FCC Proposes $233,000 Forfeiture Against Cumulus Over Sponsorship ID Consent Decree
A proposed $233,000 forfeiture against Cumulus and some subsidiaries wouldn’t adequately punish the company for violating a 2016 consent decree by allegedly breaking FCC sponsorship ID rules, said FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks -- formerly of the agency’s Enforcement Bureau -- in a dissent on a notice of apparent liability issued Tuesday. The NAL lists $25,000 of that forfeiture specifically as the penalty for violating the consent decree, and that’s not enough, Starks said in a dissenting statement. The proposed forfeiture “does not follow well-established Commission precedent and is not, in my mind, commensurate with the misconduct and violations at issue.” Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel concurred on the NAL.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
The forfeiture amount may not be a large fine for a company of Cumulus’ size, but it's a very large fine in the eyes of most broadcasters, said Womble Bond radio attorney John Garziglia in an interview. For a “recidivist” violation, the proposed forfeiture is “far too lenient,” said Georgetown Law Institute for Public Representation Senior Counselor Andrew Schwartzman, who has pursued sponsorship ID complaints at the FCC in the past.
Seven stations owned by Cumulus subsidiaries allegedly violated the 2016 consent decree in 2017 and 2018 by airing ads in 26 instances without proper sponsorship ID and waiting eight months to report the violations, the NAL said. The consent decree required violations to be reported in 15 days. Some of the ads were for a gubernatorial candidate, and the others were for a sports marketing firm, the NAL said. “The FCC’s action today advances the agency’s longstanding goals of protecting consumers by ensuring that they know who is attempting to persuade them,” said the FCC in a news release. Cumulus didn’t comment.
The 2016 consent decree enshrined a $540,000 settlement between Cumulus and the FCC under then-Chairman Tom Wheeler. The consent decree concerned 178 ads aired on Cumulus stations supporting a hydroelectric energy project but not identified as having been funded by a company with a financial interest in the project (see 1601070060). It’s unusual for broadcasters to violate rules they were already fined for breaking, several broadcast attorneys said. Cumulus’ consent decree expired in January.
“This system only works if noncompliance with our consent decrees is strongly punished,” Starks said. “These rules are particularly crucial for paid political speech.” By again improperly identifying sponsors, this time for a political candidate, Cumulus “made a bad thing worse,” Schwartzman said. “It is particularly troubling that the commission takes such a lax attitude toward sponsorship ID issues on electoral matters,” he said.
Several broadcast attorneys said the NAL confirms a perception that the agency's paying particular attention to sponsorship ID violations. Stations should take particular care with a third party paying for station time, said Garziglia. Parties buying blocks of time on secondary channels also can potentially violate sponsorship ID rules, he said.