Student Scholarship

Document Type

Research Paper

Abstract

This paper analyzes the historical development and regulatory policies of the Federal Communications Commission regarding the qualification of applicants for broadcast facilities. Established by the Communications Act of 1934, the commission was created to bring order to the chaotic early years of radio, which were characterized by uncontrolled growth and severe frequency interference. The primary mandate of the agency is to ensure that broadcast licenses are granted in a manner that serves the public interest, convenience, and necessity. However, the report notes that this standard is not precisely defined by statute, requiring the commission to rely on a case-to-case method of decision-making that involves significant administrative discretion. 

To be eligible for a license, an applicant must meet specific financial, legal, and technical qualifications. Legally, applicants must be citizens and have no history of significant anti-monopoly violations or certain criminal convictions. Financially, they must demonstrate the ability to construct and operate the station, though the commission has never set absolute minimum dollar amounts. Technically, while an applicant does not need to be an engineer, they must have a qualified staff capable of maintaining broadcast standards. 

In competitive hearings where multiple qualified candidates apply for the same facility, the commission employs additional criteria to break the tie. These factors include local residence and familiarity with the community, the integration of ownership and management, and the diversification of backgrounds among those in control. The agency also considers the diversification of media control, generally disfavoring applicants with existing newspaper affiliations to prevent local monopolies on information. The author concludes that while the commission's policies are often criticized for inconsistency, a flexible and discretionary approach is necessary to adapt to a constantly changing industry and truly serve the public interest.

Research Highlights

  • The Problem: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) lacked a complete, formal statement defining the "public interest, convenience, and necessity" standard, leading to inconsistent and subjective evaluations of broadcast station applicants. 

  • The Method: The author conducted a qualitative analysis of the Communications Act of 1934, federal court cases, and FCC decisions, supplemented by interviews with FCC Commissioners, Hearing Examiners, and Washington attorneys. 

  • Quantitative Finding: In 1931, 15% of broadcast stations were newspaper-owned, increasing to 33% by 1938; 1952 minimum financial requirements for station construction ranged from $6,500 for a 100-watt Class IV station to $200,000 for a 50-kw Class I or II station; the FCC staff was reorganized into 12 functional sections in 1952. 

  • Qualitative Finding: The FCC employs a "case-to-case" decision method for applicants because the "public interest" phrase is not susceptible to exact definition; comparative hearings weigh factors such as local residence, integration of ownership and management, and diversification of backgrounds among controlling persons; the Commission maintains that "absolute consistency" in policy is secondary to the need for administrative elasticity in a changing industry.

Publication Date

1-1954

Faculty Sponsor

Archive

Download

Share

COinS