Communications and Society Program

The Public Interest and Digital Broadcasting: Options for Political Programming Endnotes

The Public Interest and Digital Broadcasting: Options for Political Programming

Endnotes

1. The Communications Act of 1934 §309.
2. 47 U.S.C. §309(a).
3. Mark S. Fowler and Daniel L. Brenner, "A Marketplace Approach to Broadcast Regulation," Texas Law Review 60 (1982): 209-210.
4. Reed Hundt and Karen Kornbluh, "Renewing the Deal Between Broadcasters and the Public: Requiring Clear Rules for Children's Educational Television," Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 9 (Winter 1996): 16.
5. The Communications Act of 1934 §315.
6. However, if a broadcaster airs a news documentary on a candidate, the equal time provision does apply. The exemption for documentaries only applies to documentaries in which the appearance of a candidate is incidental to the subject matter.
7. This decision was made in response to a petition filed by the Aspen Institute Program on Communication and Society. See Aspen Institute, 55 FCC 2d 697 (1975), aff'd sub nom; Chisholm v. F.C.C., 538 F.2d 349 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 890 (1976).
8. Regarding Petitions of Henry Geller and the National Association of Broadcasters and the Radio-Television News Directors Association to Change Commission Interpretation of Certain Subsections of the Communications Act, BC Docket 82-564, FCC 83-529. The decision was published in the Federal Register 48 (25 November 1983), 53166.
9. Herbert E. Alexander and Anthony Corrado, Financing the 1992 Election (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1995), 231.
10. Inquiry into Section 73.1910 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations Concerning the General Fairness Doctrine Obligations of Broadcast Licensees, 102 F.C.C. 2d 143, 146 (1985).
11. Inquiry into Section 73.1910, 246.
12. Meredith Corporation v. F.C.C. 809 F.2d 863 (D.C. Cir. 1987).
13. For a discussion of the administrative and legislation debates on the Fairness Doctrine during this period, see Robyn R. Polashuk, "Protecting the Public Debate: The Validity of the Fairness Doctrine in Ballot Initiative Elections," UCLA Law Review 41 (December 1993): 392-442. For a discussion of the role of the Fairness Doctrine in the years after its adoption, see Steven J. Simmons, The Fairness Doctrine and the Media (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978).
14. Thomas E. Patterson, Out of Order (New York: Knopf, 1994), 173-75.
15. Robert S. Lichter and Linda S. Lichter, "Take This Campaign-Please," Center for Media and Public Affairs, Media Monitor 10:5 (September/October 1996), quoted in Richard Davis and Diana Owen, New Media and American Politics (New York: Oxford, 1998), 215.
16. Davis and Owen, New Media and American Politics, 90.
17. "Broadcasters Fight Campaign Finance Proposal; Plan to Link Free Time for Political Ads to Digital TV Draws Fire," Chicago Tribune, 30 May 1997.
18. Cited in Robert Gluck, "Why TV is Addicted to Campaign Cash," George, March 1998, 73.

19. Gluck, "Why TV is Addicted to Campaign Cash."
20. Gluck, "Why TV is Addicted to Campaign Cash."
21. Amy Keller, "Debate About Free TV Time Gets Audience From Rules," Roll Call, 16 May 1996.
22. Spencer S. Hsu, "TV Stations Curtail Discount Ads for Virginia Campaign," Washington Post, 14 October 1997, A1.
23. Alexander and Corrado, Financing the 1992 Election, 21.
24. Totals for congressional and presidential candidate spending are based on data reported by the Federal Election Commission.
25. Joseph E. Cantor, Congressional Campaign Spending: 1976-1996, Congressional Research Service Report 97-793 GOV (Washington, DC: Library of Congress, August 1997), 1.
26. Data reported in Joseph E. Cantor, Denis Steven Rutkus, and Kevin B. Greely, Free and Reduced-Rate Television Time for Political Candidates (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, 7 July 1997), 5.
27. Sarah Fritz and Dwight Morris, Handbook of Campaign Spending: Money in the 1990 Congressional Races (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1992), 53-54; Dwight Morris and Murielle E. Gamache, Handbook of Campaign Spending: Money in the 1992 Congressional Races (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1994), 6-10; and Dwight Morris and Murielle E. Gamache, Gold-Plated Politics: The 1992 Congressional Races (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1994), 9.
28. Ira Chinoy, "In Presidential Race, TV Ads Were Biggest '96 Cost by Far," Washington Post, 31 March 1997, A19.
29. For a discussion of these issues and the FCC actions, see Cantor and Rutkus, Free and Reduced Television Time, 8-11.
30. Cited in Amy Keller, "FCC Gets Ready to Force Free Time Issue," Roll Call, 17 April 1997, 25.
31. Center for Responsive Politics, "Beyond the 30-Second Spot," (1988), 72, cited in Cantor and Rutkus, Free and Reduced Television Time, 8.
32. These were spots that were aired just before or after news broadcasts. Under FCC regulations, licensees do not have to provide federal candidates with time during news broadcasts.
33. Federal Commmunications Commission, "Mass Media Bureau Report on Political Programming Audit," 7 September 1990, 1-8.
34. For a discussion of campaign time purchase practices, see Patrick Novotny, "Cable Television, Local Media Markets, and the Post-Network Trends in Campaign Advertisements in the 1990s," Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C., 28-31 August 1997.
35. Keller, "Debate About Free TV Time."
36. See, among others, Gary C. Jacobson, The Politics of Congressional Elections, 2d ed. (Boston: Little, Brown, 1987); Michael J. Malbin, "Campaign Finance Reform: Some Lessons from the Data," Rockefeller Institute Bulletin, 1993, 49; and Jonathan S. Krasno and Donald Philip Green, "Stopping the Buck Here: The Case for Campaign Spending Limits," The Brookings Review, Spring 1993, 17-21.
37. Malbin, "Campaign Finance Reform," 51.
38. Norman J. Ornstein, Thomas E. Mann, and Michael J. Malbin, Vital Statistics on Congress 1995-1996 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1996), 83.
39. William Schneider, CNN News, Transcript #1202-14, 17 May 1996.

