The National Association of Broadcasters, the Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council and the National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters have filed a brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in regards to the organizations’ legal challenge of the FCC’s order mandating disclosures for foreign government-sponsored programming that is now pending judicial review.
Oral arguments in the case have been scheduled for Tuesday, April 12.
At issue is The FCC’s new rule, adopted last April, that the FCC says will “eliminate any potential ambiguity to the viewer or listener regarding the source of programming provided from foreign governmental entities.”
The new FCC rule states that by having stations identify its sources of programming, “we seek to address an important issue of public concern while going no further than necessary, thus balancing considerations of the First Amendment with the need for consumers to be sufficiently informed as to the origin of material broadcast on stations licensed on their behalf in the public interest.”
The Commission rule goes on to say by refining the rule it is ensuring that the public is fully informed on the source of programming consumed. “e find it is critical that the American public be aware when a foreign government has sponsored, paid for, or, in the case of political programs or programs involving the discussion of a controversial issue, furnished the programming for free as an inducement to air the material, particularly given what seems to be an increase in the dissemination of programming in the United States by foreign governments and their representatives.”
In the objection brief from the three organizations, they say the rule is unlawful and violates with the Communications Act, the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act. The groups say this rule is pointless and addresses a “phantom harm” that is highly unlikely to occur since foreign agents, under threat of criminal penalties, must disclose their 3 foreign principal in all programming and supply copies of that programming to the Department of Justice.
The Order requires broadcasters to conduct investigations of every programming lease, even infomercials and local programming. The groups say it is “arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act. It imposes substantial burdens on thousands of broadcasters to address a phantom harm.”
Of course purchases of time or programming of any sort should have disclaimers. The real question is why they should be allowed at all. I pray that the NAB loses this case and so, it would seem, do many broadcasters from the comments here.
I was unaware of the rule but I like it.
The Chinese government is leasing a number of AM stations across this country, including one in Loudon County, VA that can be heard well in Washington, D.C. and another in Boston that was once the voice of the African-American community before its greedy corporate owners decided to lease to China Radio International instead. Why shouldn’t the public be informed that their local station might be blasting Chicom propaganda far and wide? Our airwaves should not be for sale to foreign governments, especially those of hostile countries. At least make it known to the listening public exactly who is putting on programming. (That’s what the FCC is doing and what the corporate types at NAB are fighting.)
As Justice Brandeis noted, “Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” Nothing about fighting this flatters litigants in the least.
I’m thinking that foreign voices do not have some kind of constitutional right to be on U.S. airwaves. The least we can do is seek transparency as to who those voices are.
I’ll go with the FCC on this one.
MORE Russian propaganda on American airwaves – yes! #LOL
Because all Americans support our Public Airwaves being commandeered by foreign governments, right? Are you so desperate you can no longer identify what is obviously unAmerican and wrong?
Comments are closed.