> **DA 07-1641**

In Reply Refer to:

> 1800B3-KD

Released: April 6, 2007

Ms. Martha Beatriz López Amador

1124 Bay Boulevard

Suite E-100

Chula Vista, CA 91911

William H. Fitz, Esq.

Covington & Burling LLP

1201 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.

Washington, DC 20004-2401

In re: KFMB(AM), San Diego, CA

Facility ID No. 42120

Midwest Television, Inc.

File No. BR-20050726AAV

Application for Renewal of License

**Informal Objection**

Dear Ms. Amador and Mr. Fitz:

This letter refers to: (1) the above-noted July 26, 2005, application of
Midwest Television, Inc. (the "Licensee") to renew the license of radio
station KFMB(AM), San Diego, California (the "Station"), and (2) the
September 26, 2005, Informal Objection ("Objection") to that application
filed by Martha Beatriz López Amador.[^1] In her Objection, Ms. Amador
alleges that the license for the Station should not be renewed because
KFMB(AM) failed to follow through on a promise made to her by the
Station's Richard Roberts on his daily talk show, "The Rick Roberts
Show," to post a picture of her missing daughter on his web page on the
Station's website. For the reasons set forth below, we deny Ms. Amador's
Objection and grant the renewal application.

**Discussion.** In evaluating an application for license renewal, the
Commission's decision is governed by Section 309(k)(1) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"). That section
provides that we are to grant the renewal application if, upon
consideration of the application and pleadings, we find that (1) the
station has served the public interest, convenience, and necessity; (2)
there have been no serious violations of the Act or the Commission's
Rules (the "Rules"); and (3) there have

been no other violations which, taken together, constitute a pattern of
abuse.[^2] If, however, the licensee

fails to meet that standard, the Commission may deny the application --
after notice and opportunity for a hearing under Section 309(e) of the
Act -- or grant the application "on terms and conditions that are
appropriate, including a renewal for a term less than the maximum
otherwise permitted."[^3]

In her Objection, Ms. Amador claims that, in June 2005, she called and
spoke with Mr. Roberts about her missing daughter during his program
broadcast over the Station. During that conversation, Mr. Roberts
allegedly volunteered to upload and post a photograph of her daughter
onto his web page, which is hosted on the Station's website. According
to Ms. Amador, pursuant to the Station's instruction to her, she
e-mailed the Station several photographs and a story about her missing
daughter. Ms. Amador states that, when she followed up with the Station,
she was told by Station personnel that her pictures would not be posted
because her story was "confusing" and "contradictory."[^4] Ms. Amador
contends that, by failing to post the pictures, KFMB(AM) has implied
that her efforts are part of a hoax and has thereby tarnished her
"social image."

The role of the Commission in overseeing program content is limited. The
First Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section 326 of the
Act prohibit the Commission from censoring program material or
interfering with broadcasters' free speech rights. The Commission does
regulate broadcast content where federal statutes direct it to do so.
For example, the Commission enforces the statutory prohibition on the
broadcast of obscene, indecent and profane material contained in 18
U.S.C. § 1464. However, the only matter allegedly aired by the Licensee
referred to in the Objection consisted of Mr. Roberts' discussion with
Ms. Amador about posting on his web page the photograph of her missing
daughter, program material that fails to violate any Commission Rule. To
the extent that Ms. Amador takes issue with Mr. Roberts' subsequent
decision not to so post the girl's photograph, the Commission does not
regulate the non-broadcast activities of station personnel or
announcers, including their operation of a web page.[^5] Finally, as to
her claim to have been defamed by these events, such allegations are
outside of the Commission's jurisdiction. "Such allegations are properly
the subject of private defamation actions \[under state law\], not of
Commission licensing proceedings."[^6] Accordingly, the Commission does
not regulate the conduct that is the subject of Ms. Amador's
complaint.[^7] We accordingly deny the Objection.

**Conclusion.** We have evaluated the KFMB(AM) renewal application
pursuant to Section 309(k) of the Act,[^8] and we find that KFMB(AM) has
served the public interest, convenience, and necessity during the
subject license term; there have been no serious violations of the Act
or the Rules and there have been no other violations which, taken
together, constitute a pattern of abuse.

In light of the above discussion, and pursuant to Section 309(k) of the
Act, and Sections 0.61 and 0.283 of the Rules,[^9] the Informal
Objection filed on September 26, 2005, by Martha Beatriz López Amador IS
DENIED, and the application (File No. BR-20050726AAV) of Midwest
Television, Inc., for renewal of license for KFMB(AM) IS GRANTED.

Sincerely,

Peter H. Doyle

Chief, Audio Division

Media Bureau

cc: Midwest Television, Inc.

[^1]: It does not appear that Ms. Amador sent a copy of her Objection to
    the Licensee, from which the Commission has no record of having
    received a response.

[^2]: 47 U.S.C. § 309(k)(1). The renewal standard was amended to read as
    described by Section 204(a) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
    Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996). S*ee Implementation of
    Sections 204(a) and 204(c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996
    (Broadcast License Renewal Procedures)*, Order, 11 FCC Rcd 6363
    (1996).

[^3]: 47 U.S.C. §§ 309(k)(2), 309(k)(3).

[^4]: It appears from the Objection that these comments were not
    broadcast over the Station. Instead, Ms. Amador believes that
    listeners that heard her on-air conversation with Mr. Roberts would
    view his failure to have posted the girl's photograph in an
    unflattering light to Ms. Amador. *See* Objection, August 8, 2005,
    letter from Martha López to Rick Roberts at 3.

[^5]: *Citadel Broadcasting Company,* Memorandum Opinion and Order and
    Notice of Apparent Liability, FCC 07-41 (released April 4, 2007),
    note 139 (*citing* *Eagle Radio, Inc.*, Memorandum Opinion and
    Order, 9 FCC Rcd 1294, 1294-95 (1994); *Dale A. Owens*, Memorandum
    Opinion and Order, 54 FCC 2d 375, 378-79 (1975)). We note that the
    Licensee has posted the following disclaimer on Mr. Roberts' web
    page, evidencing his control over its content: "The different points
    of views on the Rick Roberts Blog are not supported nor do they
    reflect the views and beliefs of KFMB Stations or any entity
    affiliated with KFMB Stations." *See*
    <http://www.760kfmb.com/rick_blog/index.php#rick_top>

[^6]: *Jacor Broadcasting of Tampa Bay, Inc*., Memorandum Opinion and
    Order, 7 FCC Rcd 1826 (MB 1992) (citing *Anti-Defamation League of
    B'nai B'rith*, Memorandum Opinion, 4 FCC 2d 190, 191 (1966)). *See
    also* *Policy Regarding Character Qualifications in Broadcast
    Licensing*, Report, Order and Policy Statement, 102 FCC 2d 1179
    (1986) (subsequent history omitted) (narrowing the range of non-FCC
    related misconduct to be considered when assessing an applicant's
    character qualifications).

[^7]: To the extent that the Ms. Amador believes that the Station has
    breached an agreement with her or has otherwise dealt unfairly with
    her, she may pursue any such claims in a local court of competent
    jurisdiction. *See Letter to Jeff Kost*, 21 FCC Rcd 6223, 6225 (MB
    2006).

[^8]: 47 U.S.C. § 309(k).

[^9]: *Id.*; 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.61, 0.283.