Oral argument in Radio Communications Corporation’s challenge of the FCC’s implementation of the Low Power Protection Act (see 2407050020) will take place Nov. 18, said an order Thursday from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

The FCC shouldn’t “shift the long-standing understanding of localism” in its proceeding on prioritizing locally originated programming (see 2403120071), said America’s Public Television Stations and PBS in a teleconference meeting Tuesday with Media Bureau Chief Holly Saurer and an aide to Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, according to an ex parte filing in docket 24-14. Public TV programming is local because it's issue-responsive, the filing said. “The definitions established in this rulemaking could have implications for what is considered ‘local’ broadcast programming in future regulations,” said the public TV groups. The FCC should adopt a “qualified” noncommercial educational broadcast station definition that would allow NCE applications to be prioritized without meeting the agency’s proposed requirements that programming be originated locally. The public TV groups also said the FCC shouldn’t expand rules governing TV translators. Rather than requiring translators to designate communities of license, the agency should “grandfather in existing COLs for public television translators until the station requests to change their community of license.” Doing otherwise could “create a burdensome engineering and administrative scramble for some public television stations,” the public TV groups said.

The FCC’s 2018 quadrennial review order “reasonably” found that competition hasn’t diminished the need for the agency’s broadcast ownership rules. Moreover, the agency was within its authority to expand rules limiting broadcasters from owning multiple top-four network affiliates, the FCC said in a respondent's brief filed in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The agency was responding to challenges of the QR order that multiple broadcasters brought (see 2407160069). Though filed Friday, the brief wasn’t public until Monday. “The record showed that despite the proliferation of non-broadcast sources of audio and video programming, broadcast radio and television remain virtually the only providers of local programming,” the FCC said. Broadcasters “provide the lion’s share of the local news and community-oriented programming that is essential to achieving the FCC’s goals of promoting localism and viewpoint diversity,” therefore justifying the retention of limits on local radio and TV ownership, the agency said. The FCC dismissed broadcaster arguments that its approach means broadcasters could never obtain relief from agency ownership restrictions even if the industry were on the brink of death. “This doomsday scenario is purely hypothetical,” the FCC said. “Neither broadcast radio nor broadcast television is currently in such dire straits.” In future Quadrennial Review proceedings, “if non-broadcast providers of audio and video services start offering more of their own local news and community-oriented programs in competition with the local programming of broadcast stations,” the FCC could revise its market definitions, the filing said. The agency expanded the top-four prohibition to include multicast channels and low-power stations to prevent broadcasters from exploiting workarounds to limits on owning multiple top-four stations in the same market, the brief said. MVPDs “have first-hand experience of the harm caused by certain broadcasters’ end-runs around the rule,” said NCTA and the Advanced Television Broadcasting Alliance in an intervenor brief supporting the FCC position. “Those end-runs cause the same public interest harms that the Top-Four Prohibition was meant to prevent and should therefore be prohibited for the same reasons.” The court should reject broadcaster arguments that the expansion of the top-four rules regulates content and violates the First Amendment, the FCC said. The rule change “targets transactions involving network affiliations that may be used to evade the local television rule, and it applies regardless of the content of programming.”

The Media and Democracy Project petition against Fox’s station WTXF-TV Philadelphia isn’t “remotely similar to the occasional complaints by politicians about the political slant of a particular network or channel,” said former telecom lobbyist Preston Padden in an informal filing Tuesday responding to a recent statement from FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington (see 2409130062). “There is nothing political about the MAD Petition,” Padden said, adding that Simington was "mistaken" when he implied MAD's challenge of WTXF-TV’s license renewal wasn’t in line with the First Amendment. The petition “is not about speech,” Padden said. “It is about Fox’s conduct -- its business decision -- to knowingly and repeatedly choose to present false news, rather than the truth, in order to protect its profits.” Simington and Fox didn’t comment.

