[grc] Equal time for political candidates

Wed May 11 09:31:01 PDT 2016

Kenny,

I think you're confusing three different things: Section 315 a, Section 315
b and Section 399

The section you are now referring to appears to be Section 315b  having to
do with "lowest unit rate". This only applies if you are selling time to
candidates. This does not appear to apply to you.

The person who is asking for time is citing Section 315 a. This does appear
to apply to you.

And, as some have mentioned, Section 399 might also be a cause for concern.

Bottom line--- as pretty much everyone has said--- is,  if a programmer is
running for office (and others are also running for that office) safest
thing to do is suspend their program until the election is over.

If you don't want to do that, you really need to get good, professional
legal advice from a practicing FCC attorney.

Philip Tymon

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Kenny Lavender WTSQ via grc <
grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote:

> Here is the content section of the code he is referring to:
>
> (2) Content of broadcasts
> (A) In general
> In the case of a candidate for Federal office, such candidate shall not be
> entitled to receive the rate under paragraph (1)(A) for the use of any
> broadcasting station unless the candidate provides written certification to
> the broadcast station that the candidate (and any authorized committee of
> the candidate) shall not make any direct reference to another candidate for
> the same office, in any broadcast using the rights and conditions of access
> under this chapter, unless such reference meets the requirements of
> subparagraph (C) or (D).
>
> (B) Limitation on charges
> If a candidate for Federal office (or any authorized committee of such
> candidate) makes a reference described in subparagraph (A) in any broadcast
> that does not meet the requirements of subparagraph (C) or (D), such
> candidate shall not be entitled to receive the rate under paragraph (1)(A)
> for such broadcast or any other broadcast during any portion of the 45-day
> and 60-day periods described in paragraph (1)(A), that occur on or after
> the date of such broadcast, for election to such office.
>
> (C) Television broadcastsA candidate meets the requirements of this
> subparagraph if, in the case of a television broadcast, at the end of such
> broadcast there appears simultaneously, for a period no less than 4 seconds-
> (i) a clearly identifiable photographic or similar image of the candidate;
> and
> (ii) a clearly readable printed statement, identifying the candidate and
> stating that the candidate has approved the broadcast and that the
> candidate's authorized committee paid for the broadcast.
> (D) Radio broadcasts
> A candidate meets the requirements of this subparagraph if, in the case of
> a radio broadcast, the broadcast includes a personal audio statement by the
> candidate that identifies the candidate, the office the candidate is
> seeking, and indicates that the candidate has approved the broadcast.
>
> (E) Certification
> Certifications under this section shall be provided and certified as
> accurate by the candidate (or any authorized committee of the candidate) at
> the time of purchase.
>
> (F) Definitions
> For purposes of this paragraph, the terms "authorized committee" and
> "Federal office" have the meanings given such terms by section 30101 of
> title 52.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: grc [mailto:grc-bounces at maillist.peak.org] On Behalf Of Michelle
> Bradley via grc
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 9:28 AM
> To: grc at maillist.peak.org
> Subject: Re: [grc] Equal time for political candidates
>
> I think we have two different issues here.
>
> Equal time, which is addressed in §315  below.
>
> Station endorsement of candidates, which is addressed in §399.
>
> What I speak of with §399 is not a statutory requirement that once a
> candidate announces their bid for public office that you have to kick them
> off the air, you are keeping a liability that the candidate DJ may
> say something on the air that could be construed as an endorsement.
> Some will interpret (and they already have) that the DJ's presence on the
> air, using his/her name on the air (supplementing the campaign signs all
> around the listening area) can be perceived as an endorsement by the
> station.
>
> I still feel that a political candidate having live, unfettered access to
> an NCE/LPFM station during a political campaign is a conflict of interest
> and opens the station to §399 liabilities.
>
> Also, if you read §315(a) where it states:
>
> If any licensee shall permit any person who is a legally qualified
> candidate for any public office_*to use a broadcasting station*_, he shall
> afford equal opportunities to all other such candidates for that office in
> the use of such broadcasting station: Provided, That such licensee shall
> have no power of censorship over the material broadcast under the
> provisions of this section. No obligation is imposed under this subsection
> upon any licensee to allow the use of its station by any such candidate.
>
> The key words "to use a broadcasting station" come into play here.
>
> If a competing candidate was to escalate the issue, the vague wording of
> §315(a) would mean that once a person is declared a legally-qualified
> candidate and the "use" a broadcast station (even to spin records only), an
> opportunity must be provided to all other candidates for that office.
>
> Again, I would still strongly suggest suspending the show until after the
> election.
>
> =m
>
>
>
> On 5/11/2016 9:12 AM, Kenny Lavender WTSQ via grc wrote:
> > Here is his email that he sent me after calling me:
> >
> > Dear Mr. Lavender:
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time to speak with me this afternoon.  In
> reference to our conversation regarding equal time for political
> candidates, I offer this for your consideration:
> >
> > Communications Act of 1934, § 315; codified at 47 U.S.C. § 315:
> >
> > "(a) Equal opportunities requirement; censorship prohibition;
> > allowance of station use; news appearances exception; public interest;
> > public issues discussion opportunities; If any licensee shall permit
> > any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office
> > to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities to
> > all other such candidates for that office in the use of such
> > broadcasting station: Provided, That such licensee shall have no power
> > of censorship over the material broadcast under the provisions of this
