FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

The Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) regulates interstate and foreign communications
by radio, television, wire, satellite, and
CABLE TELEVISION. The FCC oversees the development
and operation of broadcast services and
the provision of nationwide and worldwide telephone
and telegraph services. It also oversees the
use of communications for promoting the safety
of life and property and for strengthening the
national defense. The FCC maintains a comprehensive
web site: www.fcc.gov.
The FCC was created by the Communications
Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq.) to
regulate interstate and foreign communications
by wire and radio in the public interest. The scope
of its regulation includes radio and television
broadcasting; telephone, telegraph, and cable television
operation; two-way radio and radio operation;
and satellite communication. The FCC is
composed of five members who are appointed by
the president. Only three of the commissioners
may be members of the same political party at
any given time. A review board and an office of
general counsel assist the commission. In addition,
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW judges conduct evidentiary
adjudicatory hearings and write initial
decisions. In January 2002, the FCC announced
a major restructuring of several of its bureaus,
reducing the number of bureaus from seven to
six and renaming several of them.
Media Bureau
The Media Bureau combines the functions
of the Mass Media and Cable Services Bureaus.
The Mass Media Bureaus regulates the following
services: amplitude modulation (AM), frequency
modulation (FM), television, low-power
television, translator, instructional television
and related broadcast auxiliary, and directbroadcast
satellite. The Media Bureau issues
construction permits, operating licenses, and
renewals or transfers of such broadcast licenses
except for broadcast auxiliary services. The
bureau also oversees compliance by broadcasters
with statutes and FCC policies.
The division of the Media Bureau (formerly
organized as the Cable Services Bureaus) develops,
recommends, and administers policies and
programs for the regulation of cable television
systems. It advises the FCC on the development
and regulation of cable television. Among its
other responsibilities, the bureau investigates
complaints from the public; coordinates with
state and local authorities in matters involving
cable television systems; and advises the public,
other government agencies, and industry groups
on cable television regulation and related matters.
Wireline Competition Bureau
The Common Carrier Bureau was renamed
the Wireline Competition Bureau in 2002. This
Bureau regulates interstate common carrier
communications by telephone. Common carriers
include companies, organizations, and individuals
providing communications services to
the public for hire, which must serve all who
wish to use them at established rates. In providing
interstate communications services, common
carriers may employ landline wire or
electrical or optical cable facilities.
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
administers all domestic commercial and private
wireless TELECOMMUNICATIONS programs
and policies. Commercial wireless services
include cellular, paging, personal, specialized
mobile radio, air-ground, and basic exchange
telecommunications. Private wireless services
include land mobile radio (including public
safety, industrial, land transportation, and business),
broadcast auxiliary, operational fixed
microwave and point-to-point microwave, and
special radio telecommunications. The Wireless
Telecommunications Bureau also implements
laws and treaties covering the use of radio for
the safety of life and property at sea and in the
air, and administers commercial and amateur
radio operator programs.
International Bureau
The International Bureau manages all FCC
international telecommunications and satellite
programs and policies, and represents the FCC
at international conferences, meetings, and
negotiations. The International Bureau consists
of three divisions: Telecommunications, Satellite
and Radiocommunication, and Planning and
Negotiations.
The Telecommunications Division develops
and administers policies, rules, and procedures
for the regulation of telecommunications
facilities and services under section 214 of the
Communications Act (47 U.S.C.A. § 153 et seq.)
and Cable Landing License Act (47 U.S.C.A.
§ 34 et seq.). In addition, the division develops
and administers regulatory assistance and training
programs in conjunction with the administration’s
Global Information Infrastructure
initiative.
The Satellite and Radiocommunication
Division develops and administers policies,
rules, standards, and procedures for licensing
and regulating satellite and earth station facilities,
both international and domestic.
The Planning and Negotiations Division
represents the FCC in negotiations with Mexico,
Canada, and other countries on international
agreements that coordinate radio frequency
assignments to prevent and resolve international
radio interference involving U.S. licensees.
Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau
The Consumer Information Bureau was
renamed the Consumer and Governmental
Affairs Bureau in 2002. This bureau is a onestop-
shopping place for information regarding
FCC policies, programs and, activities. The Consumer
Centers, located in Washington,D.C., and
Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, also help individuals
file informal complaints on a variety of issues,
including: slamming (switching services without
customer approval or knowledge); cramming
(unauthorized, misleading, or deceptive
charges for services not requested or not
received); and disability access. The Consumer
Education Office (CEO) works with consumer
organizations and government agencies concerned
with FCC regulatory activities. CEO prepares
informational materials and conducts
forums to educate the public about important
FCC regulatory programs and to solicit feedback
on issues regulated by the commission. This
office also arranges briefings and seminars for
educational institutions, consumer organizations,
and other interested groups. The Disability
Rights Office (DRO) ensures that FCC
actions and policies enable people with disabilities
to have the same access as everyone else to
telecommunications. DRO helps to implement
mandates for nationwide telephone-relay services;
access to telecommunications wireline and
wireless products and services; televised emergency
access; and closed captioning on television
programming.
Office of Engineering and Technology
The Office of Engineering and Technology
administers the Table of Frequency Allocations,
which specifies the frequency ranges that various
radio services may use. The office also administers
the Experimental Radio Service and the
Equipment Authorization Program. The Experimental
Radio Service permits the public to
experiment with new uses of radio frequencies.
This allows the development of radio equipment
and exploration of new radio techniques prior to
licensing under other regulatory programs. The
Equipment Authorization Program includes
procedures for agency approval of radio equipment
importation, marketing, and use.
Compliance
Much of the investigative and enforcement
work of the FCC is carried out by the commission’s
field staff. The Field Operations Bureau
has six regional offices and 35 field offices. It also
operates a nationwide fleet of mobile radio
direction-finding vehicles for technical enforcement
purposes. The field staff detects radio violations
and enforces rules and regulations. The
radio spectrum is under continuous surveillance
to detect unlicensed operation and activities or
nonconforming transmissions, and to furnish
radio bearings on ships and planes in distress.
The Field Operations Bureau also administers
public service programs aimed at educating
FCC licensees, industry, and the general public
to improve compliance with FCC rules and regulations.
Telecommunications Act of 1996
In a sweeping overhaul of the Communications
Act of 1934, Congress passed the Telecommunications
Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C.A. § 51 et
seq.) in February 1996. The legislation was
designed to deregulate the $500-billion-per-year
telecommunications industry and to encourage
competition, thus freeing telephone companies,
broadcasters, and cable television operators to
enter one another’s markets in order to secure
lower prices and higher-quality services for U.S.
consumers. Critics of the legislation charged
that it would increase the cost of cable TV and
telephone service and would encourage monopolization
of the media. Supporters of the legislation
claimed that it would foster competition
and make available new services such as
advanced wireless communications, home
banking, and interactive television. By 2002, both sides could claim that parts of their predictions
had come true.
Critics of the act have noted that the cable
television industry has gone through a steady
stream of MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS, resulting
in just a few major cable companies dominating
the cable industry in the United States.
Cable bills have steadily risen since the passage
of the 1996 act. Advocates of deregulation point
out that wireless communication has continued
to grow in a competitive marketplace and that
consumers have more choices and lower costs.
As for radio, critics have charged that the relaxation
of ownership rules by the FCC has resulted
in the acquisition of many stations in one market
by just one company. As a consequence, local
programming has given way to national programming
for entire radio chains.
The 1996 act contained provisions that went
beyond deregulation to include restrictions on
the distribution of indecent material. For example,
Title V of the act, known as the Communications
Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) (47 U.S.C.A.
§ 223(a)–(h)), forbade the transmission of indecent
material over computer networks such as
the INTERNET unless steps were taken to keep
the material away from children, and required
that new television sets be equipped with an
electronic block that would allow viewers to prevent
children from viewing objectionable programming.
