FCC Should Try Out Political Ad File Web Rule On Small Stations Before Recon Ruling, NAB Says
The FCC should give smaller stations an election cycle under requirements to post political ad sales information online before deciding whether to reconsider the rule, NAB commented Monday, the last day for replies on the agency’s public notice on the rule. The requirement is already in effect for the Big Four network affiliates in the top 50 markets, and set to apply to all broadcasters starting in July. A group of broadcasters has asked the FCC to reconsider and relax the requirements, and in June the commission asked for comments on possible changes (CD June 27 p20).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Several public interest groups asked for changes to make the data more useful and accessible, while NAB said posting political ad info online could be more difficult for smaller stations than large ones, according to replies in docket 00-168. The agency should hold the reconsideration petition until “stations of all sizes and types in all markets” have had at least one election cycle under the requirement, said NAB.
Posting ad sales info online has been “uneventful” for large broadcasters, but would likely be burdensome for small ones, NAB said. “Small market stations have much more limited personnel and financial resources, and yet they may experience intensive demand to air political ads during a busy election.” One association-member broadcaster said some of its stations in markets outside the top 100 received more than 100 political ad orders in 2012, with each station “placing thousands of individual political spots,” NAB said. Though he agrees with political transparency, attorney Michael Couzens -- who represents several smaller broadcasters -- told us he “can’t believe it’s good for smaller stations to expand the political filing requirement.” The FCC has been punishing online filing violations with large fines, which will be much harder for smaller stations to absorb, Couzens said.
"Given the novelty of the online political file and the uncertainties involved in expanding that file to many more stations with fewer resources,” the commission should hold off on taking up the petition for reconsideration filed last year by a coalition of station groups, NAB said. TV station groups argued the filing rule forces stations to share valuable ad rate information online, hurting their ability to compete (http://bit.ly/182lf6k). The station groups asked the bureau to let stations keep the ad rate information in hard copy only, while allowing stations to post “the aggregate amount of money spent by a sponsor of political advertisements” online on an “opt-in basis.”
That petition should be denied outright, said the Public Interest Public Airwaves Coalition, Sunlight Foundation and Center for Effective Government (http://bit.ly/1cegGcj). Adopting the station groups’ proposed rule change “would represent a step backwards in the Commission’s goal to modernize,” they said. If some broadcasters file aggregate data, while others filed the more extensive data currently required, “doing any sort of aggregation and comparative analysis would be virtually impossible,” said the joint filing.
Instead, the FCC should take steps to make the online political ad data even more amenable to being analyzed, said the public-interest groups. They want the commission to require TV stations to upload their political files using “machine-readable” forms similar to those used by the Federal Election Commission for its extensive campaign finance reporting requirements. The Sunlight Foundation has put a sample version of the form online: http://bit.ly/12Ivi0x. Data that are easier to analyze “would allow the public, as well as the Commission, to better monitor broadcast stations’ compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements,” said the groups. Forms like those suggested by Sunlight Foundation might also make the whole process of sharing political ad data online “less burdensome” for smaller stations, said Angela Campbell, co-director of Georgetown University’s Institute for Public Representation, which was part of the joint filing, in an interview.
There’s pending litigation lurking behind the online political ad proceeding. Last year, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia denied NAB’s request for an emergency stay of the commission’s initial political ad file order, and the association appealed the matter to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, court documents say. NAB agreed to hold its appeal in abeyance until after the comment cycle on extending the rule to all broadcasters and the commission’s ruling on the station groups’ petition for reconsideration (CD Jan 23 p2).
The association said Monday it hasn’t given up on court as an option. “Nothing in these comments affects NAB’s arguments before the D.C. Circuit that the FCC lacks statutory authority to require online political files and that the Order’s asymmetric, broadcast-only public and political file requirements are arbitrary and capricious,” said NAB. Cable, satellite and online video providers all sell political ads, but only broadcasters have to post their sales information online, NAB said. “This regulatory and competitive disparity is only becoming more indefensible, as political advertising on other outlets increases.”