Harry Cole

Harry Cole has no picture

The primary focus of Mr. Cole’s practice is broadcasting, including transactional, regulatory and appellate work. He has represented clients before the FCC and in various courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

Articles By This Author

TV Online Public File Update: Political File Exemption Set to Expire as of July 1

Media Bureau “reminder” seems to eliminate any hope of extension of exemption for non-Top Four affiliates outside of top 50 DMAs.

If you’re a TV licensee who doesn’t happen to be either (a) in any of the top 50 DMAs or (b) affiliated with one of the top four commercial networks (ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC), we’ve got some news for you: it looks like you’ll be having to upload all your new (but none of your old) political file data to your online public inspection file starting July 1, 2014.

That, at least, is the unmistakable take-away message from a public notice issued by the Media Bureau.

The notice reminds one and all of a wrinkle the Commission included when it imposed the online public file requirement for TV licensees back in 2012. At that time, the obligation to upload the political file component of each station’s public file was limited to Top Four affiliates in the top 50 DMAs. All other stations were still required to maintain a political public file, but only on paper, as they had done for years.

In 2012, the Commission said the exemption would be good only until July 1, 2014. BUT the FCC held out at least a glimmer of hope that the exemption might be extended: in 2013 the Media Bureau was to invite comments on whether “any changes [to the online political file rule] should be made before it takes effect for the other stations.” The Bureau dutifully solicited comments in June, 2013 and, as we reported last year, the response was less than overwhelming.

Continue Reading...

Pursestrings 2014: New Application Fees Announced

Effective date TBD

If you’re planning on filing any applications in the near future, you can save yourself a few bucks by getting them on file sooner rather than later. That’s because the FCC’s schedule of application fees has just been given its semi-regular overhaul, resulting in an across-the-board uptick of about 8%. (That reflects the net change in the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers since the last increase, a formula specified by Congress in Section 158 of the Communications Act.)

The Act gives the FCC no latitude when it comes to fee application cost-of-living adjustments: they’re supposed to be done every two years. Since the last increase took effect in 2011, we’re running a bit late this time around, but who’s keeping track?

The good news is that, while the 2014 fee hikes have been announced, they won’t become effective for at least a few months. The precise effective date is, well, not all that precise just now. Historically, this is where the fun begins. Long-time readers may remember our original “Pursestrings” series of posts, starting in September, 2008, and stretching out until mid-May, 2009. (Short version: Despite adoption of a new fee schedule in September, 2008, with an anticipated effective date of January 1, 2009 or thereabouts, that date was missed, and then several later announced effective dates passed as well. The fees announced in September, 2008, finally kicked in for real until May, 2009.) Things worked a bit more smoothly in 2011, the last time the fee schedule was hiked, but you never can tell.

According to this year’s announcement, the effective date of the new rates will be 30 days after the order is published in the Federal Register. Perhaps so, but Section 158(b) of the Communications Act requires that the Commission notify Congress of application fee adjustments “not later than 90 days before the effective date”. So the FCC’s going to have to let Congress know about the new fees, and then wait 90 days. It will also have to publish a notice in the Federal Register 30 days before they can take effect.

Bottom line: you’ve probably got another three, maybe four, months to take advantage of the current lower fees. We’ll keep our eyes open for further Federal Register notices and report on them in future posts.

Non-English EAS? The FCC Wants to Hear From You!

Commission looks to “refresh the record” in 10-year old proceeding, seeks comments on MMTC “designated hitter” proposal

The FCC is thinking about further tweaking its broadcast Emergency Alert System (EAS) to assure non-English speaking audience members access to emergency information.

The proposal is an offshoot of a more comprehensive set of proposals submitted by the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council (MMTC) and several other public interest groups back in 2005. (Yes, that’s 2005 – nearly a decade ago. More on that below.) Last December, some MMTC reps met with folks at the Commission to try to move things along. In the course of that meeting MMTC emphasized that it believes that broadcasters should be required to “work together”, along with “state and market counterparts”, to identify each party’s “responsibility based on likely contingencies”. Accountability – which MMTC characterized as “awareness of the plan/responsibilities” – would be “encouraged” by requiring broadcasters to “certify or explain their role in such a plan” in their renewal applications.

In an ex parte memo describing the December meeting, MMTC explained that its plan

Continue Reading...

R.I.P.: Critical Information Needs Study

We note the passing of an FCC effort to probe the editorial standards and processes of broadcasters.