The same attorney can't represent multiple parties in the hearing proceeding on the TV and radio licenses of Antonio Guel and the Hispanic Christian Community Network, ruled FCC Administrative Law Judge Jane Halprin in an order posted Friday (see 2408280048). Broadcast attorney Dan Alpert’s “proposed simultaneous representation of all three deponents is fundamentally at odds with ‘the proper dispatch of business and the ends of justice,’” said the order. Alpert had sought to represent Guel, his daughter Maria Guel and niece Jennifer Juarez in the case but faced arguments from the FCC Enforcement Bureau that this would be a conflict of interest. The hearing proceeding is based in part on allegations that Antonio Guel pretended to sell his stations to Juarez while actually retaining control of them, and conflicting filings in the case show Maria Guel and Antonio Guel as heading up multiple companies involved in the matter. “With each filing in this proceeding, the control and operation of the Guel family’s broadcast licenses becomes less clear,” said the order. “It is therefore not only foreseeable but likely that there will be incongruity in the testimony of Mr. Guel, Ms. Juarez, and Ms. Guel.” Halprin’s ruling allows Alpert to continue representing Antonio Guel in the case, but bars him from representing Maria Guel or Juarez. The order gives Maria Gual and Juarez 45 days to obtain new counsel.

AM and FM broadcasters shouldn’t make FY 2024 regulatory fee payments into the FCC’s commission registration system (CORES) due to an issue with the way the system classifies stations, according to an FCC spokesperson and a disclaimer posted in CORES. “The FCC is continuing to do its due diligence to reevaluate the population count information for AM and FM broadcasters for FY 2024 regulatory fees,” the spokesperson said. “We expect to have this situation resolved early next week.” Regulatory fees are due Sept. 26.

California's public-private agreement with Google for funding news publishers (see 2408220039) undercompensates journalists and doesn’t address all the tech companies benefiting from news content, said NAB in a blog post Wednesday. “This is another missed opportunity for meaningful progress and a reminder of Big Tech’s continued unchecked dominance,” it said. The deal “makes abundantly clear that the need for federal action is now more urgent than ever,” and calls for Congress to pass the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (JCPA). “It’s ironic that while this deal offers AI accelerator funds, it ignores the fact that Big Tech-backed AI platforms continue to ingest and profit from local news content without proper compensation or permission,” NAB said. “News is costly to produce, and stations invest significant resources to keep reporters in their local communities,” NAB said. “The business practices of the tech giants prevent local stations from recouping their investment in local journalism, as these platforms exert enormous influence over what online content is eligible to be monetized.” Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D), who announced the agreement, didn’t comment.

Radio station operator Beasley Broadcast Group's debt restructuring plan will mean lenders end up with less than originally promised, S&P said Tuesday as it lowered its issuer credit rating on Beasley to CC from CCC+. It said that when restructuring is done, it expects to lower its issuer credit rating on the company to selective default. Under the debt restructuring plan announced last week, Beasley will exchange notes due in 2026 for notes due in August 2028, repurchase up to $68 million of its 2026 notes and issue $30 million in notes due in 2028. S&P said the new debt's higher interest rates don't appear to be adequate compensation to the company's lenders.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday denied a Gray Television motion asking it be allowed to file a supplemental briefing in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's Jarkesy decision (see 2408140057) (docket 22-14274). Gray is appealing a $518,000 FCC forfeiture order.

The FCC should reverse course on its proposed $150,000 penalty against Mission Broadcasting (see 2401120069) in light of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions on agency enforcement and Chevron deference, Mission said in a supplemental filing posted Tuesday in docket 22-443. The proposed penalty is from a January notice of apparent liability over accusations from Comcast that Mission violated the FCC’s rules on good faith retransmission consent negotiation by allowing Nexstar -- which operates all of Mission’s stations – to negotiate on Mission’s behalf for WPIX New York. “Just as courts should no longer defer to agency interpretations of statutes, neither should they defer to agency interpretations of regulation” after SCOTUS’ Loper Bright v. Raimondo decision, Mission said. The FCC’s NAL is based on “irrational interpretations” of FCC rules and precedent and the agency hasn’t shown that Mission’s violations were willful and continuous, Mission said. “Common sense demands that the presentation of a contract proposal is a ‘discrete act,’ not a continuing violation, and the NAL’s contrary reading of the statutory term is inconsistent with FCC and judicial precedent,” Mission said. Under the high court’s SEC v. Jarkesy ruling, the FCC’s proposed forfeiture would violate the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial, Mission said. Jarkesy “confirms that the FCC’s enforcement regime suffers from constitutional deficiencies,” Mission said. Attorneys have widely predicted that the Loper Bright and Jarkesy decisions will be raised in nearly every FCC enforcement proceeding going forward (see 2407250030). Mission and Nexstar are also facing a second, $1.8 million NAL connected with Mission’s operation of WPIX (see 2403220067).