WASHINGTON—Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr appeared before a Senate oversight committee on Wednesday and faced harsh criticism by Democrats on various topics, including threats against TV broadcasters for carrying ABC comedian Jimmy Kimmel. One senator said Carr should resign.

[This article originally appeared in our sister publication, Radio World; their extensive coverage of regulatory and business issues can be found here.]

Republican Olivia Trusty and Democrat Anna Gomez also appeared and faced direct questioning from committee members, but the controversial chairman was the main focus.

Issues raised during the meeting included Carr’s “Delete, Delete, Delete” initiative to do away with outdated regulations, spectrum reallocation and current broadcast ownership rules.

But it was Carr’s use of public interest and “news distortion” policies that sparked the most debate.

Carr had met in advance with several Senate Republicans to prepare for the onslaught of questions. He touted his accomplishments in an opening statement, saying the pipeline has reopened to freeing more spectrum to advance next-generation technologies now that Congress has restored the commission’s auction authority.

However, following statements by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chairman of the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and ranking member Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the committee quickly focused its questions on Carr and his actions in his first year as chairman.

At the center of much of the hearing was Carr’s actions following the Kimmel monologue controversy. Carr was critical of Kimmel’s comments on his late-night TV show and faced backlash after pressuring broadcasters to take the ABC program off the air in late September. Carr warned then that local broadcasters that aired Kimmel could face fines or loss of licenses.

At the time, Cruz was sharply critical of Carr. He took a more conciliatory tone during the hearing.

Cruz did say that the government cannot “force private entities to take actions that the government cannot take directly. Government officials threatening adverse consequences for disfavored content is an unconstitutional coercion that chills protected speech.”

Carr defended his actions, saying he was enforcing the public-interest standard as charged by Congress. “We should be enforcing those rules and policies,” he said.

Republicans on the committee were generally complimentary of Carr’s policies. Carr clashed often with Democrats, including Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

“After Jimmy Kimmel’s monologue, you went on a podcast and suggested that ABC should take Kimmel off the air, saying, ‘We can do this the easy way or the hard way.’ Those were your words. Do you think it is appropriate to use your position to threaten companies that broadcast political satire?” she asked.

Carr responded: “I think any licensee that operates on the public airwaves has a responsibility to comply with the public interest standard, and that’s been the case for decades.”

Klobuchar asked Carr for his thoughts on comments made by President Donald Trump on social media this week following the stabbing deaths of actor Rob Reiner and his wife.

“Senator, look, Democrats on this dais are accusing me of engaging in censorship, and now you’re trying to encourage me to police speech on the internet. I’m simply not going to do it,” Carr replied.

He continued: “Let’s step back. Broadcast TV is fundamentally different than any other forms of media, whether it’s cable or podcast or soapbox on the main street. There’s a public trustee model that Congress has set up.”

Carr deflected some of the Democrats’ criticism of his attempts to chill free speech. He said that Democrats in Congress previously wrote letters to cable companies pressuring them to drop Fox News, One America News Network and Newsmax because they disagree with the political perspectives of those cable channels.

“We have jurisdiction with respect to the broadcast airwaves uniquely to ensure that their operations are in the public interest, and there’s very specific rules in broadcast hoaxes and news distortion,” he said.

Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) charged the chairman with turning the FCC into the “Federal Censorship Commission.” Markey said Carr should resign.

“Chairman Carr, you are not reinvigorating the public interest standard; you are weaponizing the public interest standard. That is what the Carr FCC is doing every single day.”

Markey also discussed the FCC’s investigation of a San Francisco radio station that reported on an ICE raid in real time on air. KCBS (AM) San Francisco aired an immigration enforcement report; Carr had accused KCBS of failing to operate in the public interest and opened an inquiry.

A recent report in the Los Angeles Times said station staffers later claimed Carr’s complaints eventually sparked changes to the station’s newsroom operations due to political pressure.

Carr testified: “Broadcasters understand perhaps for the first time in years that they’re going to be held accountable to the public interest, to broadcast hoaxes rules, to the news distortion policy. I think that’s a good thing.”

Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) debated Carr on whether the chairman considers the FCC an independent agency. “Senator, thanks for that question. I think there’s a test for this in the law, and the key portion of that test…” Carr said before being interrupted by the senator.

“Yes or no is all we need, sir. Yes or no, is it independent?” he asked.

Carr: “The FCC’s not an independent agency formally speaking.”

Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich) asked Carr about free speech for broadcasters.

“So this should be a pretty easy question. Do you think the FCC should protect free speech?” Peters asked.

Carr: “Yes.”

“Okay. So if you will not revoke licenses…you won’t revoke licenses or retaliate if they’re simply engaging in free speech?”

“Senator, first of all, the Supreme Court has expressly said there is no First Amendment right to an FCC license. And the Supreme Court has said that the FCC enforcing the public interest standard on licensees is not a violation of the First Amendment or censorship,” Carr replied.