The FCC’s Multi-Market Study of Critical Information Needs, known to many simply as the Critical Information Needs, or CIN, Study, is dead. On February 28, a Commission spokesperson announced tersely that the agency “will not move forward” with the CIN Study. No official cause of death was given, but it appeared that the study was unable to survive the firestorm of negative reaction it had attracted in recent weeks. A previously announced test-run of the study set for Columbia, South Carolina has presumably been canceled.

The CIN Study’s Origins

The CIN Study had been in development, largely unnoticed, for two years. To a number of regular Commission observers its origins are something of a mystery.

The study first emerged publicly in early February, 2012, when the FCC’s Office of Communications Business Opportunities (OCBO) issued a Request for Quotation (RFQ) for a “Barrier Study” (also described as a “Review of the Literature Regarding Critical Information Needs of the American Public”). How long the concept of such a study had been percolating within the Commission up to that point is not clear.

Continue Reading...

This Should Get Your Attention II: Nearly $2 Million in Fines to Three Cable Companies for Fake EAS Attention Signals

NBCUniversal, Viacom and ESPN whacked for “Olympus Has Fallen” spot.

Last November we reported on a Commission crack-down on the broadcast of EAS (or EAS-like) tones in non-emergency situations. Heads up: the Commission is still cracking down – not only on broadcasters, but also on cable networks.

If you don’t believe us, just ask your friends at NBCUniversal, or Viacom, or ESPN. They are all looking down the wrong end of a Notice of Apparent Liability doling out a total of nearly $2 million dollars in fines for the transmission of EAS attention signals in non-emergency situations. Q.E.D.

The circumstances here track last November’s: a spot produced by an advertiser happened to contain EAS-like sounds. It didn’t help that the spot also included images of terrorists and violence and visual text reading “THIS IS NOT A TEST” and “THIS IS NOT A DRILL”. Sure, in the context of this particular ad – for the action-adventure flick “Olympus Has Fallen” – that kind of excitement might seem normal and to-be-expected, but everyone agreed that (a) the tones included in the spot either were EAS tones or sounded a lot like them and (b) there was no emergency. And that’s all that matters.

Continue Reading...

Utah Judge to Aereo: Not in this Circuit!

As Supreme Court decision approaches, a U.S. District Judge in Utah has enjoined Aereo from rolling out its service in the Tenth Circuit.

Ten days ago we suggested that Aereo aficionados who can’t wait for the Big Show in the Supreme Court (oral argument April 22, decision likely before the end of June) might want to take a look at the U.S. District Court in Utah. That’s where the latest of the broadcasters’ copyright infringement suits brought against Aereo has been poking along.

And looky here. U.S. District Judge Dale Kimball has granted the broadcasters’ motion for a preliminary injunction! This marks the first time that Aereo has been on the wrong end of an injunction ruling; it should send a clear signal to one and all that Aereo may be in for some rough sledding ahead.

Judge Kimball’s decision reads like it was written by the broadcasters. Some sample bits and pieces: 

“The plain language of the 1976 Copyright Act support[s] Plaintiffs’ position.”

“Aereo’s retransmission of Plaintiffs’ copyrighted programs is indistinguishable from a cable company and falls squarely within the language of the Transmit Clause.”

There is “no basis in the language of the Transmit Clause or the relevant legislative history suggesting that technical details take precedence over functionality. In fact, such a focus runs contrary to the clear legislative history.”

And the bottom line?

Continue Reading...

OSHA to Tower Industry: Protect Your Workers

With 17 preventable deaths in the last 14 months, regulators send a message to everybody involved with tower work.

A great many communications operations  – broadcasters, telecom, cable, public safety – utilize towers in some capacities. So it caught our attention when our friends at Radio World reported on an open letter released recently by David Michaels, Ph.D., MHP, addressed to “Dear Communication Tower Industry Employer”. The letter highlights an important area of regulation for anybody responsible for a tower. (You may know Dr. Michaels better as the Head Honcho -- technically correct title: Deputy Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health in the Department of Labor -- at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).)

The gist of the letter: There has been a rash of fatal accidents involving tower workers. Thirteen deaths in 2013, four more reported already in 2014.

And, according to Michaels, all of those deaths were preventable.

Aggravating that already tragic report is OSHA’s conclusion that a “high proportion” of the deaths occurred because of a “lack of fall protection” – either inadequate protection or failure to ensure that tower workers are using the available protection properly – for which the workers’ employers are responsible.

