, high-speed internet delivered from next-gen satellites.”

The commission is promising spectrum abundance will expand high-speed connectivity to underserved areas and allow a new generation of space-based communications.

“Bountiful downlink spectrum for consumer terminals provides more bandwidth for in-home satellite broadband and with more spectrum for fixed earth stations, these rules can improve how traffic is routed on the ground,” it said in the announcement.

“Additional capacity for inter-satellite links strengthens the backbone in orbit and makes it more resilient. Bolstering spectrum access for earth stations in motion brings better connectivity to ships, planes and vehicles. New spectrum for telemetry, tracking and control opens the door to a wide range of industrial and commercial innovations in space that we are only beginning to imagine.”

It said the decision will bring more capacity for satellite broadband to homes, in-flight and on-ship connectivity, and core traffic-routing functions in satellite ground networks.

In the 12.7-GHz band, the order permits fixed-satellite service (FSS) operations in both uplink and downlink; allows FSS uplinks from individually licensed gateway and feeder link earth stations to space stations in geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) and non-geostationary orbit (NGSO); and allows uplinks from earth stations in motion (ESIMs) aboard aircraft and maritime vessels to GSO space stations and downlink transmissions from NGSO space stations to blanket licensed user terminals, including ESIMs.

In the 42-GHz band, it permits FSS downlink to individually licensed satellite gateway and feeder-link earth stations; maintains the existing primary allocation for terrestrial fixed service stations; and changes the allocation for terrestrial mobile service stations to secondary.

The commission also opened a further notice of proposed rulemaking to consider opening 1,450 megahertz of spectrum in the Ku- and Ka- bands, along with 138.25 gigahertz in the D-band, for “more intensive satellite communications.”

And in a second FNPRM, it added more spectrum bands under consideration for space-related applications including control of spacecraft and transmission of data for newly developing space operations.

WASHINGTON—A U.S. senator wants to know whether the Federal Communications Commission could legally function if its members were all from one political party.

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has asked Commissioner Anna Gomez, the agency’s only Democrat, for her legal opinion on whether the Communications Act permits the FCC to do its work with a 3–0 panel of Republicans.

Some observers believe President DonaldTrump might fire Gomez after expected Senate confirmation of nominee Danielle Thumann Severs, a Republican. Thumann Severs would give Republicans a 3–1 majority on a body that in normal times has five members.

Gomez is a telecommunications attorney as well as a frequent and vocal critic of the Trump administration. She has over 30 years in domestic and international communications law and policy. Her FCC term expired in June but she continues to serve under a holdover provision that extends to the end of 2027.

In a letter to Gomez, Wyden cited increasing speculation that Trump intends to fire her after securing a third seated Republican.

Gomez has publicly acknowledged multiple times that Trump might fire her, especially after the Supreme Court’s ruling this summer holding that a president can remove Federal Trade Commission commissioners at will.

But Wyden wrote in the letter that Congress established the FCC in such a way that no party can grab total control over the nation’s communications infrastructure.

He said that some “commentators have tried to suggest that this mathematical formula is just a complicated way of creating a limit of three members from one political party.”

He continued: “But Congress has, in other contexts, shown that it knows exactly how to write a numeric upper limit. In establishing other bodies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the International Trade Commission, Congress provided that not more than three commissioners may belong to the same party.”

Wyden noted amendments to the act that require the commission to have political balance at any operational size: If there are three commissioners on the FCC, only two can be from the same political party.

Before 1982, Wyden wrote, the Communications Act declared that “not more than four” commissioners of a then-seven seat FCC could be from one party.

Wyden believes federal law prohibits a one-party commission. He feels that any action taken by a partisan FCC could be overturned in court. He warned of staggering consequences regardless.

“The FCC’s daily docket consists of thousands of routine but essential administrative actions that are taken through delegated authority,” he wrote.

“The U.S. communications sector represents hundreds of billions of dollars in economic valuation, and relies on the legal validity of these FCC actions. Under an all-Republican commission, every single license renewal, equipment certification, spectrum transfer or other delegated action would be legally defective, casting a cloud of crippling legal uncertainty over the entire communications industry,” Wyden wrote.

Thumann Severs was expected to appear before the Senate Commerce Committee this month, but her hearing was delayed since she is on maternity leave, according to several reports.

Communications Daily reported that communications sector lobbyists. expect the committee will likely delay Thumann Severs confirmation until November.

Meanwhile, civil rights groups recently sent a letter to the top Republican and Democrat of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation urging them to delay confirmation hearings for Thumann Severs.

TV Tech reported that the groups asked Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) to delay until Gomez is renominated alongside Thumann Severs, so that both nominees move through the confirmation process together as a package, the traditional way Congress has handled FCC nominees.

WASHINGTON—Over the weekend, President Trump rolled out two new ads promoting his presidency that have been broadcast on both broadcast and cable networks. The ads, funded by the U.S. government, could violate federal law, according to many politicians and experts.

In response, Public Citizen filed a complaint with the FCC, FTC, individual broadcasters urging media companies to immediately stop airing the ad.

Public Citizen also filed a second complaint with the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) alleging that the new ad violates laws prohibiting the use of government resources for propaganda, the Hatch Act, and other related laws.

The ads, which are airing in two media markets containing key districts in the upcoming midterm elections, include a disclaimer: “Paid for by the U.S. government.” Public Citizen previously submitted a complaint to GAO and OSC after the first Trump-promoting government-funded ad appeared on air last week.

“That the Trump administration not only failed to acknowledge and investigate last week’s illegal ad, but instead doubled down and released a second piece of taxpayer funded political propaganda during the mass-viewing moment of Sunday football is appalling and alarming,” said Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen. “These illegal ads should immediately be pulled from the air, and the White House’s many apparent violations of the law should be investigated.”

“This administration’s repeated and flagrant violations of the law, including the Hatch Act, are an affront to taxpayers and our democracy,” said Craig Holman, Ph.D., a government ethics expert with Public Citizen. “The FCC and other oversight agencies are charged with ensuring this type of abuse of taxpayer funds does not happen. But that system only works if they take action.”

The letter to broadcasters notes that they should refrain from airing advertisements that they know are otherwise illegal under the law, and that broadcasters must maintain a public file on any political ads they air. Failing to uphold this duty can result in broadcast license revocation, the letter states.

The FCC/FTC complaint is available to read here, and the second OSC and GAO complaint can be found here.

WASHINGTON—A bipartisan group of Republicans and Democrats in Congress have introduced the Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act, which aims to bring entertainment productions back to the United States from foreign countries through federal tax incentives.

Following President Trump’s call for Congress to establish a federal production incentive to bring entertainment jobs and production back to America, this bill would establish a 20% base tax credit for qualifying film, television, and visual effects (VFX) projects that are produced in the United States.

U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Sens. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), and Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) introduced the legislation on Sept. 24.

In the House, Representative Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas-01), Representatives Linda T. Sánchez (D-Calif.-38), Brian Jack (R-Ga.-03), Laura Friedman (D-Calif.-30), David Kustoff (R-Tenn.-08), Judy Chu (D-Calif.-28), Mike Carey (R-Ohio-15), and Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.-03) introduced companion legislation in the House.

Backers of the legislation included the Motion Picture Association, companies like Paramount and NBCUniversal and a variety of unions.

Those supporters include the American Federation of Musicians, American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP), Coalition for American Production (CAP), CreativeFuture, Directors Guild of America (DGA), FilmUSA, Independent Film and Television Alliance (IFTA), International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE), Motion Picture Association (MPA), Paramount, Producers Guild of America (PGA), Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), Teamsters, Television Academy, Writers Guild of America East (WGAE), and Writers Guild of America West (WGAW) have endorsed the legislation.

“Having worked in a movie theater growing up, I saw early on how films can move and inspire generations of Americans. Films like ‘The Notebook’ bring us to tears, and films like ‘Forrest Gump’ inspire us to see the world differently. That is the power of film, and South Carolina is blessed to serve as the backdrop for both of these iconic American stories,” said Sen. Scott. “We cannot stand by as more and more American film production moves overseas, taking jobs, investment, and an important source of American cultural influence with it. This legislation will create jobs in communities across America, support local economies, and help ensure that the next generation of iconic American films is made right here in America.”

“The Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act would deliver a true gamechanger for American creators, workers, and businesses – a federal incentive that supercharges production at home, fuels jobs and growth in local communities, and makes the United States a more competitive destination for the next generation of great film and television," MPA Chairman and CEO Charles Rivkin said in a statement. "There’s a reason everyone from President Trump to a bipartisan group of members in Congress to studios, unions, guilds, and more want to get this done. Passing this legislation could inject $250 billion into the country’s economy and deliver nearly 145,000 new jobs every year across all 50 states. That’s a story we can write together by enacting this bill, to ensure that more stories are crafted, created, and made here in America."

The bill would also provide optional 5% bonus credits that could be stacked on top of the 20% base credit, with the total credit capped at 30%. Bonus credits could be received through:

• Production in rural Opportunity Zones or federally declared disaster zones
• Multi-state productions
• Production is completed by an independent producer
• Film companies that increase their number of domestic productions relative to their previous foreign investment
• The tax credit would exclude live sporting events, sexually explicit material, marketing, daytime-drama shows, award event programming, social media posts, and other non-legacy media productions.

Several states have established their own economic incentives, but the lack of a unified federal incentive has left the United States behind as productions leave for countries like Canada and the United Kingdom, the backers of the legislation argued.

Screen Actors Guild - American Federation of Television and Radio Artists President Sean Astin said that “SAG-AFTRA is proud to partner with our fellow unions, industry and policymakers in a bipartisan effort to rescue the domestic film and television business. The money is being invested, the productions are being made, the jobs are being created, just not in America. This is a jobs bill and that is exactly what our members want to see. We have the infrastructure. We have the crews. We have the talent. Now all we need is a level playing field. We are the storytellers who inform and entertain the world. Let's get back to doing that right here at home. Thank you, Senators Scott and Schiff and Representatives Moran, Sánchez, Friedman, and Jack, for championing this critical legislation,” said

Chairman and CEO of Paramount David Ellison and NBC Universal Entertainment chairman Donna Langley were also among those who backed the bill.

“Paramount fully supports this legislation, and thanks Senator Scott for his bipartisan leadership on this important issue," Ellison said in a statement issued just days after Paramount settled antitrust litigation by making commitments to maintain a certain production levels.

"America’s highly-skilled production workforce— including camera operators, set production designers, editors, visual effects artists, lighting and sound crews, costume and makeup teams, transportation workers filmmakers, and countless others — are critical to our nation’s economy, and have built and powered one of this country’s greatest cultural exports," he added. "We believe now is the time to pursue this important legislation, so we can support our critical production workers and make more films and TV right here at home. Paramount will continue working closely with our union partners and the broader creative industry at every level to help support this effort.”

“A federal incentive that complements existing state programs would help level the playing field, drive economic growth, create high-skill jobs, and ensure more film and television production is made in America by one of the nation's most dynamic industries," added Donna Langley.

WASHINGTON—FCC Chairman Brendan Carr announced on Wednesday that the commission will vote later this month on two items that would open up additional spectrum for “next-generation connectivity.”

In a satellite spectrum abundance order, the commission will vote on unlocking more than 1,000 MHz of spectrum in the 12 GHz and 42 GHz bands for a range of connectivity services, including even faster satellite broadband. Second, the commission will seek comment on a proposal to modernize the FCC’s rules for ultra-wideband technology (UWB)—unlicensed offerings that power a range of IoT, consumer, and other cutting-edge devices.

"Unlicensed device manufacturers are increasingly finding that UWB’s high data rates, precise location capabilities, and ability to coexist with other services across multiple spectrum bands make it the right technology for today’s needs," the FCC said. "Today’s NPRM addresses the technology advancements and explosion in innovative use cases since the commission’s landmark 2002 decision to authorize the first unlicensed UWB operations."

Carr said the FCC's proposal "will push more commercial spectrum into the marketplace than ever before. By unlocking these bands, the FCC will give a big boost to American innovation and promote economic growth across a wide range of industries."

“In the spectrum abundance decision, we will ensure that consumers continue to benefit from competitive, high-speed Internet delivered from next-gen satellites,” Carr added. “And in our UWB proposal, the commission will propose to modernize our existing rules to unlock even more opportunities for unlicensed devices across a wide swath of spectrum. This spectrum is so seamlessly woven into our everyday lives, from keeping us safe in our cars to tracking our package deliveries that most people don’t even realize its critical role. The proposal circulated today represents the Commission’s first comprehensive modernization of these rules since their adoption in 2002 and works to further refine and reshape our rules to meet today’s needs.”

The announcement comes amid a slew of initiatives to auction off more publicly held radio spectrum since the FCC's auction authority was restored a year ago.

The National Association of Broadcasters is reiterating its support for allowing the use of EAS software. But the association doesn’t want the FCC to reduce the time required to fix or replace defective EAS software, at least not yet.

As TV Tech sister brand Radio World has reported, the commission recently issued a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) exploring possible rule changes for EAS and Wireless Emergency Alerts. In addition to proposing EAS software, the commission is looking at certain policy and technical updates to improve the effectiveness of EAS.

[Read Radio World’s four-part series about the proposals and questions in the FNPRM.]

The NAB is among those filing comments. The association applauded the commission for considering allowing EAS participants to install EAS software in a single device.

“The FCC correctly frames the proposed software-based EAS model as an opportunity to better integrate EAS into modern broadcasting IP-centric air chains, enhance public safety, and reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens on EAS participants,” NAB wrote.

A software approach, the NAB said, would facilitate remote EAS operations, monitoring and collection of performance data.

“This approach will also promote resiliency by enabling EAS operations to be located at multiple local or edge locations and will optimize maintenance by preventing the need to physically diagnose and repair problems within an EAS hardware device.”

The NAB believes that flexibility should be the watchword of a software-based model.

The FNPRM proposes allowing broadcasters to install EAS software in a single server or computer that manages a station’s EAS functions, or within multiple components to facilitate cross-system integration, which NAB is agreeable to.

“A software approach will promote resilient, redundant EAS operations that can be located at both a station’s studio or transmitter,” NAB wrote, “allowing immediate fail-over if the software’s primary location is inaccessible due to fire, flood, or other disaster.”

However, the NAB believes it would be “premature” to reduce the required time for repairing or replacing defective EAS software before notifying the commission.

Under current rules, participants may operate without defective EAS equipment pending its repair or replacement for 60 days without further FCC authority. The commission tentatively proposes to shorten this to 72 hours for those using software.

“There are still too many uncertainties around the implementation of EAS software to change the deadline at this time,” the NAB believes.

The commission said in the FNPRM that although 60 days is usually sufficient for the repair of hardware devices, a shorter amount of time seems reasonable for software that could be fixed with a patch or other remote solution.

NAB also said such a change is impractical since EAS participants test the functionality of their systems and review the logs of tests weekly at most.

Moreover, in many cases, a problem with a software-based model “could have nothing to do with the software itself, but instead [be] related to the server, computer or other hardware on which the software runs, or the firewall or some other component,” NAB wrote.

The association does believe that a shift from dedicated hardware boxes could help alleviate supply chain issues and encourage more vendors to enter the market.

The NAB says “a software approach could ease overall supply chain problems because software does not have to rely on the manufacture of the purpose-built, physical hardware components for new or replacement proprietary EAS boxes in which software is housed. Nor would EAS equipment have to be shipped to manufacturers or EAS Participants.”

The association also supports the FCC’s focus on the cybersecurity of EAS software. It says it believes a software approach will improve security by facilitating updates to address security vulnerabilities through a software patch instead of forcing personnel to upgrade all of their boxes manually or ship the products to a manufacturer.

NAB agrees with the FCC that EAS software should be tested and approved under a conformity assessment system.

It said it is optimistic that some of the Telecommunications Certification Bodies already approved by the FCC to certify EAS devices can perform conformity testing of software, or would develop this capability in response to demand.

The association generally supports other proposals in the FNPRM for improving the authentication and geotargeting of EAS alerts, using a universal alert identification number to reduce duplicative alerts, or integrating visual symbols into EAS.

The NAB does caution the commission against imposing additional mandates “that could outstrip the capabilities of existing EAS devices and require broadcasters to purchase new EAS equipment.”

The group asked the FCC to “avoid reducing the automated simplicity of EAS or limiting broadcasters’ ability to provide EAS alerts consistent with their journalistic judgement.”

Radio World will report shortly on other comments to the FCC. You can read filed comments in PS Docket 25-224 at the FCC site.

The deadline for reply comments is Sept. 29.

The big news in the broadcast industry in August was the Federal Communications Commission’s vote to eliminate its TV-station ownership cap.

Advocates of removing the limit, which bars a single broadcaster from reaching more than 39% of all U.S. TV households, argued that it hindered local stations and their ownership groups from competing effectively with social media giants, digital ad platforms and streaming services—competitors never envisioned in 2004 when the cap was raised from 35% to 39%.

Those favoring its continuation argue that the FCC lacks the authority to eliminate the cap without new legislation, and that the move will promote further media consolidation and a loss of voices in markets.

With all of that said, this really isn’t a column about lifting the cap. Rather, it’s about competition in a government-regulated market and a comment from Gary Weitman, chief communications officer at Nexstar Media Group.