Other topics were brought up during the meeting, including broadcast-ownership rules that are the subject of the next scheduled quadrennial review. Republican Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas urged the commission to change the ownership rules to enable local broadcasters to compete with today’s media giants.

“Local broadcasters are hugely important and provide the news, the weather, the sports; and we need to make certain that their viability is enhanced by ownership rules that the commission has talked about and considering,” Moran said.

Carr has repeatedly indicated strong support for broadcast ownership reform but didn’t offer an opinion during the oversight committee hearing.

Committee member Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) asked about Carr’s efforts to stem a new form of payola, what she called “show-ola” in which broadcast stations allegedly pressure artists to play their station events in exchange for airplay.

“They particularly like to couple this with threats of reduced airplay if the band or the artist cannot give them these free events,” Blackburn said.

Carr replied: “Historically, there’s been a law on the books that prevents radio stations from accepting or seeking unreported payment of money or any other compensation to influence airplay, the time that music is played on the station.

“One concern that you brought to my attention early on, including through a letter earlier this year, is that a lot of radio stations are holding music festivals, and the concern that’s been raised is that they are effectively pressuring musicians, that could be ones that are well off or ones that are just getting started, to perform for free under threat that they may suffer airplay on radio stations if they don’t do that. I think that’s a concern. We issued an enforcement advisory right after being aware of this from you, and we are going to be and are investigating some issues around this.”

This was the first Senate Commerce Committee oversight hearing with all seated FCC commissioners present in more than five years, though the FCC normally has five, not three, members.

[This article originally appeared in our sister publication, Radio World; More of their coverage of regulatory and business issues can be found here.]

This week U.S. Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) introduced the Student Athlete Fairness and Enforcement (SAFE) Act to codify athletes’ rights and protections in law, expand revenue for all schools, support women’s and Olympic sports and bring much-needed stability to the college sports system.

The Act, for the first time, gives all athletes Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) rights, establishes uniform health and safety standards, protects scholarships and requires agents to register with a state and abide by clear contract requirements, including a 5 percent cap on fees.

The bill provides new opportunities for schools to increase revenues for all sports by amending the Sports Broadcasting Act, and ensures all schools, not just the biggest and the richest, benefit from those increased resources. The legislation stops collectives from engaging in pay for play by requiring that any payments to students are for legitimate use of their NIL. For the millions of fans who care deeply about their college sports teams, the Act requires football and basketball games to be made available for free in schools’ local media market and tackles transfer portal concerns.

“This legislation is a path through the new world of NIL,” said Sen. Cantwell. “This bill will protect athlete rights, preserve women’s and Olympic sports, and help smaller schools compete. It is a fair shake for everyone, instead of the biggest, richest schools.”

“The SAFE Act empowers athletes and strengthens protections for their health, safety, and education,” said Sen. Booker. “In stark contrast to harmful legislation being considered in the House, our bill preserves athletes’ rights to advocate for themselves and ensures meaningful avenues for accountability. Playing college football was one of the great gifts of my life—and it instilled in me a lasting conviction to fight for justice and fairness for athletes today and into the future.”

“The Student Athlete Fairness and Enforcement Act (SAFE Act) provides clear and enforceable rights and protections to college athletes,” said Sen. Blumenthal. For far too long, college athletes had their basic economic rights denied while the NCAA failed to protect their health, safety, and academic success. Our measure centers athletes’ rights and wellbeing with real reforms while bringing schools the clarity they need and promoting women’s and Olympic sports.”

The National Association of Broadcasters immediately announced its support for the bill.

“NAB thanks Senator Cantwell for her leadership on this important legislation,” said NAB President and CEO Curtis LeGeyt. "The availability of college sports on free, local broadcast outlets strengthens the unique connection between universities, their communities and the student athletes who inspire them. At a time when Big Tech is locking more content behind costly paywalls, this bill will ensure that games remain accessible to the widest possible audience through broadcast television. We look forward to working with the Committee and other policymakers as this legislation advances.”

Morgan Murphy Media, a station group with TV and radio stations in the upper midwest and northwest, also came out in support.

“Morgan Murphy Media would like to thank Senator Maria Cantwell for her leadership on the important legislation bringing college sports to fans for free” the company said in a statement. “For 135 years, we’ve been a family-owned, local media company and broadcaster committed to public service. Today, we serve the state of Washington and 12 others, and we know how vital these universities are to the fabric of our communities. Broadcast TV reaches all corners of our country for free to the viewer. We continue to believe the public should have free access to the teams, coaches and inspiring athletes instead of the increasing move by Big Tech to acquire rights and lock them behind paywalls. Nothing ties communities together like the love for its local university.”

Over the past five years, college athletics has changed significantly after many states passed laws to allow athletes to earn compensation from their NIL, creating a patchwork of rules that upended how schools recruit, train, and retain athletes. The college sports landscape was further changed by the unanimous Supreme Court decision in Alston vs. NCAA in 2021 that paved the way for NIL and the recent Grant House vs. NCAA settlement that allows schools to directly compensate athletes, up to 22 percent of athletics revenue.

