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.”

WASHINGTON—A bipartisan group of Senators has drafted a bill to protect media creators against the unfair use of generative artificial intelligence (AI).

Senator and Chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property Chris Coons (D-Del.), along with Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) say the “Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe” (NO FAKES) Act strikes a balance between protecting copyrighted works and free speech. 

The draft comes amid growing concern over the popularity of new generative AI tools such as ChatGPT and MidJourney, an issue that has roiled Hollywood, causing both writers and actors to strike against studios.    

“Generative AI has opened doors to exciting new artistic possibilities, but it also presents unique challenges that make it easier than ever to use someone’s voice, image, or likeness without their consent,” said Senator Coons. “Creators around the nation are calling on Congress to lay out clear policies regulating the use and impact of generative AI, and Congress must strike the right balance to defend individual rights, abide by the First Amendment, and foster AI innovation and creativity. I am thankful for the bipartisan partnership of Senators Blackburn, Klobuchar, and Tillis as we work to protect all individuals from unauthorized replication and ensure that the United States sets clear rules governing the intersection of AI and intellectual property.”

(Read: UN Conference to Focus on Impact of AI on the Film Industry)

The NO FAKES Act would prevent a person from producing or distributing an unauthorized AI-generated replica of an individual to perform in an audiovisual or sound recording without the consent of the individual being replicated. The person creating or sharing the unauthorized replication would be liable for the damages caused by the AI-generated fake. Exclusions are provided for the representation of an individual in works that are protected by the First Amendment, such as sports broadcasts, documentaries, biographical works, or for purposes of comment, criticism, or parody, among others.

With the rapid advance of generative AI, creators have already begun to see their voices and likenesses used without their consent in videos and songs, the senators noted in their announcement. Notably, the song “Heart on my Sleeve,” which used AI-generated likenesses of the voices of pop stars Drake and The Weeknd, accumulated hundreds of thousands of listens on YouTube, Spotify, and other streaming sites within days and was poised to appear on streaming charts before it was removed by streaming services.

Actors union SAG-AFTRA, which was involved in negotiations over ending its walkout with the studios before talks broke down this week, applauded the move.

“A performer’s voice and their appearance are all part of their unique essence, and it’s not ok when those are used without their permission. Consent is key, and I’m grateful that Sens. Coons, Blackburn, Klobuchar and Tillis are working to give performers recourse and providing tools to remove harmful material,” said SAG-AFTRA President Fran Drescher.A bipartisan group of Senators has drafted a bill to protect media creators agains the unfair use of generative artificial intelligence (AI).

Text of the draft is available here. 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—NAB President and CEO Curtis LeGeyt will be highlighting a number of issues needing Congressional and FCC action when he testifies today, Sept. 13, at a House Communications and Technology Subcommittee hearing titled “Lights, Camera, Subscriptions: State of the Video Marketplace.” 

In his oral and written testimony, the NAB said that LeGeyt will urge congressional action that would enable broadcasters to fairly compete and expand viewer and listener access to their services by passing the AM Radio For Every Vehicle Act and legislation reinstating the Diversity Tax Certificate program. 

LeGeyt will also discuss why the FCC urgently needs to modernize broadcast ownership rules, create a more transparent, fair and predictable process for broadcaster transactions, refresh the record in its vMVPD proceeding and encourage the rollout of NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0.

The hearing follows a recent blog post by LeGeyt detailing important areas where FCC action is necessary to keep broadcasting strong and enable vital local news. The blog was published after the confirmation of Anna Gomez to the FCC, with LeGeyt writing that an "FCC fully seated with all five commissioners can be the catalyst to keep broadcasting strong for the millions who depend on our free, locally-focused service."

In written testimony to the Subcommittee released by the NAB prior to the hearing, LeGeyt noted that as “we celebrate broadcasting’s centennial anniversary,...[b]roadcasters’ critical role as first informers, emergency lifelines and entertainment media has never been more important as misinformation runs rampant online. Yet significant shifts in the media and advertising marketplace pose challenges to this uniquely free and local model, absent needed congressional and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) attention.”

