• PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Edit: I just found out that that’s not true for political broadcasts. https://www.fcc.gov/media/policy/statutes-and-rules-candidate-appearances-advertising

    (a) The Commission may revoke any station license or construction permit –

    (7) for willful or repeated failure to allow reasonable access to or to permit purchase of reasonable amounts of time for the use of a broadcasting station, other than a non-commercial educational broadcast station, by a legally qualified candidate for Federal elective office on behalf of his candidacy.

    Huh, weird rules and what does “bona-fide” mean in this instance?:

    Q: Does the FCC regulate the content of cable programming?

    A: Cable television system operators generally make their own selection of channels and programs to be distributed to subscribers in response to consumer demands. The Commission does, however, have rules in some areas that are applicable to programming – called “origination cablecasting” in the rules – that are subject to the editorial control of the cable system operator. The rules generally do not apply to the content of broadcast channels or to access channels over which the cable system operator has no editorial control.

    Q: What is the “equal opportunities” rule of political cablecasting?

    A: Once a cable system allows a legally qualified candidate to use its facilities (by identifiable voice or picture), it must give “equal opportunities” to all other legally qualified candidates for that office to use its facilities. The cable system can not censor the content of the candidate’s material in any way, and can not discriminate between candidates in practices, regulations, facilities or services rendered pursuant to the equal opportunities rules.

    Candidates must submit requests for equal opportunities to the cable system within one week after a rival candidate’s first use of the cable system. If the person was not a legally qualified candidate at the time of the rival’s first use, he or she may submit a request within one week of the rival’s next use of the cable system after he or she becomes a legally qualified candidate.

    Q: Does a legally qualified candidate’s appearance on a newscast trigger the equal opportunities rule?

    A: No. Candidate appearances that are exempt from the rules include appearances on a bona fide newscast, bona fide news interview, bona fide news documentary, or on-the-spot coverage of a bona fide news event.

    https://www.fcc.gov/media/program-content-regulations

    • Overzeetop@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      My guess is that there is no set standard in law. When you deny someone else “equal opportunity “ they can challenge the denial to the FCC and in court. Whoever loses the FCC appeal files a federal lawsuit. Then it would be based on case law for the definition of bona fide in similar cases and, barring that, similar usage of the term. You duke it out with $1000/hr lawyers in federal court for 2-3 rounds until the most recent loser appeals to the Supreme Court where they turn youdown or you argue if the FCC even has the power to compel such an “equal opportunity “ based on the law which allows the rule to be written.

      At least that’s my layman’s understanding of the process.

        • Overzeetop@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, but what’s “authentic”? If you make up a news story about a really really good campaign stop, is it just a bona fide news story or is it an advertisement? News about his history of financial or humanitarian success?

          The devil, as always…

          • PeleSpirit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            True, it will probably end up with the results you mentioned, but it does seem to have some teeth in law. I’m sure there’s precedence that they’re citing but it’s probably too expensive and who wants to go onto fox, oan or rt anyway.