U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

69–010 

" ! SENATE 110TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

REPORT

2008

110–461 

Calendar No. 966 

MEDIA OWNERSHIP ACT OF 2007 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND 

TRANSPORTATION 

ON

S. 2332 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2008.—Ordered to be printed 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARINGcongress.#13
(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

THOMAS CARPER, Delaware 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

MARGARET CUMMISKY, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

LILA HELMS, Deputy Staff Director and Policy Director 

JEAN TOAL EISEN, Senior Advisor and Deputy Policy Director 

CHRISTINE KURTH, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel 

PAUL J. NAGLE, Republican Chief Counsel 

MIMI BRANIFF, Republican Deputy Chief Counsel 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
Calendar No. 966 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 110–461 

MEDIA OWNERSHIP ACT OF 2007 

SEPTEMBER 15, 2008.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. INOUYE, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 2332] 

The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to 

which was referred the bill (S. 2332) to promote transparency in 

the adoption of new media ownership rules by the Federal Communications Commission, and to establish an independent panel to 

make recommendations on how to increase the representation of 

women and minorities in broadcast media ownership, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments, and 

recommends that the bill (as amended) do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of S. 2332 is to promote local programming and content in media by requiring the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to seek public comment on any proposed changes to 

media ownership rules, to conduct a rulemaking to examine the impact of media ownership on local programming, and to solicit expert recommendations on how to increase minority and female 

ownership of broadcast media. 

BACKGROUND AND NEEDS

For decades the FCC has sought to ensure that the allocation of 

broadcast licenses serves the public interest and promotes the core 

values of competition, diversity, and localism. As was noted by the 

Supreme Court more than 50 years ago, the First Amendment 

‘‘rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of 

information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to 

the welfare of the public.’’ Associated Press v. United States, 326 

U.S. 1 (1945). 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
2 

1 See Sinclair Broad. Group, Inc. v. FCC, 284 F.3d 148 (D.C. Cir. 2002). 

The Communications Act of 1934 provides the FCC with the authority to grant licenses for the use of broadcast facilities, consistent with the ‘‘public interest, convenience, and necessity.’’ The 

FCC views broadcasters as trustees of the public airwaves and imposes restrictions and obligations on broadcasters accordingly. The 

Supreme Court has upheld the regulation of broadcasters pursuant 

to public trustee constraints as constitutional since the Red Lion 

case was decided (Red Lion Broadcasting Company v. FCC, 395 

U.S. 367 (1969)). Pursuant to this authority, the FCC has policies 

limiting both the national and local ownership of broadcast licenses. 

Initially, the FCC reviewed common ownership issues on a caseby-case basis. As the industry developed, the FCC adopted brightline rules addressing license ownership in national and local media 

markets, consistent with the public interest. Among other things, 

FCC rules limit the number of television stations and radio stations a single company can own in one market. In addition, the 

FCC’s newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule prohibits the ownership of a television or radio station and the daily newspaper in 

the same market. 

With the enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 

Act), Congress significantly loosened media ownership limits. The 

1996 Act eliminated limits on national radio ownership and raised 

the cap on national television audience reach from 25 to 35 percent. 

The Act also eased local radio ownership limits by creating a sliding scale limit that allowed for as many as eight co-owned radio 

stations in the largest markets. The 1996 Act also mandated that 

the FCC review its media ownership rules every two years to ‘‘determine whether any of such rules are necessary in the public interest as the result of competition.’’ 

2002 BIENNIAL REVIEW

In 2002, the FCC released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking announcing that the agency would review its full range of broadcast 

ownership rules. The public was asked to comment on the continued viability of these rules, in light of changes in the media marketplace and recent court decisions.1 On June 2, 2003, led by thenFCC Chairman Michael Powell, the agency adopted its 2002 Biennial Review decision, relaxing many of the FCC’s media ownership 

rules. 

The revised rules included a national television audience reach 

cap of 45 percent. With respect to local television ownership, the 

revised rules permitted one company to own two stations in markets with five or more television stations and three stations in markets with 18 or more television stations. With respect to local radio 

ownership, the revised rule retained existing caps, but adjusted the 

way stations are counted. The revised rules combined the radio/television and newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership restrictions into 

a single new media cross-ownership rule. Under this proposed rule, 

in markets with three or fewer television stations, no cross-ownership was permitted among television stations, radio stations, and 

daily newspapers in the same market. In markets with four to 

eight television stations, combinations were limited to one of the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
3 

2 See Prometheus Radio Project, et al. v. FCC, 373 F. 3d 372 (3rd Cir. 2004) (Prometheus). 3 2006 Quadrennial Regulatory Review—Review of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership 

Rules and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 21 FCC Rcd 8834 (2006); see also 2006 Quadrennial 

Regulatory Review—Review of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership Rules and Other Rules 

Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Second Further Notice 

of Proposed Rule Making, 22 FCC Rcd 14215 (2007). 

following: (1) a daily newspaper, one television station, and up to 

half of the radio station limit for that market; (2) a daily newspaper and up to the radio station limit for that market; or (3) two 

television stations and up to the radio station limit for that market. 

