Pillsbury’s communications lawyers have published the FCC Enforcement Monitor monthly since 1999 to inform our clients of notable FCC enforcement actions against FCC license holders and others. This month’s issue includes:
- Florida Radio Station Faces $14,000 Proposed Fine for Contest Rule Violations
- $6,500 Fines Targeted at Mississippi and Tennessee FM Translators for Late-Filed License Renewal Applications and Unauthorized Operation
- FCC Continues Focus on Collecting Unpaid Regulatory Fees from Broadcasters
FCC Fines Florida Radio Station for Contest Rule Violations
The FCC proposed to fine a radio broadcaster $14,000 for violating the Commission’s Contest Rule while conducting a multi-station contest. Specifically, the FCC issued a Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL) asserting that the broadcaster failed to select and/or notify contest winners in a timely fashion, as required by the licensee’s announced contest terms.
Section 73.1216 of the FCC’s Rules requires a licensee to “fully and accurately disclose the material terms” of a contest it broadcasts or promotes and to conduct the contest “substantially as announced and advertised.” Material terms include, among other things, eligibility restrictions, the time and means of selecting winners, and the extent, nature, and value of prizes. Prizes must be awarded promptly, and the FCC has consistently found violations where stations failed to award prizes in accordance with the announced contest terms.
In April 2021, the FCC received a complaint alleging that one of the licensee’s radio stations had not conducted a contest in a manner “substantially as announced and advertised.” The Enforcement Bureau issued a Letter of Inquiry (LOI) to the licensee in August 2021. In its November 2021 response, the licensee explained that during the first half of 2021, it had conducted a nationwide contest on 194 of its stations. During the contest, each participating station announced a contest “keyword” once an hour, for eleven hours each day, for 27 days. Listeners could qualify to win by submitting this keyword via text message or the internet before the end of the hour in which the word was announced. One national winner would then be picked each hour from across all stations, creating 297 winners (11 per day x 27 days). The prize was a $1,000 check and winners were to be notified within 72 hours, according to contest terms.
Upon review, the licensee discovered that as a result of human error, the contest had not been conducted according to the announced contest terms. In its LOI response, the licensee disclosed that (1) the part-time employee tasked with randomly selecting a national winner from among those qualified sometimes failed to do so; (2) the part-time employee’s manager did not provide supervision to confirm winners were selected; and (3) some winners were never notified they had been selected. Ultimately, 50 winners out of 297 were not timely selected and/or notified. After receiving the LOI but before submitting its response to the FCC, the licensee selected and notified 50 “replacement” winners.
The licensee argued that its actions did not amount to a violation of the rules because (1) an insubstantial number of winners that were not timely selected/notified compared to the total number of winners; (2) the contest terms only required the licensee to select “a total of up to, but not more than,” 297 verified winners; (3) it was not done intentionally, but was merely the “poor performance of two employees” that caused the selection/notification failures; and (4) the licensee went to “great lengths” to mitigate the selection/notification failures, eventually awarding prizes to all “winners” who completed the required paperwork. Continue reading →