Carr Draws Lines Between Broadcasters and Networks, Predicts Aggressive Moves on USF

Carr drew lines between local broadcasters and broadcast networks, emphasizing the FCC's public interest requirements for each. Networks and local broadcasters are “two different entities,” Carr said. “We've been seeing this Hollywood-New York ‘foie gras’ coming down from the national networks, and the affiliates feel like they don't have a lot of freedom to actually serve their local communities.” The FCC can help local broadcasters if they adhere to their public interest obligations and “understand that there are consequences in the statute if they don't.”

Broadcast industry officials have said that Carr's public comments hinting at possible FCC action against media outlets are directed primarily at the networks, and that his regime will be favorable to broadcast deregulation despite his repeated condemnations of the media. Trust in the news media is at an all-time low, Carr said Tuesday. “I think that's something that we at the FCC, as charged by Congress to look out for the public interest in this space, have an obligation to take on.”

Carr said broadcasters' public interest obligation is what differentiates how the FCC should treat social media companies and broadcasters. For social media companies, the power to block or mute voices should be in the hands of the users, he said. “Should that decision be made in a centralized place in Silicon Valley, or should that decision-making power be distributed to the participants in the town square?” He added, “My North Star has always been more speech, less censorship.”

By contrast, the public interest standard mandates that a broadcaster is "a steward for the voices of everybody in your community that didn't get the FCC license.” Carr said he is “very open-minded” about the FCC "taking a look at” broadcaster public interest obligations “consistent with the statutory provisions against censorship that are in the Communications Act.”

A “soup to nuts” conversation is needed about the USF's future, Carr said. Requiring tech companies to pay into USF is “something that is definitely worth taking a look at.” In addition, the program should adopt tech-neutral provisions making room for fixed wireless and low earth orbit tech. “We have to have a rethink about the long-term future of USF in light of all these technologies.” Carr said the FCC must provide more support to the space economy in general, though he praised Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel for creating the FCC Space Bureau. “We need to give the green light to all these U.S.-based satellite operators, whether it’s Kuiper, whether it’s Starlink, so they can get up and running.” The space industry has “geopolitical implications” for U.S. competition with China.

The FCC should take “a balanced approach” on spectrum and work with other federal users, Carr said. “We've got to get to where the proof is in the pudding.” He said that during the previous Republican administration the FCC largely prevailed in conflicts over spectrum with other federal users but lost such conflicts under the current White House. “We've got to do a lot more than zero megahertz.”

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez said she will look for "places of bipartisan agreement" under a Republican-controlled FCC but will "speak up in areas where I disagree." During a PLI panel, Gomez said robocalls is a potential issue where Democratic and Republican commissioners could find common ground. Commissioner Geoffey Starks intends to continue focusing on connecting underserved populations, pursuing the return of FCC auction authority, and monitoring national security issues closely during the next administration, Justin Faulb, his chief of staff, said during a separate panel. Faulb and Gomez's chief of staff, Deena Shetler, said their bosses are grappling with keeping people connected in the wake of the affordable connectivity program's lapse.