In markets with nine or more television stations, any combination 

that otherwise complies with the local television and local radio 

ownership rules was permitted. As a result, in a large market, one 

company could theoretically own as many as eight radio stations, 

three television stations, a daily newspaper, and the cable company. 

The revised rules faced significant public criticism. In response 

to the 2002 Biennial Review decision, more than three million individuals complained to the FCC. Congress also voiced its opposition. 

On September 16, 2003, the Senate voted 55-40 to support a ‘‘resolution of disapproval’’ of the FCC decision, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. In addition, in omnibus appropriations legislation in 2004, Congress rolled back the FCC’s new national television ownership cap from 45 to 39 percent. 

Appeals of the FCC’s 2002 Biennial Review decision were consolidated in the Third Circuit. On June 24, 2004, the Third Circuit affirmed the FCC’s general authority ‘‘to regulate media ownership,’’ 

but remanded to the FCC the bulk of its rule changes in the 2002 

Biennial Review decision for further justification and record support.2 The court also largely stayed the FCC’s new rules from the 

2002 Biennial Review decision. As a result, the agency’s previous 

rules continue to govern media ownership in this country. On June 

13, 2005, the United States Supreme Court denied the petitions for 

the writ of certiorari seeking review of Prometheus. 

On June 21, 2006, the FCC adopted a notice of proposed rulemaking seeking comment on the issues raised by the Prometheus 

remand, pursuant to its duty under section 202(h) of the 1996 Act 

which now requires the agency to review its media ownership rules 

on a quadrennial basis.3 As part of its efforts to seek public comment, the FCC held six public field hearings across the United 

States. On November 13, 2007, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin published an editorial in The New York Times calling for the FCC to 

roll back its media ownership rules in order to permit newspaper/ 

broadcast cross-ownership in the top 20 markets. Subsequently, on 

December 13, 2007, the Committee held a hearing on FCC oversight during which several members requested the FCC take additional time to solicit comment and consider its proposed changes to 

its media ownership rules. Just a month after the Martin editorial, 

on December 18, 2007, the FCC concluded its rulemaking by approving a revised set of ownership rules under which newspaper/ 

broadcast cross-ownership is presumptively permissible in the top 

20 markets. For other markets, the Commission determined that it 

would review transactions on a case-by-case basis, subject to a negative presumption, which may be overcome through evaluating: the 

level of concentration in the market; whether or not the combined 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
4 

4 Media Ownership Study Two: Ownership Structure and Robustness of Media by Kiran 

Duwadi, Scott Roberts, and Andrew Wise revised September 5, 2007 at 5-6. 5 Id. at 5. 6 See, e.g., Alexander, Peter J. and Brown, Keith. ‘‘Do Local Owners Deliver More Localism? 

Some Evidence from Local Broadcast News.’’ FCC Working Paper (2004). 7 Letter from JayEtta Z. Hecker, GAO, to the Honorable Edward J. Markey, dated December 

14, 2007, at 9. 

entity will significantly increase the amount of local news in the 

market; whether or not the combined newspaper and broadcast 

outlets will continue to employ their own editorial staff; and the financial condition of the newspaper or broadcast station in the proposed combination, or if the newspaper or broadcast station is in 

financial distress, the proposed owner’s commitment to invest significantly in newsroom operations. 

INDUSTRY CONSOLIDATION

The decade leading up to the 2002 Biennial Review decision was 

a period of significant change in the media marketplace. In the 

broadcast television industry, the number of television station owners decreased by approximately 40 percent between 1995 and 2003. 