An Aug. 6 Variety.com article quoted Weitman as saying, in part: “The FCC’s decision to eliminate the broadcast ownership cap is a welcome, necessary and long-overdue recognition of today’s competitive landscape, which is dominated by legacy Big Media and Big Tech. For too long, local broadcasters were handcuffed from reaching the scale they needed to compete on a more level playing field by outdated federal rules that didn’t apply to the largest and most powerful companies like Google’s YouTube, Meta’s Instagram or Netflix.”

The comment made me wonder how else local broadcasters have been “handcuffed from” competing “on a more level playing field by outdated federal rules.” If the 22 years since the 39% cap was established is a standard for determining what is “long overdue,” how about the 30 years since Congress and the FCC established rules for the transition from analog to DTV or the 28 years since the first digital TV signals went on air?

Broadcasters are required to use MPEG-2 TS, a compression scheme and digital packaging technology first published in the mid-1990s. Since then, a succession of more-efficient compression algorithms has been released—with the latest (VVC) being 75% to 80% more efficient than MPEG-2. On the packaging and encapsulation side of the ledger, the world began to embrace IP as the World Wide Web gathered steam in the early 1990s.

Now, the television industry waits to see what the FCC will do when it comes to sunsetting ATSC 1.0 so it can fully embrace a new standard that has no restrictions on using the latest—and most efficient—compression schemes as they come along, nor the inability to encapsulate and package bits like the rest of the world.

The hope is the agency will make rules enabling broadcasters to transition by setting up ATSC 1.0 lighthouses to free up channels to take full advantage of the ATSC 3.0 capabilities and services while continuing to transmit legacy DTV to viewers with older sets.

While the FCC and the industry may indeed overcome this hurdle, I am not confident that, in the long run, it is possible to expect a government-regulated industry to compete with unregulated businesses—especially when 20 or 30 years seems to be how long it takes for the regulator to modernize rules, and unregulated competitors can pivot on a dime.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has sided with four Democrats running for Congress in a decision that would limit the organizations and groups who are entitled to discounted political advertising under Federal Communication Commission rules.

The ruling is important for broadcasters because an FCC Public Notice scheduled to go into effect on Sept. 4 would have expanding the types of advertisers and groups who could be eligible for discounted ads. This could significantly reduce the revenue broadcasters get from political advertising in the hotly contested upcoming midterms.

In opposing the Public Notice, Commissioner Anna Gomez emphasized the potential harm to stations by arguing that "broadcasters are being directed to slash prices and sell their most valuable inventory during their busiest and most lucrative season, even as this same FCC has spent months arguing broadcasters need economic and regulatory relief to compete with Big Tech and streaming. You cannot claim broadcasters are struggling to survive and then force them into a fire sale on the one thing that could actually help them compete and increase revenue."

At the end of March, the Media Bureau issued a Public Notice with guidance on who is entitled to the discounted advertising rates under the “FCC’s lowest unit charge (LUC) requirements” that appeared to expand the eligibility for discounted ads. That Notice argued that that “the LUC requirements are applicable to (1) authorized committees, including authorized committees that engage in joint fundraising with legally qualified candidates for federal office, and (2) advertisements that qualify as coordinated expenditures of political parties and legally qualified candidates for federal office.”

This was challenged by the Television Bureau of Advertising but on August 13, the Media Bureau rejected the TVB’s petition asking the agency to reconsider its ruling, arguing that the agency hadn’t actually changed any of its rules.

Separately, four candidates for Congress filed an emergency motion in June with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit to block the FCC’s interpretation of the rules for discounted political ads.

The suit (Case No. 26-1785) was brought by Ohio Senate candidate Sherrod Brown, Georgia Senate candidate Jon Ossoff, North Carolina Senate candidate Roy Cooper and Michigan congressional candidate Kristen McDonald Rivet, all Democrats.

In an August 25th ruling, the court granted the emergency motion.

“The Petition for Review before us challenges the [FCC’s] Public Notice, which takes effect on September 4, 2026, for the impending November general election,” the court noted. “The four petitioners [contend]...that the Public Notice contravenes the plain language of the LUC requirement and pertinent campaign finance statutes. In the Federal Candidates’ words, the Public Notice “unlawfully dilutes [their] and other candidates’ statutory right to buy advertising time at lowest unit charge by insisting that broadcasters make that same right available to political parties and joint fundraising committees in circumstances where their spending cannot, under campaign finance law, be considered spending by or on behalf of a candidate.’”

“On the other side of this dispute are the FCC, as a respondent, and the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (together, the “Party Committees”), as intervenors. The FCC and the Party Committees separately — but similarly — argue both that we lack jurisdiction to review the Public Notice and that the Public Notice is correct on the merits,” the ruling explained.

After reviewing the arguments, the court concluded that “we are confident of our jurisdiction to review the Public Notice. Further, we conclude that the LUC requirement and campaign finance statutes are clear that neither political parties nor joint fundraising committees with non-candidate members can be entitled to the LUC. We therefore grant the Petition for Review, such that we set aside and hold for naught the Public Notice.”

The full ruling is available here.

As broadcasters await a decision from the FCC to shut down the current ATSC 1.0 broadcast format, the industry’s leading lobbyist is reiterating its support for ATSC 3.0, (aka “NextGen TV”).

Since last October, when the FCC voted on a proposal to determine a date when to sunset ATSC 1.0, debate has swirled around the timing of the shutdown and what consumer protections will be in place to ensure viewers don’t lose access to free over the air broadcasting. The commission is expected to announce a final decision by the end of 2026.

The NAB, which has promoted NextGen TV as a way for broadcasters to better compete in the increasingly complex TV landscape, told the FCC six months ago that continuing uncertainty over the lack of a date is hampering progress.

“The record developed here confirms that the Commission’s central task is no longer to debate whether NextGen TV is worth pursuing—stakeholders across the ecosystem recognize that it is—but to decide whether the transition will be allowed to succeed through an orderly, coordinated framework, or instead be stranded indefinitely in a regime of regulatory uncertainty and half-measures, all to the detriment of the viewing public,” the NAB said in comments filed with the commission in February.

Currently approximately 76% of U.S. households can receive a NextGen TV signal, according to the ATSC. In April, Pearl TV Group, a consortium of broadcasters and tech suppliers, announced the launch of an initiative to develop consumer converter boxes that could retail for under $60.

The association has also launched a campaign to help preserve live sports on free over the air TV, again noting the increased competition from streaming giants.

The ability to access live sports over free TV, competition from Silicon Valley and the very survival of broadcasting were tied together in NAB’s latest blog. The association also took aim at viewers who criticize the content protection aspects of ATSC 3.0, with many claiming that certain devices on the market don’t carry the necessary software to decode DRM-protected signals.

“ATSC 3.0 includes security and service-protection mechanisms as part of its technical framework, just as modern communications and entertainment platforms routinely protect their content and distribution systems, the NAB said. “There is an important reason for these protections. Broadcasters invest substantial resources to secure sports, entertainment and other high-value programming. They also invest every day in local journalists, meteorologists, production professionals and the technology needed to keep communities informed and safe.”

“Without reasonable safeguards, unauthorized businesses can capture local stations’ signals and resell them at scale without permission or compensation,” the association added.

NAB also criticized the possibility that the broadcast industry could be saddled with outdated technology, impacting its competitiveness.

“Requiring broadcasters to operate a decades-old standard forever would effectively make free, over-the-air television the only major communications platform that is never permitted to modernize,” it said. “That would not protect viewers. Over time, it would leave viewers with an increasingly outdated service while streaming platforms, wireless providers and global technology companies continue to innovate.”

NAB’s latest blog can be accessed here.

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that President Donald Trump has the power to fire commissioners at independent agencies without cause.

The landmark 6-3 ruling overturns a precedent dating back more than 90 years and significantly strengthens executive branch authority over such agencies as the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission, which were established by Congress to be somewhat insulated from political influence.

In the 6-3 majority opinion, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. ruled that Trump had the right to fire Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic FTC member, without cause and that the “FTC’s for-cause removal provision is contrary to the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.”

The case has important implications for other independent agencies such as the FTC, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the FCC because it would allow the president to fire anyone without cause.

It could also give the president much greater control over the federal bureaucracy by providing him with the authority to fire or retain people based on political loyalty and partisan politics.

In a strongly worded dissent, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the majority opinion “reshapes our Government. Dozens of independent commissions are now likely to become purely executive agencies, shifting tremendous power over broad swaths of American life into the President’s hands…For more than 90 years, Congress believed, with this Court’s express approval, that it was allowed to create a workable Government, including by granting certain agencies tasked with certain responsibilities some independence from Presidential control. In rejecting that project, after decades of promising the political branches that structures like the FTC’s were permissible, the Court creates an Executive Branch that Congress never dreamed of establishing and that it now has little hope of ever reining in.”

In a separate case, however, SCOTUS ruled 5-4 in Trump v. Cook that Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook,could remain in her job while she challenges Trump’s efforts to fire her.

The Trump v. Slaughter decision was immediately blasted by Democrats and the FCC’s lone Democratic commissioner, Anna Gomez.

U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, complained that “today, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority overturned a 91-year-old precedent and once again delivers for President Trump. Congress created independent agencies to shield critical decisions from short-term partisan whims and to ensure bipartisan and well-reasoned decision-making. By gutting these protections, the Supreme Court is throwing the door open for politics—not the public interest—to be the guiding star for future decisions. Congress must take action to preserve the ability for agencies to deliver expert, fact-based results for the American people.”

Said Gomez: “This decision puts at risk how Congress intended independent agencies to function in American democracy. When Congress established the Federal Communications Commission, it made a deliberate choice to create a multimember, multiparty, independent body insulated from political pressure precisely because the decisions this agency makes about who can speak over the public airwaves, how spectrum is allocated, and how communications markets are regulated, are too consequential to be made on the basis of political loyalty. We are already seeing what political control of this agency looks like in practice, through investigations targeting broadcasters and government critics for coverage this administration finds unfavorable.”

Gomez also noted the apparent contradiction between the two decisions. “In a companion decision, the Court protected the Federal Reserve from political interference while leaving media regulators exposed," she noted. "Democracy depends on a free press and the preservation of free expression through all communication technologies as much as it depends on a stable economy."

“For nearly a century, the FCC’s credibility as an expert-driven regulatory body has been a cornerstone of American leadership in global communications,” Gomez continued. “When we negotiate spectrum agreements with foreign governments and international bodies, our counterparts trust that our positions reflect technical expertise and legal authority, not the political preferences of whoever occupies the White House at a given moment. That credibility is difficult to build and easy to destroy, and the uncertainty created by this decision puts it at risk in ways that will reverberate far beyond our borders.

“When commissioners can be removed for their policy views rather than for cause, the inevitable result is an agency that pulls its punches and defers to political winds rather than the record before it,“ Gomez added. “Consumers pay the price for that kind of regulatory timidity in higher costs, fewer choices and slower progress toward the connected future this country deserves.”

While Trump has removed commissioners in other agencies for critical comments, Gomez has some protection in that the FCC needs a quorum of three commissioners to take action and her removal would prevent votes on upcoming matters.

State associations representing broadcasters in all 50 states as well as groups in District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have sent a letter to Congressional leaders supporting the "Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe" or NO FAKES Act of 2026.

Amid the ongoing, rapid expansion of generative artificial intelligence (“AI”), the NO FAKES Act would create important guardrails for the use of digital replicas without unduly restricting the potential benefits that generative AI can contribute to the broadcast and creative industries now and in the future, the groups said.

The letter was sent to John Thune Senate Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer Senate Minority Leader, Mike Johnson House Speaker, and Hakeem Jeffries House Minority Leader.

“This bipartisan legislation would protect the voice and visual likeness of all individuals, including the most trusted broadcast news anchors and local on-air personalities, from unauthorized computer-generated recreations made by generative AI,” the letter said. “It would also provide important exclusions for use of digital replicas in certain bona fide news reporting and broadcasting, as well as commentary, criticism, scholarship satire, parody, and other First Amendment speech.”

Nothing that “nonconsensual voice and image clones can sever that trust, ruin reputations and careers, and distort our public disclosure,” the letter argued that the “NO FAKES Act would create a federal remedy, while also preserving certain state laws, for individuals to fight back against abusive and manipulative deepfakes that threaten to disrupt that trust. And while combatting misinformation, disinformation, misappropriation of content, and deepfakes is a multifaced problem, the NO FAKES Act is a step in the right direction.”

ALBANY, N.Y.—The New York State Senate and Assembly has passed landmark legislation (A.11292/S.9934A) protecting news media from being bombarded by deceptive “stealth crawlers” from tech companies.

“By protecting broadcast news operations from unauthorized access by Big Tech, the legislation ensures the economic foundations of producing original, local news by broadcast stations throughout the Empire state,” David Donovan, president of the New York State Broadcasters Association, said in hailing the legislation, believed to be the first of its kind in the country. “It prohibits using ‘stealth crawlers’ to extract a broadcaster’s news content without permission or payment. In addition, the legislation requires AI systems to disclose when crawlers are employed to extract content from broadcasters.”

The legislation addresses a longstanding problem faced by broadcasters and news sites. Some AI systems use “stealth crawlers” to hide their identities and secretly access digital services owned by newspapers and broadcasters. This practice imposes substantial burdens on local newspapers and stations, which are often overwhelmed by millions of bot hits each day. It can also devalue the website traffic figures that news websites rely on to sell advertising.

“The New York Assembly and Senate just took a strong stand for transparency and the health of our information ecosystem,” said Danielle Coffey, president and CEO of the News/Media Alliance. “Right now, news websites are drowning in bot traffic. Bad bots are disguising their identities to overload publisher servers and access the quality content on our sites, hurting our ability to serve readers. This bill will be a simple, common sense solution to this problem. By requiring transparency and accountability for bad actors, the New York Stealth Crawler Prohibition Act gives publishers the tools they need to defend themselves and continue providing quality and critical information.”

Diane Kennedy, president of the New York News Publishers Association, also lauded the precedent-setting legislation: “News publishers invest substantial resources of labor, skill, and capital in producing original journalism. The proliferation of stealth crawlers — automated bots that access news sites without identifying themselves or disclosing their purposes — enables technology companies and other actors to access the fruits of that investment without consent or transparency. This legislation prohibits crawlers from disguising their identity when accessing covered news sources and creates a meaningful private right of action for journalism providers to enforce that obligation.”

The three associations thanked “Assemblyperson Steven Otis, Chair of the Internet Assembly Science and Technology Committee (A.11292) and Senator Mike Gianaris, Deputy Majority Leader of the NY State Senate (S.9934A) for sponsoring this important legislation. Through their extraordinary efforts citizens in New York will continue to access original local news by their favorite newspapers and broadcast stations.”

WASHINGTON—America’s Public Television Stations has issued a statement saying it was “disappointed that the House Appropriations Labor-H Subcommittee did not include essential funding for local public television stations today in their FY 2027 appropriations bill."

It also urged Congress to restore the funding and create a new funding mechanism for public stations to replace the now defunct Corporation for Public Broadcasting and thanked the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee for recommending continued funding of $50 million for the Next Generation Warning System (NGWS)

In a June 5 statement from APTS’s president and CEO Kate Riley noted that “as drafted, the House Appropriations Labor-H Subcommittee Appropriations Bill misses an opportunity to extend a desperately needed lifeline to local public media stations that continue to be devastated by the rescission of public media funding last summer.”

To rectify that, Riley said “we have asked Congress to create a new fund in the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations Bill which would provide direct grants to local public broadcasting stations throughout the country through a Local Public Broadcasting Commission. Stations would be able to use the funding to support local station operations, local programming and essential community services.”

“With the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) dissolved, a new mechanism is needed to provide direct grants to stations to support their local public services,” she added. “This fund would provide the support needed to ensure the stabilization of local stations and continuity of services that are now at risk at stations nationwide due to the rescission of public broadcasting funding.”

The end of Federal funding and the CPB has been particularly tough on public media because by statute over 70% of the annual appropriation to CPB went to local stations.

“With that funding now gone, many local stations throughout the country are reeling with some struggling to survive,” Riley said. “Stations in communities small and large throughout the country are cutting local programming, staff, public services, operations and more. One station has already closed and an additional station just ceased broadcast operations. Without the restoration of local station funding, more will likely follow suit.”

The group did stress however that it was “grateful that the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee today recognized the essential role that public television plays in the nation’s civil defense, public safety and homeland security. The subcommittee’s recommendation of continued funding of $50 million for the Next Generation Warning System (NGWS) will help ensure public broadcasters are able to meet their public safety missions and provide the highest level of resilient and reliable public safety and homeland security services to communities throughout the country.”

“The NGWS grant program at FEMA enhances public broadcasting stations’ ability to provide alert and warning and interoperable public safety communications and to incorporate emergency technology into lifesaving activities,” Riley said. “NGWS helps stations replace aging infrastructure that is essential to their ability to transmit alerts and warning and their other public safety missions. In addition, NGWS helps stations incorporate emerging technology to enhance those lifesaving activities.”

Riley also stressed that “we remain hopeful that funding for the Local Public Broadcasting Commission and Ready To Learn will be fully funded in the final FY 2027 appropriations bill that will support local stations’ ability to help keep Americans safe, to educate America’s children, and to connect Americans to their own communities and open doors to other hometowns across this country.”