> > section. No obligation is imposed under this subsection upon any
> > licensee to allow the use of its station by any such candidate.
> > Appearance by a legally qualified candidate on any-
> >
> > (1) bona fide newscast,
> > (2) bona fide news interview,
> > (3) bona fide news documentary (if the appearance of the candidate is
> > incidental to the presentation of the subject or subjects covered by
> > the news documentary), or
> > (4) on-the-spot coverage of bona fide news events (including but not
> > limited to political conventions and activities incidental thereto),
> >
> > shall not be deemed to be use of a broadcasting station within the
> meaning of this subsection. Nothing in the foregoing sentence shall be
> construed as relieving broadcasters, in connection with the presentation of
> newscasts, news interviews, news documentaries, and on-the-spot coverage of
> news events, from the obligation imposed upon them under this chapter to
> operate in the public interest and to afford reasonable opportunity for the
> discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance."
> >
> > I believe that for my purposes it is reasonable, in accordance with this
> statute, to request two hours of weekly broadcast time on WTSQ-FM
> regardless of content of the program, which to the best of my knowledge
> does not meet the exemptions outlined above.
> >
> > With specificity, I believe that the phrase "If any licensee shall
> permit any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public
> office to use a broadcasting station, he shall afford equal opportunities
> to all other such candidates for that office in the use of such
> broadcasting station" is clear in its meaning and application to this
> request.
> >
> > I have an extensive background in media production for broadcast
> standards and an off-site production facility able to meet your requirement
> for on-air signal.  Here is the program I propose to you and your
> organization:
> >
> > "CRRRRAZY TALK!", a weekly two hour talk show in the style of Art Bell.
> In practice, this program would more likely be roughly 90 minutes of
> monologue, interview and panel discussion with the rest of the time devoted
> to station formatting and music breaks.  I would prefer WTSQ aggregate the
> music to correspond with a weekly genre theme; e.g. punk, hip hop, jazz,
> etc. but am able to provide appropriate playlists.
> >
> > Literally anyone can come on CRRRRAZY TALK!, provided they follow this
> procedure:
> >
> > 1. Write a hand-written letter to me
> > 2. Offer brief synopsis of argument/issue 3. Include self-addressed
> > stamped envelope 4. Wait 2-4 weeks for reply
> >
> > I want to create a space where listeners come and talk about anything
> they wish.  My live-to-tape production capabilities allows me to make sure
> that nothing way out on the edge or out of compliance with FCC regulation
> is able to reach the air.
> >
> > To address the second topic of our conversation, I am requesting WTSQ's
> consideration for a live, on-air debate between me and the Democratic
> nominee for WV37.  As a media outlet whose principal broadcast area
> encompasses the district, I believe it benefits the community and furthers
> WTSQ's mission to hold this public conversation.  I understand that WTSQ is
> not compelled to host or air this program.
> >
> > I understand per our conversation that you must present this to your
> board of directors for consideration.  I will look forward to your reply.
> A copy of this letter has been submitted to my consulting attorney for
> convenience and accuracy.
> >
> > Warmest regards,
> > -Thomas W. Goodman
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: grc [mailto:grc-bounces at maillist.peak.org] On Behalf Of Lanny
> > Cotler via grc
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 8:00 PM
> > To: Michelle Bradley; grc at peak.org
> > Subject: Re: [grc] Equal time for political candidates
> >
> > Is it worth the risk? Maybe it is.
> >
> > I'd hate to see the Bill of Rights being trumped (no pun intended) by
> itty-bitty laws-within-laws.
> >
> >
> >> On May 10, 2016, at 4:56 PM, Michelle Bradley via grc <
> grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> You are still risking that something will be said that can be seen as a
> political endorsement in violation of section 399 of the Communications
> Act, state non-profit laws and if 501(c), the IRS code.
> >>
> >> Here in the NCE world (which includes LPFM), we have 399 looming over
> us.. commercial radio does not have this.
> >>
> >> =m
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/10/2016 7:53 PM, Lanny Cotler via grc wrote:
> >>> Why not offer the candidate the opportunity to have a musical
> (non-political) slot to DJ.
> >>>
> >>> The more DJs we have, the better.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On May 10, 2016, at 5:18 AM, Kenny Lavender WTSQ via grc <
> grc at maillist.peak.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> We have been approached by a candidate for office requesting equal
> airtime as one of our DJs that is running for local office.  They aren't
> yet opponents.  The potential candidate thinks that he is due equal time
> based on the Dj having a musical program where he doesn't discuss
> politics.  Any ideas on how to proceed?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Kenny Lavender
> >>>> Vice President
> >>>> WTSQ LP 88.1
> >>>> The Status Quo
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> grc mailing list
> >>>> grc at maillist.peak.org
> >>>> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> KLLG ~ 97.9 FM
> >>> Lanny Cotler, Director
> >>> Little Lake Grange Radio
> >>> Willits Hometown Low Power Radio
> >>> P.O Box 820, Willits, CA 95490
> >>> 707-367-1812
> >>> LANNY at KLLG.ORG
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> grc mailing list
> >>> grc at maillist.peak.org
> >>> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> grc mailing list
> >> grc at maillist.peak.org
> >> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > grc mailing list
> > grc at maillist.peak.org
> > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
> > _______________________________________________
> > grc mailing list
> > grc at maillist.peak.org
> > http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
>
> _______________________________________________
> grc mailing list
> grc at maillist.peak.org
> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
> _______________________________________________
> grc mailing list
> grc at maillist.peak.org
> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
>