The NAB is calling on the FCC to dismiss a news distortion complaint filed by the Center for American Rights, or CAR, against CBS. NAB argues that the complaint lacks merit and raises significant First Amendment concerns for all broadcasters, including radio.
CAR’s complaint alleges that an interview with then-Vice President and presidential candidate Kamala Harris on 60 Minutes was edited in a way that misled the public. The FCC is seeking public comment on the complaint after releasing the raw footage and transcript of the interview provided by CBS.
However, NAB Chief Legal Officer and EVP of Legal and Regulatory Affairs Rick Kaplan contends in a comment to the FCC that the complaint, “does not even allege a prima facie case for news distortion, let alone provide evidence that the editing in question was designed to deliberately mislead viewers about a significant event and done so at the direction of the licensee’s management.” The organization maintains that the allegations fail to meet the strict standards required to prove news distortion, which include demonstrating intent to deceive and involvement by station management.
The NAB also challenges the FCC’s authority to enforce its news distortion policy, arguing that, “Congress did not grant the FCC the authority to develop and enforce its news distortion policy and that policy also almost certainly violates the First Amendment.” The organization points out that the policy stems from the now-defunct Fairness Doctrine, which the FCC abandoned in the late 1980s due to constitutional concerns. “The Commission once had a balance requirement known as the ‘Fairness Doctrine.’ It jettisoned that doctrine decades ago, however, because requiring so-called ‘balance’ runs counter to the public interest and the First Amendment,” the NAB stated in its filing.
The filing also warns against government overreach into editorial decisions, asserting that the FCC has historically rejected complaints based on how news segments are edited. “The Commission possesses neither the expertise nor the desire to look over the shoulder of broadcast journalists and inquire why a particular piece of information was reported or not reported.”
Additionally, Kaplan highlights the vagueness of the FCC’s news distortion policy, warning that terms like “distortion,” “bias,” and “suppression” are undefined and open to interpretation. “The ‘vice of vagueness’ – not to mention potential overbreadth – thus infects the news distortion policy,” NAB argues, citing concerns that unclear regulations could be weaponized against broadcasters.
For these reasons, the NAB is urging the FCC to dismiss the complaint, stating, “Further FCC action here would be contrary to decades of precedent, as well as intruding into First Amendment protections afforded to broadcasters.”
This filing reinforces NAB’s firm stance on protecting broadcast journalists’ ability to report the news freely without the threat of regulatory backlash. In October, NAB President Curtis LeGeyt commented, “A free press must report, inform and scrutinize without fear of reprisal. Frivolous lawsuits aimed at stifling this essential role risk undermining democratic principles and ignore the First Amendment’s protection of how news is reported. NAB stands firmly with our members against any attacks on their First Amendment-protected reporting.”
