NAB Files to Intervene in Prometheus Challenge

RADIO ONLINE | Friday, January 26, 2018

NAB has filed Motions to Intervene in Prometheus' challenge to the FCC's media ownership reform order with the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. Prometheus Radio Project is seeking review of the Reconsideration Order and among other things, a stay of the effective date of the Reconsideration Order, in which the FCC granted in part and denied in part petitions for reconsideration of a 2016 order that had belatedly resolved the FCC's mandated 2010 and 2014 reviews of its broadcast ownership rules.

In its petition, Prometheus states that FCC was "unable to provide a cogent response" to explain why it had failed to resolve the required 2010 and 2014 quadrennial reviews and "remind[ing] the Commission of its obligation to complete" its reviews. The tardily-completed 2016 Order, however, failed to keep pace with competitive changes in the marketplace, as Congress intended when imposing the quadrennial review requirement. The FCC instead maintained its existing rules and even adopted additional restrictions on the ownership and operation of broadcast stations.

Among other actions, the 2016 Order reversed course to maintain the complete ban on common ownership of a newspaper and a single radio or TV station in the same market -- a ban that the FCC had previously concluded did not serve the public interest, a conclusion with which the court has agreed. NAB actively participated in the FCC proceedings leading to the adoption of the 2016 Order and requested reconsideration of many aspects of it.

In its filing, NAB said that many of its members were adversely affected by the 2016 Order and would be adversely affected if the Reconsideration Order were to be reversed "in its entirety" and all the outdated ownership restrictions that were "modified or repealed" on reconsideration reinstated, as Petitioners request (filed January 16, 2018). Similarly, NAB's members would be adversely affected if the effectiveness of the Reconsideration Order were stayed and/or the FCC enjoined "from approving any broadcast license applications that would be inconsistent with the [current] ownership limits," as Petitioners also request.

In conclusion, NAB said it's a "party in interest" and that it's entitled to mandatory intervention in Petitioners' appeal because it participated "in the proceeding before the agency," and its "interests will be affected" by this Court's disposition of the Reconsideration Order.