For more information, visit www.apts.org.

WASHINGTON—The National Association of Broadcasters has released a new 30-second TV spot in its effort to enlist the public in urging lawmakers to keep sports programming on local broadcast stations.

“More and more, the games fans love are getting locked behind paywalls,“ the spot says. “Another app. Another fee. Another way fans get left behind.”

Sports belong where everyone can access them—on broadcast TV, it says. The spot asks the public to text “Sports” to 39179. Doing so, takes people to a letter to lawmakers that says in part:

“Live sports should remain a shared experience that everyone can access, no matter where we live or what we can afford. That’s why I’m asking you to help keep live spots on broadcast TV.”

NAB’s “Keep the Game On” campaign emphasizes the role of local broadcasters in delivering major sporting events.

The spot is available in English and Spanish.

NAB’s Keep the Game On campaign is available online.

WASHINGTON—In a wide-ranging Public Notice reminding broadcasters of their public interest obligations, the Federal Communications Commission stressed that “spectrum auctions routinely bring in billions of dollars for the same spectrum broadcasters use for free” and insisted that the agency has the authority to investigate, fine and potentially remove broadcast licenses for violations of broadcast public interest obligations.

Those public interest obligations include the requirement that "broadcasters are also prohibited from engaging in news distortion," the agency noted.

Though not signed and not explicitly issued in response to any given criticism, the document amounts to an unusual public defense from the GOP-led commission for the regulatory approach taken under FCC Chair Brendan Carr. As previously reported, he has been criticized by Democrats in Congress, former FCC officials and FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez for attempting to use the agency's enforcement powers to limit "free speech" and chill broadcast news coverage that is critical of the Trump administration.

“Federal law requires broadcasters to comply with a basic and fundamental obligation—they must operate in the public interest,” the public notice argued. “Congress first enshrined this concept in the law nearly 100 years ago, and it charged the FCC with the responsibility of ensuring that broadcasters only obtain and maintain a license to the extent they are operating in a manner that serves the `public interest, convenience, and necessity.’”

In addition to its statutory authority to enforce “public interest” requirements, the Public Notice argued that “spectrum is a finite public resource bound by the limits of physics” and an extremely valuable asset.

“Spectrum auctions routinely bring in billions of dollars for the same spectrum broadcasters use for free,” the agency reminded broadcasters, adding that “proceeds from the auction for broadcast television spectrum that was reallocated for wireless broadband use yielded $19.8 billion in revenue, including $10.05 billion for winning broadcast bidders and more than $7 billion to be deposited to the U.S. Treasury for deficit reduction.”

“In exchange, broadcasters are required to operate in the public interest of the communities they serve,” the agency noted. “It is this service as a public trustee—and the corresponding obligation to offer programming responsive to the needs and interests of the local communities they are licensed to serve—that makes broadcasters unique and distinguishes them from other programmers. It is an obligation that broadcasters take on voluntarily, in exchange for the privilege of holding a license to operate using the public airwaves.”

The Public Notice also laid a variety of legal arguments affirming the regulator’s controversial conclusion that it has the power to ensure that broadcast programming is in the public interest.

“Programming decisions by broadcasters must be made in service of the public and be responsive to the needs of the local community they are licensed to serve, not the private interests of national networks,” the FCC insisted.

“No broadcaster has a ‘right’ to use the public spectrum,” the notice stated, adding that “indeed, the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that certain FCC regulatory efforts in furtherance of its statutory mandate `enhance rather than abridge the freedoms of speech and press protected by the First Amendment.’” and that “the courts have recognized that there are limits on broadcasters’ First Amendment rights.”

The FCC concluded that “the mere denial of a license because ‘the public interest’ requires it ‘is not a denial of free speech.’”

“Where the Commission finds that a broadcaster has failed to serve the public interest, the Commission may take appropriate action, including enforcement action,” require a licensee to file an early license renewal application,” as it has done with ABC’s stations, and apply the “public interest” rules when considering mergers or station sales.

As examples of the FCC’s authority to regulate content, the notice cited its “main studio” rule, intended to ensure service obligations were met by placing a station’s production center within the community it served,and its “program origination” rule, which required stations to originate a minimum percentage of its non-network programming from its main studio or elsewhere within its community of license.

“The purpose of the rule was to encourage locally-oriented programming in furtherance of the Commission’s public interest standard and localism mandate,” the Notice argued.

It also highlighted rules relating to the station’s online public inspection file issues/program lists, and insisted “broadcasters are also prohibited from engaging in news distortion, must provide equal opportunity to political candidates and are prohibited from airing obscene, indecent and profane content.”

“The Commission will continue to engage in a robust review of applications to ensure compliance with our rules and determine whether broadcasters have met their obligation to operate in the public interest,” the notice concluded. “We encourage broadcasters to review their current practices and confirm that they fully align with their statutory public interest obligation.”

In the final sentence, the Notice also stressed that the agency determination to both investigate public-interest violations and enforce those rules in ways that could involve taking away broadcast licenses.

“The Commission will not hesitate to exercise its statutory authority to ensure that broadcasters either fulfill their public interest obligation or provide the privilege of being a broadcast licensee to someone that will fulfill that duty,” the Notice stated.

Carr also reiterated the agency’s authority in a post on X:

In response, Gomez asserted: “The ‘public interest’ does not mean this administration's interests. Broadcasters should ignore these latest threats and stiffen their spine.“

Imagine a world where every professional sporting event every Sunday kickoff, every playoff run, every championship moment is locked behind a streaming paywall.

That world is no longer hypothetical. It is arriving, quietly but steadily, reshaping how Americans experience one of the few remaining shared cultural institutions.

But before we accept this shift as inevitable, it is worth asking a more fundamental question: Who built the pipeline that created these athletes in the first place?

The overwhelming majority of professional athletes whether in the National Football League, the National Basketball Association, or beyond began their journeys in the American public system. They trained on taxpayer-funded fields, learned discipline and teamwork in public schools, and, in many cases, developed their skills at publicly supported colleges and universities.

This is not incidental. It is foundational.

Open Your Wallets, Again
The American public did not merely consume sports it helped create the conditions that made modern professional sports possible. From infrastructure to education, from coaching to competition, the early stages of athletic development have long been supported, directly or indirectly, by taxpayers.

And now, at the highest level, the public is being asked to pay again. Not once, but repeatedly.

To follow a full season today, fans are often required to navigate a fragmented landscape of access: traditional cable, multiple streaming platforms, exclusive game packages, and premium add-ons. In some cases, the total cost approaches or exceeds $1,000 annually just to watch games that were once readily available on free, local television.

This is not simply a matter of convenience. It is a question of access and, ultimately, fairness. Because what we are witnessing is not just a technological evolution. It is a structural shift in who gets to participate in the experience of sports.

The Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 was enacted in a very different era, one in which broad public access was a central expectation. The law granted leagues the ability to collectively negotiate television rights an exception to traditional antitrust rules precisely because those rights would still serve the public interest by keeping games widely available.

That balance is now under strain.

Last week the U.S. Department of Justice opened an inquiry into whether the NFL’s business practices may be crossing a line leveraging its unique structure and protections in ways that could limit competition and disadvantage consumers.

At the center of this inquiry is a simple but consequential concern: when a league has the power to bundle rights, divide them across platforms, and effectively dictate how fans access games, does that begin to resemble market control rather than market competition?

Critics argue that it does.

They point to a system in which access is no longer unified but splintered, where consumers must chase games across platforms, and where the cumulative cost of participation continues to rise. They argue that the combination of antitrust protection and modern media strategy has created an environment where the league can maximize revenue without sufficient regard for accessibility.

Has the Balance Shifted Too Far?
To be clear, professional sports leagues are not charities. They are businesses, and they have every right to innovate, to grow, and to pursue revenue in a changing media environment.

Streaming is not the problem. Innovation is not the problem. Even profit, in itself, is not the problem. The concern arises when the balance shifts too far when the public, having already invested in the foundation, finds itself priced out of the result.

Sports have long held a unique place in American life. They are not merely entertainment. They are a shared experience that binds communities, bridges divides, and creates common ground in an increasingly fragmented society.

For generations, families gathered around televisions to watch games that were accessible to all, regardless of income or geography. Those moments were not just about competition; they were about connection.

When access becomes conditional, when it depends on the number of subscriptions one can afford, that shared experience begins to erode.

This is the broader implication that policymakers and regulators must now consider.

The question is not whether leagues like the NFL should evolve. They must. The question is whether they can do so while still honoring the public compact that helped build them.

That compact is not written in statute alone. It is rooted in a simple principle: that something built, in part, by the public should remain meaningfully accessible to the public.

As the DOJ review unfolds, it presents an opportunity not just to examine legal frameworks, but to reconsider the balance between private enterprise and public interest.

Because if the future of sports is one where full participation is reserved for those who can navigate and afford a complex web of subscriptions, then we have not merely changed how games are delivered.

We have changed who they are for.

And that is a cost far greater than any monthly fee.

A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that the Trump administration’s executive order to end federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service was unconstitutional.

The ruling’s impact is unclear. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia noted that since Congress withdrew funding through last year’s Rescissions Act, and because the Corporation for Public Broadcasting has dissolved, no order can provide “meaningful relief” regarding that specific pool of money.

But Judge Randolph Moss repeatedly wrote in the Tuesday ruling that President Trump’s order crossed the line of the First Amendment. Moss was appointed to the D.C. district court in 2014 under President Obama’s administration.

Moss said that the order was issued without regard to nationwide interconnection systems, calling such distribution the “backbones” of public radio and TV.

Colorado Public Radio was a partner in the lawsuit challenging the executive order, along with NPR, Aspen Public Radio and KSUT. CPR said in a release that the ruling prevents the executive order from restricting CPR and other stations from using any federal funds for NPR content. In December, Radio World reported on the stations’ concerns.

NPR, according to its own reporting, said that it was not clear what the decision, which could be appealed by the Trump administration, would mean for the future of federal funding of public broadcasting. But the organization’s comments celebrated the decision.

“Today’s ruling is a decisive affirmation of the rights of a free and independent press — and a win for NPR, our network of stations and our tens of millions of listeners nationwide,” Katherine Maher, NPR’s president and CEO, said in a release.

White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement: “This is a ridiculous ruling by an activist judge attempting to undermine the law.”

Representatives from the three Colorado public radio stations, according to a release, said the stations remain prepared to defend the ruling should the Trump administration appeal.

Timeline
The executive order issued by President Trump last May ultimately clawed back $1.1 billion in funding that Congress had set aside for public media outlets. Later last year, it led to a dispute between CPB and NPR over public radio distribution.

CPB dissolved this past February.

The D.C. court acknowledged in its order that while the federal government may impose limits on grants or fund its own speech to promote specific perspectives, “the First Amendment draws a line, which the government may not cross, at efforts to use government power — including the power of the purse — ‘to punish or suppress disfavored expression’ by others.”

Although CPB has been dissolved, the court clarified that this does not render the case moot because the executive order “sweeps beyond the CPB.”

The court is also issuing a permanent injunction to prevent federal agencies from enforcing the executive order.

In a statement, PBS, said it was “thrilled with today’s decision,” calling the president’s order a “textbook unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination and retaliation, in violation of longstanding First Amendment principles.”

The National Association of Broadcasters is praising the FCC and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) for opening an investigation into how professional sports rights are currently negotiated with an eye towards leveling the playing field for broadcasters.

In February, FCC Chairman Brandon Carr announced that the FCC’s Media Bureau had issued a Public Notice seeking public comment about the current state of sports TV and in particular, how the increasingly fragmented viewing landscape is impacting how viewers watch sports on TV. Deadline for public comments is March 27.

"Given the nexus between sports programming and the local media marketplace—as well as the FCC’s ongoing work to support local news and reporting—we believe it is important for us to evaluate the sports media landscape and understand how changes have impacted consumers and broadcasters," the bureau stated in its notice.

In December, NAB launched a campaign “Keep the Game On” to advocate for keeping live professional sports available on free TV and to increase public awareness of how outdated ownership rules impact broadcasters' competitiveness in negotiating with Big Tech over sports rights.

"Games that once aired on local broadcast stations are increasingly gobbled up by Big Tech platforms, hidden behind paywalls that come with steep monthly bills,” said NAB President Curtis LeGeyt. “That is not progress, it is a problem. Broadcasters need the ability to compete and keep sports accessible to everyone."

This week, the association highlighted this recent tweet from Sen. Lee:

“We’re grateful for Chairman Carr and Sen. Lee providing leadership on this important topic as consumers are increasingly frustrated by the scattering of live sports across multiple streaming platforms,” the NAB wrote in a blog. “Fans want to easily watch their hometown teams and marquee national events on broadcast television, free and accessible to all. As the biggest games in football and basketball have shown, broadcast television continues to bring communities together around the moments that matter most.”

“But outdated government ownership rules make it harder for broadcasters to compete for sports rights and the advertising revenue that supports them,” they added. “In today’s fragmented media marketplace, broadcasters must compete against global streaming companies and Big Tech platforms that face none of the same regulatory restrictions.”

The NAB’s web page for ownership rules is here and its "Keep the Game On" web page is here.

A federal judge on Saturday ruled that Kari Lake, who President Trump appointed a year ago to run the Voice of America, has acted unlawfully.

"Lake satisfies the requirements of neither the statute nor the Constitution," U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth wrote in his ruling. "As a consequence, any actions take by her during her asserted tenure acting as CEO between July 31 and November 19, 2025, including but not limited to the August 29 reduction in force effort or actions taken pursuant in the March or July delegations of CEO authority, are void."

Lamberth has been dealing with court challenges over the leadership of VOA since last summer, questioning the government’s arguments about Congress’s role in running the agency, which is in charge of broadcasting news in 49 languages to countries where the free press is endangered. Cuts to the VOA, which runs Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, and the Middle East Broadcast Networks since Lake took over have resulted in only six languages being offered now.

All three networks have legally challenged Lake in court.

Since Lake—a former Arizona gubernatorial candidate—assumed control, she has dismissed contractors and fired almost all permanent network and agency full-time staffers including the director of the Voice of America. She has also contracted with One America Network to carry its right-wing content as well as denied funding to Radio Free Europe and Radio Free Asia. She also cancelled a lease for a new HQ.

Specifically, the judge’s ruling revolved around whether or not Lake had the authority for her actions and whether she had ever been officially appointed. Although President Trump had announced his intentions to nominate Lake to the job before starting his second term, the person designated to run the Global Media agency—which oversees the VOA—was never confirmed by Congress. Since Trump had dismissed most of the board that was in charge of hiring a new director if there was no CEO, Lake’s appointment was held up.

Last summer, the White House named her “acting deputy CEO” which Lake said gave her “95%” of the duties and powers of the CEO.

NPR reported that it has not found any evidence that Lake was every appointed by Trump to the position.

The judge’s decision raised questions as to the viability of Lake’s actions and could result in the reversal of other decisions she has made for the last year.

NEW YORK—In a move that will streamline compliance with state privacy rules, Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) has announced significant updates to its Multi-State Privacy Agreement (MSPA) that the group described as the most substantive amendments to the framework since 2023.

The updates are designed to aid advertisers’ compliance and business objectives by simplifying privacy law compliance, reducing partner contracting friction, closing contractual gaps, and strengthening protections under U.S. state privacy laws.

The IAB noted that as privacy enforcement accelerates across the U.S., advertisers face increasing business risk relating to the personal data flowing through agencies, ad tech vendors, measurement providers, and other downstream partners. Recent state enforcement actions have highlighted the fact that advertisers remain responsible for protecting consumer data, even when the data is shared with or otherwise activated by third parties.

“This update makes the MSPA an even more powerful tool for the digital advertising ecosystem,” said David Cohen, CEO, IAB. “In a time of increasing enforcement and complexity, we’re giving advertisers and their partners a clear, trusted framework that simplifies compliance, accelerates collaboration, and protects them in a meaningful way. As adoption grows, the value multiplies—creating a shared standard that helps the entire industry move faster, with greater confidence, while reinforcing consumer trust and supporting the ad-supported internet people rely on every day.”

The revised MSPA introduces advertiser-specific updates that simplify compliance and speed adoption across the ecosystem, including a streamlined structure that increases accessibility for major brands and clarifies how ad tech partners may process personal data—creating a consistent compliance baseline across covered transactions without the need for custom contract amendments or repeated negotiations. The result is unlocked business opportunities and a quicker go-to-market approach with partners that are MSPA signatories, the IAB explained.

The group also stressed that state regulators are making clear that strong contractual controls over personal data are no longer optional.

Recent California enforcement actions involving Healthline Media and American Honda Motor Co. highlight, amongst other things, breakdowns tied to not having required privacy terms in contracts. In the Healthline enforcement action, California regulators highlighted that Healthline could, in part, return to CCPA compliance by complying with the MSPA.

More information is available here.

WASHINGTON—Broadcasters from across the country have gathered in Washington, D.C., for the National Association of Broadcasters’ (NAB) annual State Leadership Conference (SLC), an advocacy event where local radio and television leaders champion policies that strengthen stations’ ability to serve their communities.

Steve Patterson, host of Hubbard Radio’s myTalk 107.1 and the nationally syndicated “Donna & Steve Show,” emceed the program, which focused on broadcasters’ indispensable role in delivering trusted news, emergency information and local connection to communities nationwide.