“In today’s hyper-competitive media landscape, broadcasting remains the most popular source of news, entertainment programming, sports and investigative journalism in communities across America,” LeGeyt said. “More than 181 million adults watch broadcast TV on a monthly basis, and more than 227 million listeners tune into broadcast radio each week. For the 2022-23 TV season, 79 of the top 100 series in primetime were aired by broadcasters.”

Unfortunately, broadcasters are currently forced to compete for audiences and ad dollars in a media landscape where they are forced to “operate under a set of outdated rules and restrictions....while other media and big tech platforms operate without restraint,” he said. 

“These challenges are exacerbated by Big Tech’s market power and largely unregulated practices in both the marketplace for digital advertising and as gatekeepers to digital content, including the local broadcast news that is accessed online (or in the automobile).” he said. “These collective pressures divert local advertising revenue away from broadcasters, making our uniquely free and local service that much more difficult to support. It also devalues our product when it is accessed online.”

To address those challenges LeGeyt urged congress to pass the AM Radio For Every Vehicle Act (H.R. 3414) and to pass legislation to reinstate the Diversity Tax Certificate program, which would help diversify ownership of broadcast companies. 

LeGeyt also urged Congress to encourage the FCC to make several reforms that will enable broadcasters to compete on a level playing field. 

These include: 

• “Modernize its local and national broadcast ownership rules to account for the rise, and increasing dominance, of digital media,” he said. “Modernizing these decades-old rules would allow broadcasters to continue to serve local viewers in a way no other platform can. It would allow broadcasters to compete for audiences, advertising and investment against digital platforms operated by tech giants with market caps in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Such reform would safeguard the viability of local broadcast journalism, as broadcasters could leverage local economies of scale and spread the significant cost of news production across more outlets. A recent survey confirms that larger market broadcast stations, and those stations with the resources to hire more staff, produce more hours of local news than small market stations and those with smaller news staffs.24 Modernizing ownership regulations also makes broadcasting more desirable for potential investors and new entrants, ensuring continued investment and encouraging greater diversity in local broadcasting and content.
• “Create a more transparent, fair and predictable process for broadcaster transactions. Mergers and acquisitions enable stations to achieve the economies of scale and scope that are necessary for broadcasters to thrive and serve their local audiences. If the FCC’s procedure governing transactions is fair and provides more business certainty, companies may be encouraged to pursue mergers that could help them better compete and invest in the critical local journalism they provide. A more transparent, just and predictable process allows broadcasters a legitimate chance to compete in the marketplace and continue serving the public.”
• “Refresh the record in its vMVPD proceeding. In 2014, the FCC initiated a proceeding to consider modernizing the definition of multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) to include virtual streaming services that offer linear programming. Nearly a decade later, the media landscape has completely transformed, yet the FCC’s languishing record does not reflect that drastic change and its impact on consumer access to local broadcast stations. There is simply no reason the FCC should not at least refresh its record in this proceeding to better reflect current marketplace realities.”
• “Continue to support the rollout of NextGen TV. Television broadcasters are transitioning our over-the-air broadcasts to a Next Generation Television standard, also known as ATSC 3.0. NextGen TV will enable local television broadcast stations to deliver a higher quality picture, immersive audio, more diverse programming, interactive content, and advanced emergency services. We appreciate the Commission’s support of the Future of Television Initiative, a partnership helping to bring the reality of NextGen TV to viewers across the country and unlock cutting-edge services that benefit public safety, close the digital divide and revolutionize broadcast TV. Ongoing oversight is critical to ensure a successful nationwide rollout.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The Senate Judiciary Committee has passed the reintroduced Journalism Competition and Preservation Act by a vote of 14 to 7, prompting the NAB to applaud the action saying it would “enable local media to negotiate for the fair market value of our news content.”

The bill passed the Judiciary Committee last year but did not get a vote in the full Senate. 

Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), chairwoman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust and Consumer Rights, and John Kennedy (R-LA) reintroduced the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act on March 31,  2023. 

It still needs to pass the full Senate and faces an uphill battle in the House before it could be signed into law. 

