As we celebrate the Fourth of July, remember that citizen soldiers from New York helped secure our nation’s freedom. That spirit lives on today in the New York Army National Guard (NYARNG). We have created a campaign to help your community understand the NYARNG’s vital mission and to learn about the career opportunities that are available. The NYARNG will make local personnel available for interviews at your radio or television station. The interviews can also be done remotely. Interviews should take place just before or on the Fourth of July. If you are interested in interviewing a representative of the NY Army National Guard from your community, contact Trevor at telmendorf@nysbroadcasters.org . Trevor will send you the contact information for your local NY Army National Guard representative. Stations should set up the interview directly with NYARNG’s representative. So, join us and help celebrate the Fourth of July with the women and men of the NYARNG who make Independence Day possible. These interviews will help stations meet their FCC public service obligations and can be listed on your quarterly issues program list. This offer is for NYSBA members only.

As we reported earlier this year, we had a tremendous number of stations that entered NYSBA’s Excellence in Broadcasting Awards this year. The Excellence in Broadcasting Awards is a state-wide competition, with stations competing against other stations in similarly sized markets (i.e., small, medium, and large). The competition includes both broadcasting and digital categories. We also have a separate college division, and these radio/television stations were judged against each other throughout the entire state. There are three separate competitive classifications and stations compete only with others in the same group: GROUP 1: New York City only GROUP 2: Albany/Capital District, Buffalo, Long Island, Rochester, and Syracuse GROUP 3: All other markets The awards will be presented at regional lunches throughout the state. The lunches will be held from 12 noon to 2 PM at the following locations: New York City – Manhatta, 21 Liberty Street| Thursday, September 12th Long Island – Blackstone Steakhouse, 10 Pinelawn Road| Friday, September 13th Buffalo – Aloft Buffalo Downtown, 500 Pearl Street | Monday, September 23rd. Rochester – The Strathallan Hotel, 550 East Avenue| Tuesday, September 24th Syracuse – Embassy Suites by Hilton Syracuse Destiny USA, 311 Hiawatha Blvd.| Wednesday, September 25th Binghamton – DoubleTree Hotel, 225 Water Street| Thursday, September 26th Albany – Wolfert’s Roost Country Club, 120 Van Rensselaer Blvd. | Friday, September 27th This was a very competitive year. We want to congratulate all of the stations who won this prestigious award. You can see the list of all award winners here.

A recent article in Inside Radio reported the results of the recent “Sports Audio Report” issued by Edison Research on sports audio usage. According to the article: “Radio and podcasts occupy a major place in the American sports fandom landscape, with 64% of sports fans saying they frequently or occasionally listened to sports audio content throughout the last year — with AM/FM radio the most popular consumption channel.” For those stations with sports/sports talk formats, the study is worth reading. You can see a more detailed analysis of the study in Inside Radio here.

The FCC has released its new proposal requesting comments on the regulatory fees for 2024. The fees are based on operating costs. As a result of arguments presented by broadcasters last year, the FCC revised its approach to assessing regulatory fees. As a general matter, the FCC proposes to reduce TV station fees by approximately 15.4% from last year. Proposed radio station annual regulatory fees will see a decrease between 4.9% and 6.1%. The FCC seeks comment on whether to end its presumption that silent stations are entitled to fee waivers without providing evidence of financial hardship. It is proposed that, beginning in 2025, such stations will be required to document their inability to pay. Fees are generally due in late September before October 1st, which is the first day of the Federal Government’s fiscal year. The proposed regulatory fees for television can be found in Appendix F, which begins on page 63 of the FCC’s proposal. Proposed radio fees can be found on page 112 of the FCC’s proposal. You can access the FCC’s proposal regarding regulatory fees here.