On March 4, attendees will head to Capitol Hill to meet with their members of Congress to discuss policy priorities critical to local stations.

NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt delivered remarks on March 3 to 570 attendees, outlining the urgent need to modernize outdated regulations that prevent local stations from competing on a level playing field with global technology platforms. He underscored broadcasters’ unique and essential role in public safety, civic engagement and strengthening local democracy.

Broadcasters also heard from key policymakers shaping broadcast policy, including Sen. Ed Markey (MA), who spoke about the enduring value of broadcast radio and his leadership on the bipartisan effort to pass the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act. Sen. John Barrasso (WY) addressed the threat a performance tax poses to local radio stations and the importance of broadcasters in their communities. Rep. Richard Hudson (NC-09), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, spoke about the need for broadcast ownership rules to reflect today’s landscape and the importance of keeping AM radio in cars.

NAB’s advocacy team provided a comprehensive policy briefing led by executive vide president of government relations Shawn Donilon, equipping attendees with the latest updates on ownership reform, the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act and other legislative priorities.

NAB executive vice president, public affairs and chief of staff Michelle Lehman also highlighted NAB’s America 250 campaign, outlining opportunities for stations to engage audiences in the commemoration of the nation’s milestone anniversary.

The conference also celebrated excellence and leadership within broadcasting. NAB presented the prestigious Crystal Radio Awards, honoring stations for outstanding community service, and Ralph Oakley received the Chuck Sherman Television Leadership Award in recognition of his exceptional contributions to local television.

NAB senior Vice president, State, International and Board Relations Sue Keenom recognized outgoing state association leaders for their dedicated service to broadcasters and their communities, including:

• Jim Timm, president, Nebraska Broadcasters Association and outgoing president, National Alliance of State Broadcasters Associations (NASBA)
• Pat Roberts, Florida Association of Broadcasters
• Neal Gladner, Arkansas Broadcasters Association
• Vance Harrison, Oklahoma Association of Broadcasters
• Cathy Hiebert, Alaska Broadcasters Association
• Chris Kline, Arizona Media Association
• Keith Shipman, Washington State Broadcasters Association

As broadcasters prepare for meetings with lawmakers tomorrow, this year’s State Leadership Conference reinforced a singular message: Local radio and television stations remain the most trusted and resilient source of news and information in communities across America.

WASHINGTON—While broadcasters have made the elimination of ownership caps a major policy priority for decades, a new report from OpenSecrets documents how those efforts went into overdrive in 2025, as the Federal Communications Commission signaled it might be willing to change the rules and station groups announced a number of major deals that would require regulatory changes.

In 2025, Nexstar Media Group spent $3.2 million lobbying the FCC in 2025, roughly 10 times more than it did every year from 2018 to 2023, when its lobbying activity remained steady, according to OpenSecrets.

Meanwhile, Sinclair Broadcast Group, the second largest station owner, last year spent $800,000, up from $770,000 in 2024 and about four times its 2023 federal lobbying total.

As previously reported, broadcasters have long argued that the current rules that limit the reach of station groups to no more than 39% of all TV homes in the U.S., put them at a severe competitive disadvantage to big tech companies and streaming services who have captured a large share of the TV ad and subscription market in the last 15 years. Our full coverage of that issue can be found here and here along with our FCC coverage here.

The issue has become even more important as Nexstar announced in 2025 a $6.2 billion deal to acquire Tegna, Sinclair began talks about acquiring E.W. Scripps and station groups like Scripps and Gray announced deals and station swaps that would require changes to the rules.

The study also noted that “to help sway the FCC, Congress and the White House, Nexstar hired lobbyist Jeff Miller, who served as finance chair on President Donald Trump’s second inaugural committee, at the start of 2025. Miller heads Miller Strategies, one of the firms that have benefited most from their close connection with the Trump administration. Nexstar paid the firm $510,000 over the course of the year, although most of its lobbying was handled by the company’s in-house team. Tegna reported its first year of lobbying in 2025, spending $550,000 exclusively on Miller Strategies. Combined, the lobbying firm raked in over a million dollars from just the potential Nexstar-Tegna merger.”

The report also highlights the ongoing debate over whether the FCC has authority to change the rules, as the NAB and broadcasters have argued, or whether it would require Congress to pass new legislation, as opponents of changes to the ownership caps have argued.

The full report is available here.

DENVER—The International Broadcaster Coalition Against Piracy (IBCAP) has filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against the operators of the illegal streaming service known as DMTN IPTV, as well as Idriss Premium TV and Max TV (collectively, DMTN IPTV).

The federal lawsuit alleges that DMTN IPTV illegally transmitted copyrighted content owned by IBCAP members, despite repeated requests for compliance under U.S. copyright law. According to the complaint, IBCAP issued 68 notices of infringement to the operator and 435 takedown notices to hosting companies used by the defendants since 2020.

“This lawsuit against DMTN IPTV is the latest in a long line of legal actions to enforce copyrights that are being blatantly infringed by pirate services,” said Chris Kuelling, executive director of IBCAP. “Our strategy of working with our members to protect their content by continually detecting and removing infringing streams has been highly successful. Nevertheless, when a pirate continues to ignore our takedown requests, the next step is to coordinate legal action. In line with past lawsuit wins, we expect a similar outcome in this case, including a broad injunction that can be enforced against third parties, such as hosting providers, CDNs, ISPs and payment processors to stop this infringement.”

At the time of filing the complaint, the website used to promote and market the infringing service promised customers “No More Cable Bills” and stated that DMTN IPTV “can be installed on any device.” The complaint also describes deceptive tactics allegedly used by the operators to hide illegal activities over the years, including providing PayPal sales receipt descriptions for leather goods rather than for the infringing service.

The suit names Idriss Elkasmi, based in Fes, Morocco, as the direct infringer and primary operator of the service, along with other Doe defendants. It further alleges that Ali Ezzaary, along with other Doe defendants, promote and enable access to the infringing service as secondary infringers.

The lawsuit seeks statutory damages totaling more than $21 million. It also seeks a permanent injunction, transfer of domains used by the service and court orders preventing third parties, including hosting providers, CDNs, ISPs and payment processors, from supporting the infringing operation.

The lawsuit was coordinated by IBCAP and filed by IBCAP member DISH Network. All evidence for the case was obtained and provided by the IBCAP lab. A copy of the complaint can be found here.

WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, has announced that he will convene a full committee hearing titled “We Interrupt This Program: Media Ownership in the Digital Age” on Tuesday, February 10, 2026, at 10:00 am EST that will examine the Federal Communications Commission’s current broadcast media ownership rules.

The hearing comes at a time when the FCC is considering whether to modify current ownership rules as part of its Quadrennial 2022 Review. FCC Chair Brendan Carr has indicated his willingness to modify the rules as a way of strengthening local broadcasters but the regulator has made no final decision.

Several broadcasters, most notably Nexstar have also announced major deals that would require changes in the ownership rules.

Cruz announced that witnesses will include Chris Ruddy, CEO of Newsmax, who has filed comments with the FCC arguing that current ownership caps should be retained and Curtis LeGeyt, president and CEO of the NAB, which has long argued that the rules need to be eliminated.

Cruz said that the hearing would pay particular attention to one rule limiting a single broadcaster from reaching beyond 39 percent of U.S. television households nationwide in light of today’s evolving media landscape.

“The media market is changing rapidly, leading many to wonder if broadcast media ownership rules should reflect this new reality,” Cruz said in a statement. “This hearing is an important opportunity to discuss whether existing rules are legally sound, antiquated, or need to be updated to promote competition and protect against corporate censorship against conservatives.”

In announcing the hearing, the Committee noted that “as more Americans consume video content through streaming services and social media, the original intent of media ownership rules—to promote competition and diversity by limiting the number of media outlets a single entity may own—warrants review. Some telecommunications experts contend, however, that the current 39 percent cap is statutory, meaning it can only be changed by an act of Congress and not through regulation. Other critics worry possible changes to media ownership rules will result in fewer conservative voices on broadcast television.”

Opponents of changing the rules have argued that the FCC lacks the authority to eliminate the caps while the NAB and other larger broadcast groups have argued the agency has the power to eliminate them.

WASHINGTON—The NAB has released a new nationwide survey of registered voters that finds broad public support for eliminating the national broadcast ownership cap, a restriction that limits how many households a local TV station owner can reach across the country.

In announcing the survey, which was commissioned by the NAB and conducted by Fabrizio Ward, the NAB said the findings show that voters think the cap is unfair and they want government to give local stations a fair chance to compete for advertising and audience against Big Tech platforms, which face no such restrictions.

The survey comes at a time when the Federal Communications Commission is reviewing the ownership caps and broadcasters have announced a number of deals for stations that would require the current rules to be relaxed or eliminated.

“Voters are sending a clear message: the government should not impose arbitrary limits on trusted local broadcasters while Big Tech platforms face no such restrictions,” said NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt. “Ending the arbitrary national ownership cap - which applies to no other form of media - is about fairness and competition, but it’s also about ensuring local stations have the scale they need to invest in strong local journalism, emergency information and service to their communities.”

Bob Ward of Fabrizio Ward added: “These results show broad agreement that local stations should be allowed to compete nationally for advertising. Voters see this as a fairness issue, and they respond to where elected officials stand.”

The NAB described the key findings include:

• Voters see the national ownership cap as unfair by a 38-point margin: 58% of voters say the 39% ownership restriction is unfair, including 33% who say it is very unfair, while just 20% say it is unfair.
• Voters want local broadcasters to compete nationally for advertising by a 42-point margin: 57% say local TV station owners should be able to compete nationally against cable networks and internet streamers rather than the 15% that say they should remain restricted.
• There are clear political consequences for lawmakers: by a margin of 23-points, voters say they are more likely (36%) rather than less likely (13%) to vote for a member of Congress who supports allowing local station owners to compete nationally for advertising. Conversely, by a 24-point margin voters say they are less likely (36%) rather than more likely (12%) to vote for a member of Congress who opposes reform.
• Voters favor a level playing field with Big Tech by a 43-point margin: 52% say government policies should make it easier for local TV stations to compete for advertisers against Big Tech while just 9% think government should make it harder.
• Local TV remains a trusted source of news: 55% of voters express trust in local TV newscasts.

The survey results are available here.

On Thursday, Corporation for Public Broadcasting President and CEO Patricia Harrison delivered her final remarks during the organization’s last board meeting.

In remarks obtained by TV Tech sister brand NicRadio World, Harrison said that following Congress’ rescission of federal funding for public media, CPB realized it could no longer operate in the manner the American public has come to expect.

“In a profound irony, it is precisely because public media remains so essential to American civic life that CPB’s final act must be to dissolve for the greater good,” Harrison said.

Harrison, 87, became CEO of CPB in 2005.

CPB’s board of directors voted to dissolve the organization at the beginning of the month, after 58 years of operation.

On the Senate floor Thursday, Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) honored Harrison in his remarks.

“Throughout her tenure, Harrison ensured that CPB’s investments strengthened service to local communities and delivered lasting public value,” he said.

Why?
In her remarks, Harrison attempted to address the exact reasoning behind the organization’s defunding.

“Was it a burden to the taxpayer?” she asked. “Was this a cost-saving move? No. Unlike in other countries where citizens are heavily taxed — for example, the BBC and the NHK — American public media outlets reflect the free-enterprise and volunteer ethic of our citizens.

“For $1.65 a year in taxes — less than the cost of a cup of coffee — every American has access to content that inspires independent thinking and understanding of the rights and responsibilities of Americans living in a vibrant democracy,” she said.

But in the wake of the federal rescission of funding for public media, CPB came to the realization that it had limited time to protect its legacy and the work it had done, Harrison said.

“The longer CPB tried to exist without funding, the higher the prospect that our remaining funds would never reach the public media system already reeling from the defunding,” she said.

The organization was also concerned that any remaining funding could become subject to content-based restrictions and compliance demands that would “further harm stations” and erode public trust.

“After all of the political attacks and congressional defunding, we recognized a hard truth: Without funding and independence, CPB risked becoming a liability to public media rather than a protector of it — something that looked intact from the outside but was hollow at its core,” she said.

Compliance
According to Harrison, CPB was the first organization to sue the Trump administration over “attacks” on public media’s independence and the withholding of appropriated funds. She said that the organization refused to comply with executive directives that violated its mission or the editorial independence of local stations, continuing to fund PBS and NPR until the end.

“We could have survived by complying with demands for political control over news coverage, by rewriting history, by limiting the stories and information shared with the American public, by abandoning diverse talent, or by supporting content that increases divisiveness through disinformation,” Harrison said.

“But that was never going to happen on our watch, and that is less than what the American people deserve.”

Since October, Harrison said that CPB has granted approximately $170 million to the public media system. It has also invested in the American Archive of Public Broadcasting and helped to fund national distribution of locally produced programming through American Public Television, she said.

Legacy
Harrison concluded her remarks by thanking CPB’s board, PBS’ CEO Paula Kerger and then she closed with a call to action.

“The future of public media and our nation depends on each of you. It depends on our collective ability to look upon the next evolution of media and ensure it is harnessed for the purpose of educating and connecting all people,” she said.

“Together, we will prove that a nation of neighbors will survive.”

WASHINGTON—The U.S. House of Representatives this week passed its final fiscal year (FY) 2026 minibus package of funding, which includes money for public broadcasting’s Next Generation Warning System as well as its “Ready to Learn” grant program.

The package, which includes the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education (Labor-HHS-Education) bill and the Homeland Security bill, will allocate $48 million for the emergency alert system and $31 million for “Ready for Learn.”

In the summer of 2025, Congress severely cut funding for public broadcasting, resulting in the eventual shuttering of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. In August, CPB announced that it was ending its grant program for the Next Generation Warning System, suggesting that the funding for the grant should continue under FEMA.

Kate Riley, President and CEO of America’s Public Television Stations, issued a statement applauding this week’s vote.

“While America’s Public Television Stations are deeply disappointed that the final package does not restore any of the local station funding that was rescinded last year— a devastating missed opportunity for Congress to save local stations, particularly those serving rural areas—we are grateful that the bill provides some funding for the important public safety and education services that public media provides in communities throughout the country.

“We are pleased that the final minibus package recognizes the lifesaving work of local public broadcasting stations and provides $48 million for public broadcasting’s Next Generation Warning System for fiscal year 2026. This program within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s FEMA enhances local public broadcasting stations' ability to provide alert and warning and interoperable public safety communications to communities across the country, and to incorporate emerging technology in those lifesaving activities. Public broadcasting has long been a committed partner with the local, state and federal public safety community. That work depends on reliable and resilient public broadcasting infrastructure, which this program supports.

“We are also grateful for the $31 million for Ready To Learn, a competitive grant program at the Department of Education that supports the creation and distribution of educational media content and services to millions of children across America. For over three decades, this program has been proven to prepare all children for success in school and life by using the power of public television’s on-air, online, mobile and on-the-ground educational content and services to build the science, math and literacy skills of children ages two to eight.

“At the same time, we are incredibly disappointed that this bill misses a critical opportunity to restore essential funding for local stations. Since the rescission vote last year, Americans in every community across the country, especially rural communities, have experienced the loss of essential services that only local, independent public television stations provide.

"Two stations have already announced their closures and without federal funding, many more local stations have been forced to eliminate or reduce local programs and services, including local history programs, community event coverage, agricultural programming and local public affairs programming, among others. Still others are putting off much needed infrastructure investments – risking programming and public safety services. The impacts in local communities are impossible to ignore.

“We appreciate Representative Bacon’s (R-NE) and Representative Amodei’s (R-NV) amendment which attempted to restore some funding for local stations in this minibus package as well as the support of bipartisan Members of Congress in both the House and the Senate, who have been working to try to save local stations throughout the FY 2026 funding process.

“We are not giving up. We will not stop fighting for our local stations and the vital services they provide their communities. We remain hopeful that continued Congressional bipartisan support in the upcoming FY 2027 appropriations process will enable a restoration of local station funding to support stations’ essential missions of public safety, education and local community connections.”

WASHINGTON—In a move that could have a major impact on daytime and late night talk shows, the Federal Communications Commissions' Media Bureau has issued guidance telling broadcast stations airing certain late night and daytime talk shows that they are required to give equal time to rival candidates.

The guidance could also give affiliate stations a legal rationale for dropping controversial programming like "Jimmy Kimmel Live", which regularly criticizes President Trump.

It isn't certain, however, what legal impact the new guidance might have given that the FCC has not voted on any new regulations.

“Late night programming and daytime talk shows have been exempt from that [equal time for political candidates] requirement since 2006 when an exemption was given to Jay Leno because he was conducting bona fide news interviews,” the FCC noted in its latest guidance. “Importantly, the FCC has not been presented with any evidence that the interview portion of any late night or daytime television talk show program on air presently would qualify for the bona fide news exemption…Moreover, a program that is motivated by partisan purposes, for example, would not be entitled to an exemption under longstanding FCC precedent. Any program or station that wishes to obtain formal assurance that the equal opportunities requirement does not apply (in whole or in part) is encouraged to promptly file a petition for declaratory ruling that satisfies the statutory requirements for a bona fide news exemption.”