"NAB applauds the Senate Judiciary Committee for its strong bipartisan passage of the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act,” NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt said in a statement. “For too long, local news outlets have been at the mercy of Big Tech behemoths that devalue broadcasters' critical community-focused journalism when it is accessed online. This legislation will enable local media to negotiate for the fair market value of our news content. We appreciate the leadership and hard work of Sens. Klobuchar and Kennedy to address the impact of Big Tech’s outsized market power on local journalism, and we applaud Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member Grassley and the bipartisan members of the committee for supporting this important legislation."

The bill’s sponsors say the legislation would: 

• Empower eligible digital journalism providers—that is, news publishers with fewer than 1,500 exclusive full-time employees and news broadcasters that engage in standard newsgathering practices—to form joint negotiation entities to collectively negotiate with a covered platform over the pricing, terms, and conditions under which the covered platform’s access to digital news content.
• Require covered platforms—which are online platforms that have at least 50 million U.S.-based users or subscribers and are owned or controlled by a person that has either net annual sales or market capitalization greater than $550 billion or at least 1 billion worldwide monthly active users—to negotiate in good faith with the eligible news organizations.
• Enable non-broadcaster news publishers to demand final-offer arbitration if their joint negotiation with a covered platform fails to result in an agreement after six months.
• Create a limited safe harbor from federal and state antitrust laws for eligible digital journalism providers that allows them to participate in joint negotiations and arbitration and, as part of those negotiations, to jointly withhold their content from a covered platform.
• Prohibit discrimination by a joint negotiation entity or a covered platform against an eligible digital journalism provider based on its size or the views expressed in its content and provide a private right of action for violations of this prohibition.
• Prohibit retaliation by a covered platform against eligible digital journalism providers for participating in joint negotiations or arbitration and provide a private right of action for violations of this prohibition.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Representative Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18) have introduced the Communications, Video, and Technology Accessibility Act (CVTA). 

Markey is a member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and author of the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA), and Eshoo is a senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. 

The CVTA updates and amends the CVAA to keep pace with the proliferation of emerging technologies that have come online since Senator Markey’s 2010 bill was passed with bipartisan support.

Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) are cosponsors.

“Since I authored the 21st Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act, technologies have changed. What hasn’t changed is our obligation to make sure that everyone – including people with disabilities – has equal access to the services and technologies they need to thrive,” said Senator Markey. “That is why I am introducing the Communications, Video, and Accessibility Technology Act, to update current laws on the books so that we can meet the technological moment and ensure opportunity, independence, and equal access for all.”

“As technology has rapidly evolved over the last two decades, much of our economy and day-to-day lives have moved online,” added Rep. Eshoo. “Unfortunately, accessibility standards have stayed largely the same, leaving people with disabilities behind. In 2020, 38% of people who were blind or had low vision reported issues with at least one of the technologies needed to do their jobs, and in 2021 as many as 70% of students who are deaf or hard of hearing reported technology challenges in the educational environment. I’m proud to introduce legislation with Senator Markey to update current laws so people with disabilities have full access to modern technology that is necessary to participate equally in the 21st century.”

FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel also weighed in with support for the legislation. “Accessibility means equal opportunity to create, participate, and communicate—and promoting accessible technology is an important part of our agency’s mission,” she said. “To do so effectively we need to keep up with emerging technologies. This legislation will help us do just that, by ensuring that people with disabilities have full access to communication products and services that are necessary to participate equally in today’s world, while laying a foundation for accessibility in future technologies.”

Since Congress enacted the CVAA in 2010, accessibility requirements for people with disabilities have not kept pace with changing technologies, the bill’s proponents said. As a result, individuals with disabilities do not have full access to many communication and video tools that are essential today. For example, the majority of video programming lacks audio descriptions for people who are blind or low vision, accuracy issues plague closed captioning on both online and televised video programming for people who are deaf or hard of hearing, video conferencing services do not have adequate functionality for people with disabilities, and deaf individuals who use sign language face significant barriers to access emergency services, the sponsors reported. 

To address these and other issues, the CVTA would:

• Improve and expand closed captioning and audio description standards for television programming and online video streaming platforms to ensure that people with disabilities have equitable access to the wide range of programming available to the general public;
• Update current requirements to ensure viewers can easily activate and select preferred settings for closed captions and audio description on their video programming devices, such as televisions, smart phones, laptops, and tablets;
• Improve access to video programming for people who are deaf and use sign language;
• Empower the FCC to ensure accessibility regulations keep pace with emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence and augmented or virtual reality platforms.

