As FCC Chairman Brendan Carr seeks suggestions for what broadcast regulations could stand a rollback, a bipartisan coalition of 73 US House members, led by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC), has called for an update to decades-old radio and TV ownership caps.
In a letter addressed to Chairman Carr, lawmakers argued that current rules are placing local TV and radio broadcasters at a significant disadvantage in the evolving media environment.
The members of Congress highlighted that the ownership limits, many of which date back to the 1940s and were last meaningfully adjusted in the 1990s, are out of sync with the rise of unregulated digital platforms. As tech giants dominate the media and advertising landscape without the same restrictions, local broadcasters remain bound by rules created in an era when they were the only electronic media source.
The letter states that broadcasters are being held back from innovation, expansion, and newsroom investment, weakening their ability to compete and serve local communities. “At a time when newspapers are battling to survive, broadcasters’ local engagement is more important than ever. When broadcasters cannot combine or expand operations, they struggle to maintain sufficient newsroom staff and invest in journalism,” the lawmakers wrote. “Updating these rules is not just an urgent economic necessity, it is a public service imperative.”
The NAB, which recently launched its Modernize the Rules public awareness campaign, is one of the main supporters of the regulatory change.
NAB President Curtis LeGeyt said, “America’s local TV and radio stations are facing a radically transformed media landscape where global tech giants operate without restriction while local stations remain shackled by decades-old rules. NAB is grateful to Rep. Hudson and his bipartisan colleagues for urging the FCC to bring its ownership regulations into the modern era.”
“Quickly updating these rules is essential to preserving local journalism, strengthening public safety, and ensuring that broadcasters can continue to serve the communities that rely on them every day.”
National News networks are not limited geographically. Why should station groups be?
What a load of bushwa. Nothing is stopping local broadcasters from competing online with “other electronic sources” if they truly have any commitment to what passes these days as journalism. Letting big groups get bigger hasn’t helped the cause of local broadcasting or local journalism over the last 29 years since the Telecom Act of 1996, so why would giving fewer people more power help localism now?
Comments are closed.