22-459 — Comment Digest

Consideration of how ownership rules impact localism and competition in broadcasting.

Filers split on: “The Commission should maintain ownership rules to promote localism and competition.”

• Free Press Free Press 2022 Quadrennial Reviewsupport — The commenter argues that current ownership policies fail to promote a competitive and diverse local broadcasting market, which is already highly concentrated, and emphasizes the need for government regulation to protect this scarce resource and prevent monopolization, citing studies that show consolidation has resulted in reduced local news production and diversity of viewpoints.p. 3
• John Caracciolo PresidentCEO JVC Mediaoppose — The commenter concludes that revising the ownership limits is essential for strengthening local service and ensuring the sustainability of community-focused broadcasters.p. 2
• Connoisseur Mediaoppose — The commenter contends that the outdated Local Radio Ownership Rule hampers local broadcasters' competitiveness against digital media, harming localism and media diversity, while also highlighting that declining advertising revenue has resulted in fewer radio stations and less local programming, which diminishes community engagement; they warn that without regulatory relief, local radio's audience and revenues will continue to decline, adversely affecting local communities.pp. 4, 6, 30
• David Klann mb 22 459 comment klannsupport — The commenter argues that maintaining the Local Radio Ownership Rule is crucial to prevent further consolidation of FM radio ownership, which has harmed local communities by reducing competition among broadcasters and leading to a decline in local content in favor of aggregated and nationally syndicated programming.p. 1
• Maranatha Broadcasting Companymodify — The commenter argues that as vMVPDs become primary gateways to viewers, the FCC should implement ownership reforms that do not harm independent local broadcasters or create distribution bottlenecks, while also emphasizing the need for safeguards to ensure that local broadcasting remains accessible and beneficial to the public as large station groups seek more ownership flexibility.pp. 2, 4
• musicFIRST Coalition Final 2025 12 17 musicFIRsupport — The commenter argues that the FCC's analysis of ownership rules should concentrate exclusively on broadcast radio stations to promote localism and diversity, expressing concern that deregulating FM ownership would harm the diversity of viewpoints and local programming essential for community engagement and public safety. They contend that increased consolidation would diminish the quality of local programming and community engagement, as larger companies tend to prioritize profits over local needs.pp. 3, 28

Arguments that current ownership rules are outdated and hinder competition in the modern media landscape.

Filers split on: “The Commission should update ownership rules to reflect the current competitive media environment.”

• John Caracciolo REPLY COMMENTS OF JVC BROADCASsupport — The commenter believes that the existing ownership rules are outdated and do not reflect the current media landscape, urging the Commission to modernize these rules to better serve local broadcasters and their communities.p. 3
• Seven Bridges Radiosupport — The commenter argues that the current ownership restrictions are outdated and hinder the ability of small broadcasters to compete effectively in today's diverse media landscape.p. 2
• International Center for Law Economics FCC Brosupport — The commenter believes that antitrust agencies are better equipped to evaluate mergers based on current market conditions and competition, argues that outdated rules hinder local broadcasters' ability to compete effectively against increased competition from digital platforms, and emphasizes the need for the FCC to update its rules to reflect the current competitive environment in media and telecommunications.pp. 2, 6, 22
• Fox Corporation Fox Dual Network Rulesupport — The commenter argues that both rules are outdated and fail to account for the evolving media marketplace, and that both should be eliminated to allow broadcasters to compete effectively.p. 19
• Gray Mediasupport — Gray Media argues that the Local Television Ownership Rule is outdated and hinders growth and innovation in the broadcast industry, emphasizing that it no longer promotes competition and localism due to the rapid changes in the media landscape, including significant competition from digital platforms and streaming services.pp. 3, 4
• One Ministriesoppose — The commenter advocates for the retention of the FCC's ownership rules to protect smaller and independent broadcasters, especially minority and religious stations, from the negative impacts of relaxed regulations favoring larger networks; additionally, they support extending must-carry rules to newer virtual MVPD services to enhance distribution for independent stations, while criticizing the NAB for jeopardizing these broadcasters by promoting a transition to a new broadcasting standard that is not yet widely accessible.p. 1

Discussion on the FCC's legal authority to modify ownership rules and the National Cap.

Filers split on: “The Commission should assert its authority to modify ownership rules and the National Cap.”

• David Klann mb 22 459 comment klannoppose — The commenter believes that the FCC's role is to serve the public interest by ensuring access to local programming that reflects community needs, rather than facilitating ownership changes that benefit distant investors.p. 1
• Sue Wilson Media Action Center FCC Dec 17 Quadoppose — The commenter references a Supreme Court ruling that criticized the FCC for having insufficient data to make informed decisions regarding ownership rules.p. 6
• musicFIRST Coalition Final 2025 12 17 musicFIRsupport — The commenter asserts that neither the Third Circuit nor the Eighth Circuit has mandated the relaxation of ownership rules, emphasizing that the FCC has the discretion to retain rules that serve the public interest.p. 3
• International Center for Law Economics FCC Brooppose — The commenter believes that the FCC's role should be limited to spectrum management and public interest obligations, leaving competition oversight to antitrust agencies.p. 22
• Newsmax Mediasupport — The commenter believes that the FCC retains the power to enact new regulations to promote competition and localism, even under the Eighth Circuit's interpretation, which they argue is misguided and does not reflect Congress's intent regarding regulatory reviews.pp. 19, 21
• Americom Limited Partnership 2022 Quadrennial support — The commenter highlights that the FCC's ownership rules have not changed since 1996, while the audio marketplace has evolved significantly, necessitating a review of these rules.p. 2

Discussion on how digital platforms affect traditional broadcasting competition and ownership rules.