A host of organizations and educational institutions also came out in favor of the act. They include: Access Living, Access Ready, American Council of the Blind, American Foundation for the Blind, Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs, Blinded Veterans Association, CommunicationFIRST, Carroll Center for the Blind, Communication Service for the Deaf, Hearing Loss Association of America, National Association of the Deaf, National Federation of the Blind, Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Inc., Perkins School For The Blind, and United Spinal Association.

The full test of the bill is available here. 

DirecTV has asked two TV station groups to return their local stations to the DirecTV lineup for the next two weeks for the Nov. 8 midterm elections, and in essence suspending the current blackout. 

A total of 27 local stations owned by Mission Broadcasting and White Knight Broadcasting have been removed from DirecTV’s lineup while the groups battle it out over retrans fees. The two groups are managed and controlled by Nexstar Media Group, the nation’s largest TV station group.  

"DirecTV has a standing offer to  both Mission and White Knight, strongly urging the two broadcasters to return all stations immediately to  impacted DirecTV customers in 25 Nielsen DMAs,” the company said in a press release. “In return, DirecTV will pay Mission and White Knight  whatever higher retransmission consent rates the parties eventually agree upon retroactively to the date the  signals are reinstated."  

DirecTV accused Nexstar of shirking its public obligations. “Nexstar Media Group…is currently no longer allowing access to local programming and important political conversation ahead of the mid-terms to an estimated 4 million homes across the U.S.,” the company said.

White Knight Broadcasting pulled its NBC and Fox affiliates from DirecTV on Oct. 7. Nexstar then pulled its  local broadcast stations and national news service NewsNation from Verizon Fios on Oct. 14. Mission  went dark on DirecTV on Oct. 21.  

“This is a critical time in American political life,” DirecTV added. “We are less than two weeks from one of the most important  Congressional midterm elections in American History, and gubernatorial elections in 36 states. The results of  this midterm will have a profound impact on some of the most important political, public health and economic  issues of our time."  

DirecTV accused the station groups of hypocrisy, saying that if the broadcast industry is so vital to the public square, then it should back it up with more than words.

"Broadcasters like Nexstar, Mission and White Knight claim a unique and special role in delivering news to  Americans,” DirecTV said. “The broadcast industry is, even now, asking Congress to provide it with special regulatory  protections… During the COVID-19 global pandemic in March 2020, Mission and Nexstar returned stations to DISH customers  that had been suspended since Jan. 3 to keep citizens informed as the health crisis unfolded. DirecTV now calls  upon Mission and White Knight to return stations operated by Nexstar through the conclusion of the critical  mid-term election while the parties continue to work privately toward a new agreement.”

A Nexstar spokesman told TV Tech sister brand NextTV not to involve them in the dispute.

"Despite DirecTV’s allegations, Nexstar is not a party to these negotiations and does not control any of these television stations,” Nexstar spokesman Gary Weitman said. ”These stations are owned by Mission Broadcasting, Inc., and White Knight Broadcasting, not Nexstar.” 

WASHINGTON—The House of Representatives on Monday unanimously passed the PRESS Act, which would establish federal protection to prevent journalists from being compelled to reveal confidential sources and prevent federal law enforcement from abusing subpoena power. The bill, also known as —H.R.4330 - Protect Reporters from Exploitative State Spying Act (PRESS Act) now goes to the Senate, which is also expected to approve it.

Bill sponsor Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) applauded its passage.

“Today is a triumphant day for press freedom,” said Rep. Raskin. “With the PRESS Act closer than ever to becoming law, a federal press shield law is within reach that affords journalists protection from government overreach and abuse of the subpoena power. I’m grateful to Representatives Yarmuth and Lieu for their partnership in this effort to make good on this foundational constitutional promise, and I urge our colleagues in the Senate to advance the central, bipartisan mission of protecting a truly free and unmuzzled press—by sending this legislation to the president’s desk.”

The PRESS Act has the endorsement of Demand Progress, News Media Alliance (NMA), News Leaders Association, MPA – The Association of Magazine Media, Protect the 1st, Radio Television Digital News Association (RTDNA), Reporters Without Borders (RSF), and the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) and the National Association of Broadcasters, which also commended the vote.