In February 1996, two separate
actions were filed in U.S. district court in
Philadelphia challenging the constitutionality of
the CDA. The first suit, ACLU v. Reno, No. Civ.
A. 96-963, 1996 WL 65464 (E.D. Pa.), was filed
by the AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION and
19 other plaintiffs. The second action, American
Library Ass’n v. United States Department of Justice,
No. Civ. A. 96-1458 (E.D. Pa.), was brought
by the American Library Association and 26
other plaintiffs. The other plaintiffs in both
actions included civil libertarians, computer
businesses, online services, newspapers, and
librarians.
The lawsuits were consolidated for hearing
before a special three-judge panel, authorized
under the CDA and consisting of two federal
district court judges and the chief judge of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The
plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction to
prevent enforcement of the CDA pending the
outcome of a trial of their lawsuit. They challenged
section 223 of the CDA, which states, in
part, that any person in interstate or foreign
communications who “by means of a telecommunications
device knowingly . . . makes, creates,
or solicits and . . . initiates the transmission
of . . . any comment, request, suggestion, proposal,
image, or other communication which is
obscene or indecent, knowing the recipient of
the communication is under 18 years of age”
may be fined or imprisoned. In addition, section
223 makes it a crime to use an “interactive computer
service” to transmit to persons under 18
years of age any material that, in context,
“depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive
as measured by contemporary community standards,
sexual or excretory activities or organs,
regardless of whether the user of such service
placed the call or initiated the communication.”
The plaintiffs argued that the CDA violates the
FIRST AMENDMENT because it bans a substantial
category of protected speech from most parts of
the Internet. The government responded that
shielding minors from access to indecent materials
is a compelling interest that justifies the
restrictions imposed by the act.
The court noted that the CDA was not narrowly
tailored to further the government’s interest
in protecting minors, noting that “it is either
technologically impossible or economically prohibitive
for many of the plaintiffs to comply with
the CDA without seriously impeding their posting
of online material which adults have a constitutional
right to access.”According to the court,
The Internet is a far more speech-enhancing
medium than print. . . . Because it would necessarily
affect the Internet itself, the CDA
would necessarily reduce the speech available
for adults on the medium. This is a constitutionally
intolerable result. . . . As the most
participatory form of mass speech yet developed,
the Internet deserves the highest protection
from governmental intrusion.The
court granted the plaintiffs’ request for a
preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement
of the disputed sections of the CDA
pending trial (Reno, 929 F. Supp. 824 [E.D.
Pa. 1996]).
In another lawsuit, Playboy Entertainment
Group, owner of the Playboy cable television
channels, challenged the act’s requirement that
cable companies block audio and video transmissions
of sexually explicit programs. Section
561 of the act states, in part,
In providing sexually explicit adult programming
or other programming that is indecent
on any channel of its service primarily dedicated
to sexually-oriented programming, a multichannel video programming distributor
shall fully scramble or otherwise fully
block the video and audio portion of such
channel so that one not a subscriber to such
channel or programming does not receive it.
In Playboy Entertainment Group v. United
States, 918 F. Supp. 813 (D. Del. 1996), the district
court issued a TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
ORDER blocking the enforcement of section 561.
Playboy had argued that the blocking and time
requirements imposed on cable operators violated
the First Amendment and EQUAL PROTECTION.
When Playboy applied for an injunction,
the same court dissolved the RESTRAINING
ORDER and upheld the law. On appeal, the U.S.
Supreme Court affirmed.
The pace of deregulation by the FCC continued
through 2002, with the promise of more
consolidation of companies in the cable, broadcast,
radio, and telecommunications sectors.
FURTHER READINGS
U.S. Government Manual Website. Available online at
(accessed November
10, 2003).
CROSS-REFERENCES
Censorship; Fairness Doctrine.