based on the limited evidence it had about any effect the changes might have on female and minority ownership.
“The FCC repeatedly asked commenters to submit empirical or statistical studies on the relationship between the ownership rules and minority and female ownership,” Kavanaugh wrote. “Despite those requests, no commenter produced such evidence indicating that changing the rules was likely to harm minority and female ownership.”
In 2017 the FCC, under a chairman appointed by Trump, eliminated a rule that had barred companies from owning two television stations in a market that didn’t have at least eight independently owned stations. The change also let companies own two of the top four stations in some markets if the FCC grants a waiver.
In addition, the FCC eliminated separate bans on ownership of both a daily print newspaper and a broadcast station in the same coverage area, and on ownership of both a radio and television station in a single market.
An appeals court ruling against the FCC put the changes on hold.
Backers of stronger rules said they would press for renewed FCC action.
“This decision clearly reinforces the FCC’s authority to issue new, stronger rules if the record would support that,” said Andrew Jay Schwartzman, co-counsel for the group that challenged the FCC’s rules relaxation. “We will likely press for better data and for rules that would address increased concentration nationally and within local markets.”
The cases are FCC v. Prometheus Radio Project, 19-1231, and National Association of Broadcasters v. Prometheus Radio Project, 19-1241.'
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-01/supreme-court-rules-fcc-can-relax-media-ownership-rules
= new reply since forum marked as read