The FCC recently announced its new requirements for identifying “leased” programming that is sponsored by foreign governments or their agents. Such programming is subject to the FCC’s enhanced sponsorship ID requirements. A key question has been the nature and scope of a station’s obligation to investigate whether a program has been sponsored by a foreign government.  The foreign sponsorship ID requirements in the FCC rules require that licensees exercise reasonable diligence to obtain information: (1) Inform the lessee of the foreign sponsorship disclosure requirement. (2) Ask the lessee whether it falls into any of the categories that would qualify it as a “foreign governmental entity.” (3) Ask the lessee whether it knows if any individual/entity further back in the chain of producing/distributing the programming to be aired qualifies as a foreign governmental entity and has provided some type of inducement to air the programming. (4) Memorialize the above-listed inquiries and retain such memorialization in its records for the remainder of the license term or for one year, whichever is longer. There was an additional rule requiring stations to check federal databases to see if the entity was listed as a foreign entity. This requirement was struck down by the Court of Appeals which held that section 317(c) imposes on licensees only “a duty of inquiry," not a duty of investigation. Responding to the Court’s decision, last week the FCC replaced the “investigation” obligation with a verification requirement that gives broadcasters two options to comply with the rules: Option 1: A station and the lessee must both execute written certifications using standardized language, with the lessee certifying that they are not acting on behalf of a foreign government and the licensee certifying that they explained this FCC requirement to the lessee; or Option 2: A station must ask the lessee to provide screenshots of the search results for the lessee’s name in the Department of Justice’s Foreign Agent Registration Act database and the FCC’s most recent U.S.-based foreign media outlet report. In effect, while the court ruled that the FCC cannot require stations to investigate, it believes it can require stations to ask if their program supplier is a foreign government or agent. The FCC adopted standardized templates to help with the certification process. Stations not wanting to use the FCC’s templates may develop their own that are consistent with the rules. Importantly, the foreign sponsorship identification rules will not apply to sales of advertising for commercial goods and services to the extent that such programming would not otherwise be subject to the general sponsorship disclosure rules, as set forth in the FCC’s rules. The rules will not apply to political candidate advertisements. However, in a significant reversal of its previous position, the FCC’s new rules will apply to issue advertisements and paid public service announcements. Moreover, programming lease agreements in existence at the time of the compliance date are grandfathered for the duration of the lease. Going forward, the new rules will apply to any extensions of the lease agreement. The rules will apply to locally produced programming as well as religious programs. The rules will apply regardless of whether the programming is paid for or supplied to the station “for free.” Stations in the North Country that broadcast Canadian programs should consult their attorneys to determine whether the programming falls withing the scope of the rules. We are not convinced that the revised rule will pass court muster. We expect the most recent decision to trigger additional litigation. You can access a copy of the FCC’s decision here.

We successfully lobbied the New York Legislature to pass significant changes to the Political “AI” law that was enacted last April as part of the budget process. The Governor’s budget included a draconian political AI law that placed stations in the middle of litigation battles between political candidates where a candidate’s image or voice was included in an opposing candidate’s political communications. The old law created a legal process where an aggrieved candidate could easily sue a station.  A station would be responsible if it knew or should have known deceptive AI was used in political communications. A station could be required to label political content and be held responsible for court costs and attorney’s fees. Not only did this create liability, but it also conflicted with federal law. Our goal was to reduce litigation risks and avoid conflicts with federal regulations. Here are the highlights: Conflicts with Federal Law Resolved:  The new legislation makes it clear that the NY law cannot conflict with Federal law. For example, federal law prevents stations from editing or placing labels on political ads purchased by a candidate's authorized campaign committee. The new legislation makes it clear that federal law controls. Actual knowledge v. “Should have known”:  The existing law can hold stations responsible if they “should have known” there was deceptive AI in a political communication. Under the new legislation, stations are only responsible if they have actual knowledge that a candidate’s image or voice in a political communication has been manipulated. This major change will help protect broadcasters. News Exemption:  The existing law requires stations to place the specific label, “This (image or voice) has been manipulated,” if the newscast includes materially deceptive content containing a candidate’s image or voice. The new legislation allows a station to use its own words to acknowledge that there are questions about the authenticity of the materially deceptive media.  The new law states: “The news exemption refers to materially deceptive media distributed by a bona fide news reporting entity for the purpose of news reporting or coverage, if the reporting clearly acknowledges through content or a disclosure, in a manner that can be easily read or heard by the average listener or viewer, that there are questions about the authenticity of the materially deceptive media; We believe news reporting and coverage provisions should be read broadly. This news exemption is superior to the existing law. Political Advertising:  This is a huge change. The existing law requires stations to put labels on political ads that contain materially deceptive content that has been manipulated with AI or other electronic means. This can lead to a conflict with federal law. It also can harm the political advertising market.  Political advertisers do not want to place labels on their political communications. The legislation requires a station to implement a policy regarding political AI. Stations must adopt a policy requiring political advertisers to include a disclosure label if the ad contains a manipulated deceptive image, video, or audio of a candidate. A copy of the policy would be given to an entity purchasing a political ad. There is no obligation to investigate. Stations would not be required to take any action if the advertisement contains a materially deceptive modified image. The obligation is limited to adopting a policy and communicating that to the entity purchasing the ad. This old law remains in effect until the Governor signs the legislation. Although once signed, the new legislation applies retroactively, so any pending litigation will be dismissed. Remember, this law is enforced by a private right of action. In other words, it is triggered when a candidate files a suit against a station. This means that judges across the state will be interpreting the language of the new law. The problem is that different judges may interpret provisions of the law differently. We are paying close attention as to how the legislation is implemented. Please let us know if you become involved in litigation. The new legislation that passed is vastly superior to the current law. We want to thank all the stations that were involved in the extensive lobbying effort. You can see an excellent memo outlining the new law by our Washington DC communications attorney Jack Goodman here. You can see the text of the new legislation here.