So Michaels is using his open letter to remind employers, in no uncertain terms, of their “responsibility to prevent workers from being injured or killed while working on communication towers”. Who is the target audience? Not only the company that hires the workers, but also tower owners and “other responsible parties in the contracting chain”.

Continue Reading...

Zombie Alert Redux

Congressional staff report resurrects zombie event, with embellishments

One of the endearing qualities about zombies is their resilience: knock them down and they’ll get back up again, and again, and again. They’re also quite the attention-grabbers.

It’s not surprising, then, that government concern about zombies surfaces and re-surfaces from time to time to jar the sleepy citizenry out of its complacency. Example: A recent staff report out of a Congressional committee (about the “Federal Government’s Track Record on Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure) which revisits a zombie incident from last February to make a point.

As with most zombie tales, however, the report is not entirely accurate.

The report is critical of the government’s performance overall. It tells of “significant breaches in cybersecurity”, “confidential cybersecurity plans . . . left unprotected”, sensitive data “stolen by a malicious intruder”. It’s enough to send one screaming to one’s fall-out shelter for the duration.

One paragraph in the 19-page report stood out to some of us here in the CommLawBlog bunker (to which, of course, we had immediately repaired).

According to the report, the numerous security failures it describes “aren’t due to poor practices by the private sector”. Rather, they were “real lapses by the federal government”, including this one, which we quote verbatim from the report:

Continue Reading...

Aereo Update: And the Question is . . .

The Supremes opt to use the broadcasters’ formulation of the question to be resolved by the Court.

OK, all you Supreme Court tea leaf readers, you’ve got another leaf to read in the Aereo case. According to the Supreme Court’s website, the “question presented” that the Court has decided to use as the focus for briefing in that case is this:

A copyright holder possesses the exclusive right “to perform the copyrighted work publicly.” 17 U.S.C. §106(4). In the Copyright Act of 1976, Congress defined the phrase “[t]o perform ... ‘publicly’” to include, among other things, “to transmit or otherwise communicate a performance or display of the work ... to the public, by means of any device or process, whether the members of the public capable of receiving the performance or display receive it in the same place or in separate places and at the same time or at different times.” Id. §101.

Congress enacted that provision with the express intent to bring within the scope of the public-performance right services that retransmit over-the-air television broadcasts to the public. Respondent Aereo offers just such a service. Aereo captures over-the-air television broadcasts and, without obtaining authorization from or compensating anyone, retransmits that programming to tens of thousands of members of the public over the Internet for a profit. According to the Second Circuit, because Aereo sends each of its subscribers an individualized transmission of a performance from a unique copy of each copyrighted program, it is not transmitting performances "to the public," but rather is engaged in tens of thousands of “private” performances to paying strangers.

The question presented is:

Whether a company "publicly performs" a copyrighted television program when it retransmits a broadcast of that program to thousands of paid subscribers over the Internet.

That’s possibly good news for broadcasters, because that’s the way that they perceived the question that the Court should be addressing. 

By contrast, when it advised the Court that it wouldn’t mind if the Court agreed to review the Second Circuit’s Aereo decisions, Aereo said that the appropriate question should be:

Continue Reading...

Aereo: Supreme Court Bound!

Broadcasters' cert petition is granted; Alito recuses himself, Kagan doesn't

The Supreme Court has decided that now would be a good time to consider the arguments arising from the Second Circuit’s Aereo decisions to date – so the Supremes have granted the petition for certiorari filed by the broadcaster parties to the Second Circuit case. While this could ordinarily bode well for the broadcasters – after all, if the Supreme Court thought the Second Circuit got it right, they could just deny cert and let the Second Circuit’s action stand – you can probably expect Aereo to claim something of a victory here because, as we have previously reported, Aereo itself urged the Court to take the case.

As of this writing the briefing and argument schedules haven’t been posted on the Supreme Court’s website. Since the Court will be hearing arguments until the end of April, it seems reasonably likely that the Aereo case will be briefed and argued this term, which would mean that a decision from the Court by the end of June would be a near certainty. 

From the scant information that is currently available, it’s impossible to say how the Court is likely to rule. There are, however, two interesting tidbits that may or may not come into play down the line.

First, Justice Alito recused himself from consideration of the cert petition. As is customary, no reason for his recusal was given, nor did the Court’s order disclose whether he would be recused from the merits end of the case – although recusal there would seem more than likely. If he’s out, that would reduce the number of justices hearing the case to eight, giving rise to the possibility of a 4-4 split. In that case the decision of the lower court – i.e., the Second Circuit’s order upholding the denial of a preliminary injunction against Aereo – would remain in place.

