David Oxenford

By David Oxenford, Wilkinson Barker Knauer

It’s the start of another year, so it is time to dust off the crystal ball and look at what we expect to be the big regulatory and legislative issues facing broadcasters in the new year.  Looking back on our forecast for 2025 that came out just over a year ago, I was surprised to see that we had predicted that the new Commission would be interested in defining the public interest standard, reviewing network-affiliate relations, and looking at the political biases that broadcasters allegedly exhibited.  All of these were in fact issues that came up this year but, as no conclusions were reached on any of these matters, these same issues will no doubt continue to be on the FCC’s agenda in 2026.

Public Interest Standard

Throughout 2025, FCC Chairman Carr has been talking about the public interest standard in most of his many public discussions of media regulation, and those comments have prompted much legal analysis from all corners.  We expect that, in the coming year, there will continue to be discussions about what the public interest standard really means– and just how far that standard goes in authorizing the FCC to act to regulate broadcast operations.

Network-Affiliate Relations

The FCC has also received preliminary comments on the relationship between television networks and their affiliates.  As we noted last week, reply comments were due December 29, so the pleading cycle has now closed.  In the Public Notice asking for these comments, there was a statement that the comments would be used to inform the Commission as to whether a formal rulemaking proceeding was necessary to further review the issues.  With the comments in, we will be watching to see if the FCC moves forward with any additional proceedings.

Media Ownership

But we expect that the biggest issue for broadcasters in 2026 will be a further review of the broadcast ownership rules – and quite possibly a relaxation of those rules.  In 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit determined that the FCC’s restrictions on one owner having interests in two top-4 TV stations in any market was not defensible and struck that restriction (see our article here).  But that relaxation of the rules does not appear to be enough for many TV broadcasters, as there are now pending at the FCC deals that, if approved, would have one owner holding three or more stations in a market.  Some of these deals would also exceed the 39% national audience cap.  Proceedings are open that could change both of those rules this year.  See our article here for more on the TV rules.

The radio ownership rules have been unchanged for 30 years despite massive changes in the audio marketplace.  When these rules were enacted, there was no active satellite radio service, much less the unlimited on-demand audio streaming services offered by multiple companies and available on almost everyone’s mobile phones.  As radio has not been able to secure any substantial relief from the 30-year-old restrictions on ownership since the onslaught of digital competition over the last decade, there is much hope in the industry that we will see a significant relaxation of those rules this year.  Transactions seeking a waiver of the radio ownership rules have already been filed, so we may see hints of the FCC’s direction over the coming months.  We recently wrote here about the need for change in the radio ownership rules.

Delete, Delete, Delete

Last year, we also said that we expected the FCC to be more deregulatory than the prior Commission.  But I’m not sure that we could have anticipated a proceeding called “Delete, Delete, Delete” and the adoption of a process to make noncontroversial deletions of old rules without first going through the “notice and comment” process – a process that requires the Commission to write up a justification for any action that it was planning and to seek public comment first before any action would be taken. The FCC’s new “Direct Final Rule” process allows it to delete obsolete rules on an almost immediate basis, with the Commission needing to consider public comments only if someone quickly comes to the Commission after a rule deletion is announced  with a convincing argument that the rule should remain.  Thus far, this Direct Final Rule process has only been used on truly noncontroversial matters like deleting rules related to analog television or other rules referring to FCC policies that had been revised or superseded.

We expect this year the FCC will start to look for rules to delete by reviewing more substantive policies that impede broadcast growth.  In the past, we have suggested a repeal was long overdue for the Rural Radio Doctrine that forbids broadcasters from moving their stations from rural areas into metropolitan areas where they would serve more people (see our article here on that policy).  While that may not be high on the FCC’s list, it does appear that many paperwork burdens (like those imposed by the Biennial Ownership Reports which have already been put on hold) may be considered by this FCC.  Last year, one area where we had anticipated the FCC to roll back paperwork obligations was EEO.  Instead, we were surprised to see EEO audits for both broadcast and cable that not only asked for information about the historical affirmative action requirements for broadcasters, but also asked questions about reverse discrimination – whether the audited station had shown favoritism for applicants or employees based on their race, ethnicity, gender, or other immutable characteristics.  See our article here for more on those audits.  We will see if the results of those audits lead to any actions in 2026.  Concerns about “DEI” programs have come up in the FCC’s evaluation of several big media mergers, so it appears that the FCC will continue to enforce its EEO policies in the coming year.

Underwriting

Last year, the FCC also started an investigation into the underwriting practices of many noncommercial stations – particularly those affiliated with NPR and PBS.  See our article here.  At the time many of these issues were raised, we wondered if the FCC would look more closely at underwriting and perhaps take steps to better define noncommercial broadcaster’s obligations under those rules.  Thus far, none of the investigations have resulted in any public findings and no policy examination of the underwriting rules has begun We will be watching to see how the recent announcement that the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which was the main funding source for NPR and PBS stations, that it will dissolve and cease operations after 58 years due to a lack of Congressional funding will affect the review of these issues.