Filers split on: “The Commission should consider digital competition when evaluating the necessity of ownership rules.”

• John Caracciolo REPLY COMMENTS OF JVC BROADCASsupport — The commenter argues that maintaining ownership restrictions for broadcasters is unfair given the competitive landscape has changed with digital platforms lacking such restrictions, and that broadcasters face public-interest obligations that digital competitors do not, undermining the justification for these limits; they also contend that the limited broadcast spectrum does not equate to marketplace dominance, as consumers now have a wide array of audio and content choices.pp. 1, 2
• Beasley Media Group Licensessupport — The commenter argues that broadcast radio is no longer isolated in its market due to the rise of various digital audio services since the rule was enacted, and emphasizes the urgent need to repeal the rule to protect the survival of the radio broadcasting industry against this growing competition.pp. 10, 12
• John Caracciolo PresidentCEO JVC Mediasupport — The commenter argues that the FCC's media ownership rules need to adapt to today's competitive landscape, which includes significant unregulated digital competitors, and that current ownership limits and rising operating costs hinder broadcasters from achieving necessary economies of scale to compete effectively, especially as digital giants consolidate control over the audio and advertising market.pp. 1, 2
• Americom Limited Partnership 2022 Quadrennial support — Americom contends that the concept of radio as a distinct marketplace is outdated due to competition from digital platforms that are not subject to the same restrictions, and highlights that new entrants like SiriusXM, YouTube, and Spotify have intensified competition, resulting in decreased advertising revenues and lower station valuations.pp. 3, 5
• Sinclairsupport — Sinclair contends that the traditional view of broadcast television competing only with other local stations is outdated and fails to account for the significant competition from digital platforms and streaming services.p. 6
• Seven Bridges Radiosupport — The commenter highlights that new forms of competition, such as streaming services and podcasts, were not considered when the 1996 Act was enacted, making the current regulations less relevant.p. 2

Debate over the necessity of the Dual Network Rule to maintain competition and diversity.

Filers split on: “The Commission should maintain the Dual Network Rule to ensure competition and diversity.”

• Newsmax Mediasupport — The commenter asserts that the Dual Network Rule is necessary to prevent further consolidation among the major networks, which would harm competition in national programming.p. 18
• American Television Alliance ATVA Quadrennial support — The commenter believes that the Dual Network Rule is necessary to promote competition, localism, and viewpoint diversity, and that its elimination would harm these objectives.p. 15
• ABC Television Affiliates Association Affiliatsupport — The commenter argues that the Dual Network Rule is necessary to maintain a balance between Networks and Affiliates, ensuring that local stations can serve their communities without undue interference.p. 3
• DIRECTVsupport — The commenter believes that allowing dual ownership of major networks would harm competition and reduce diversity in programming.p. 34
• Connoisseur Mediaoppose — The commenter emphasizes that Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act mandates a deregulatory approach, suggesting that the Commission should modify or eliminate outdated regulations that hinder competition.p. 16
• Fox Corporation Fox Dual Network Ruleoppose — Fox Corporation asserts that the Commission's justification for keeping the Dual Network Rule is not supported by current evidence and fails to consider significant changes in the media landscape, making its retention legally questionable.p. 17

Debate over whether ownership diversity should focus on race and gender or diverse viewpoints.

Filers split on: “The Commission should shift focus from race and gender to ensuring diverse viewpoints in ownership policies.”

• Center for American Rights 22 459support — The commenter contends that the emphasis on race and gender in ownership policies is misplaced, advocating instead for the representation of diverse viewpoints in broadcasting, while also highlighting that recent legal and regulatory changes, including Supreme Court rulings, warrant a reassessment of these considerations.pp. 1, 3
• Center for American Rights 22 459 Opening Cmt oppose — The commenter argues that the focus on ownership as a proxy for viewpoint diversity is no longer valid, as ownership does not necessarily equate to diverse viewpoints in today's media landscape.p. 1
• Daniel Miller FCC — The commenter believes that ownership caps should vary based on market size, with specific limits for different tiers of markets to promote diversity in ownership.p. 1

Debate on how to define the product market for retransmission consent and its impact on consolidation.

Filers split on: “The Commission should adopt the DOJ's approach in defining the product market for retransmission consent.”

• DIRECTVmodify — The commenter emphasizes the need to differentiate between markets to accurately assess competition and potential harms from consolidation, argues that a clear definition of product markets is necessary for effective regulation and to ensure that broadcast transfers serve the public interest, and highlights that the rising costs of retransmission consent fees should be a key factor in evaluating the potential harms of consolidation.pp. 2, 5, 40
• American Television Alliance ATVA Quadrennial support — The commenter argues that including cable channels and video streaming in the product market for broadcasters would enable unchecked local consolidation, resulting in higher retransmission consent rates and increased costs for consumers, and urges the FCC to adopt the DOJ's approach in defining the product market for retransmission consent, highlighting the unique position of Big Four stations.pp. 2, 9
• NCTA The Internet Television Association 12172 — The Commission needs to clarify that sharing information and coordinating activities among non-commonly owned stations violates the ban on joint retransmission consent negotiations to maintain competition.p. 15