Second, Justice Kagan did not recuse herself.

Continue Reading...

Older Entries

January 1, 2014 — Aereo Cert Day - January 13, 2014?

December 27, 2013 — D.C. Circuit Rejects Challenge to Sunsetting of Viewability Rule

December 26, 2013 — FCC Looking to Expand Closed Captioning Requirement for IP-Delivered Programming

December 6, 2013 — Incentive Auction Update: Projected Auction Date Moved into 2015

December 5, 2013 — Ghost in the Machine?

December 3, 2013 — LPFM Update: Audio Division Issues Progress Report, Road Map

November 22, 2013 — Low Numbers for Low Power

November 19, 2013 — Key Bridge Global LLC Becomes Fourth "White Space" Coordinator to Win Approval

November 14, 2013 — Discount Daze Update: Comment Deadlines Announced in UHF Discount Proceeding

November 4, 2013 — Less Than a Year After Initial CALM Act Effective Date, a New CALM Act Standard Has Been Proposed

October 22, 2013 — LPFM Update: Finding Translator Input Info in the CDBS Database

September 29, 2013 — Biennial Form 323's: The filing window opens October 1

September 27, 2013 — Discount Daze! FCC Proposes Tossing UHF Discount, Creating VHF Discount

September 23, 2013 — Incentive Auction Update: Bureau Looks For Input on What Auction-Induced Reassignment Expenses Should be Reimbursable

September 9, 2013 — Net Neutrality 2013: The D.C. Circuit Hears the Arguments

September 6, 2013 — AereoKiller Cuffed Nationwide

August 28, 2013 — Aereokiller in the Ninth Circuit

August 15, 2013 — Update: CDBS Still Clutching the Same Old NADs

August 12, 2013 — 2013 Reg Fees Set

July 31, 2013 — Media Bureau to Singleton FM Translator Applicants: NOW you can file

July 16, 2013 — Aereo Update: Second Circuit Nixes En Banc Review

July 8, 2013 — Will LPFM Applications Have to Protect Amended FM Translator Applications?

July 7, 2013 — The CALM Act - Six Months and Counting

July 3, 2013 — Did Verizon Short its Customers - and the FCC - $250 million (or More)?

June 17, 2013 — FCC to LPFM Applicants: Let the Uploading Begin!

June 9, 2013 — Quad Erat Demonstrandum? FCC Seeks Comment on MMTC Study

June 1, 2013 — FEMA WEA PSA's 'R' OK!

May 24, 2013 — 2013 Reg Fees: The FCC Proposes a Couple of Alternatives

May 23, 2013 — FM Translator Application Update: Last Chance Settlement Window Opened

April 24, 2013 — Broadcast Renewal Trifecta: Improper "Menu" Underwriting Announcements, "Renewal Expectancy" . . . and Chesterfields!

April 10, 2013 — Cellular Wars: The Employees Strike Back!

April 10, 2013 — Aereo in the Second Circuit: Wha' Happened?

April 9, 2013 — Regulation in Retrospect: "New" FCC Rule Books Now Available

April 2, 2013 — Indecency Alert: New Unannounced "Egregiousness" Standard Now Apparently in Effect, But More Changes May Be On the Way, Eventually

March 15, 2013 — FM Translator Application Update: Bureau Announces Window for Filing of Preclusion Showings

March 10, 2013 — Audio Division to Permittees: Get License Applications Filed Within 30 Days of Permit Expiration . . . Or Else!

March 4, 2013 — Revised Form 323 Out for Comment at OMB

February 24, 2013 — The Five-Year Enforcement Shot Clock: Has the FCC Finally Begun to Acknowledge It?

February 15, 2013 — More FM Translator Applications Down the Tubes

February 11, 2013 — TVStudy: Changes in TV Coverage Calculations Devised For Incentive Auctions

February 7, 2013 — GAO Report: In Wake of Successful Hack of FCC Computer Systems, $10 Million Fix Ineffective

February 5, 2013 — Bureau Disposes of FM Translator Applications

January 31, 2013 — Some TV Broadcasters Relieved of Obligation to Upload Some (But Not All) Issues/Programs Lists to Online Public Inspection File

January 25, 2013 — Explosive Proposal: C4 for FM's?

January 15, 2013 — Form 323 - Kissing the SUFRN Good-bye?