Technical Issues & Auctions

Technical issues also will be considered.  For TV, rules to assist the rollout of ATSC 3.0 will likely be adopted, although with no mandatory transition date (see our note on the FCC’s proposals here).  LPTV stations have proposed the use of a different transmission standard, 5G Broadcast, and the FCC may look at that alternative.  For FM stations, increased digital power is still being considered by the FCC (even though asymmetric side bands were approved in 2025).  There is also a proposal pending for A10 stations – allowing Class A FMs to increase power to 10 kW.  It is unclear if that proposal will move forward this year but, because it is just an industry proposal, before any actions can be taken the FCC would need to initiate a notice and comment rulemaking, so there is unlikely to be any change in analog FM power limits this year.

Actions to make spectrum available for wireless carriers may also affect broadcasters in new year.  There is a proposal pending, pursuant to Congressional direction, to recapture more of the C-Band, which is used by satellite earth stations to receive broadcast programming.  The portions of this band that could be reclaimed would be dedicated to wireless uses.  Also, just this week, the FCC announced that, at its regular monthly open meeting on January 29, it will consider more unlicensed uses of the 6 GHz spectrum used for broadcast auxiliary purposes.  Watch for these issues to be resolved late in the year.

AM operators are still hoping for the adoption by Congress of the AM for Every Vehicle Act, and there are indications that this may be the year that the bill is adopted and signed into law.  Recently, a group of broadcasters suggested that the FCC allow AM licensees to buy translators and move them up to 500 miles to use with AM stations (see our note here).  Expect the FCC to take comments on that proposal in the near term – but whether it goes further remains to be seen, and final resolution may be unlikely in 2026.

The FCC has already announced an opportunity to file for new LPTV and TV translator stations, starting in March – the first such window in over 15 years.  The FCC also included in its budget for Fiscal Year 2026 revenue from an FM auction – so watch for vacant FM channels that have accumulated in the four years since the last auction to be made available during a filing window later this year.  Some have proposed other windows for other classes of new stations but, with potential auctions for applicants who end up being mutually exclusive with other applicants in the LPTV window needing to go to auction and because of the anticipated FM auction, it would not be surprising if there are no additional filing windows for new broadcast stations this year.

Political Season

2026 is, of course, a big election year.  Chairman Carr has raised questions about some established practices affecting broadcasting in a political year – particularly the equal time rule, and its application to candidate appearances in “exempt” programs.  As those policies have been quite entrenched in FCC precedent (see, for instance, our article on one case where the FCC explained its policy), a change would seem to require an FCC rulemaking and, given that candidates are becoming legally qualified as we write this article, it seems late in the game to change any policies in ways that will affect this year’s elections.

But two other decisions could affect the political advertising process.  The FCC in December postponed the effective date of its new requirements that broadcasters verify that the buyers of political issue ads are not agents of foreign governments.  The FCC delayed the effective date until June 7 but, if implemented then, it could require burdensome investigations of issue ad buyers right in the middle of the 2026 election campaign, at a time when broadcasters are already scrambling to comply with their same day/next day political file obligations.

Also, a Supreme Court decision is expected by June on whether political parties can coordinate their spending with federal candidates.  If the Supreme Court decides to allow such coordination, there may well be more money flowing at the direction of political candidates.  Depending on how any decision is written, it may also mean that more money will be funneled through candidates and be subject to lowest unit rates.

Music Royalties

Finally, where would we be without a mention of music royalties?  As we noted in our recent 2026 Broadcasters Regulatory Calendar, we are expecting a Copyright Royalty Board proceeding at any time to approve certain settlements that will set the rates for payments to SoundExchange to obtain the rights to stream recorded music.  We already know that payments by commercial broadcasters  streaming their signals online will increase, as there is a settlement on those rates between NAB and SoundExchange that is just waiting for CRB approval.  The CRB’s decision will also approve other settlements with some noncommercial broadcasters – and the decision will set rates for noncommercial religious broadcasters and for commercial webcasters not affiliated with broadcast stations.

Other music royalty battles are likely coming as well.  SoundExchange is likely to continue to push for an over-the-air performance royalty for sound recordings – an issue considered at a Congressional hearing last month (see our article here).  The Copyright Office is looking at royalties for the Performing Rights Organizations, given the rise of GMR and several other new collection agencies (see our article here).  We would hope to see some recommendations coming out of that study to limit the ever-increasing amount of those royalties.

Conclusion

These issues just scratch the surface of the potential legal and regulatory matters that broadcasters may face this year.  For instance, we have not even talked about issues raised by broadcasters’ use of Artificial Intelligence, thought that is a topic that could fill several blog articles and is sure to come up in 2026.  Regulation of Big Tech has also been discussed in past years, and those issues are likely to come up again this year.  There are certainly enough issues to keep us busy, and there are no doubt more issues that most station operators want to deal with when they are primarily interested in just running their own station during these competitive times.  But regulatory change will come – and you need to stay on top of these changes.  Read this blog, join state and national broadcast organizations, and review the trade press regularly – and consult your counsel about decisions that may affect your organization.  With that, dare I say Happy New Year!?