Carr, NAB Build Case For First Step In Media Ownership Reform Ahead Of Vote.

Less than two weeks before the Federal Communications Commission votes on eliminating the 39% national television ownership cap, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr and the National Association of Broadcasters are making an increasingly coordinated case that decades-old ownership restrictions now threaten rather than protect local broadcasting.

Their message extends beyond television. While the Aug. 6 vote centers on the national TV ownership cap, the outcome could shape the Commission's broader approach to broadcast ownership regulation, including its ongoing review of local radio ownership limits, where broadcasters are also seeking significant deregulation.

Speaking with reporters Wednesday, Carr argued the existing ownership cap has outlived its original purpose. Instead of restraining the market power of national television programmers, he said it now primarily limits local station groups competing against media companies that can already reach virtually every American through streaming services, virtual MVPDs and other digital platforms.

"Things are out of balance, and one of the reasons we're doing this is to help bring balance back to the broadcast airwaves," Carr said. "You allow local TV groups to scale, and therefore they can compete in a much more level playing field."

Carr argued the cap was originally intended to prevent national programmers from combining programming dominance with station ownership. Today, he said those same companies can reach nearly every household directly through streaming services while local broadcasters remain constrained by ownership limits.

"If you end up in a world in which local broadcasters are merely undifferentiated pass-throughs of national programming, the entire idea of the broadcasting system breaks apart," Carr said.

NAB President/CEO Curtis LeGeyt echoes that theme in a new blog post, arguing policymakers shouldn’t repeat what he characterized as the government's slow response to the decline of newspapers.

"This debate is not about giving broadcasters a special advantage," LeGeyt writes. "It is about ending a unique disadvantage." He says broadcasters now compete against streaming platforms, social media companies and other digital rivals that face no comparable ownership restrictions.

LeGeyt argues that modernizing the ownership rules would strengthen — not diminish — local broadcasting by giving station groups greater ability to invest in local journalism, emergency coverage and NextGen TV.

"Preserving trusted local news will not happen by standing still," LeGeyt says. "It will happen by ensuring broadcasters have every opportunity to compete, invest and continue serving America's local communities."

Carr also defended the FCC's legal authority to revisit the cap despite objections from Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX) and others who argue Congress must act first. Carr said the Commission believes it retains authority to modify the rule and is confident its legal reasoning will withstand judicial review.

Opponents see the pending regulatory rollback as both an unlawful power grab and a policy mistake that would accelerate media consolidation. Commissioner Anna Gomez agreed that the media marketplace has changed dramatically since the ownership rules were adopted in 1996 but she argues that doesn’t give the FCC authority to eliminate a limit Congress explicitly enacted into law. She said any change to the 39% cap must come from Capitol Hill.

Notably, Gomez also stopped short of defending every existing ownership restriction when speaking to reporters Wednesday. Gomez said she supports examining broadcast ownership rules on a market-by-market basis but she opposes what she described as the "wholesale deregulation" that is planned.

“It's clear that the media landscape has changed,” Gomez said. “I do think that we need to look at it on a market-by-market basis because of the fact that we need to understand the changes in economics. And we want to make sure that we have voices representing those communities, so that has been my proposal.”

For now, the fight over the television ownership cap may ultimately shape the future of radio ownership regulation. The Commission's willingness to revisit one of the industry's longest-standing ownership restrictions—and its assertion that it has legal authority to do so—could provide an important signal about how aggressively Carr intends to pursue additional ownership deregulation, including potential changes to the local radio ownership rules now under review.