"NAB commends the House of Representatives for passing the PRESS Act with overwhelming bipartisan support,” said NAB President Curtis LeGeyt. “A free press is a necessary and vital hallmark of American democracy, enabling the unencumbered reporting of news and information that affects our communities, our nation and the world. This legislation honors the sanctity of journalists’ relationship with their sources and ensures members of the press may continue their important work without fear or favor. We appreciate the leadership of Reps. Raskin, Lieu and Yarmuth on this legislation and look forward to working with their counterparts in the Senate to pass this important bill into law."

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The National Association of Broadcasters has issued a statement strongly supporting recent revisions to the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act. 

The Journalism Competition and Preservation Act, originally introduced in the House (H.R. 1735) and Senate (S. 673) last year, would level the playing field between big tech and local news media by providing a temporary antitrust exemption to allow broadcasters and certain other digital publishers to jointly negotiate with dominant online platforms regarding access to their content, the NAB said. 

The revised bill would:

• Ensure there is no “take it or leave it” approach by requiring platforms and content providers to make reasonable offers and negotiate in good faith;
• Define broadcaster eligibility to ensure the inclusion of all local broadcasters holding or operating under an FCC license and engaging in certain journalistic activities;
• Provide that local broadcasters are eligible to participate in joint negotiations regardless of their size or views expressed within their content; and
• Make clear that the joint negotiation framework does not amend copyright law.

"NAB applauds the ongoing work of Sens. Amy Klobuchar and John Kennedy, Reps. David Cicilline and Ken Buck to strengthen the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act,” NAB president and CEO Curtis LeGeyt said. “This legislation would address the dominant power Big Tech gatekeepers wield over local media outlets, including television and radio broadcasters, by enabling fair negotiations when digital platforms seek to offer their users access to our valuable community-based content. We thank the bill’s cosponsors for recognizing the need to preserve local journalism in our communities and look forward to continuing working with them on advancing this bill through the legislative process."

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The NAB has applauded the passage of the FY 2023 Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that included language preventing the FCC from taking administrative action against broadcasters that accept cannabis advertisements consistent with the law of the state or jurisdiction in which the station is licensed.

Many states and local jurisdictions have legalized cannabis but broadcasters have been unwilling to take pot ads because the substance is still illegal on the Federal level and could subject them to FCC actions.  

If the Senate passes the bill with the current provisions, stations could take those ads, which have previously only appeared in other media.  

"For too long, local broadcasters have been stuck in a regulatory purgatory because of conflicting federal and state cannabis laws,” said NAB spokesman Alex Siciliano. “Today’s passage marks an important step towards allowing broadcasters to receive equal treatment for cannabis advertising that many other forms of media have enjoyed for years. While we are pleased to see the House act, broadcasters will continue to work with policymakers for a permanent resolution to this competitive disparity to the benefit of consumers.”

WASHINGTON—The NAB voiced its support this week for the passage of H.R.4330 - Protect Reporters from Exploitative State Spying Act (PRESS Act) by the House Judiciary Committee. The legislation would establish protections for journalists at the federal level regarding the revelation of their confidential sources except in defined circumstances such as threats to national security.

“NAB applauds the House Judiciary Committee for its bipartisan passage of the PRESS Act, legislation that will protect journalists’ right to legally, openly and fearlessly report the news,” said NAB President Curtis LeGeyt. “Embracing the right of a free press to report the news without fear or favor, journalists rely on confidential sources to shine a light on wrongdoing in government, expose waste of taxpayers’ dollars and hold our elected officials accountable. 

“Broadcasters appreciate the leadership of Reps. Raskin, Lieu and Yarmuth on this important issue, and Sen. Wyden's sponsorship of companion legislation in the Senate. We look forward to working with all members of Congress to pass this important legislation that upholds a guiding principle of American democracy."

WASHINGTON, D.C.—While the NAB applauded the passage of the Low Power Protection Act by the Senate Commerce Committee, the LPTV Broadcasters Association has issued a strongly worded statement condemning the current version of the legislation as too flawed and limited to protect low power stations. 

