March 21, 2021 | 1:43 pm EDT by Shelly Palmer
Shelly Palmer: “Whenever I’m asked about the fate of the television business, I always answer, ‘As goes the next NFL deal, so goes TV.’ Well, as everyone with even the slightest interest in the subject already knows, the NFL/TV deal is done but times have changed. The NFL deal makes it very clear that it is time for the FCC to think seriously about reclaiming the spectrum gifted to the local broadcast industry. It is also time for Congress to craft policies that not only respect the state of today’s technology but aspire to leverage the technology of tomorrow.”
April 1, 2021 | 3:13 pm EDT by Scott R. Flick
Few rules in the Code of Federal Regulations have as tortured a history as 47 CFR § 73.3555 the broadcast multiple ownership rules. The subject of court decisions too numerous to count, a brief review of FCC decisions revising (or deciding not to revise) these rules reveals a twisted mass of logic and rationales where parties fiercely argue even as to the very reason for their existence. Today, the Supreme Court released a
unanimous decision reversing the Third Circuit’s ruling involving three ownership rules, noting simply that the FCC’s approach had been reasonable, and the fact that it made its decision based on the record before it rather than the record the Third Circuit wished for, was just the way government must function.
POLITICO
Sign up for POLITICO Playbook today.
Email
Sign Up
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or updates from POLITICO and you agree to our privacy policy and terms of service. You can unsubscribe at any time and you can contact us here. This sign-up form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Presented by Facebook
The overwhelming evidence tells us Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is slowing or killing the $2,000 checks. | Cheriss May/Getty Images
DRIVING THE DAY
AT THE MOMENT which means as of before dawn this Wednesday morning it doesn’t look like Senate Majority Leader
Provided by Dow Jones
By Ryan Tracy and Jeff Horwitz State attorneys general said in a lawsuit earlier this month that a 2018 business agreement between two digital advertising giants, Facebook Inc. and Alphabet Inc. s Google, was an illegal price-fixing deal. Lawmakers are calling for further investigation. The companies say it was above board. The Wall Street Journal viewed part of a recent unredacted draft version of the lawsuit, which elaborates on allegations in the redacted complaint filed in a Texas federal district court. Ten Republican attorneys general, led by Texas Ken Paxton, say Google gave Facebook special terms and access to its ad server, a ubiquitous tool for allocating advertising space across the web. This and other conduct by Google, they allege in the final lawsuit, harms competition and deprives advertisers, publishers and consumers of improved quality, greater transparency, increased output and/or lower prices.
POLITICO
Get the California Playbook Newsletter
Email
Sign Up
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or updates from POLITICO and you agree to our privacy policy and terms of service. You can unsubscribe at any time and you can contact us here. This sign-up form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
THE BUZZ: Gov. Gavin Newsom spent his Tuesday reordering the landscape of California politics.
THE SENATE PICK:
Newsom finally ended the supercharged Senate lobbying and frenzied speculation by picking the presumed frontrunner: his longtime ally, Secretary of State Alex Padilla. Newsom’s calculus for replacing White House-bound Sen.