gitarcarver wrote:

Whether a broadcasting company can or should have its license revoked for continual lies is a conversation that in my opinion, should happen.

In the past 30 years I have led FCC broadcast license renewal efforts for a small non-profit broadcast station several times.

To be very clear here on the matter of “challenging FCC licenses”, I would first point out that FCC broadcast licenses can be challenged by anyone when they are up for renewal.

There are some politically motivated organizations, some individuals, and some organizations that just want to obtain a station’s broadcast license for themselves, who challenge some broadcast licenses at renewal time.

Their challenges usually consist of strongly worded letters (or letter writing campaigns) to the FCC regarding the licensee. Their allegations are often irrelevant under the law, and sometimes simply false.

They sometimes do succeed in creating more work for the licensee to rebut their allegations. But the FCC has a decent track record of finding out and dismissing irrelevant and/or bogus challenges on its own.

The challenges rarely succeed.

To understand the mass hysteria (and its longevity) which can lead to organized license challenges, see this canonical example of a related Rulemaking Petition:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/fcc.asp

Although Rulemaking petition RM-2493 was not a license challenge, it does illustrate the semi-organized hysteria which underlies some license challenges.

However, I think the topic is a discussion that needs to be had.

Let’s remove Trump and all political commentary from this for a moment.

If the FCC issues licenses as part of its charter duties and part of the issuance of licenses is to “serve the public interest,” (from the original 1934 act) can anyone really say that the staged rollovers of the Suzuki Samarai served the “public interest?” How about the faked exploding gas tanks? Rollovers staged for Ford Explorers? Pink slime anyone? (These are some cases just off the top of my head.)

It is easy to say those cases can be handled by the courts, but those plaintiffs and defendants are big buck corporations with the ability to spend big bucks on lawyers. What about the average person who can’t afford to take on large broadcasting corporations?

Where is the “public interest” when a broadcasting company deliberately lies? Repeatedly lies? Is there a threshold when a broadcasting company has become so reckless in regard for the truth that their license is not renewed? Does size of the company affect that renewal?

I am not naive enough to think that there is not an ulterior motive to Trump’s tweet. I am not saying that I think that stations should be held accountable for running stories where there is a disagreement in politics. Disagreements is not the same thing as lies. Criticism is not the same thing as lies.

Whether a broadcasting company can or should have its license revoked for continual lies is a conversation that in my opinion, should happen.

In the movie 1776, Stephen Hopkins returns from the “necessary” and says “Well, in all my years I ain’t never heard, seen nor smelled an issue that was so dangerous it couldn’t be talked about. Hell yeah! I’m for debating anything.”

I happen to agree with that sentiment.

Trump’s judicial appointments seem like they would protect our First Amendment rights, and that is another important part of the story.

Trump is bad here, no doubt, but the real threat to free speech in America is from the Democrats.