Media and Democracy Project urges FCC to establish a 'bright-line test' with hearing on FOX affiliate’s broadcast license

Our petition is not about speech or political slant — it’s about the deliberate business decision by the Murdochs and Fox to lie to the American people about the 2020 election to protect the company’s profits. That decision cannot be squared with the character requirements of the Communications Act, and the FCC has the opportunity to prove that its public interest policy matters.”

Brian Hansbury, co-founder of the Media and Democracy Project

Today, the Media and Democracy Project (MAD), joined by a bipartisan coalition of prominent former FCC officials, legal experts, and media advocates, filed further comments with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) urging the agency to designate the WTXF-TV broadcast license application for a hearing. In its filing, the coalition asserts that this matter is not controversial nor political and that action by the Commission is a straightforward application of its statutory obligations.

“Our petition is not about speech or political slant — it’s about the deliberate business decision by the Murdochs and Fox to lie to the American people about the 2020 election to protect the company’s profits,” said Brian Hansbury, co-founder of the Media and Democracy Project. “That decision cannot be squared with the character requirements of the Communications Act, and the FCC has the opportunity to prove that its public interest policy matters.”

The filing argues that this case is “easily distinguishable from routine complaints by politicians about the political slant of a particular channel or classic journalistic prerogatives.” The group calls for the Commission to establish a “bright-line test to provide clear guidance on when a hearing is required.” The filing continues, “[p]roviding this guidance also would be a crowning addition to this Commission’s legacy.”

“Commissioner Carr’s recent threat against the broadcast industry (an echo of Trump’s threat against ABC and CBS — against whom there has been no judicial finding) illustrates the importance of this commission adopting a more clear bright line test that invokes the character provision of the communications act only after there has been a judicial finding,” said former Murdoch lobbyist Preston Padden. “If the FCC fails to act, it risks setting a dangerous precedent that undermines its own authority and the public’s trust in broadcast media.”

In urging Commission action, the group also called on the FCC to pay particular attention to three passages from earlier informal comments:

1. In an earlier filing from former FCC Chairman Alfred Sikes, the radio station owner recounted preparing his first application for a station license. It required him to commit to operate in the “public interest.” He recalled wondering whether that language was “just some bureaucratic construct or a legally enforceable requirement.” Later, after serving as chairman of the Commission, he notes that “the answer is still elusive.”
2. In an informal objection, former FCC Commissioner Ervin S. Duggan and former editor of The Weekly Standard Bill Kristol, cited Judge Davis’ findings in US Dominion, Inc. v. Fox News Network, emphasizing that Fox’s behavior “is not consistent with the FCC’s character requirements for broadcast licensees who are supposed to operate their stations in the public interest first and foremost.” The pair continued, “given that the Murdoch/Fox lies contributed to the January 6 riot in the Capitol and duped millions of Americans into believing that the election was stolen, their actions shocked the conscience.”
3. In informal comments from preeminent defender of media First Amendment rights, Floyd Abrams, he recounted his long history of serving as counsel to media organizations whose First Amendment rights were threatened. Notwithstanding that history, Abrams states, “but knowing and repeated distortion of information about a forthcoming election is precisely what a broadcaster may not do, and that the Commission may consider in determining whether license renewal is appropriate.”

The joint informal comments were filed by Brian Hansbury, MAD’s co-founder; Alfred Sikes, former Republican chairman of the FCC; Ervin S. Duggan, former Democratic FCC commissioner and former PBS president; William Kristol, longtime editor of The Weekly Standard; William Reyner, longtime lead regulatory and commercial outside counsel to Murdoch/Fox; and Preston Padden, former executive of Fox Broadcasting Company and former lead lobbyist for Rupert Murdoch/News Corporation/Fox.

A copy of the informal comments is available here. A link to a timeline of MAD’s petition is available here.

About the Media and Democracy Project:

MAD is a non-partisan, all-volunteer, grassroots organization focused on strengthening a free and independent media in the public interest. MAD aims to improve our national discourse so that American voters can engage in informed decision-making. As part of that goal, MAD has an interest in the responsibility of journalists and media to report fully, accurately and fairly on the electoral process and the outcome of elections. Additional information is available at www.MediaAndDemocracyProject.Org.

 To sign up for more information from The Media and Democracy Project, click here.