FCC Public File Order Changes Unlikely, as Genachowski Takes Down Broadcaster Arguments
LAS VEGAS -- Broadcasters hopes they might get scaled back a draft FCC order on online public-file disclosure dwindled late Monday after Chairman Julius Genachowski delivered a sharp rebuke of industry arguments against the proposed requirement. In a speech at the NAB Show (http://xrl.us/bm37ck), Genachowski countered one-by-one the arguments raised by broadcasters against putting online for all to see the political file they're required to keep publicly available on paper at stations. “Despite the proud history of broadcast journalism ... some broadcasters and a few others have strongly resisted online disclosure,” Genachowski said. “It’s the 21st Century. I call it common sense."
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
"Most of the more preposterous arguments” against the proposal “have come from outside the NAB,” Genachowski said. He said he could imagine how difficult it must be for NAB CEO Gordon Smith to build consensus on such an issue. “I can count FCC members on one hand,” he said. “NAB has thousands."
Broadcaster hopes that they'd get changes to the political-file section of the Media Bureau draft public file order (CD April 9 p5) tentatively slated for a vote at the April 27 commissioner meeting were low before Genachowski’s speech, industry officials said. His speech further lowered hopes, though Genachowski did address some ways the FCC is considering making it easier for broadcasters so they won’t have to upload to fcc.gov paperwork the agency already has, said TV station lawyer and NAB attendee Scott Flick of Pillsbury. “Its very clear from everything I've heard him say that they are on the path and there is nothing that is going to dissuade him from proceeding,” said Flick, whose clients oppose putting all the political file online but understand some other public file information may need to go on the Internet. Genachowski and staff “are making a very determined argument as to why this is fine and should be done,” Flick said.
The final draft order seems unlikely to change much from what Genachowski first circulated earlier this month, communications lawyers who back the order and oppose it agreed. They said Commissioner Robert McDowell likely will vote against it and Commissioner Mignon Clyburn likely will approve it with Genachowski. The order seems unlikely to be changed to include putting cable and DBS providers’ political ad files online, too, to respond to broadcaster concerns TV stations are being singled out, lawyers including Flick said. Bureau representatives had no comment.
The final order likely will stick with the draft in requiring all TV stations to eventually post online information on who bought political ads at the lowest cost offered by the outlet and how much the spots went for, lawyers opposing more requirements and those seeking them said. Nonprofit groups want the order to apply to all TV stations in time for this year’s presidential and congressional elections, or at least to more than the ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC affiliates in the 50 largest markets 30 days after the rules take effect as the draft order says (CD April 11 p3). They too won’t likely get the changes they want, broadcast and public-interest group lawyers said. But they said both public interest and broadcast groups likely will continue lobbying (CD April 16 p14) the commission on the order in the hopes that some changes could be made, no matter how unlikely.
With time running out on lobbying, industry lawyers were eager to get time with FCC members and staff attending the show. If the item remains on the agenda for the April 27 meeting, the so-called “sunshine” period of lobbying-free down time before the meeting would begin Friday night, industry attorneys noted.
Broadcast industry arguments against online disclosure seem to boil down to a desire that the information “shouldn’t be too public,” Genachowski said. “But in a world where everything is going digital, why have a special exemption for broadcasters’ political disclosure obligation?” Smith told reporters Monday the NAB is working in good faith on the rule with the FCC and that he’s found Genachowski “much more open to our concerns” during those meetings than his remarks indicated Monday. “We've found an open mind in some cases about our concerns,” Smith said.