January 3, 2013 — FM Translator Application Dismissal Lists - A Clarification

December 21, 2012 — Update: Deadline for FM Translator Dismissal Lists Announced

December 19, 2012 — Incognito Incentive Auction Input Encouraged

November 29, 2012 — Commissioner Pai: The Dude Abides.

October 27, 2012 — As Sandy Nears, FCC Provides Emergency Response Information

September 30, 2012 — More Online TV Public Inspection File How-To's: The Issues/Programs List

September 28, 2012 — Online TV Public Inspection File - Some How-To's

August 28, 2012 — ivi TV Loses Round Two

August 23, 2012 — Update: USPTO to Take Another Look at Mission Abstract Patent

August 1, 2012 — Another Day, Another Online Public File Demonstration

July 18, 2012 — FCC Still Clenching Improperly Collected Application Fees

July 12, 2012 — Update: Aereo Allowed to Continue Operation During Copyright Challenge

July 6, 2012 — The CRB Dodges an Appointments Clause Bullet

July 3, 2012 — Effective Date of Revised TV Public File Rule Announced

June 29, 2012 — Update: Supremes Shut Down FCC Appeal in Janet Jackson Case

June 21, 2012 — FCC v. Fox: Heading Back to the Second Circuit, Again

May 28, 2012 — Audio Division Re-Affirms Ruling: Studio Site Moves Based on Longley-Rice Must Be Approved in Advance

May 17, 2012 — Don't Touch That REC button . . .

May 16, 2012 — Media Access Project Exits Stage Left

May 4, 2012 — 2012 Reg Fees Proposed: Up, Up and Away!

April 17, 2012 — "What a Beautiful Sight!"

April 13, 2012 — LPFM Tool Time!

April 6, 2012 — LPFM - The Next Generation: FCC Invites Comment on Post-LCRA Regulation of LoPos

April 5, 2012 — Third-Adjacent LPFM Spacings Eliminated (Almost)

April 2, 2012 — Translate This! FCC Breaks LPFM/FM Translator Logjam

March 8, 2012 — Net Neutrality Update: The D.C. Circuit Goes Through the Motions

February 6, 2012 — In Memoriam: Nai Tam

January 20, 2012 — FCC STILL Applies Over-the-Air Contest Rules to On-Line Contests

December 22, 2011 — Reminder: EAS Nationwide Test Form 3's Are Due December 27

December 5, 2011 — Commission to Contest-Conducting Stations: Present Prizes Pronto!

November 7, 2011 — Update: FCC Tweaks Nationwide EAS Test Reports, Again

November 3, 2011 — Update: The Incredible Shrinking Nationwide EAS Test

November 2, 2011 — Indecency 2011: Third Circuit Sides With CBS, Again

November 1, 2011 — Update: FCC Tweaking Nationwide EAS Test On-Line Reporting System

November 1, 2011 — Nationwide EAS Test Reports - Some Questions Raised, Some Answered

October 25, 2011 — Preview: Electronic Report Form for Nationwide EAS Test Participants

October 13, 2011 — Reefer Madness III: Feds Looking to Bust Broadcasters?

October 9, 2011 — Reefer Madness II: Update on "Joint" Sales Advertising

October 6, 2011 — Net Neutrality: The Circuits are Jammed!

September 30, 2011 — Form 323 - The Fun Begins Again

September 25, 2011 — Media Bureau Green Lights MDCL Technology for AM Stations

August 23, 2011 — Form 323 Deadline Extended to December 1, 2011

August 17, 2011 — Update: Public Inspection File Inquiry Arrives at OMB

August 2, 2011 — Spectrum Quest (Home Edition)

July 22, 2011 — 2011 Reg Fees Set

July 18, 2011 — New CALM Act Standard Coming! (Take an Extra Six Days for Those Reply Comments)

June 28, 2011 — For Years FCC Ignores Own Rule, Pockets Filing Fees

June 27, 2011 — First Amendment Face-off: Supremes To Consider Constitutionality of FCC Indecency Regime

June 20, 2011 — "I See Dead Proceedings."

May 30, 2011 — The CALM Act: The Next Step

May 26, 2011 — Field Office: Public File Faux Pas Not Fixed? Forfeiture Figures To Be Higher!

May 17, 2011 — Court To FCC: OK To Defer To State Rate Determinations Re Intrastate Call Terminations

May 13, 2011 — Consent Decree Is Beginning, Not End, Of Licensee's Troubles

May 11, 2011 — LPFM Impact Inquiry Initiated

May 3, 2011 — 2011 Reg Fees Proposed: Going Up!