“In the meantime, the Media Bureau encourages all television broadcast stations to ensure that they are making all appropriate equal opportunity filings in accordance with section 73.1943 of the FCC’s rules and as required by agency precedent. 47 CFR § 17.1943. It is important that both broadcasters and legally qualified candidates understand the FCC’s equal opportunities regulations and how they can result in broadcasters offering opposing legal qualified candidates comparable time and placement,” the FCC concluded.

The move drew immediate fire from the lone Democrat on the FCC, Commissioner Anna Gomez, who said it was an “an escalation in this FCC’s ongoing campaign to censor and control speech.”

“Nothing has fundamentally changed with respect to our political broadcasting rules,” Gomez said in a statement. “The FCC has not adopted any new regulation, interpretation, or Commission-level policy altering the long-standing news exemption or equal time framework. For decades, the Commission has recognized that bona fide news interviews, late-night programs, and daytime news shows are entitled to editorial discretion based on newsworthiness, not political favoritism. That principle has not been repealed, revised, or voted on by the Commission. This announcement therefore does not change the law, but it does represent an escalation in this FCC’s ongoing campaign to censor and control speech.

“The First Amendment does not yield to government intimidation,” Gomez added. “Broadcasters should not feel pressured to water down, sanitize, or avoid critical coverage out of fear of regulatory retaliation. Broadcast stations have a constitutional right to carry newsworthy content, even when that content is critical of those in power. That does not change today, it will not change tomorrow, and it will not change simply because of this Administration’s desire to silence its critics.”

Last year, FCC Commissioner attacked "Jimmy Kimmel Live" for violating public interest standards for broadcast stations and applauded Nexstar and Sinclair for temporarily blacking out his show on their broadcast stations. This drew fire from free speech groups and some conservatives like Ted Cruz who argued that Carr's interpretation of public interest rules could be used to censor conservatives.

WASHINGTON—The NAB, a coalition of network affiliates and a number of large broadcast station groups have filed replying comments urging the Federal Communications Commission to end a variety of ownership restrictions and caps.

The filings from the NAB, Sinclair, Scripps, Cox, Nexstar, Fox, Trinity Broadcasting and a coalition of network affiliates also rebutted arguments in FCC filings by unions, public interest groups, nonprofits, individual consumers, pay TV groups and some smaller broadcasters. who oppose eliminating the ownership caps.

The reply comments by the NAB and other broadcasters ’s comments are part of the the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) 2022 Quadrennial Regulatory Review. The deadline for comments and reply comments in the Quadrennial Review ended on Jan. 16.

In its reply comments, the NAB once again urged the Commission to modernize local radio and TV ownership rules that no longer reflect today’s media landscape. Despite dramatic changes in how Americans consume media, local broadcasters continue to be shackled by rules first crafted nearly a century ago, severely limiting their ability to compete against streaming giants and big tech companies that are not subject to those regulations, the NAB argued.

More specifically, NAB argued that the record provides no credible justification for retaining local radio and TV ownership restrictions, which artificially limit broadcasters' ability to grow, invest and serve our local communities and that opponents of reform rely on mischaracterized data and legal arguments that ignore today’s competitive landscape.

Removing these outdated restrictions would better position local radio and television stations to compete with Big Tech and deliver diverse, community-focused content, the NAB argued while stressing that the Commission needs to act quickly. Modernizing these rules is essential to ensuring the continued vitality of local broadcasting.

A filing by the ABC Television Affiliates Association, CBS Television Network Affiliates Association, FBC Television Affiliates Association, and NBC Television Affiliates, who collectively represent more than 700 Big Four Network-affiliated local TV stations serving viewers in all 208 Designated Market Areas focused on the need to eliminate Duopoly Rule while retaining the Dual Network Rule.

“As the comment cycle winds down in yet another periodic review of the Commission’s local media ownership rules, the Commission should take note of the latest clear signal from the marketplace that its structural ownership rules don’t serve the public interest and, in fact, have caused real damage to local communities, large and small, across America,” the affiliates argued.

“The Commission must bear its share of the responsibility for the continuing erosion of newsgathering in local communities…In this 2022 Quadrennial Review, the Commission faces the same choice for local television and the local television multiple ownership rule (the “Duopoly Rule”) as it faced for newspapers and the NBCO Rule from 2000 through 2017. The Commission can choose to continue treating local television stations as dominant media players that must be saddled with unique regulations that apply to none of their competitors and no other industry. Or, it can follow Congress’s directive and repeal the Duopoly Rule because (i) abundant competition has made local television stations just one of a plethora of diverse media voices in every market in the country; and (ii) today, the Duopoly Rule damages local television without any benefit – and, in fact, with significant harm – to the public. The Commission can continue treating the only video provider that delivers comprehensive, trusted, reliable local news (for free, over-the-air) as a threat to competition and the public interest. Or, it can craft a regulatory regime that supports local television stations and local news—and gives local television stations at least a fighting chance to continue serving the public and to avoid the fate of The Post-Gazette and so many other local newspapers.”

“The comments in this proceeding leave no doubt that the right choice – and the statutorily mandated choice – is to support local television stations by repealing the Duopoly Rule (and retaining the Dual Network Rule),” the filing concluded.

“The commenters supporting retention of the Duopoly Rule are mainly multichannel video industry participants led by DirecTV and NCTA that see the Duopoly Rule primarily as a vehicle for trying to save money on their retransmission consent costs, and so-called “public interest” groups that reflexively favor regulations regardless of their continuing utility," the affiliate contended. "These commenters urge the Commission to maintain the status quo even as the marketplace undergoes massive changes and the share of video viewing and advertising dedicated to local broadcasting continues to shrink."

"On the other side of the ledger, NAB, the Affiliates Associations, and several broadcast television station groups have told the Commission in no uncertain terms that retaining the Duopoly Rule will lead to further decline of local broadcast stations and less local news for communities across the country," the filing noted. "The choice facing the Commission is stark, and the stakes couldn’t be higher. The Affiliates Associations urge the Commission to take action now and repeal the Duopoly Rule. And for the same reasons – to serve the public interest and advance localism – the Commission should retain the Dual Network Rule.”

Filings by Fox argued that the commission should eliminate the Dual Network Rule that prohibits mergers between the four largest broadcast networks because mergers would give the broadcasters the scale they need to compete with big tech companies.

“As fully set forth in their initial comments, the Affiliates Associations strongly disagree,” the affiliates argued. “Whereas the Duopoly Rule is a general broadcast industry regulation designed to establish the structure of local broadcast markets, the Dual Network Rule is a special-purpose rule designed to maintain balance between the national Big Four Networks and their local Affiliates. The Dual Network Rule alone has not been enough to restrain the Big Four Networks from taking increasing control of their Affiliates’ finances and programing; getting rid of the Dual Network Rule would only exacerbate that problem. The Commission is examining the Network-Affiliate relationship in another proceeding, and removing the Dual Network Rule while the Commission compiles its record therein would be a mistake.”

The FCC under Chairman Carr has opened a proceeding examining the relationship between the major networks and affiliates as part of a larger effort to strengthen local broadcasters and reduce the influence of what he sees as liberal “bias” in their news and programming.

The full filings from the NAB and others can be found here:

• NAB: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011675548753/1
• Scripps: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/101160180604198/1
• Cox: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011678897994/1
• Nexstar: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/101162933922349/1
• Affiliate Groups representing ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011600367418/1
• Sinclair: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/10116778908637/1
• Trinity Broadcasting: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011639008746/1
• Fox: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011615031709/1

NAB

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011675548753/1

Scripps

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/101160180604198/1

Cox

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011678897994/1

Nexstar

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/101162933922349/1

Affiliate Groups Representing ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011600367418/1

Sinclair

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/10116778908637/1

Trinity Broadcasting

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011639008746/1

Fox

https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/1011615031709/1

LAS VEGAS—In a wide-ranging fireside chat at CES 2026, Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr reiterated the importance of local news and information provided by local broadcasters and their rollout of NextGen TV broadcasts.

Carr declined, however, to take a position on whether the FCC would impose mandates requiring TV to be able to receive 3.0 signals and reaffirmed his commitment to enforcing public interest standards on broadcast content in ways that have been controversial with broadcasters and free speech advocates.

In the interview with Carr, Gary Shapiro, executive chair and CEO of the Consumer Technology Association, repeatedly praised Carr and President Donald Trump.

At one point, Shapiro called Trump’s speech on AI “the best speech I've heard any president or national leader give on technology,” prompting Carr to quip that Shapiro’s “second favorite” speech by Trump must have been the one the president made regarding tariffs, a policy that has been opposed by the CTA.

In contrast, Shapiro did not mention critics who have contended that the public interest standards being imposed on broadcasters might violate free speech or First Amendment rights.

Shapiro did, however, cite statistics showing that viewers were much more likely to watch video over streaming platforms and cable. He also asked Carr if the FCC had plans to identify lesser-used spectrum and potentially auction it off.

In terms of the public-nterest standard, Carr said, “broadcasters are a very, very unique distribution medium that because the government is picking a winner and loser. [Because] you get a license, you get this microphone, you get to speak, you don't necessarily get to conduct yourself the same way you would if you were on a podcast or a soapbox or a cable chain.”

“So one thing that I've been working on is attempting to reinvigorating the FCC public interest standard,” Carr said. “Now some people have raised concerns about that. They don't want to comply with our public-interest obligations, and I think there are a couple options there. One, if you're a broadcaster and don't like the fact of that public-interest obligation, you can turn your license in. There's lots of different ways to distribute your content. You can become a cable channel, you become a podcast, you become a YouTube channel. If you want the unique privilege of broadcasting your content over the airways and…all the benefits that come with it, retrans, must-carry, [and] various rights, then you’ve got to comply with public interest in it.”

Another option, Carr said, in terms of the public interest standard would be to “put that spectrum back up for auction. If you want to continue to broadcast without the public interest obligation, then maybe let everyone have a fair and free shot at purchasing that spectrum without the public-interest obligation.”

In terms of the transition to NextGen TV, Carr said: “As a general matter, we're really supportive of this transition to 3.0 because it can be not just better television, but it can also be used for data casting, which can be a new competitive service, and so we're looking at all those options. We've asked some questions…We're gonna look at it all…[What] is the future of broadcasting? What does local broadcasting look like in five years and 10 years and 15 years? And that is something that I spend a lot of time thinking about, and how do we get the regulatory framework right?

“If you care about local news and local reporting in this country, if you think that's valuable as a public interest, as a national interest, right now, local broadcast television stations are the ones that are almost exclusively, in many cases, doing it,” Carr added. “Look at newspapers. They [have been closing]...by the dozens all across the country. Your local 5 o’clock, 6 o’clock TV news are sort of the last of the real local gumshoes [on the ground] report. Now I love that we're getting a lot more social media as well…But I still think that institutionally, those local broadcasters play a key role.”

Finding a way to strengthen those efforts is important for the FCC, he added, “because the competition is fierce, the ad revenue is declining.”

Carr said that one way to strengthen these local broadcasters would be to rebalance the relationship between the owners of the large national networks, like ABC parent Disney, and the local stations.

“I think over the years, the balance of power has shifted too far into the hands of the national programmers, and they're effectively just using local TV stations as outlets for their own programming,” he stressed. “We're looking at lots of ways to really empower those local broadcast TV stations to actually identify the needs of their local communities and serve those needs of the local communities, and not merely become” something that passes along national programming.

The full fireside chat can be accessed at C-SPAN.org.

WASHINGTON—Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr has appointed Jonathan Williams as the regulator’s chief economist.

Williams assumes the new role in addition to serving as chief of the FCC’s Office of Economics and Analytics.

Williams was an economics professor and the director of the Center for Regulatory and Industrial Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The FCC chief economist advises the chair, commissioners and bureaus and offices and works within the agency’s Office of Economics and Analytics.

“I’m excited that Dr. Williams will lend his talents to the FCC as we continue to integrate economic analysis into our decision-making,” Carr said. “Dr. Williams’ record of distinguished scholarship in the academic sector in addition to his extensive research makes him the right person for this job. I look forward to drawing on his advice and counsel as we advance the Commission’s agenda and support President Trump’s America First agenda to increase economic opportunity for American businesses.”

Williams joined UNC-Chapel Hill as an assistant professor in 2015 and has been a professor of economics there since 2022. In this role, he also served as the director of the Center for Regulatory and Industrial Studies (CRIS), which was founded within the economics department to support research related to industrial organization and data science. Additionally, he served as an academic affiliate for the International Center for Law & Economics. Prior to UNC, he worked as an assistant professor of economics at the University of Georgia as well as an instructor at the University of Virginia.

Williams’ research has focused on industrial organization and applied econometrics. His research has been published in numerous academic journals and presented in many seminars over the past decade. He holds both a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics and a Bachelor of Science in applied mathematics from Ohio University, as well as a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Virginia.

WASHINGTON—The Corporation for Public Broadcasting’s board of directors has voted to dissolve the organization that oversaw the federal government’s investment in public broadcasting and media for 58 years.

The move came after a decades-long political fight by conservatives to end federal funding for public media that culminated in 2025 with President Donald Trump asking Congress to rescind previously appropriated money for public media and votes by the Republican-controlled Congress to end federal funding. Most of the staff was laid off last fall.

CPB’s board took the vote after determining that maintaining the corporation as a nonfunctional entity without funding would not serve the public interest or advance the goals of public media. “A dormant and defunded CPB could have become vulnerable to future political manipulation or misuse, threatening the independence of public media and the trust audiences place in it, and potentially subjecting staff and board members to legal exposure from bad-faith actors,” the CPB said in a press release.

As it moved to dissolve the CPB, board members also highlighted the organization's longstanding work to develop and strengthen public media in the U.S.

“For more than half a century, CPB existed to ensure that all Americans—regardless of geography, income, or background—had access to trusted news, educational programming, and local storytelling,” CPB President and CEO Patricia Harrison said. “When the Administration and Congress rescinded federal funding, our Board faced a profound responsibility: CPB’s final act would be to protect the integrity of the public media system and the democratic values by dissolving, rather than allowing the organization to remain defunded and vulnerable to additional attacks.”

“What has happened to public media is devastating,” CPB Chair Ruby Calvert said. “After nearly six decades of innovative, educational public television and radio service, Congress eliminated all funding for CPB, leaving the Board with no way to continue the organization or support the public media system that depends on it. Yet, even in this moment, I am convinced that public media will survive, and that a new Congress will address public media’s role in our country because it is critical to our children's education, our history, culture and democracy to do so.”

First authorized by Congress under the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, CPB helped build and sustain a nationwide public media system of more than 1,500 locally owned and operated public radio and television stations.

The board said CPB’s stewardship helped public media become a trusted civic resource, delivering educational programming, providing life-saving emergency alerts during natural disasters and crises and supporting rigorous, fact-based journalism that uncovers issues affecting people’s daily lives.

As part of the process of dissolving the organization, CPB will complete the responsible distribution of all remaining funds in accordance with Congress’s intent.

CPB will also provide support to the American Archive of Public Broadcasting to continue digitizing and preserving historic content, and CPB’s own archives—dating back to the organization’s founding in 1967—will be preserved in partnership with the University of Maryland and made accessible to the public.

“Public media remains essential to a healthy democracy,” Harrison said. “Our hope is that future leaders and generations will recognize its value, defend its independence, and continue the work of ensuring that trustworthy, educational, and community-centered media remains accessible to all Americans.”

In response to the vote, Kate Riley, president and CEO of America’s Public Television Stations, said: “The winddown and now dissolution of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is the direct result of the rescission of public media funding last year. The consequences of that rescission continue to ripple throughout the public media system and the communities that depend on their local stations for lifesaving public safety services, exceptional education resources, and local storytelling that binds communities together and reflects their unique history, culture and aspirations for the future...The loss of CPB will be felt in every community large and small throughout this country."

“Local stations and the essential services they provide their communities continue to be at risk," Riley concluded. "We call on Congress to act now to restore some level of support for local stations in the final FY 2026 funding bills.”

In 2025, regulatory issues dominated the headlines in a ways not seen in decades, as an activist Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr pushed hard to advance the administration’s agenda,

While a number of stories related to late night TV and Jimmy Kimmel made the list, very few of the most popular regulatory stories on the TV Tech website, involved one time controversies. Most of these stories, particularly those relating to free speech, ownership rules, blackouts and the ATSC 3.0 transition, also provide essential background reading for the regulatory issues that will continue to reshape the industry in 2026.

Here are the 20 most popular stories touching on regulatory issues that were posted to the TV Tech website in 2025:

1. Disney Urged to Shut Down ABC to Avoid Political Turmoil

Analysts think Disney should stop broadcasting but keep the licenses.

2. DirecTV Says Costs for ATSC 3.0 Transition Would be ‘Onerous’

American Television Alliance tells FCC that these costs would produce ‘no benefits whatsoever’ for pay TV operator’s subscribers.

3. Carr Weighs in on Disney, YouTube Dispute

“People should have the right to watch the programming they paid for — including football” the FCC chair said in a X post.

4. ABC Takes `Jimmy Kimmel Live!' Off the Air Indefinitely

The network made the move after FCC Chair Carr attacked the late night show for "sick" comments about the killing of Charlie Kirk and threatened licenses of stations who aired it.