According to studies recently conducted by the FCC, these trends 

have continued albeit at slower pace. Between 2002 and 2005, the 

number of commercial television station owners decreased about 

four percent and the number of commercial radio station owners 

decreased by eight percent.3 During the same period the number 

of television/radio combinations increased by more than 20 percent.4 As a result of this increase in concentration, there are fewer 

local owners of radio and television broadcast stations. Studies suggest that local owners of broadcast media provide more local news 

programming.5

Consolidation in the media marketplace has left women and minorities with only a limited ownership interest. According to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigation ‘‘[w]hile 

there are no reliable government data on ownership by women and 

minorities, ownership of broadcast outlets by these groups appears 

limited. According to the industry stakeholders and experts we 

interviewed, the level is limited, and recent studies generally support this conclusion.’’ 6 In testimony before the Committee on November 8, 2007, Alex Nogales, President of the National Hispanic 

Media Coalition, stated ‘‘[m]ore than a third of Americans are people of color. Yet they own less than 3% of television stations and 

less than 8% of radio stations—and these numbers are going down, 

not up.’’ 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

On November 8, 2007, the Committee held a hearing to examine 

the effects of media ownership consolidation on localism and diversity in news and entertainment. Senator Dorgan introduced S. 

2332 on the same day with Senators Lott, Kerry, Bill Nelson, Cantwell, Snowe, Biden, Clinton, Feinstein, and Obama as original cosponsors. 

On December 4, 2007, the Committee held an executive session 

at which S. 2332 was considered. The bill was approved by voice 

vote, as modified by a managers’ amendment offered by Senator 

Dorgan. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
5 

On December 13, 2007, the Committee held a hearing on FCC 

oversight during which several members spoke at length about 

Chairman Martin’s proposed role changes, as described in his editorial in The New York Times. On December 14, 2007, twenty-six 

Senators signed a letter to Chairman Martin urging a further period of comment on the Chairman’s proposed rule changes. On December 18, 2007, the FCC approved a revised set of ownership 

rules under which newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership is permissible in the top 20 markets. 

Staff assigned to this legislation are Jessica Rosenworcel, Democratic Senior Communications Counsel, Alex Hoehn-Saric, Democratic Communications Counsel, Paul Nagle, Republican Chief 

Counsel, and Michael Engel, Detailee. 

ESTIMATED COSTS

In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the Congressional Budget 

Act of 1974, the Committee provides the following cost estimate, 

prepared by the Congressional Budget Office: 

JANUARY 16, 2008. 

Hon. DANIEL K. INOUYE, 

Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2332, the Media Ownership 

Act of 2007. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Susan Willie. 

Sincerely, 

PETER R. ORSZAG. 

Enclosure. 

S. 2332—Media Ownership Act of 2007 

S. 2332 would require the Federal Communications Commission 

(FCC) to follow certain schedules for notice and public comment periods when changing any of its regulations related to the ownership 

of broadcast organizations. The bill would require the FCC to provide a 90-day period when notice of such change is offered and a 

60-day period for public comment on the proposed regulations. The 

bill also would require the FCC to respond within 30 days to public 

comments received during the period set aside for such comments. 

Before voting on any changes in rules governing the ownership 

of broadcast and newspaper organizations, the bill would require 

the FCC to study the effect of such cross-ownership (broadcast and 

newspaper organizations owned by one entity) on the availability 

and quality of local programming by radio and television stations 

and newspapers. The bill also would establish an independent 

panel that would make recommendations to increase the number of 

broadcast organizations that are owned by women and minorities. 

Based on information from the FCC, CBO estimates that implementing S. 2332 would cost less than $500,000, subject to the availability of appropriated funds, to provide a report on media conVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:17 Sep 16, 2008 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR461.XXX SR461

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
6 

centration to the independent panel. Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

S. 2332 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Susan Willie. This estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the legislation, as reported: 

NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED

The number of persons covered by this legislation would be consistent with current levels of individuals affected. 

ECONOMIC IMPACT

S. 2332 would have a positive impact on the nation’s economy by 

encouraging female and minority ownership of media outlets. 

PRIVACY

S. 2332 is not expected to have an adverse effect on the personal 

privacy of any individuals that will be impacted by this legislation. 

PAPERWORK

S. 2332 would have minimal impact on current paperwork levels. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

In compliance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides that no provisions 

contained in the bill, as reported, meet the definition of congressionally directed spending items under the rule. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 would establish the Act as the Media Ownership Act 

of 2007. 

Section 2 would amend section 202 of the Telecommunications 

Act of 1996 to require the FCC to: (1) publish any proposed modifications to its broadcast ownership regulations at least 90 days 

prior to a vote and provide at least 60 days for public comment; (2) 

complete a separate rulemaking on localism before voting on 

changes to broadcast ownership regulations, including a study to 

determine the impact of station duopolies and newspaper/broadcast 

cross-ownership on the quantity and quality of local news, public 

affairs, local news media jobs, and local cultural programming; and 

(3) convene an independent panel to make recommendations to the 

FCC regarding specific rules to increase women and minority ownership of broadcast media, conduct an accurate census of the state 

of women and minority ownership of broadcast media, and have 

the FCC act on the panel’s recommendations before voting on 

changes to broadcast ownership regulations. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
7 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, as 

reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets, new material is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996 

SEC. 202. BROADCAST OWNERSHIP. 