May 2, 2011 — LPFM Cheerleader to FCC: Let Translators Originate

April 22, 2011 — Shut Up And Deal

April 17, 2011 — Public Inspection File Rule: FCC Asks If It's Really Necessary

April 9, 2011 — Spectrum Inventory Tools: Touts And Doubts

April 7, 2011 — Update: Effective Date Of New Rural Radio Rules Set

April 5, 2011 — Verizon v. FCC: On To Plan C?

March 4, 2011 — Pursestrings 2011: New Application Fees Announced

March 1, 2011 — To Serve Broadcasters*

February 21, 2011 — Old Complaints Never Die . . . And They Apparently Don't Fade Away, Either

February 13, 2011 — Coming Attractions: FCC Webinars Touting Spectrum Re-Purposing

February 11, 2011 — Striving For Perfection

February 9, 2011 — Net Neutrality Update: Coming soon - OMB Review!

February 7, 2011 — Time To Doublecheck Your BAS Data In ULS?

February 3, 2011 — Verizon v. FCC: On To Plan B?

January 21, 2011 — Net Neutrality: Verizon Looks For A Home Court Advantage

January 17, 2011 — . . . and statistics."

January 5, 2011 — Local Community Radio Act - It's The Law!

January 4, 2011 — NYPD (Not Too) Blue Moon

December 27, 2010 — Bootstraps Auction Preference Under Consideration

December 20, 2010 — Christmas Comes Early For LPFMs

December 4, 2010 — Auction 91 - The Dates Are Set

November 23, 2010 — FCC Doffs CAP Requirement . . . For Six Months, At Least

November 12, 2010 — Some Fine Points About Fining

November 7, 2010 — "Our Survey Said . . . " - Update

November 5, 2010 — "Our Survey Said . . ."

October 22, 2010 — S. 592, Where Are You?

October 13, 2010 — FCC Takes Wraps Off Revised Broadcast Renewal Form

October 5, 2010 — Longley-Rice Dependent Studio Site? No Prior Authorization? $7K, Please!

September 13, 2010 — Broadcasters Beware: Non-Operation Could Lead To Non-Renewal

August 24, 2010 — Contest Faux Pas: A Day Early, $4K Short

August 9, 2010 — STELA NPRMs On Fast Track

August 6, 2010 — S. 3756: Another Thumbs Up For Auction Proceeds Sharing

August 3, 2010 — FAA Backs Off Proposal To Expand EMI-Based Review Of Radio Applications

August 1, 2010 — H.R. 5947: Another Order Of Carrot, Please - This Time Hold The Stick

July 20, 2010 — S. 3610: The Carrot And The Stick Make Their Appearance

July 16, 2010 — Indecency In A Post-Fox World: What's Up Next?

July 12, 2010 — Form 323: SSN Disclosure Requirement Largely Written Out Of Form In Last-Minute Revision

July 9, 2010 — 2010 Reg Fee Surprise

July 5, 2010 — Form 323: The Court Weighs In

June 25, 2010 — Form 323: Point/Counterpoint

June 15, 2010 — Form 323 Update: FCC Has Some 'Splaining To Do

May 19, 2010 — Compromise Tower Agreement - For The Birds

May 18, 2010 — Supreme Court Mum On Must-Carry Market Mod

April 8, 2010 — Revised Form 323 Available - April 9, 2010

March 31, 2010 — Turn-Of-The-Century NCE Translator Applications Dismissed

March 14, 2010 — Cable Programming Exclusivity Ban Survives Appeal . . . But For How Long?

March 12, 2010 — Retransmission In Transition?

February 19, 2010 — A Complaint Process Is Born!

February 4, 2010 — Extreme Makeover (Not!) - Radio Edition

February 1, 2010 — Help Wanted? Help Needed?

January 13, 2010 — The Good Kind of Snowe Job

December 24, 2009 — Court Review Of Revised Form 323 Is Sought As Bureau Suspends January 11 Deadline

December 9, 2009 — Presenting The New Form 323!!!