Senators backing the current version “collectively sent a message that is loud and clear to local journalism, minorities, culturally diverse, religious, veteran and disabled LPTV station owners that they have no interest whatsoever in protecting independent Low Power Television, only corporate supporters.”

The LPTV Broadcasters Association said it will continue pushing for a version of the act that would actually protect low power stations. 

In a March 21 letter to the Senate Commerce Committee, the Association criticized the legislation for severely limiting the number of stations that could apply for Class A status, which would protect their spectrum from interference. The legislation currently would only allow stations in DMAs with fewer than 95,000 homes to apply for Class A status and protections. 

“Low Power Protection Act needs to protect all qualified LPTV stations, regardless of  geographic location,” the Association said. “The LPTV stations that need protection most are the ones in urban or  suburban areas that provide the best “public interest” programming from local, independent  journalism to religious and racially/ethnically diverse programming. Rural LPTV stations are  generally the least in need of `protection.’” 

This would also severely limit the number of stations who could apply, the Association said. Referring just to states with Senators on the Senate Commerce Committee, the Association estimated that of the 1055 LPTV stations in those states, only 95 would be eligible to apply for Class A status. “15 States out of the 26 States represented by the Committee would see absolutely no  protection or benefit from the Act,” the Association said. 

The Association also stressed that this would severely limit their access to financing and their ability to improve their operations or upgrade to NextGen TV. “LPTV stations  are currently not eligible for SBA or preferred lender financing as they do not consider an LPTV  license as collateral whereas they do for “Protected” Class A stations," it noted. 

“Class A status allows Small Business to invest in their communities and create jobs while addressing diverse, unique programming, be it religious, racial, ethnical diverse, or local  community journalism, the Association said. “LPTV stations are operated by a diverse culture including minorities,  veterans, and handicapped principals who need Class A protection to protect and ensure the  continuation of essential, free over the air, local programming that truly serves the public  interest.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), members of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, and Representative Anna G. Eshoo (CA-18), senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Representative Peter DeFazio (OR-04), chair of the House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure, have reintroduced the Protecting Community Television Act.

The legislation would ensure that community television operations continue to receive the resources they need to educate and inform viewers in the cities and towns where they operate, the legislators said. 

Currently, local governments are permitted to require, as part of cable franchise agreements, that cable companies meet demonstrated community needs by providing in-kind contributions that benefit schools, public safety buildings, and public, educational, and government (PEG) channels, also known as community television stations. 

However, in August, 2019, the FCC voted to permit cable companies to assign a value to these contributions and then subtract that amount from the franchise fees the cable operator pays the local community. As a result, local governments have to decide between supporting PEG stations in cable franchise agreements and supporting other important services for critical community institutions like schools and libraries.

The Protecting Community Television Act clarifies that the franchise fees that cable companies provide local governments only include monetary assessments, not in-kind contributions.

“Throughout the ongoing pandemic, viewers in Massachusetts and across the country have relied on community media to stay safe, healthy, and informed,” said Senator Markey. “I’m proud to re-introduce the Protecting Community Television Act because, in this era of increased media consolidation and globalization, it is critical that we preserve the PEG operations that lift up local voices and air the programming that is most relevant to the lives of our family members and neighbors. I thank Congresswoman Eshoo, Senator Baldwin, Congressman DeFazio, and all of our cosponsors for their partnership on this important legislation.”

“Community television is a critical part of our society, giving a voice to nonprofits, artists, local governments, and other community members who otherwise struggle to be heard,” said Representative Eshoo. “The Trump FCC’s actions on cable franchise fees have hurt public, educational, and governmental television, and this harms communities. I’m proud to introduce legislation with Senators Markey and Baldwin, and Congressman DeFazio that [would] reverse these harmful agency actions and protect community television by ensuring local voices have the platform they deserve.”

A copy of the legislation can be found here. 

Senators Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Ben Cardin (D-Md.) have also co-sponsored this legislation.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—In response to the passage by the House of Representatives of the Build Back Better reconciliation package that includes provisions in the Local Journalism Sustainability Act, both the National Association of Broadcasters and the LPTV Broadcasters Association issued statements applauding the vote. 