(a) NATIONAL RADIO STATION OWNERSHIP RULE CHANGES REQUIRED.—The Commission shall modify section 73.3555 of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3555) by eliminating any provisions limiting 

the number of AM or FM broadcast stations which may be owned 

or controlled by one entity nationally. 

(b) LOCAL RADIO DIVERSITY.— 

(1) APPLICABLE CAPS.—The Commission shall revise section 

73.3555(a) of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3555) to provide 

that— 

(A) in a radio market with 45 or more commercial radio 

stations, a party may own, operate, or control up to 8 commercial radio stations, not more than 5 of which are in the 

same service (AM or FM); 

(B) in a radio market with between 30 and 44 (inclusive) 

commercial radio stations, a party may own, operate, or 

control up to 7 commercial radio stations, not more than 

4 of which are in the same service (AM or FM); 

(C) in a radio market with between 15 and 29 (inclusive) 

commercial radio stations, a party may own, operate, or 

control up to 6 commercial radio stations, not more than 

4 of which are in the same service (AM or FM); and 

(D) in a radio market with 14 or fewer commercial radio 

stations, a party may own, operate, or control up to 5 commercial radio stations, not more than 3 of which are in the 

same service (AM or FM), except that a party may not 

own, operate, or control more than 50 percent of the stations in such market. 

(2) EXCEPTION.—Notwithstanding any limitation authorized 

by this subsection, the Commission may permit a person or entity to own, operate, or control, or have a cognizable interest 

in, radio broadcast stations if the Commission determines that 

such ownership, operation, control, or interest will] result in an 

increase in the number of radio broadcast stations in operation. 

(c) TELEVISION OWNERSHIP LIMITATIONS.— 

(1) NATIONAL OWNERSHIP LIMITATIONS.—The Commission 

shall modify its rules for multiple ownership set forth in section 73.3555 of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3555)— 

(A) by eliminating the restrictions on the number of television stations that a person or entity may directly or indirectly own, operate, or control, or have a cognizable interest in, nationwide; and 

(B) by increasing the national audience reach limitation 

for television stations to 35 percent. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
8 

(2) LOCAL OWNERSHIP LIMITATIONS.—The Commission shall 

conduct a rulemaking proceeding to determine whether to retain, modify, or eliminate its limitations on the number of television stations that a person or entity may own, operate, or 

control, or have a cognizable interest in, within the same television market. 

(d) RELAXATION OF ONE-TO-A-MARKET.—With respect to its enforcement of its one-to-a-market ownership rules under section 

73.3555 of its regulations, the Commission shall extend its waiver 

policy to any of the top 50 markets, consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity. 

(e) DUAL NETWORK CHANGES.—The Commission shall revise section 73.658(g) of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 658(g)) to permit a television broadcast station to affiliate with a person or entity that 

maintains 2 or more networks of television broadcast stations unless such dual or multiple networks are composed of— 

(1) two or more persons or entities that, on the date of enactment of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, are ‘‘networks’’ as 

defined in section 73.3613(a)(1) of the Commission’s regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3613(a)(1)); or 

(2) any network described in paragraph (1) and an Englishlanguage program distribution service that, on such date, provides 4 or more hours of programming per week on a national 

basis pursuant to network affiliation arrangements with local 

television broadcast stations in markets reaching more than 75 

percent of television homes (as measured by a national ratings 

service). 

(f) CABLE CROSS OWNERSHIP.— 

(1) ELIMINATION OF RESTRICTIONS.—The Commission shall 

revise section 76.501 of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 76.501) to 

permit a person or entity to own or control a network of broadcast stations and a cable system. 

(2) SAFEGUARDS AGAINST DISCRIMINATION.—The Commission 

shall revise such regulations if necessary to ensure carriage, 

channel positioning, and nondiscriminatory treatment of nonaffiliated broadcast stations by a cable system described in 

paragraph (1). 

(g) LOCAL MARKETING AGREEMENTS.—Nothing in this section 

shall be construed to prohibit the origination, continuation, or renewal of any television local marketing agreement that is in compliance with the regulations of the Commission. 