December 3, 2009 — Wireless Broadband vs. Over-The-Air TV: The Bell Rings For The Main Spectrum Event

November 30, 2009 — FHH to FCC: Think Again

November 19, 2009 — MMTC To FCC: Rethink Form 323

November 17, 2009 — FHH To FCC: "Stay"

October 30, 2009 — Deadline For Filing New Form 323: December 15

October 29, 2009 — Moment Method Modeling: Update V

October 26, 2009 — Power To The Parents Redux

October 23, 2009 — Vacant NCE-FM Reserved Channel Window Postponed Two Months

October 21, 2009 — Revised 323 Approved By OMB

October 18, 2009 — Brrrrrrr - The Chill Is On

October 18, 2009 — FCC Announces Window For Vacant NCE-Reserved Channels

October 2, 2009 — Biennial Ownership Report (Form 323) Deadline Extended

September 21, 2009 — Coming Soon: Mobile Spam?

September 9, 2009 — FCC Invites Comments On "Ratchet Rule" Proposal

September 4, 2009 — Rackley/Dawson Propose Deep-Sixing The "Ratchet Rule"

September 2, 2009 — "Contrarian"? Au Contraire!

September 1, 2009 — Update: AM on FM Translator Rules Become Effective October 1, 2009

August 30, 2009 — Court Kiboshes Cable Cap

August 19, 2009 — Revised Form 323 Revealed

August 17, 2009 — Meanwhile, Back At The Second Circuit . . .

August 12, 2009 — Impaired Transparency?

August 10, 2009 — Responding To A False Alarm?

July 31, 2009 — 2009 Reg Fees Set

July 24, 2009 — 8th Floor Access Control

July 22, 2009 — Auction 79 - Up-Front Payments Due July 31

July 9, 2009 — Adventures in EEO-Land

June 27, 2009 — FCC to NCE's: Ixnay on the "Cold Refreshing Beer"

June 21, 2009 — Caution, E-Filers: The FCC Knows Who You Are!

June 19, 2009 — HD Radio Upgrade: FCC Concentrates and Asks Again

June 11, 2009 — Plus Ça Change, Plus C'est la Même Chose

June 5, 2009 — Court Affirms LPFM-Friendly Rules

June 4, 2009 — Post-Transition DTV Call Sign Protocol Announced

June 3, 2009 — Any Time At All

May 29, 2009 — Late Breaking News: June-October, 2009, Form 323 Reporting Requirement Suspended

May 28, 2009 — More Comments Invited On Proposed HD Radio Power Increase

May 21, 2009 — PPM Inquiry: A Can of Worms?

May 11, 2009 — 50,000,000 Birds Can't Be Wrong . . . Can They?

May 11, 2009 — Found In Translation

May 7, 2009 — New Ownership Report, Audit Designs Left To Bureau

April 29, 2009 — FCC v. Fox - The Supreme Court Rules

April 21, 2009 — Spectrum Auction Bidders In Qui Tam Scam Jam

April 17, 2009 — Brrrrrrr - FCC Announces Freezes On FM Mods

April 17, 2009 — Auction 79 - The Dates Are Set

April 9, 2009 — New Ownership Reporting Rules Adopted As Commissioners Seek "Diversity"

April 7, 2009 — STAT!! Timely Filing of CP Extension/Assignment Applications Becomes Crucial

April 2, 2009 — Nightlight, Pink Slips

March 25, 2009 — Audio Division Addresses Environmental Assessment Requirements

March 19, 2009 — LPFM Stuck With $20K Fine for "Advertisements"

March 3, 2009 — Power to the Parents?

February 21, 2009 — Another Friday Night, Another DTV Order

February 17, 2009 — Washington's Birthday Special: Another DTV Public Notice!!!

February 11, 2009 — DTV Transition Update - 680+ Analogs Set To Turn Off Early

February 9, 2009 — DTV Extension: It Ain't Over 'Til The Paperwork's . . .

February 5, 2009 — Moment Method Modeling: Update IV

February 4, 2009 — DTV Extension? June 12 Is Looking Like The New Date!

February 2, 2009 — Don't Look Now, But You're STILL Being Watched (Update II)

January 27, 2009 — DTV Extension? Senate Says June 12!

January 23, 2009 — A New (well, sort of new) Sheriff In Town

January 20, 2009 — Departing Martin Takes 31 Parting Shots At Cable

January 11, 2009 — DTV Transition Extension - The Line(s) From Vegas

January 9, 2009 — Moment Method Modeling: Update III

January 8, 2009 — DTV Transition Extension: What's the Over/Under?

January 5, 2009 — NTIA Wait Lists Coupon Requests

December 30, 2008 — In the Starting Blocks: Replacement Translator Spectrum Rush Set to Kick Off On January 5

December 27, 2008 — "Analog Nightlight" Service Standards Proposed

December 22, 2008 — Moment Method Modeling: Update II

December 19, 2008 — Antennas: When is an Omni Not an Omni?