5. Nagravision, Broadpeak Partner on Sports Piracy Solution

Collaboration gives sports rights holders and broadcasters the ability to detect, identify, and disrupt piracy in real-time

6. LPTV Broadcasters: Costs of ATSC 3.0 Transition Could Force `Many’ Stations Out of Business

In an FCC filing opposing the NAB’s plans to sunset ATSC broadcasts, the LPTVBA said broadcasters should not be forced to convert to ATSC 3.0.

7. Nexstar's ABC Affiliates To Preempt `Jimmy Kimmel Live!'

Nexstar joined Sinclair not airing the show's return on ABC on Sept. 23 but says it continues to have "productive" talks with Disney about the future.

8. FCC Commissioner Gomez Blasts ABC for Suspending Jimmy Kimmel

She called ABC’s decision a “cowardly corporate capitulation” to threats from the FCC to suspend broadcast licenses that have no legal basis in “facts or the law”.

9. 50 State Broadcasting Associations Pass Resolution Backing ATSC 1.0 Sunset

Resolution supports FCC ‘establishing a clear, industry-wide date-certain transition plan for the full deployment of Next Gen TV (ATSC 3.0) as well as a sunset date for ATSC 1.0’.

10. U.S. Appeals Court Vacates FCC’s Top-Four Station Ownership Rule

NAB, FCC chair Brendan Carr applaud 8th Circuit’s ruling overturning FCC rules that station groups can’t own more than one of the four most-watched TV stations in a market

11. FCC Restores Accidentally Deleted ATSC 3.0 Rules

The agency has restored and recodified certain rules involving reporting requirements in a new Order.

12. Gray Media to Acquire Block Communications TV Stations for $80 Million

Deal is another example of how station groups are betting that FCC deregulation will open up a wave of deals and consolidation.

13. Pearl TV Doubles Down on ‘National Security Threat’ Posed by SiliconDust's 3.0 Tuners

In comments to the FCC, large broadcast station groups reiterated that the manufacturer uses a Huawei chip.

14. Weigel Broadcasting Pushes Back on Proposals for ATSC Sunset

In a meeting with FCC staff representatives of the broadcaster opposed the NAB’s plans for a “flash cut” from ATSC to ATSC 3.0.

15. FCC Approves Review of Broadcast Ownership Rules

NPRM to look at local television and radio ownership rules that limit the number of stations a single entity can own in a local market.

16. NBCUniversal Blasts Idea of Two-Tiered Station Ownership Rules

FCC filing said that there should not be two separate ownership caps for network O&Os and other TV station groups.

17. FCC to Vote on Accelerating ATSC 3.0 Transition at October Meeting

Commission will act on whether to propose shutting down 1.0 by 2030.

18. NAB: Ownership Caps Have Created a ‘True Emergency for TV Broadcasters’

‘The record shows that the need for TV broadcasters to gain scale now has become an emergency,’ the group told the FCC.

19. FCC to Lift Freeze on Applications for New LPTV, TV Translator Stations

The move is part of a phased process running into 2026 that will also lift the current freeze on major changes for Class A television, low power television and TV translator stations and permits.

20. ATSC 3.0: 'I Can't Imagine Anyone Defending Our Current Adoption Strategy'

The tasks of defining and socializing NextGen’s vision require a “break glass” resolve we haven’t seen or needed in a while.

WASHINGTON—In the wake of an executive order from President Trump and a determination by an Executive Branch Interagency body that foreign made drones pose “unacceptable risks” to U.S. security, the Federal Communications Commission has updated its “Covered List” of banned technologies and products to include all new foreign made unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) and all UAS critical components.

The move effectively bans sales of new drones and components by the Chinese manufacturer DJI, which dominates the drone market in the U.S. and other foreign makers.

It does not, the FCC stressed, impact a consumer’s ability to continue using drones they previously purchased or acquired. “Nor does today’s decision prevent retailers from continuing to sell, import, or market device models approved earlier this year or previously through the FCC’s equipment authorization process,” the agency said. “By operation of the FCC’s Covered List rules, the restrictions imposed by today’s decision apply to new device models.”

The move comes at a time when drone have become increasingly important in TV production, particularly for news and live sports. In 2025, for example, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) accepted Sinclair’s Declaration of Compliance for Operations Over People. That, Sinclair said, made it the first broadcaster authorized to fly drones over people and vehicles for newsgathering without a waiver from the government regulator.

As previously reported, the potential ban on new foreign drones, which has been brewing for months, has raised widespread concerns about the impact of any ban on new products or components.

“I welcome this Executive Branch national security determination, and I am pleased that the FCC has now added foreign drones and related components, which pose an unacceptable national security risk, to the FCC’s Covered List,” said FCC chair Brendan Carr in a statement. “Following President Trump’s leadership, the FCC will work closely with U.S. drone makers to unleash American drone dominance.”

By way of background, the FCC’s Covered List is a list of communications equipment and services that are deemed to pose an unacceptable risk to the national security of the U.S. or the safety and security of U.S. persons. Under the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act, the Commission can update the Covered List only at the direction of national security authorities. In other words, the Commission cannot update this list on its own and is required to implement determinations that are made by our national security agency experts.

Equipment on the Covered List (“covered” equipment) is prohibited from getting FCC equipment authorization. Most wireless devices require FCC equipment authorization prior to importation, marketing, or sale in the U.S. Covered equipment is banned from receiving new equipment authorizations, preventing new devices from entering the U.S. market.

In making the determination to ban new foreign-made drones, national security agencies referenced, among other things, concerns that that foreign-made UAS could be used for attacks and disruptions, unauthorized surveillance, sensitive data exfiltration, and other UAS threats to the homeland. Additionally, the determination noted that reliance on such devices unacceptably undermines the U.S. drone industrial base, the FCC reported.

The full Public Notice on can be found here.

WASHINGTON–The Federal Communications Commission has agreed to extend the deadline for comments on proposals to further expand the ecosystem for next generation wireless services in the Upper C-band (3.98–4.2 GHz).

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed by Congress earlier this year directs the agency to complete a system of competitive bidding in the Upper C-band by July 2027.

The new Order extends the time to file comments and reply comments on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to January 20, 2026, and February 18, 2026. Prior to that extension, comments had been due on January 5, 2026, and reply comments are due February 3, 2026.

The agency noted that it does not normally extend deadlines. “In this case, however, we believe that a brief extension will help commenters to develop more comprehensive responses to the complex technical, legal, and policy issues presented in the NPRM without jeopardizing the Commission’s ability to satisfy its legislative remit to complete a system of competitive bidding in the Upper C-band by July 2027,” the Order said.

The NAB, Aerospace Industries Association and others had all requested an extension earlier this month.

In a May filing, the NAB said it has serious concerns about auctioning Upper C-band spectrum.

“NAB again emphasizes that use of the Upper C-band for satellite program contribution and distribution is critical to the broadcast industry and that use has become more intense since the “Lower C-band” auction less than five years ago," the NAB said. "While the Lower C-band transition occurred largely without disrupting incumbent C-band services, that success was possible only because the Commission preserved a substantial portion of C-band for satellite use. NAB believes that further expansion of new services into Upper C-band will be dramatically more complex and expensive than Lower C-band and will result in material degradation and interruption of broadcast services.”

In a Dec. 11 letter requesting the extension the NAB said “the Upper C-band proceeding encompasses complex technical, operational, and safety-related considerations across a uniquely broad set of stakeholders — including the aviation industry and broadcasters. Developing the comprehensive, cross industry input needed to support a robust rulemaking record requires the exchange of significant technical data, operational analyses, and confidential information.”

“These efforts were unavoidably disrupted by the recent federal government shutdown and associated nationwide impacts, as FAA and aviation industry work on the forthcoming NPRM stalled during that time," the letter continued. “Significantly, we are expecting the FAA to issue an NPRM that will substantially inform industry responses in this proceeding. In addition, because of the December holiday period, subject-matter experts who are focused on maintaining safe and reliable air operations and maintaining reliable broadcast infrastructure will have limited availability. Finally, the Commission’s comment period for the Fifth FNPRM of the Next Gen TV Proceeding largely coincides with that of the Upper C-band NPRM and involves many of the same organizations and subject matter experts.”

Given those issues, the “NAB respectfully urges the Commission to grant the requested extension… This brief extension would not materially affect the Commission’s overall timeline or compromise the statutory requirement to conduct the auction by July 2027. Finally, granting such extension will better equip all parties — including the Commission — to achieve an efficient rulemaking process that supports safe aviation operations, protects incumbent users, and facilitates a successful Upper C-band auction.”

The full letter can be found here.

Additional filings in this proceeding are available here.

A new poll commissioned by the National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC) and Defend the Press Campaign found that large majorities of likely voters in the upcoming mid-term elections opposed “large national broadcasters buying up or merging with local TV stations.”

Overall, 72% of the respondents opposed the idea, including 75% of Democrats and 70% of Republicans. Only 7% were in favor of the acquisitions and 21% were not sure.

“The bottom line is that Americans across the political spectrum don’t want local TV station consolidation,” said Brenda Victoria Castillo, president & CEO, NHMC, which is opposed to the FCC loosening or lifting current ownership caps on station groups. “They expect it to drive up their prices and give billionaires more power over what they see and hear, not to mention degrading the quality of coverage in their communities.”

The survey also found that 81% said they preferred local TV stations to be locally owned as opposed to being owned by “large national broadcast corporations.” Only 2% said they preferred local stations to be owned by the national broadcast corporations.

In addition, 80% of respondents opposed loosening legal restrictions that would allow large corporations to buy more local stations, with 89% of Democrats and 70% of Republicans opposing changes to the rules.

While local TV stations bill themselves as local media, the survey did not address the fact that most commercial broadcast stations are already owned by large station groups like Nexstar, Sinclair, Tegna, E.W. Scripps, Paramount, NBCUniversal, Disney and Fox. The NAB and many station groups have long argued that lifting the ownership caps would help them better compete against big tech companies that dominate the ad business.

The National Hispanic Media Coalition has in the past opposed further consolidation of the local TV station sector and has argued that the FCC should not raise current ownership caps.

The poll also found that large majorities of likely voters (76%) believed that corporate mergers would lead to higher prices for consumers.

The two groups said the survey—conducted by Lake Research Partners via live phones and text-to-online among 1,000 likely 2026 midterm voters nationwide—is among the first to measure public attitudes toward local TV station consolidation in the context of affordability, cost-of-living pressures, and growing attempts by billionaires to seize control of their local news.

The full poll results and the questions that voters were asked can be found here.

WASHINGTON—The National Association of Broadcasters has once again filed comments with the Federal Communications Commission urging the agency to abolish ownership rules governing TV and radio station.

The NAB made the comments in a filing for the FCC’s 2022 Quadrennial Review of ownership rules. Congress requires the agency to review those rules every four years, a process that has been delayed in recent years by court rulings.

In a detailed 128-page brief filed on Dec. 17 the NAB stressed that “when the Commission first adopted rules prohibiting common ownership of AM, FM, or television stations serving substantially the same area, Franklin D. Roosevelt occupied the White House. Now in the third decade of the 21st century, FCC rules still restrict local common ownership of AM and FM stations separately by service and in total and prevent ownership of more than two TV stations in all local markets. Even beyond the vast changes this century in the media marketplace – both audio and video and the two combined – the FCC has no justification to keep ex ante local ownership rules when its license transfer review process is far better suited to evaluating the public interest benefits of proposed transactions. In this 2022 quadrennial review, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) accordingly urges the FCC to expeditiously eliminate all of its ex ante local broadcast ownership rules.”

FCC Chair Brendan Carr has repeatedly indicated that he would like to liberalize those rules as part of a larger policy of helping local broadcasters. Some of those rules, notably the prohibition of owning more than one top four TV station in a market, have already been struck down by Federal court rulings.

On the same day that the NAB filed its brief in the 2022 Quadrennial Review process, president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt also praised comments by FCC Chair Brendan Carr during a Dec. 17 Senate Commerce Committee oversight hearing.

“Today’s hearing underscored what local broadcasters have been saying for years: the rules governing television and radio ownership are badly outdated and no longer reflect the competitive realities of today’s media marketplace,” LeGeyt said. "Local stations are competing every day against unregulated global tech and streaming giants that face none of the constraints imposed on broadcasters. That imbalance makes it harder for stations to invest in local journalism, weather coverage, emergency information and the live sports programming that communities rely on.

"We appreciate Chairman Carr’s willingness to confront these issues head-on and his recognition that policymakers have the power to modernize the rules before more local voices are lost,” he added. “NAB looks forward to working with Chairman Carr to strengthen local broadcasting, preserve competition and ensure communities continue to have access to trusted, local news and information.”

The full NAB filing can be found here.

Three issues dominate television’s outlook as this tumultuous year concludes: The fate of NextGen TV (even as the FCC tries to boost its implementation), ownership and consolidation at all levels and the significance of broadcasting itself in a video landscape that is now fragmented by streaming media usage.

While 2025 fomented an array of technology, business and regulatory highlights, many of these controversial developments will grow in importance in the years ahead. Most notably, artificial intelligence tools are exploding into production and operations. At the same time, IP-based video production is transforming production workflows.

Collectively, the year’s progress has set the stage for more near-term industry upheavals—especially given the turbulent political environment.

Mixed Message on NextGen TV?
The Federal Communications Commission’s notice of proposed rulemaking in late October calling for “less regulation” of NextGen TV sent a mixed message. It would not require broadcasters to simulcast ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 signals and would not mandate 3.0 tuners in new TV sets. Nor would it set an end date for the current ATSC 1.0 transmission. Nonetheless, the agency’s official statement curiously contends that its plan “will accelerate the nation’s ongoing transition” to ATSC 3.0.

FCC Chair Brendan Carr has characterized 3.0 as “the future of broadcasting,” offering “new ways” to deliver services such as interactive programming, enhanced video and audio formats and other data services through its internet protocol-based transmission system.

“Television is moving to an IP-based format that supports features and functionalities that will allow broadcasters to compete more effectively with digital platforms, both on content and economics,” Commissioner Anna Gomez added, acknowledging the “very complicated questions” of this transition. “First and foremost is the issue of timing.”

Throughout the year, ATSC 3.0 hurtled on a roller coaster of developments. On the international front, Brazil declared its broadcasters will use the physical layer of the ATSC 3.0 standard as its “DTV+ television format of the future.” Commercial service is targeted for the FIFA World Cup next year; meanwhile, stations in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo are running experimental transmissions, with a station in Brasilia expected to launch soon. Globo TV plans to offer enhanced capabilities, such as 4K and 8K content.

Among other NextGen projects during the year: the Run3TV applications platform got a boost when NBCUniversal became an investor in the ATSC 3.0 Framework Authority (A3FA), which supports the technology for local services.

Satisfying the Urge to Merge
An ongoing consolidation effort is bubbling among station owners as well as technology providers. Beyond the marquee deals—such as the prolonged saga of Skydance (which climaxed with its takeover of Paramount Global, including CBS and cable networks)—there is the proposed alliance of Sinclair Broadcast Group with Tegna, which would potentially create the nation’s largest station group. Meanwhile, Tegna was in talks with Nexstar Media Group about joining forces. And Sinclair was also flirting with Gray Media.

Adding to the merger fantasy and frenzy was the FCC’s signaling that it may review its national ownership cap, which now limits the reach of a station group to 39% of U.S. TV homes. Separately, the 8th U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in July to vacate the “Top-Four Prohibition.” That restriction prevented a single entity from owning more than one of the four most-watched television stations in a local market. Many analysts expect that lifting the regulation will generate local-market juggling, which could be used to blend station newsrooms and ad-sales groups.

Thanks to the relaxation of regulations on the audience reach of broadcasters, media companies and their technology and content suppliers are entering a new age of consolidation.

Streaming Conquers Cable
Although FAST (free ad-supported streaming TV), SVOD (subscription video-
on-demand) and other online video formats have been growing rapidly since the pandemic, May 2025 marked the first time their combined share of total television usage surpassed the collective viewing of broadcast and cable, according to Nielsen’s monthly report “The Gauge.”

Nielsen’s analysis showed 44.8% of viewing was via streaming platforms (notably YouTube and Netflix), while 20.1% was on broadcast channels and 24.1% on cable channels. (“Other” accounted for the remaining 10.1% of viewers’ attention.)

The online migration came as program networks accelerate their online presence. Fox One debuted as a streaming service that includes all of Fox’s cable channels; Disney expanded its ESPN cable brand to an online app; and CNN (via its parent Warner Bros. Discovery) introduced a similar standalone app.

When the dust settles, some analysts contend that venerable networks such as MTV could be shuttered under Paramount’s new Skydance ownership.

“Free services have been a major driver of streaming’s overall success,” according to Nielsen’s analysis. But the shifting environment—and viewers’ dismay about increasing costs for multiple streaming services—is likely to alter the lineup in the years ahead.

AI Everywhere
Two decades ago, toward the end of the internet/web bubble, a cheeky prediction from Silicon Valley proclaimed “IP on Everything,” suggesting internet protocol was integral to the emerging Internet of Things and other services that would all become connected. Now the comparable hype involves artificial intelligence, which is weaving its way into countless aspects of our lives.

AI is seeping into media creation and delivery, from creative workflow and production to home displays. Skeptics are already voicing concern that it is reshaping news production, trust and ethics, deriding the AI onslaught as “virtual saturation” and predicting “AI fatigue” among customers and providers.

