LAS VEGAS—In extensive remarks at the 2026 NAB Show on Monday, Federal Communications Commissioner Olivia Trusty took up one of the most divisive and controversial issues facing the regulator in remarks entitled “Finding the Angel of Public Interest.”
In the last two years, the issue of the “public interest” standards governing broadcast licenses has prompted a heated debate. On one side, President Trump and FCC Chair Brendan Carr have threaten to yank broadcast licenses over what they see as “biased” news coverage; on the other, critics like Commissioner Anna Gomez contend the regulator is engaged in an unconstitutional campaign against free speech to silence news coverage critical of the current administration.
In a rare, possibly unprecedented example of obscure FCC rules and precedents making their way into popular culture, this controversy has already produced Late Night comedy skits and heated cable news debates.
In measured remarks that carefully analyzed the issue and the importance of broadcasters in providing news, emergency information and other content that is important to the public, Trusty largely avoided the more ideological aspects of that debate.
Instead Trusty took her inspiration from a 1998 speech at the NAB Show by then-Commissioner Michael Powell who Trusty said “described his planned approach to advancing the public interest in broadcasting. As part of that speech, he said he had hoped for a visit from what he called “the angel of the public interest,” someone who might appear and offer guidance on how to apply that standard. Although this angel never reportedly appeared to Commissioner or Chairman Powell, advancing the public interest in broadcasting is just as relevant today as it was 30 years ago.”
In her remarks, Trusty stressed that broadcasters occupy a unique place in the media in that they receive licenses from the FCC to use spectrum for broadcasts, which distinguishes them from other players, such as cable operators, streaming services, podcasts, cable networks and digital outlets who are not licensed.
Trusty said this subjects them to some public interest requirements that are laid out in legislation or FCC rules governing such issues as hours of operation, prohibitions on obscene content, limits on advertising in children’s shows, misuse of emergency alerts, closed captioning and accessibility, payola, equal employment opportunities and other areas.
In terms of those longstanding public interest duties, she cited the statutory “equal opportunities” requirement for airtime of political candidates, which she said is governed by “decades of FCC precedent” that offers “a practical case-by-case framework.”
Another key aspect of the public interest standard is localism. “For example, licensees may not enter into network agreements that prevent them from preempting programming that is `unsatisfactory or unsuitable or contrary to the public interest,’ or when other programming is `of greater local or national importance.’ In other words, broadcasters are expected to respond to the unique needs of their communities, not simply transmit identical programming nationwide without considering local circumstances…Commission precedent also reinforces this duty. For that, we can look to the Commission’s news distortion policy, which reflects a simple principle: a station cannot truly serve its community if it knowingly distorts the news about important events.”
Both of those arguments were used by Carr to threaten licenses of broadcasters who aired late night talk shows and other content he deemed to have violated “news distortion policy” as biased.
Put more positively, she added that "broadcasters are at their best when they serve as trusted sources of local news…Broadcasters are also at their best when providing critical information during emergencies…And broadcasters are at their best as a free, universally accessible source of programming."
“Today’s media marketplace includes many forms of communication that do not carry the same public interest obligations, like MVPDs, streaming services, podcasts, and countless digital platforms,” she said. “But because broadcasters have accepted public interest responsibilities as part of their licenses, they occupy a unique place in the media ecosystem. That makes it critical for the FCC to ensure that broadcasters not only survive in today’s competitive environment, but thrive.”
“In a marketplace where competition and technologies are evolving, the FCC needs to get its policies right for broadcasters and the communities they serve – from ownership regulation, to the principles guiding the ATSC 3.0 transition, to continually reevaluating its regulations to ensure their benefits truly outweigh their burdens,” she added. “If the Commission achieves that goal, broadcasters will have both the ability and the right incentives to keep serving the public interest, which I see as the best way of advancing those objectives.”
As part of that, she explicitly stated her support for changing station ownership rule. “It also means updating, or eliminating, rules, consistent with our statutory authority, that may have made sense decades ago but now stand in the way of innovation,” she said.
Beyond that she also indicated her support for Carr’s initiatives to give local stations more power over the programming they air and strengthen their bargaining position in negotiations with national networks.
She also weighed in on sports programming, which is extremely important in financing the local news produced by broadcasters and indicated her willingness to examine anti-trust exemptions given to professional sport leagues. “But when sports migrate behind a streaming paywall, that public interest is no longer being served, and the need for government immunity is less clear,” she said.
Trusty also highlighted her support for the work by broadcasters on improving public safety and developing the Broadcast Positioning System. “ATSC 3.0 can enable a GPS alternative known as the Broadcast Positioning System,” she said. “Stations also are experimenting with advanced emergency alert capabilities using ATSC 3.0.”
Those examples illustrate the importance of FCC policies to strengthen local broadcasters at a time when they face serious competitive and financial pressures, she stressed.
“When it comes to news, local broadcasters continue to score highest in public trust, despite the challenges they face,” she said. “But more than half of local broadcast TV newsrooms reportedly are unprofitable on a stand-alone basis, and even as broadcasters see potential for new technologies like AI to improve the mechanics and efficiency of distributing their content, their newsrooms confront new burdens responding to third party reports based on AI-generated hoaxes or misinformation that can be prevalent on social media. A strong financial footing will better position broadcasters to meet and overcome those challenges.”
“If the FCC gets the policy framework right, supporting broadcasters, while ensuring accountability to the law, FCC rules, and longstanding legal doctrine, I believe broadcasters themselves could serve as the `angels of the public interest,’ delivering trusted information, connection, and service to the local communities that rely on them,” she concluded. “Achieving that distinction will require continued work ahead to empower broadcasters to compete on a level playing field while cementing an unwavering commitment to serve the public interest both now and in the future.”