These are some of the changes that have fostered the current “wild west” environment and a financial model that is unsustainable for small- to mid-sized schools. For example, in 2023, the average athletic department in the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) earned $79 million in revenues and spent $98 million. This legislation addresses revenue challenges facing schools today while at the same time protecting student athletes and non-revenue sports. Last month, Sen. Cantwell released a report showing how skyrocketing media rights payments have exacerbated a massive financial gap between traditional power conferences, especially the new Power 2—the SEC and Big Ten—and everyone else.

Student Athlete Fairness and Enforcement Act Key Provisions:
1. First-ever National Rights and Protections for Student Athletes. Grants student athletes a new federal right to their Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) and replaces the patchwork of state laws with a strong national NIL standard. The Act establishes:

• A 10-year scholarship guarantee.
• For Division 1 schools, 5 years of post-eligibility medical coverage for sports-related injuries.
• Safety standards for heat exertion, brain injury, sickle cell trait and asthma; enforced by independent officers.
• NIL contract requirements that protect student athletes; contracts must include key terms like what the athlete must do under the contract and how much they will be paid.
• Endorsement rights for athletes so schools cannot restrict athlete NIL endorsement deals, except during organized team activities.
• Whistleblower protections for those who report violations.
• An Office of Athlete Ombuds at the NCAA to provide independent information and advice to student athletes and assist them to resolve disputes with schools and conferences.

2. Pooling Media Rights to Maximize Revenue. Allows colleges and universities to lawfully negotiate their media rights as a group to increase their value—just like the NFL, NBA and NHL are able to do, without violating antitrust laws. The bill accomplishes this by amending the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 to include college sports. Additionally:

• The antitrust exemption begins upon signing of the legislation.
• The Act creates a Committee within the NCAA to help maximize revenue for all schools and conferences.
• It charges the Committee with determining fair distribution of media rights to ensure that schools can maintain scholarship and roster slots at 2023-2024 levels for women’s and Olympic sports. Each school shall receive more media rights revenue than they received in the 2024-2025 academic year.

3. New Broadcast Revenue to Bolster Olympic and Women’s Sports. Schools will receive more revenue from their pooled media rights.

Schools must use the increased media rights revenues to retain the same number of scholarships and roster spots for non-revenue generating and women’s sports as provided during the 2023-24 academic year.

The Committee will represent Division 1 schools broadly and will not be controlled by the biggest conferences. Members of the Committee will be chosen by university presidents and include members across the college sports ecosystem. It will not be subject to NCAA’s weighted voting rules.

4. Market Level Broadcast Access for Football and Basketball Rights. The legislation requires, just like the NFL, that content be made available for each college athletic competition for football and basketball on a non-exclusive basis for not less than one local outlet.

Local content is not behind a pay wall.

5. Streaming Media Utilization Rights. Requires broadcast networks, streaming media platforms, or other distributors who control streaming media rights to reconvey those rights back to schools if the entity does not use or materially underutilizes the streaming media rights.

This will strengthen digital distribution rights for athletic competitions other than football and basketball.

Allows non-revenue generating sports to grow through narrowcasting.

6. Cracks Down on Bad Actor Agents. Puts strong penalties in place against bad actors taking advantage of the new NIL world. The Act will:

• Require agents to register with a state and certify to the NCAA that they are registered before they can lawfully represent a student athlete.
• Cap agent fees at 5 percent.
• Prohibit agents from making fraudulent statements in their registration.
• Prohibit agents from misrepresenting NIL deals to entice student athletes to enroll or transfer. Give athletes a private right of action to enforce their NIL rights and bring cases in court against bad actor agents.

7. Brings Certainty to the Transfer Portal. Sets a national standard for student athlete transfers.

Student athletes can transfer twice without having to sit out for a year.

Student athletes can transfer without having to sit out for a year if their sport is cut or materially reduced.

8. Shines a Light on Collectives. Requires transparency for NIL deals between collectives and student athletes.

Collective NIL deals must be for a valid business purpose related to the promotion or endorsement of actual goods and services and the compensation must be at rates and terms commensurate with what other individuals would be paid.

Collectives must report to the NCAA their basic business information, what sport programs they arrange NIL deals for, and their associated schools.

These provisions are enforceable by the FTC and state attorneys general.

9. Preserves the Grant House vs. NCAA Settlement 22 Percent Revenue Share Cap. The legislation does not touch the 22 percent revenue share cap.

Other legislation would bust the settlement cap—this bill would leave it in place.

The Act respects the agreement between the NCAA and the student athletes regarding the revenue share cap.

10. Provides for Strong Enforcement. Establishes new tools for the FTC and state attorneys general.

Under the Act, the FTC can sue in court and get first-time civil penalties for violations of athletes NIL rights; and can sue agents and collectives.

The Act grants state attorneys general authority to enforce this federal law in court including against agents and collectives.

The Act gives athletes a private right of action to enforce their NIL rights and bring cases in court against bad actor agents.

Read the full text of the bill here.