Yet, as Jeff Zellmer, executive vice president of digital operations for Fox TV Stations, told TV Tech earlier this year, “AI represents a massive shift in culture and technology.” He and other station and group officials cited the range of tasks AI can enhance or generate, ranging from real-time, multilanguage translations to workflow management.

Among the capabilities are hybrid-generated content creation, such as automated sports highlight reels, that could devise video packages within seconds after live action. Ad targeting and other personalized features are also likely—and will inevitably face challenges from privacy advocates.

AI is also finding its way into TV displays. For example, at CES, Samsung demonstrated a voice remote control that creates personalized responses, including custom picture settings. Another Samsung feature is an AI button on its remotes that can offer the ability to live translate from a show’s native audio language into subtitles for another language. Can synth­esized real-time dubbing be far behind?

Defunding Public Broadcasting
Although many of 2025’s media tech issues had a political component, perhaps none was as transformative as the federal rescission package that eliminated more than $1 billion from public media funding and wiped the 58-year-old Corporation for Public Broadcasting out of existence.

Since CPB was a significant funding source for the Public Broadcasting Service and member stations, the impact was quick and vast. Many local and regional public broadcasters almost immediately announced plans to cut their staffs by up to 40%, and some said they will slash budgets, including purchase of PBS programming.

“Without federal funding, local stations are eliminating or reducing local programs, including local history programs, community event coverage, agricultural programming and local public affairs programming, among others,” Kate Riley, president and CEO of America’s Public Television Stations, said in October.

A few stations will go dark in June 2026. WPSU-TV at Pennsylvania State University sought to transfer its operating assets to WHYY, a Philadelphia public media organization; but the Penn State Board of Trustees rejected that plan.

New Jersey PBS, that state’s only public TV channel, will also go dark in June. It plans to continue producing a nightly news program on digital platforms via a broader operations deal with WNET-TV in New York City.

Public broadcasters vowed to tap other funding streams, especially corporate sponsorships, individual donations and member station fees.

EL SEGUNDO, Calif.—DirecTV has won an appeal to reinstate a federal lawsuit accusing Nexstar Media Group, Mission Broadcasting, and White Knight Broadcasting of conspiring to manipulate and increase prices of retransmission-consent fees.

The suit rose from a retransmission dispute between pay TV provider DirecTV and station owners Mission and White Knight, which resulted in the October 2022 blackout of 30 stations on DirecTV. The blackout, ongoing after more than three years, resulted in blackouts of Big-4 stations (ABC, CBS, NBC or Fox) in 25 DMAs.

On March 14, 2023, DirecTV filed suit in U.S. District Court in Manhattan alleging Nexstar, Mission and White Knight violated federal antitrust law by conspiring to fix the prices of retransmission consent fees in markets where both Nexstar and either Mission or White Knight own a Big Four station.

DirecTV alleged that Mission and White Knight shared a common negotiator who was, in fact, an agent of Nexstar. It also claimed that this negotiator improperly shared confidential rates and other financial information with Nexstar, and that the three defendants coordinated their respective blackout dates and media responses.

However, in March of 2024, the federal district court dismissed the case on the grounds that DirecTV lacked standing to assert antitrust claims against the defendants under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

On Dec. 16, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected those arguments, affirming DirecTV has standing to sue under antitrust laws and may prosecute its claims against Nexstar and its sidecars.

More specifically, the appeals court rejected the defendants’ arguments that the damage DirecTV has suffered from subscriber loss is too indirect or speculative, finding “the parties had a longstanding history of reaching agreements every three years” and because of this baseline, DirecTV “can identify concrete losses of subscribers and profits during the blackout periods that occurred when those RCAs terminated.”

The court also stressed that horizontal price-fixing “directly interfer[es] with the free play of market forces” and its victims are not limited to those who pay inflated prices.

“Lost profits resulting from a reduction in output represent a cognizable antitrust injury, and DirecTV plausibly alleges that its lost profits flowed directly from the output-reducing effects of the alleged price-fixing conspiracy,” the court concluded.

The ruling means that the case will now resume in U.S. District Court.

“We are pleased that the 2nd Circuit has held that DirecTV has standing in this case, and we plan to proceed with our claim that Nexstar, White Knight, and Mission have abused their ‘sidecar’ relationship in violation of FCC regulations and long-standing competition laws,” DirecTV Chief Legal Officer Michael Hartman said. “Nexstar’s sidecars have made a mockery of existing broadcast ownership rules, resulting in ever-increasing retransmission consent fees at consumers’ expense.”

TV Tech has reached out to Nexstar for comment.

While most station groups reported major declines in ad revenue in the third quarter, thanks to a steep decline in political advertising compared to a year ago, this week’s earnings calls with analysts were generally bullish. Most station groups beat expectations, reporting better-than-expected year-over-year results for core advertising sales that exclude political and the Olympics.

A close review of those earnings calls also provides a snapshot of the state of the industry in the latter half of 2025 and its prospects for 2026.

Station executives offered bullish comments about next year, thanks to the prospects of heavy political advertising and the likelihood regulators will relax ownership rules and allow a wave of dealmaking.

For the moment, though, all the station results were heavily impacted by the absence of political revenue in Q3 2025 compared to the record spending during the 2024 presidential campaign.

“Advertising revenue of $476 million decreased $146 million or 23.5% over the comparable prior year quarter, primarily reflecting a $145 million year-over-year decrease in political advertising,” Nexstar Media Group President and Chief Operating Officer Michael Biard noted. “However, nonpolitical advertising was essentially flat and better than our expectation of a low single-digit decline.”

Sinclair also reported year-over-year declines in total revenue, thanks to the absence of significant ad income in Q3, but reported revenue that was generally better than expected. “We delivered strong performance and met or exceeded guidance across all key metrics,” Sinclair President and CEO Chris Ripley said on the company’s Q3 earnings call. “Total revenue of $773 million came in higher than the high end of our guidance range. Core revenues were up 7% year-over-year on an as-reported basis.”

Likewise, Gray Media generally beat analysts’ expectations and while overall revenue was down 21% YoY, Q3 2025 revenue was above analyst expectations.

Hilton Howell Jr., Gray Media’s chairman and CEO, said: “Our results for the third quarter of 2025 compared favorably to our Q3 guidance for both revenues and expenses. Total revenue in the third quarter of 2025 was $749 million, at the high end of our guidance for the quarter.”

Pat LaPlatney, president and co-CEO at Gray Media added: “Q3 continued the theme we’ve been describing throughout 2025, with advertisers remaining somewhat cautious due to the macro environment. Through the quarter, though, we saw core activity strengthen more than we had projected back in August, and we ultimately finished on the high side of guidance. Remember that the Olympics on NBC provided about a $20 million uplift in July and August of 2024, of which about $16 million was core ad revenue and $4 million was political. Factoring that in, our third quarter was up about 1% over 2024.”

E.W. Scripps reported that third-quarter company revenue was $526 million, down 19% or $120 million from the prior-year quarter, mainly due to political advertising. But its Local Media division reported that core advertising (excluding political) was up, due to the services category and ”overall growth in national advertising due to strong sales efforts and Scripps’ sports strategy.”

“During the quarter, our Local Media division revenue was down 27% due to the absence of political advertising revenue compared to the prior year,” Chief Financial Officer Jason Combs said. “Core advertising revenue was up nearly 2%. We grew national advertising revenue, driven by an increase in our largest category, services. Our sports strategy helped drive that Q3 performance as well. Local Media distribution revenue was flat."

‘We’re Very, Very Optimistic About 2026’
While broadcasters haven’t released detailed guidance for their 2026 revenue expectations, executives offered generally bullish comments for the year ahead in terms of the impact of political advertising and the prospects for deregulation.

“I would say that we’re really optimistic about 2026,” said Gray Media’s LaPlatney. “We have some early Q1 numbers that are encouraging, in fact, very encouraging…As we sit here today, we’re very, very optimistic about 2026.

“We think broadcast is going from strength to strength at this moment,” explained Perry Sook, founder, chairman and CEO of Nexstar. “In the near term, we see a decreasing interest rate environment, the reset of the majority of our distribution contracts at the end of this year, the acquisition of TEGNA and an election year in 2026, all of which we expect to drive shareholder value. Longer term, we expect to accelerate our CW and NewsNation network growth strategies, our deployment of applications for ATSC 3.0 and innovation around how we go to market and the products and services we bring to benefit our viewers and our advertisers.”

As expected, M&A activity was a major topic of discussion.

‘We're Operating in the Wild Wild West’
Sinclair’s Ripley noted that “the broadcast sector is facing secular challenges within linear TV while having a unique opportunity for significant consolidation. We believe the industry is at an inflection point where scale and operational efficiency will increasingly separate high-performing companies from the rest. … Against this backdrop, in mid-August, we launched a strategic review of our broadcast business and an evaluation of a potential separation of ventures to optimize value creation across our portfolio,” that has already led to “several transactions, including partner station acquisitions and select acquisitions and divestitures.”

“One potential path for industry evolution could involve consolidating into two similarly sized scale broadcast groups," Ripley continued. "[C]reating another group comparable in size to the large broadcast combination announced in August [i.e., the proposed Nexstar-Tegna combination], could unlock an estimated $600 million to $900 million in annual synergies through mergers and subsequent portfolio optimizations. This level of consolidation would strengthen the industry's financial footing and position broadcasters as more capable competitors to big media and big tech.

“While we present this as one potential industry scenario rather than a prediction, the fundamental point is clear,” Ripley added. “The regulatory environment now enables transformational consolidation that can benefit Broadcast Group shareholders, creditors, employees and the communities we serve. Sinclair is well-positioned in this environment, and we're actively evaluating how best to participate to maximize value for our stakeholders.”

Scripps’ discussion of M&A opportunities was more modest. “As I've said from the start, we are totally focused on optimizing our portfolio of stations to structurally enhance performance and economic durability in service to our vision to create connection,” Scripps President and CEO Adam Symson sais. “We've already announced a station-swap deal with Gray where we are exchanging two Scripps stations for five Gray stations, a transaction that improves our market positioning and creates immediate efficiency opportunities. We also announced station sales in Fort Myers, Fla., and Indianapolis for cash. The sale prices represent premium multiples for the industry. These are quality stations we agreed to sell only at strong valuations, and the cash we receive will go directly to delevering.”

Deregulation Continues
In the Q3 earnings call, Nexstar’s Sook reiterated his previously expressed belief that the industry should see significant deregulation of broadcast ownership rules.

“The 8th Circuit mandate was issued on Oct. 21,” he said, refrencing the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to vacate the Federal Communications Commission’s rule barring a station group from owning more than one of the top-four stations in audience share in a given market. “That eliminates the top-four ownership rule, that will go into effect as soon as that order is published in the Federal Register and it's effective 30 days later. … And we, again, continue to believe that this administration, the Trump administration and Brendan Carr at the FCC are focused on deregulating business, allowing businesses to breathe, allowing businesses to compete and that we’ve been spending a lot of time in Washington to reinforce at the regulatory agencies and on the hill that we are indeed here to help meet the regulatory moment."

While Gray Media has already announced a number of potential acquisitions and station swaps, including an agreement to acquire stations from Allen Media Group, Howell also expressed a note of caution during the analyst call. Reacting to a report of a possible merger or deal with Sinclair, he said, “there is nothing that we are in deep negotiation with at the moment.”

“We are in a period of time in our industry where things change faster than I have ever, ever seen it,” Howell added. “For the first time in the history of our business, we are really operating in the Wild, Wild West. No one knows what the rules actually are. Anybody that tells you that…they just do not. They cannot.

“I don’t want to…do any deal that would put the basic company in any kind of risk,“ he continued. “Now, there’s a lot of big opportunities to grow. Unlike perhaps some of our competitors, I don’t believe, and my management team unanimously does not believe, that Gray actually has to do anything. I mean, we’re just fine where we are, and we can carry on our previously announced efforts to just reduce our debt and pay it down and then return more to our shareholders.”

As the malevolent siege against broadcasters’ interests intensifies from the far reaches of artificial intelligence misuse to relentless innovation in the multibillion-dollar piracy business, the overarching question is whether the industry can muster resistance on a scale conducive to success.

So far, there’s much to applaud on the anti-piracy side of the battle. When it comes to thwarting the destructive use of AI, though, the pace of remedial action is lagging well behind the growing threat, despite the din of alarms sounding from all corners of the marketplace and a plethora of federal and state legislative initiatives.

“The rise of large-scale content scraping by AI systems and digital platforms poses a serious threat to the sustainability of local journalism,” Alex Siciliano, senior vice president of communications at the National Association of Broadcasters, said. “These systems use broadcasters’ reporting to train or populate AI products without authorization, compensation or attribution—diverting revenue away from local stations that invest heavily in producing trusted news, sports and emergency coverage.”

Whether Washington has the will to do anything about this set of AI issues remains to be seen. The latest addition to the stack of pending Senate bills—the AI Accountability and Personal Data Protection Act, introduced in late July—awaits any sign that it will garner consideration.

On another track, the Content Origin Protection and Integrity from Edited and Deepfaked Media (COPIED) Act, which stalled in the Senate last year, has been reintroduced with full support from NAB to create barriers to use of deepfakes and unauthorized use of content to train AI models. Another of those NAB-supported efforts from 2024, the NO FAKES Act, was reintroduced this year with broad bipartisan support in the House and Senate. That measure takes a complementary approach toward, as NAB puts it, “protecting trusted broadcast journalists, local radio hosts and other on-air personalities from the unauthorized use of their voice, image or likeness.”

Obviously, moving all these different measures to passage, possibly with efforts to consolidate them at some point, will take a good deal of time. And there’s no telling what will be done to deal with the regulatory chaos stemming from state-level initiatives, which to date have produced over 1,000 bills targeting AI regulation of some kind, according to the security regulations tracker Lawfare.

‘Scary Good’ AI Apps
Meanwhile, just how far ahead of the law-making curve Big Tech support for mass acculturation to AI hyperrealism has gone is seen in the success of OpenAI’s Sora app, dubbed “scary good” in a New York Times headline for its ability to act as a TikTok-like social media engine for sharing AI-generated videos. In fact, as TV Tech reported in July, there’s even some experimentation with AI fakery on the part of station groups that want to bolster the reach of their newscasts by taking advantage of its ability to distort reality by turning monolinguistic on-air personalities into fluent multilinguists.

Such steps, taken with public notification of AI usage, are a response to pressures arising from the need to build broadcast news viewership in the digital domain. While TV news still serves vast audiences, “it doesn’t have the relevance, the scale and necessarily the best business model when it gets into the digital space,” said Michael Newman, director of transformation for Graham Media Group’s digital operations. At this point, Newman said, using AI in on-air newscasting is a bridge too far, though he acknowledged is use to support live translation in newscasts is “really cool and a great example of how AI and original reporting can be accessed by more people.”

Even though broadcasters welcome some controls—as reflected in the NAB’s support for legislation like the COPIED Act—the way forward is complicated by inevitable disputes over how to rein AI in. “We are also engaged with policymakers and industry partners to ensure any new regulations or voluntary standards maintain a balance between protecting creative rights and allowing legitimate innovation,” Siciliano said.

Inevitably, as the slow grind unfolds in Congress and at the Federal Communications Commission—which, at press time, was scheduled to vote in late October on a Biden-era notice of proposed rulemaking governing disclosure of AI usage in political ads opposed by Chair Brendan Carr as well as the NAB—it remains up to stations to set up protective procedures against AI misuse by outsiders as well as parameters defining limits on internal usage. To many in an industry where attitudes about regulation are mixed, this isn’t necessarily a reprehensible situation.

At Fox Television Stations, “the approach overall is that this is an area of growth that’s happening that we need to understand and be involved in,” said Jeff Zellmer, the group’s executive vice president of digital operations. “It’s better to find partners that help us use it well than to throw up walls.”

Added Sinclair Chief Innovation Officer Scott Ehrlich, “Moving responsibly falls to companies like ours.” As for industry-wide agreement on such things, “it’s hard to standardize when you’re dealing with a target moving as fast as AI,” he said.

Piracy Concerns, Too
Nonetheless, while the industry hasn’t formalized standards around AI usage, Ehrlich voiced hope for organizations moving the industry toward more generalized protection that encompasses piracy as well as AI. One group he cited is the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA), an ad hoc group working to systematize ways to establish content provenance and address misinformation.

Indeed, it’s in this realm of tools engineered to “help broadcasters verify the origin of their content, signal to viewers that programming is genuine and trace misuse when it occurs,” as described by Siciliano, that progress on the anti-piracy front offers a hopeful counterpoint to the slog on the AI side. Broadcasters are “collaborating with technology partners to strengthen the resilience of their distribution systems and guard against unauthorized access or signal manipulation,” he noted.

At this point in time, piracy is far more damaging to bottom lines across the TV broadcasting and streaming ecosystem than AI. “Video piracy is the third largest category in organized crime behind drugs and sex trafficking,” said Robin Boldon, head of product at Friend MTS, a leading supplier of forensic fingerprinting and watermarking tools used, respectively, to find stolen content in the global stream flow and identify its sources.