(h) FURTHER COMMISSION REVIEW.—The Commission shall review its rules adopted pursuant to this section and all of its ownership rules biennially as part of its regulatory reform review under 

section 11 of the Communications Act of 1934 and shall] determine 

whether any of such rules are necessary in the public interest as 

the result of competition. The Commission shall repeal or modify 

any regulation it determines to be no longer in the public interest. 

This subsection does not apply to any rules relating to the 39 percent national audience reach limitation in subsection (c)(1)(B). 

(i) NOTICE AND PUBLIC COMMENT REQUIREMENT.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—In modifying, revising, or amending any of 

its regulations related to broadcast ownership, including any 

ownership rule or limitation set forth under sections 73.3555, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
9 

73.658(g), or 76.501 of its regulations (47 C.F.R. 73.3555, 

73.658(g), 76.501), the Commission shall— 

(A) not later than 90 days prior to any vote by the Commission on the adoption of such modification, revision, or 

amendment publish such prospective modification, revision, 

or amendment in the Federal Register; 

(B) after such publication provide the public at least 60 

days on which to comment on the prospective modification, 

revision, or amendment; and 

(C) upon the expiration of the 60-day comment period described under paragraph (2), have not less than 30 days in 

which to reply to any such comments. 

(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The notice and public comment requirements under paragraph (1) shall apply to any attempt 

by the Commission to modify, revise, or amend its regulations related to broadcast and newspaper ownership made 

after October 1, 2007. 

(B) FAILURE TO COMPLY.—If the Commission fails to 

comply with the notice and public requirements under 

paragraph (1) with respect to any modification, revision, or 

amendment to which such requirements apply, then such 

modification, revision, or amendment shall be vitiated and 

shall be of no force and effect. 

(j) PROMOTION OF LOCAL CONTENT IN MEDIA.—Before voting on 

any change in the broadcast and newspaper ownership rules in a 

proceeding made necessary by the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Prometheus v. Federal Communications Commission, 

United States of America, (No. 03–3388) 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 

18390), the Commission shall initiate, conduct, and complete a separate rulemaking proceeding to promote the broadcast of local programming and content by broadcasters, including radio and television broadcast stations, and newspapers. Before publishing a 

modification, revision, or amendment of its broadcast ownership 

rules under subsection (i), the Commission shall— 

(1) complete a study to determine the overall impact of television station duopolies and newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership on the quantity and quality of local news, public affairs, 

local news media jobs, and local cultural programming at the 

market level; 

(2) publish a proposed final rule in the Federal Register not 

later than 90 days prior to any vote by the Commission on the 

adoption of the rule; 

(3) after such publication provide the public at least 60 days 

on which to comment on the prospective rule; and 

(4) upon the expiration of the 60-day comment period described in paragraph (3), have not less than 30 days in which 

to reply to any such comments. 

(k) INDEPENDENT PANEL ON WOMEN AND MINORITY OWNERSHIP

OF BROADCAST MEDIA.— 

(1) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Commission shall establish and 

convene an independent panel on women and minority ownership of broadcast media to make recommendations to the Commission for specific Commission rules to increase the represenVerDate Aug 31 2005 08:17 Sep 16, 2008 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6603 E:\HR\OC\SR461.XXX SR461

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING
10 

tation of women and minorities in the ownership of broadcast 

media. 

(2) CENSUS.—The Commission shall— 

(A) conduct a full and accurate census of the race and 

gender of individuals holding a controlling interest in 

broadcast station licensee; 

(B) provide the results of the census to the panel for its 

consideration before it makes any recommendation to the 

Commission; and 

(C) study the impact of media market concentration on 

the representation of women and minorities in the ownership of broadcast media that takes into account the data in 

the census and report the results of that study to the panel 

for its consideration before it makes any recommendation to 

the Commission. 

(3) CONSIDERATION OF PANEL’S RECOMMENDATIONS.—The 

Commission shall act on the panel’s recommendations before 

voting on any changes to its broadcast and newspaper ownership rules. 

ø(i)¿ (l) ELIMINATION OF STATUTORY RESTRICTION.—Section 

613(a) (47 U.S.C. 533(a)) is amended— 

(1) by striking paragraph (1); 

(2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as subsection (a); 

(3) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively; 

(4) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (1) (as so redesignated); 

(5) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) (as so 

redesignated) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

(6) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: 

‘‘(3) shall not apply the requirements of this subsection to 

any cable operator in any franchise area in which a cable operator is subject to effective competition as determined under 

section 623(l).’’. 

Æ 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC69 with HEARING