Ascertainment Requirements - The precursor of localism ? (history)

In response, the FCC in 1971 promulgated a "Primer on Ascertainment of Community Problems," which, as amended through 1976, remained in effect until their deregulation of radio in 1981 and television in 1984. The Primer required that stations conduct interviews with community leaders, solicit and maintain public files of comments about programming, and make the public aware of the station's duty to address community issues. Stations were also required to file Problems/Programs Lists with the FCC, outlining community problems and listing specific programs broadcast to address them. The Lists, never popular with broadcasters (Hafer & Fletcher, 1983; Heller, 1981), tended to provide a minimum of information, and doubts about their effectiveness in encouraging broadcasters to program in the public interest were widespread. The Lists were, however, important tools for audience groups challenging license renewals. Beginning in the late 1970s, but accelerating swiftly in the 1980s, Congress and the FCC began deregulating the communications industry. Broadcasters were among the most vocal proponents of deregulation, arguing that FCC paperwork such as the Lists was too cumbersome and expensive, especially for smaller stations (Powell & Gair, 1988). The scarcity rationale which had, as a constitutional matter, permitted public needs to compromise the First Amendment rights of broadcasters, had in the view of the then-FCC chair Mark Fowler been undercut by the tremendous diversity of other means of public expression, eliminating the basis for governmental intrusion into the business of broadcasting (Fowler & Brenner, 1982, pp. 225- 26). The trusteeship model under which the FCC had, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, operated since the adoption of the Communications Act was replaced by the marketplace model championed by Fowler, a model in which the market, it was argued, would supply the programming the community considered most valuable. Research conducted before the elimination of the ascertainment requirements set out in the Primer indicated that most broadcasters viewed the ascertainment procedures as useless for either gathering new information and for determining what issues are most important to the local public (Heller, 1981; Smith, 1989). Indeed, a large percentage of broadcasters surveyed indicated that their public affairs programming would not change should the FCC drop the ascertainment rules. Broadcasters cited the rules as an example of the type of expensive, time-consuming regulation that prevented them from getting on with conducting their business (Heller, 1981). With the elimination of ascertainment rules for both radio (FCC,

1981; 1986) and television (FCC, 1984), broadcasters now must only maintain a public file containing basic documents pertaining to the licensee's operation and file quarterly reports describing some community issues and the stations' programming giving "significant treatment" to such issues. The relaxation of the record-keeping and ascertainment rules can be expected to have the long-term effect of removing a major weapon used by various groups to challenge license applications and renewals (Smith, 1989). Moreover, none of the surviving FCC rules require the type of affirmative inquiry into community concerns mandated by the discarded ascertainment rules.

In understanding how to fight things, it helps to know the history of where they came from, how they came to be, and so forth.

I don't know if this will prove useful for someone else, but it can't hurt. And I appologize, some of this seemed incredibly boring as I started reading.

Perhaps I'm reading this wrong, but it seems like these ascertainment rules would have to go hand in hand with a future attempt to re-implement localism(which we know obama supports) and may help to spot it if it's inserted into some omnibus bill at some time.

If any of this is even 100% accurate. I didn't work in radio at the time of all this. I say that because of a few other links I have on the matter.

One thing that seems fairly clear, is that I keep seeing 'local' this and that, 'community' this and that when it comes to these ascertainment requirements.

The FCC in late 2009 promulgated a “Community Broadcasting Standards Structure,” which, as amended through 2012, remained in effect until the collapse of the fundamental social and political order that same year.

The Structure required that stations place 51% of their broadcast content under the control of community leaders as part of the station’s duty to address community issues. Stations were also required to file Problem Viewer/Listener Lists with the FCC, identifying viewers who complained publicly about such programming. The Lists, never popular with broadcasters, soon became search-and-arrrest lists for the FBI’s Race Crimes Unit.

In the end, the Lists became important tools for uncovering so-called white supremacist groups challenging the new racially-oriented broadcast policy. Beginning in 2010 but accelerating swiftly until 2012, Congress and the FCC began monitoring the communications industry. Broadcasters were among the most vocal opponents of this monitoring, arguing that the Lists were being used to violate the civil rights of audience members to watch what they pleased.

The “racial justice” rationale which had, as a constitutional matter, permitted the federal government to compromise the First Amendment rights of broadcasters, had superseded the “free speech” model under which the FCC had, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, operated since its beginnings. This was replaced by the ”public utilty” model championed by the Executive Branch, a model in which the government, acting as an impartial arbiter of racial justice, would dictate the content of programming according to their assessment of the needs of the general public.

Research conducted before the enactment of content requirements set out in the Structure indicated that most broadcasters viewed the federal government’s “justice” efforts as propaganda designed to indoctrinate the local public. Indeed, a large percentage of broadcasters surveyed indicated that they would cease broadcasting, and in some cases destroy their own broadcasting equipment and facilties, rather than comply with the new requirements. Broadcasters cited the rules as an example of the type of heavy-handed “media of coercion” practiced in dictatorships. In respose, the FCC moved to consolidate and nationalize most private broadcasting networks by the summer of 2011, and to close down those local broadcasters who refused to carry the new federal satellite feeds.

The collapse of the social and economic order in the winter of 2012-2013 destroyed the broadcasting industry, the FCC, the entire federal regulatory system, and, indeed the federal government itself. In the chaos that followed, the spectrum was taken over by amateur broadcasters using home-based (and often home-built) equipment.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.