A 2024 survey conducted by streaming service tracker cordcutting.com found that one in three U.S. adults admitted to pirating TV shows or movies within the past year. According to research reported by the Kearney consulting group, the U.S. ranks first in national tabulations of visits to pirate websites. Globally, the number of visits to such sites rose by 13% from 125 billion in 2019 to 141 billion in 2023, Kearney said. Parks Associates has predicted U.S.-based content suppliers will lose $113 billion to piracy in this country alone by 2027.

Big Anti-Piracy Advances
It’s clear that a new generation of advanced anti-piracy tools and services is making life harder than ever for thieves. Silent Push, operator of an advanced piracy scanning and aggregation engine, recently reported uncovering an IPTV piracy network impacting more than 20 global media brands through operations involving over 10,000 IP addresses identifying servers and computers associated with about 1,000 websites.

Friend MTS has expanded its support for fighting piracy on several fronts. In response to the recent surge in so-called CDN leeching involving injection of purloined digital rights management keys, the company launched its server-side “Distribution Watermarking” solution to identify hacked subscriptions restreamed by pirates. This complements the widely deployed FMTS client-side Subscriber Watermarking solution that disrupts a live stream within a few minutes of start time, which is essential to causing meaningful pain to viewers of illicit sports feeds.

Most recently, FMTS upgraded its piracy monitoring service with use of an AI Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) model that continuously learns and adapts to pirates’ evolving tactics. It also launched fully staffed Piracy Investigation Services, which put regional teams to work using FMTS tools in ways that combine threat intelligence, identification and enforcement in accord with local practices.

“Along with supporting traditional methods like sending notices and building the chains of evidence required by courts, we’re going many steps further with service layers offering investigations and enforcement assistance, depending on what customers want,” Friend’s Boldon said.

Shift in Attitude
Another adjustment to the current state of affairs comes from Nagravision, a longtime leader in traditional conditional access, multi-DRM protection, watermarking solutions and on-the-ground teamwork with local law enforcement and regional organizations. The company has introduced a new approach to shaping anti-piracy strategies with a business-first perspective on what customers need, said Tim Pearson, vice president of global solutions and partner marketing.

In a market characterized by the diversity of issues associated with the transition to streaming, “we’re seeing buyers coming with very purposed agendas,” Pearson noted. “They have a problem, and they want to fix it.” He said the company is putting AI to work perusing “massive amounts of analytics and insights into data platforms” to find “pattern matches that allow us to really understand consumer behavior,” such as discerning how service price deductions can produce net ROI gains by reducing reliance on pirate services.

Nagravision is also teaming with Broadpeak to strengthen the battle against CDN leeching in use cases involving live sports. With AI abetting analytics, the solution can monitor DRM license requests to detect suspicious activity patterns and speed the disruption of illicit streams, Damien Sterkers, vice president of products and solutions marketing at Broadpeak, said. “On top of the video intelligence layer, we have human services with people working 24/7 to inform content owners what’s happening,” he said.

Underlying the effectiveness of all this activity is a big shift in content owners’ attitudes about piracy. “When piracy was detected, it used to be seen as the rights holder’s problem,” Boldon said. “Now it’s understood that it’s everybody’s problem.”

A case in point is growing participation in the International Broadcaster Coalition Against Piracy (IBCAP), which has expanded to include international and U.S. content owners, broadcasters and distributors representing more than 220 television channels. IBCAP said it has instigated a surge of lawsuits running into the tens of millions of dollars against wrongdoers in the U.S. and abroad, along with real-time takedowns of illicit live sports streams, including disruptions of more than 6,000 streams reaching millions of viewers during the 2024 Indian Premier League cricket tournament.

Whether cooperation in battling the misuse of AI can get to this level remains to be seen.

The Federal Trade Commission has issued an Order settling a major case with Amazon.com, Inc., that includes some of the largest fines and refunds the agency has ever collected.

The order resolves allegations that Amazon enrolled millions of consumers in Prime subscriptions without their consent, and knowingly made it difficult for consumers to cancel.

As part of the agreement, Amazon will be required to pay a $1 billion civil penalty, provide $1.5 billion in refunds to consumers harmed by the deceptive Prime enrollment practices, and cease unlawful enrollment and cancellation practices for Prime, the FTC reported in a Sept. 25 announcement and Order.

“Today, the Trump-Vance FTC made history and secured a record-breaking, monumental win for the millions of Americans who are tired of deceptive subscriptions that feel impossible to cancel,” said FTC Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson. “The evidence showed that Amazon used sophisticated subscription traps designed to manipulate consumers into enrolling in Prime, and then made it exceedingly hard for consumers to end their subscription. Today, we are putting billions of dollars back into Americans’ pockets, and making sure Amazon never does this again. The Trump-Vance FTC is committed to fighting back when companies try to cheat ordinary Americans out of their hard-earned pay.”

In a case filed during the Biden-administration by FTC Chair Lina Khan in 2023, the agency charged Amazon and several Amazon executives with knowingly misleading millions of consumers into enrolling in Prime, violating the FTC Act and the Restore Online Shoppers’ Confidence Act (ROSCA).

The FTC alleged Amazon created confusing and deceptive user interfaces to lead consumers to enroll in Prime without their knowledge. Compounding these deceptive enrollment practices, the FTC claimed that Amazon also created a complex and difficult process for consumers seeking to cancel their Prime subscription, with the goal of preventing consumers from cancelling Prime. Amazon documents discovered in the lead up to trial showed that Amazon executives and employees knowingly discussed these unlawful enrollment and cancellation issues, with comments like “subscription driving is a bit of a shady world” and leading consumers to unwanted subscriptions is “an unspoken cancer," the FTC reported.

In announcing the settlement, the FTC noted that the settlement is only the third ROSCA case in which the FTC has obtained a civil penalty. In addition, the $1 billion civil penalty was the largest ever in a case involving an FTC rule violation and $1.5 billion in consumer redress, providing full relief for the estimated 35 million consumers impacted by unwanted Prime enrollment or deferred cancellation, was the second-highest restitution award ever obtained by FTC action.

The settlement also requires Amazon to stop their unlawful practices and make meaningful changes to the Prime enrollment and cancellation flows in a number of ways. Those include providing a clear and conspicuous button for customers to decline Prime and forcing Amazon to remove a button that says, “No, I don’t want Free Shipping.”

The Commission vote approving the stipulated final order was 3-0. The FTC filed the proposed order in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

As the House of Representatives voted early Friday morning to eliminate federal funding for public broadcasting, advocates warned that the elimination of $1 billion to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would have its biggest impact on rural communities.

“This elimination of federal funding — over 70% would go to local stations — will decimate public media and force many local stations to go dark, cutting off essential service to communities that rely on them — many of which have no other access to free, locally controlled media — especially those communities in rural areas,” Americas Public TV Stations CEO Kate Riley said in a statement. “The proponents of this legislation were myopically focused on defunding NPR and PBS, but what this bill will actually do is devastate independent local stations — some of which are not even members of NPR and PBS and don't air their programming.”

PBS President Paula Kerger concurred. “These cuts will significantly impact all of our stations, but will be especially devastating to smaller stations and those serving large rural areas. Many of our stations which provide access to free unique local programming and emergency alerts will now be forced to make hard decisions in the weeks and months ahead,” she said.

In a 216-213 vote that mostly followed party lines, the House approved "H.R. 4, the Rescissions Act of 2025," which was passed by the Senate early Thursday morning. Two Republicans, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.) and Michael R. Turner (Ohio) voted against it. The bill also eliminates $8 billion in foreign aid.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) hailed the vote. “We need to get back to fiscal sanity and this is an important step,” he said. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, who opposed the measure said that “no one is buying the notion that Republicans are actually trying to improve wasteful spending.”

President Trump praised the vote to defund “atrocious NPR and public broadcasting, where billions of dollars a year were wasted,” adding that “Republicans have tried doing this for 40 years, and failed….but no more. This is big!!!”

One public broadcasting executive said elimination of CPB funding, which makes up approximately 15-18% of PBS’s annual operating budget, will force the network to make some hard decisions. Without CPB funding, PBS, which has 350 stations nationwide, estimates that roughly 15% of its stations will be unable to operate.

“We just don’t have a lot of fat to trim elsewhere,” Julie Overgaard, the executive director for South Dakota Public Broadcasting, told the New York Times on Thursday.

“On the PBS side of things, I can’t just start cherry-picking which national programs I want and only pay for those,” she added. “So it really leaves me and many others with little choice but to look at the local programming that we self-generate.”

Taiwo Gaynor, chief content officer for Mississippi Public Broadcasting lamented the potential loss of free educational content for rural communities. “This is important for families, to have access to content that they don’t have to pay for,” Gaynor told the AP. “That is a sad thought, to think that we ... might not be able to provide that for a generation of children.”

In an email on Thursday, Kevin Martin, president and CEO of IdeaStream, a public radio station serving northeast Ohio told supporters that “we may have lost this round, but the fight is far from over.”

Even before the House approved the Senate’s bill, Martin was unsure of its impact.

“As for the long-term implications, only time will tell. We are deeply disappointed by this funding decision, but we remain resolute and optimistic about our future. The entire public media ecosystem — PBS, NPR, and local stations like Ideastream — are built through collaborations and a shared infrastructure. The ripple effect of this funding loss will be felt throughout the system, particularly by smaller and rural stations that may face the real possibility of closure.”

In advance of the House vote, FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez criticized the Senate’s approval, accusing the Trump administration of trying to stifle opposing viewpoints.

“This action is a key step in a coordinated campaign to silence public media, and the latest attempt by this Administration to censor and control speech,” she wrote. “We've yet to see any effort to probe, defund, or threaten news outlets that support the government's views, and there’s a reason for that. This has never been about saving money. It’s about silencing those who report the news accurately, without fear or favor.”

APTS's Riley said the association will continue to push for restoring the funds.

“Federal funding for public media is irreplaceable and essential to local public media stations and the existence of the public media system as a whole,” Riley said in a statement after the House vote. “This destructive rescission of Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) funding – the substantial majority of which goes to local stations – will result in the end of all federal funding to local stations starting October 1, 2025 and the total closure of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

“America’s Public Television Stations will do everything in our power to restore this critical funding, ensure the survival of local public media stations throughout the country and continue the federal investment in their essential missions of public safety, education and community connections.”

WASHINGTON—Last week Rep. Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) introduced the “Stop Sports Blackouts Act” to make cable and satellite companies refund customers who aren’t able to watch the channels they already pay for during television blackouts.

The proposed legislation is just the latest attempt by lawmakers to intervene in conflicts between multichannel video program distributors (MVPDs) and broadcasters and other content providers that all too often result in cable and satellite companies dropping channels after negotiations break down.

In introducing the act, the legislators pointed to a dispute between Optimum and MSG Networks, affecting over a million customers in the New York City tri-state area who have been unable to watch the New York Knicks, New York Rangers, New York Islanders and New Jersey Devils on networks MSG and MSGSN. A separate blackout with Nexstar Media Group-owned WPIX New York left Optimum customers unable to watch “Judy Justice’ and local news for more than 10 days, the lawmakers said.

From 2010-2024, the two congressmen said New Yorkers experienced a total of 100 blackouts for a total of 3,350 days when consumers were blocked from viewing content they had paid for.

Ryan, who claims to be a champion of consumer protection in entertainment, previously demanded an investigation into blackouts and slammed sports leagues for making it more difficult for fans to watch games.

“It’s outrageous that millions of folks couldn’t watch the Knicks, Judy Justice, or dozens of other programs for weeks because of blackouts,” Ryan said. “And it’s even more ridiculous that we’re all still paying for the right to stare at black screens! I don’t see why this is even a debate—cable companies simply should not be able to advertise and charge for services they are not providing.

“On behalf of fans across the country, we’re putting down a marker: everyone will get their money back when a blackout stops them from watching TV, no questions asked,” he continued. “That means dollars back in your pockets and, equally importantly, it provides a hell of an incentive to these billion-dollar corporations to make sure these blackouts don’t happen in the future. They have teams of lobbyists looking out for them—I’m introducing this legislation because I fight for YOU.”

Said Murphy: “Blackouts are a slap in the face to every customer paying their hard-earned money for TV shows they can’t even watch. It’s ridiculous the rest of us get stuck in the crossfire of negotiations between cable and broadcast companies. Our bill is simple: if cable companies can’t provide the service you’re paying for, they owe you a refund.”

On Jan. 1, Optimum and MSG Networks announced that they were unable to renew their distribution agreement, leaving subscribers unable to watch NBA and NHL games in the middle of the season. On Jan. 10, Optimum subscribers were subjected to an additional blackout when the company announced it had failed to come to an agreement with Nexstar Media’s WPIX, which owns the syndication rights to popular show “Judy Justice,” starring Judge Judy Sheindlin, as well as the NewsNation network.

Congressman Ryan and Sen. Murphy’s “Stop Sports Blackouts Act” would direct the Federal Communications Commission to require television distributors to provide rebates to subscribers for television blackouts that occur as a result of carriage disputes.

Last month, the FCC passed a rule requiring cable and satellite pay TV operators to report commercial broadcast station blackouts that last than 24 hours or longer and were caused by failed negotiations over a new retransmission-consent agreement.

The American Television Alliance, a group of small and independent MVPDs, warned that such legislation will only increase prices.

“We agree it’s outrageous when big broadcasters unilaterally remove channels from TV lineups, blacking out content from consumers and depriving paying customers of critical local news coverage, sporting events and entertainment programming,” said ATVA spokesperson Hunter Wilson. “While well-intentioned, this bill will only raise prices for consumers. Blackouts are the result of networks and other big programmers holding their channels for ransom to force pay TV providers into higher-priced programming deals. Requiring pay TV providers to pay rebates will only encourage big broadcasters to further increase prices at a time when retransmission consent fees are at record highs.

“The broken retransmission consent system has led to nearly a thousand TV blackouts in the last decade,” he concluded. “ATVA stands ready to work with Congress to modernize dated regulations that turn sizeable profits for big broadcasters at the expense of consumers.”

NYC regional sports network MSG Networks—which was dropped by Optimum owner Altice USA at the beginning of the year and is currently in talks with Amazon to avoid bankruptcy—applauded the proposal.

An MSG spokesman said: “It’s not surprising that elected officials are engaged and standing up for their constituents. We appreciate Senator Murphy and Congressman Ryan’s efforts to fight for sports fans who are stuck paying for content they aren’t receiving, while Altice pockets their money. It’s time for Altice to do what’s right and agree to binding arbitration so that sports fans can again begin to watch games of their favorite teams.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Fifty state broadcasters associations, including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, have sent a letter to Congressional leaders urging the passage of legislation that would reestablish a diversity tax certificate program to incentivize capital investment in women and minority-owned broadcast stations, as well as investment in the sale of stations to women and minority purchasers.

“On behalf of the undersigned broadcasters associations representing local, over-the-air broadcast stations in all 50 states, including the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, we write today to ask that you support and consider swift passage of H.R. 8072 and S. 4158, the Broadcast VOICES Act introduced by Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV-04) and Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI),” the letter said. “This piece of legislation reinstates the tax certificate program at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that would encourage investment in TV and radio broadcast station ownership for women and people of color.”

The letter was sent to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate Chuck Schumer, Minority Leader of the House Hakeem Jeffries and Minority Leader of the U.S. Senate Mitch McConnell. 

The letter noted that “From 1978 to 1995, the Minority Tax Certificate program established at the FCC provided a tax incentive to individuals who sold their majority interest in a broadcast station to people of color. During that time, TV and radio broadcast station ownership by people of color increased by more 550 percent.”

Since the program was ended, however, “diverse ownership in our industry has drastically changed not due to lack of effort or interest, but due to lack of access to capital. Currently, women make up less than 6 percent of broadcast TV station owners and people of color make up less than 3 percent. When it comes to broadcast radio station owners, women make up around 7 percent of owners and people of color make up less than 3 percent.”

To improve those low levels, the letter argued that “the tax certificate program will help us build a local media landscape that reflects our communities on the air, both in the control booth and boardroom. Additionally, the Broadcast VOICES Act will help with building a pipeline for a new generation of broadcast station owners that is inclusive of women, people of color and other underrepresented individuals. We therefore urge Congress to act swiftly and pass H.R. 8072 and S. 4158 to make sure that all voices are accurately represented in the broadcasting industry.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—In response to the introduction of the Broadcast VOICES Act that seeks to encourage more diversity in the ownership of TV and radio stations, the NAB has issued a statement backing the legislation. 

Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV-4) recently introduced H.R.8072, Broadcast Varied Ownership Incentives for Community Expanded Service (VOICES) Act, in the House and Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) introduced the legislation in the Senate, S.4158 . The bill would reestablish a diversity tax certificate program to incentivize capital investment in women and minority-owned stations, as well as investment in the sale of stations to women and minority purchasers, throughout the broadcast industry.

An earlier 1978 Minority Tax Certificate Policy helped quadruple minority ownership before it was terminated by Congress in 1995. 

“Reinstating the diversity tax certificate program is a meaningful step to level the playing field and amplify underrepresented voices in media," NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt said in a statement backing the legislation. " NAB has long been committed to access to capital initiatives that expand radio and television station ownership opportunities, particularly for women and people of color. A tax incentive program is a proven solution that significantly diversified the ranks of broadcast owners over its nearly two decades of existence. Broadcasters thank Sen. Peters and Rep. Horsford for introducing legislation that would reinstate the program and we urge swift passage of this important bill.”