Newly Formed Group Seeks to Block Sinclair Deal
The FCC should deny Sinclair Broadcast’s proposed sale of five stations to Rincon Broadcasting because of Sinclair’s sidecar relationships with Deerfield Media and Cunningham Broadcasting, said a petition to deny filed Monday by a newly formed public interest group, Frequency Forward. “In addition to controlling television stations in violation of the Commission’s multiple ownership rules, Sinclair has made material misrepresentations to conceal the extent of its control over these sidecar stations,” the petition said. “Neither Sinclair, nor Cunningham and Deerfield, Sinclair’s alter egos, are qualified to be Commission licensees.” It called for the FCC to hold a hearing into whether Sinclair and its sidecars are qualified to remain broadcast licensees.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Frequency Forward is represented by Smithwick & Belendiuk attorney Arthur Belendiuk, who has a history of representing clients in challenges against Sinclair. The group's website is just a single page, and it was formed in 2025 and operates out of Belendiuk’s offices, a spokesperson told us. According to the group's website, “Frequency Forward also intends to play an important role as a watchdog, exposing undue industry influence through investigative initiatives, including Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.”
Asked about the petition's prospects at the current FCC, Belendiuk was dismissive of the question. “So what, the law no longer matters now?” Broadcast attorneys told us they expect the FCC to dismiss the petition and approve the transaction, but to allow it to close, the agency will have to do so formally. Quietly shelving the petition, as the agency sometimes does, isn’t an option if the deal is to move forward, Belendiuk said. The proposed sale to Rincon involves three stations in Illinois and one each in Wisconsin and Missouri. Two of the stations are ABC and CBS affiliates, two are ABC only, and one is a CW affiliate.
“Frequency Forward appears to be nothing more than a front group created to give its counsel the appearance of a client to justify ongoing, repetitive, politically motivated attacks against Sinclair that the FCC has already rejected,” said a Sinclair spokesperson. “This astroturf organization appears to have been created mere weeks before the filing of its baseless pleading.” To avoid further waste of FCC resources, the agency “should reject this opposition, consider whether censure or sanctions are warranted, and more broadly ask self-proclaimed ‘public interest’ organizations like Frequency Forward to identify their membership and funding sources in FCC pleadings,” the spokesperson added.
Frequency Forward’s petition contends that Sinclair misrepresented its relationships with Cunningham and Deerfield in its responses to a letter of inquiry (see 1906270068) issued by the FCC after the agency blocked Sinclair’s purchase of Tribune in 2018. It said Sinclair submitted misleading financial information and false answers about its relationship with Cunningham and its level of control over the company, including omitting that Sinclair's SEC filings listed the company as a variable interest entity under Sinclair’s control. “This omission demonstrates on the part of Sinclair a lack of candor and a willingness to deceive the Commission.” A petition seeking to block Sinclair's license renewals filed by a Belendiuk-represented client in 2020 made arguments similar to those in the petition. Sinclair said then that SEC rules are different from FCC ownership rules, and the relationships between Sinclair and its sidecars are similar to other broadcaster arrangements.
The petition also argued that the FCC improperly disposed of allegations that Sinclair had misled the agency during the Tribune proceeding. The FCC issued a $48 million consent decree closing the matter in 2020 (see 2005220056), but the Frequency Forward petition said FCC rules bar consent decrees over character matters. Belendiuk represented viewers in an unsuccessful appeal of that consent decree, as well as a freelance journalist who sued the FCC over a FOIA request related to the settlement. Materials gained from that FOIA are part of the basis of the Frequency Forward petition. Sinclair has argued that the FCC's resolution of the proceeding was within its authority.
“Neither Deerfield, Cunningham or the other front companies have any authority to control daily operations of the stations they own, nor do they have the authority to make policy decisions, hire or fire employees, pay financial obligations or receive monies or profits from what are nominally their operations," the petition said. It added that Cunningham, Sinclair and Deerfield are represented by the same law firms: Pillsbury Winthrop and Thomas & Libowitz. “Only if the contracts are mere formalities, i.e. agreements with front companies under the control of Sinclair, can Pillsbury and Thomas & Libowitz ethically continue their joint representation.” Pillsbury “has concluded" that its "simultaneous representation of Sinclair, Cunningham and Deerfield is not adverse within the meaning of the D.C. Bar Ethics Rules,” the petition said. “The Commission should take Pillsbury at its word.” Neither Pillsbury nor Thomas & Libowitz commented. Pillsbury also represents Rincon.