By Andrew Gins
On January 29th, 2025, The FCC announced it would launch an investigation into NPR and PBS programming, alleging the networks’ broadcasting could be in violation of federal law. Chairman Carr is right to initiate this investigation into taxpayer-funded media illegally enriching themselves with advertiser dollars.
A letter published by the commission raises concerns that public media’s sponsorship IDs may be categorized as “commercial advertisements.”
As the letter states, “Federal law prohibits any NCE [Noncommercial Educational] station from running commercial advertisements.” Section 399B of the Communications Act prohibits NCE stations from “airing commercials or other promotional announcements on behalf of for-profit entities.” While the law does not prevent NCE stations from receiving on-air acknowledgments, announcements broadcasted over NCE airwaves cannot “contain comparative or qualitative descriptions, price information, calls to action, or inducements to buy, sell, rent, or lease.”
The implications of the investigation are closely tied to an ongoing policy debate regarding the use of taxpayer money to subsidize NPR and CBS. Chairman Carr stated that potential findings of for-profit endeavors at public broadcasting entities would “further undermine any case for continuing to fund NPR and PBS with taxpayer dollars.”
Public broadcasters have routinely claimed that access to federal taxpayer funding is crucial to their mission and ability to operate. If the investigation finds evidence of commercial advertising broadcasting, it would no doubt weaken their case for access for more funding.
Under current laws, NCE stations are permitted to make announcements acknowledging entities that have made financial contributions but are explicitly prohibited from promoting businesses or using imperative language that could classify the announcement as commercial advertising. In recent years, public broadcasters have taken more liberties with sponsor time slots, evolving from simply naming sponsors to allowing corporate jingles and the promotion of toll-free numbers. Public television sponsor slots began incorporating logos and credits in a bid to raise revenues and attract more sponsors during the 90s when the FCC began relaxing restrictions on what public media could broadcast.
Then came the digital revolution and the advent of podcasting. As listeners migrated online, NPR was an early pioneer of digital downloads for their audio content, into which they sprinkled ad reads to acknowledge their sponsors. This has since become industry standard, as anyone who enjoys podcasts today knows well. NPR’s reads may have begun as simple name-checking, but they have evolved into full-blown ads explaining product and service offerings, concluding with taglines. They are indistinguishable from the ads read on private sector podcasts.
Take Car Talk, for example. For decades a non-commercial radio show with no sponsors outside a few foundations, its canned episodes are now available for download by nostalgic millennials drowning in sentimentality for their Saturday morning dump runs with their dads. They cart out poor old Ray Magliozzi to read scripted advertisements for eBay Motors no different than eBay might pay to run on The Rest is History.
Chairman Carr’s endeavor is worthwhile to ensure NPR, PBS, and their affiliates comply with federal licensing obligations. Such an investigation is perfectly justified under the circumstances, contrary to the opinions of commissioners Gomez and Starks who have criticized the move. Commissioner Anna Gomez stated that the investigation is an attempt to “weaponize the power of the FCC.”
But this statement could not be further from the truth. Chairman Carr’s investigation explores the possibility of legal violations to protect the integrity of taxpayers who help fund these entities. As long as they accept taxpayer money, public broadcasters should be subject to oversight. They should not claim to function as a non-profit entity if they engage in for-profit dealings that contradict their status.
Public broadcasters could, of course, refuse tax dollars and run all the ads they want. This is precisely what former NPR editor Uri Berliner, whose bombshell essay increased scrutiny of far-left agendas in the state-funded outlet’s editorial decisions, suggested in another recent essay for the Free Press. We would certainly prefer it if they did, and defend to the death their right to run ads as a private venture. But until such time as they are willing to operate without state subsidies, it is perfectly legitimate for the FCC to investigate their double-dipping.
In any case, there is no reason why NPR, PBS, and their affiliates should be exempt from scrutiny. The goal of the investigation is not to target or silence these organizations but to ensure that they operate within the established legal frameworks that dictate the limits of promotional advertising for private sector businesses by a taxpayer-funded entity. Carr’s investigation should be viewed as a step towards ensuring fairness in the broadcasting sector and accountability over how taxpayer dollars are spent by the entities that receive them.
The post Chairman Carr is Right to Investigate Public Broadcasting Advertising Compliance appeared first on Digital Liberty.