“The Local Journalism Sustainability Act will provide meaningful incentives for local broadcast stations to hire and retain the newsgatherers who keep our communities informed, connected and engaged,” said NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith. “Local broadcast news is consistently ranked among the most trusted sources of news and information, and this bill would allow radio and television stations to employ additional journalists to report on the events, issues and emergencies affecting our nation.”

The LPTV Broadcasters Association also issued statements from Frank Copsidas, founder and president of the association and Michael Lees, executive director, supporting the passage. 

“We have actively supported the Local Journalism Sustainability Act from the beginning and the principle of investing to maintain and develop trusted local community news coverage,” said Lee. “The payroll tax credit should mean that is straightforward to implement, benefit from and track.”

The legislation must still be passed by the Senate. 

Introduced earlier this year by Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Mark Kelly (D-AZ) and Ron Wyden (D-OR), the Local Journalism Sustainability Act (LJSA) is currently sponsored by 16 senators, including Sens. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Catherine Cortz Masto (D-NV), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM), Joe Manchin (D-WV), Edward Markey (D-MA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ). 

The legislation would support local news production by television and radio broadcasters, as well as certain print and digital publications, by making a tax credit available for the hiring and retention of up to 1,500 local news journalists per company each year over five years.

A broadcaster would qualify by owning or operating a broadcast station and employing local news journalists who work no less than 30 hours per week engaging in activities related to developing and providing local news to the community. The local news journalist must also reside within 50 miles of the station’s local community.

WASHINGTON D.C.—Four media executives who serve at the dean and associate deans of the Broadcast Leadership Training program have sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer in support of the reinstatement of a tax certificate program to encourage investment in TV and radio broadcast station ownership for women and people of color. 

The NAB and other broadcast organizations have already come out in favor of the legislation.  

The letter offers support for H.R.4871, the Expanding Broadcast Opportunities Act of 2021 introduced by Reps. G.K. Butterfield (D-NC-1) and Steven Horsford (D-NV-4), and S.2456, the Broadcast VOICES Act introduced by Sens. Gary Peters (D-MI) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ). The bills would authorize the Federal Communications Commission to reestablish a Diversity Tax Certificate Program, which would provide a tax incentive to those who sold their majority interest in a radio or television station to underrepresented broadcasters.

The Broadcast Leadership Training program is an Executive-MBA style program that offers training and education on the fundamentals of purchasing, owning and running a successful broadcast operation to broadcasters who aspire to advance as group executives or station owners, particularly women and people of color. 

The BLT is a collaborative effort between the NAB Leadership Foundation and Diane Sutter, president and CEO of ShootingStar Broadcasting. 

The NAB and other broadcast organizations have already come out in favor of the legislation. 

In the letter, the executives noted that “when the broadcast diversity tax certificate program existed from 1978 to 1995, it demonstrated its success in increasing broadcast ownership among people of color. During the program’s lifespan, broadcast ownership by these groups increased by more than 550 percent. With the elimination of the program in 1995, women and communities of color have been disproportionately impacted. As demonstrated in the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Fifth Report on Ownership of Broadcast Stations from September 2021, women and people of color lag behind their male and White counterparts in owning a majority interest in commercial broadcast stations. According to the FCC’s September 2021 report on broadcast station ownership, women held a majority ownership interest in only 8% of commercial broadcast stations compared to 65% among men. Among racial minority groups (or people of color), only 4% of commercial broadcast stations held a majority ownership interest by people of color, compared to 76% among white persons.”

“As you can see from these data points,” the letter explained, “more needs to be done to level the playing field for underrepresented broadcasters and the Expanding Broadcast Ownership Opportunities Act and the Broadcast VOICES Act, can serve as that catalyst to ensure broadcasters reflect diverse points of view to respond, reflect and serve local communities.”

The letter was signed by Diane Sutter, Dean, BLT Program and president/CEO, ShootingStar Broadcasting; Marc Jaromin, Associate Dean, BLT Program/BLT Graduate and vice president and general manager at the The E.W. Scripps Company; Trila Bumstead Associate Dean, BLT Program/BLT Graduate and owner of the Ohana Media Group, LLC; and Anita S. Graham, Associate Dean, BLT Program and managing director, Graham and Associates.