40. Darrell M. West, Air Wars: Television Advertising in Election Campaigns, 1952-1992 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1993), 49-50.

41. Lawrie Mifflin, "Fox to Give Free TV Time to Candidates for President," New York Times, 27 February 1996, A19.
42. This description and the information that follows is based on the information provided in Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, Free Television for Presidential Candidates: The 1996 Experiment, March 1997.
43. Thomas S. Mulligan, "TV Firms Urged to Give Candidates Time," Los Angeles Times, 25 September 1996, D2; Mark Lorando, "WWL Offering Free Time on Air to Candidates," (New Orleans) Times-Picayune, 25 September 1996, A1; and Chris McConnell, "Belo Offers Free Time for Candidates," Broadcasting & Cable, 30 September 1996, 20.
44. Annenberg Public Policy Center, Free Television for Presidential Candidates, in passim.
45. Jon Shure, "Free TV for Candidates? Stations: Pay As You Go," New Jersey Lawyer, 3 November 1997, 3.
46. Paige Albiniak, "PBS Takes Free Time Offensive," Broadcasting & Cable, 2 February 1998, 66.
47. Martin Van Der Werf, "ABC News Chief Repeats Free-Time Offer," The Arizona Republic, 12 November 1997, B1.
48. For a discussion of the FCC's "unregulation" activity, see Nancy R. Selbst, "'Unregulation' and Broadcast Financing: New Ways for the Federal Communications Commission to Serve the Public Interest," University of Chicago Law Review 58:4 (Fall 1991): 1423-52.
49. American Enterprise Institute Legislative Analysis, Broadcast Deregulation (Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute, 1985), 2-3.
50. Jack Loftus, vice president of Neilsen Media Research, as cited in Don Aucoin, "TV Fast Changing Channels," Boston Globe, 15 March 1998, C3.
51. See, among others, Fowler and Brenner, "A Marketplace Approach to Broadcast Regulation."
52. Fred H. Cate, "The Future of Communications Policymaking," William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal 3 (Summer 1994): 13.
53. Fowler and Brenner, "A Marketplace Approach to Broadcast Regulation," 249.
54. Fowler and Brenner, "A Marketplace Approach to Broadcast Regulation," 248, n. 172.
55. See, for example, S. 1009, introduced in the lst session of the 101st Congress (1989).
56. David B. Magleby, Direct Legislation: Voting on Ballot Propositions in the United States, cited in Polashuk, "Protecting the Public Debate," 401.
57. Cantor and Rutkus, "Free or Reduced-Rate Television Time," 19.
58. See H.R. 84, submitted to the 105th Congress (1997).
59. In recent elections, a majority of the coordinated funds spent by the national party committees in both major parties in both House and Senate races went to non-incumbents. Almost all of the money spent on incumbents went to members who were in jeopardy of losing their seats. See Paul S. Herrnson, Congressional Elections, 2nd ed. (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 1998), 79-85
60. Annenberg Public Policy Center, Free Television for Presidential Candidates, 9-10.
61. Adam Clymer, "Study Calls for More TV Time for '92 Candidates," New York Times, 4 September 1991, A20.
62. John B. Anderson, A Proper Institution: Guaranteeing Televised Presidential Debates (New York: Priority Press, 1988)