Federal Communications Commission	"FCC  XX-XXX"


STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER BRENDAN CARR

Re: 	Amendment of Section 73.3556 of the Commission’s Rules Regarding Duplication of Programming on Commonly Owned Radio Stations, MB Docket No. 19-310; Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative, MB Docket No. 17-105.

It feels like this is the 75th item in this FCC’s work to modernize our media regulations.  (I’m only slightly exaggerating.)  And while some might try to sneak in a quick nap when we start talking about rules governing the duplication of radio programming or, last month’s barn burner, broadcast antenna siting, I think that would be a mistake.  Because what nearly every one of our media modernization initiatives show is the unnecessary extent to which the FCC has historically micromanaged the business operations of local broadcasters.  And it must stop.

	There are clearly circumstances in which some measure of program duplication in the same market is beneficial, such as rebroadcasting locally oriented programming that is often expensive to produce but is of particular interest to local listeners.  At the same time, there aren’t always going to be compelling reasons to rebroadcast 100% of another station’s programing.  But those decisions should be determined in the market by the listening public and not in the pages of the Code of Federal Regulations.  With the significant increase in the number of local radio stations and an explosion of other options for information and entertainment programming, I can see little reason for keeping this rule on the books.  Perhaps the record will show otherwise.

	The media marketplace is changing rapidly, and broadcasters need to change with it.  So the FCC should let them get on with that effort.  This is particularly true in the smallest markets, where we need to do everything we can to incentivize investment in local news and public interest programing.  Yet these broadcasters remain subject to anachronistic and asymmetrical regulations that limit their ability to serve their markets in the most efficient and effective way possible.  That’s why I am glad the FCC is working to address these issues, big and small.

	I would also like to thank my colleagues for agreeing to seek comment on two additional issues in today’s Notice.  First, I’m glad we are now asking questions about the impact of non-broadcast sources of news and information on the need for this rule.  After all, we must consider the realities of the modern media marketplace when reviewing our broadcast rules.  Second, the item now asks whether the FCC’s existing restriction on programming raises any First Amendment concerns.  I look forward to reviewing the record that develops on that question.

Finally, I want to thank the Media Bureau for its work on the item.  It has my support.
2