December 11, 2008 — Comment Deadlines Set In FCC Tower Inquiry

December 10, 2008 — Postcard from the Sausage Factory

November 19, 2008 — DIGITAL TV TRANSITION Ford Fusion Doesn't Crash in Final Race!!!!

November 10, 2008 — On Fire, DIGITAL TV TRANSITION Ford Fusion Takes to the Airways - Literally

November 3, 2008 — Moment Method Modeling: Update

November 3, 2008 — Court Rejects Attack On DTV Transition-related "Viewability" Rules For Cable Operators

October 24, 2008 — Comments Invited on Proposed HD Radio Power Increase

October 23, 2008 — Still Searching for Mr. Goodwrench?

October 20, 2008 — Number 38 Crashes, Leaving FCC at 0-1 on the NASCAR Circuit

October 17, 2008 — L'Affaire NASCAR: The Yellow Caution Flag Comes Out

October 17, 2008 — The FCC Heads For the Pit

October 7, 2008 — Update: The FCC Is Not Watching You Anymore (or so they have told us)

September 28, 2008 — FCC Considers Regulating Construction of Towers (and Possibly Other Structures) Near AM Antennas

September 28, 2008 — Moment Method Modeling Manumits AMers From Measurement Manacles

September 23, 2008 — Application Fees: Up, Up and Away!

September 16, 2008 — Don't Look Now, But You're Being Watched . . .

September 9, 2008 — Ordure in the Court?

September 3, 2008 — Deadlines Set For 700 MHz Comments

August 26, 2008 — Deadline for Reg Fee Payment Set

August 22, 2008 — FCC Whacks 700 (MHz) Club

August 20, 2008 — The Reg Fee Payment Window Is Open

August 19, 2008 — The Commissioners Are Coming!! The Commissioners Are Coming!!

August 14, 2008 — 2008 Reg Fees Adopted

August 12, 2008 — A Midsummer Surprise From The FCC: A Revised Version Of The Public and Broadcasting!!!

June 27, 2008 — Embedded advertising in the cross-hairs

June 23, 2008 — A Legacy for Broadcasters

June 6, 2008 — FCC Seeks Comment on MPAA's "SOC" Request

April 8, 2008 — FCC to Translator Applicants: "Never Mind"

March 3, 2008 — Supremes Keep Us Hangin' On

February 12, 2008 — FCC to fee payers: "Show me" the money

January 2, 2008 — DTV Update: FCC Releases Third Periodic Review

December 28, 2007 — D.C. Circuit Dismisses Appeals of Junk Fax Rule Revisions

December 4, 2007 — Court to FCC: Classification of Certain Prepaid Calling Cards As "Telecommunications Services" Must Be Retroactive

November 28, 2007 — BACK TO THE FUTURE!!

November 13, 2007 — Martin Single-handedly Seeks To Solve Ownership Impasse

November 8, 2007 — Expedited Settlement Opportunity for NCE FM Applicants Available Until January 7, 2008

October 30, 2007 — Broadcast localism hearing - trick or treat?

October 11, 2007 — FCC to NCE Applicants: Ten's the Limit

August 29, 2007 — Elvis has left the building

August 9, 2007 — FCC Proposes Caps for October NCE Filing Window

August 9, 2007 — Found in Translation: Daytimers Going Nighttime

August 9, 2007 — Fedsox Drop Bombs, 13-6; Bombs Catch Crabs in Nightcap

August 3, 2007 — FHH Bombs disarmed at last minute

August 2, 2007 — $20,000 Fine for False Certification

July 27, 2007 — F-Bombs Blast Wilkinson

July 17, 2007 — Rockets spike Warren Communications

July 4, 2007 — Bombs Misfire

June 28, 2007 — Taking Precedent Siriusly?

June 28, 2007 — Bombs Fall at the Jeff

June 5, 2007 — Commentary: The FCC As Holden Caulfield

June 4, 2007 — Second Circuit Trashes FCC Indecency Policy

June 2, 2007 — FCC Introduces New EAS Rules

May 23, 2007 — FCC Considering Moment Method Modeling in lieu of Field Strength Measurements for Directional AM Applicants

May 16, 2007 — Cable Guy to Feds: Let's Kiss the FCC Goodbye

May 16, 2007 — Tower Inspection Requirement Waived for Eagle, HARK Systems