As we noted previously, legislation was introduced in the New York legislature that would place stations in legal jeopardy for running food product advertising. The legislation, S.213B and A.4424B, proposed to fundamentally change the law regarding unfair and deceptive practices as it relates to food product advertisements. We strongly opposed the legislation. We noted in our Memo in Opposition to the bills: “While we agree that children should be protected from false and misleading advertising, the New York State Broadcasters Association, Inc., (NYSBA) must oppose the above-mentioned legislation in its present form.  The overbreadth of this legislation would jeopardize the legality of nearly all food and food product advertising in New York State.  The legislation could result in endless litigation involving legitimate advertisements for products in New York.” As in the past, the legislation passed the New York Senate. With considerable effort, we were able to block this harmful legislation in the Assembly. You can see the text of the legislation here. You can see our opposition to the legislation here.

As we noted previously, NYPD is in the process of encrypting its police radio communications.  Despite decades of relying on access to police communications to cover breaking news, broadcast journalists are losing access to basic police communications in boroughs across the city.  NYPD claims it needs to encrypt its communications to prevent criminals from accessing its communications.  However, journalists are not the “bad guys.”  For nearly 90 years, journalists have had access to police communications and NYPD cannot provide a single example of where this endangered a police officer.  Apart from NYPD, there is a concern that this policy can spread throughout the state. To address this concern, NYSBA and other journalist groups strongly supported the “Keep Police Radio Public Act.” The legislation, S.7759, passed the NY State Senate.  Unfortunately, its companion bill in the Assembly, A9728-A, did not pass. Importantly, the law would require all law enforcement entities in the state to allow professional journalists access to basic police communications.  The legislation reads: “Any law enforcement agency in the state that encrypts any portion of its radio communications shall ensure that all radio communications, with the exception of sensitive information, are accessible, in real time, to emergency services organizations and professional journalists as defined in section seventy-nine-h of the civil rights law.  In the event that a law enforcement agency does encrypt radio communications pursuant to this subdivision, the department of state shall, for the purpose of verifying credentials, establish and administer a process for granting real-time access to radio communications to emergency services organizations and to professional journalists.  Such a process for granting access shall take no more than five business days to complete.” Under the legislation, the rules governing journalist access would be established and implemented by the New York Department of State.  This helps ensure that local departments could not block access to journalists. This is the first time this legislation has been introduced.  Passing the Senate in the first year is an accomplishment.  However, there is more work to do.  We will be working with the Assembly and Governor’s office to move this legislation forward. You can see a copy of the legislation here.

For decades, the FCC enforced a non-duplication rule for radio stations. At the time, the Commission believed that such duplication was an inefficient use of spectrum. In 1992, the FCC adopted the most recent version of the rule, which limited the duplication of programming by commonly owned stations or stations commonly operated through a time brokerage agreement in the same service (AM or FM) with substantially overlapping signals to 25% of the average broadcast week. In 2020, the FCC eliminated the 25% rule for both AM and FM stations. In response to petitions for reconsideration by several music interests, the FCC law week reinstated the rule for FM stations. “[W]e reinstate section 73.3556 of our rules as to FM stations in order to further the goals of competition, programming diversity, localism, and spectrum efficiency.  We find that Petitioners provide valid reasons to reconsider eliminating the radio duplication rule as applied to FM stations, and we conclude that the record supports reinstating the rule for FM service.  Specifically, we find that the record does not provide sufficient evidence that the rule, as applied to FM service, has caused or will cause harm to FM licensees, that market forces alone would be sufficient to preserve the rule’s benefits, or that the 25% duplication allowance set forth in the former rule and the potential to seek a waiver to exceed that allowance in the event of special circumstances is insufficient to provide FM licensees with flexibility where needed.... As a result, we believe that elimination of the rule for FM service in the final Order was, at best, premature given the absence of such evidence, and particularly as balanced against the countervailing public interest objectives the rule serves.  Accordingly, we find that reinstating the radio duplication rule for FM service strikes the right balance between affording FM stations the ability to repurpose some amount of programming on commonly owned stations while continuing to further the public interest goals of competition, programming diversity, localism, and spectrum efficiency.” The vote to reinstate the rule was by party line 3-2, with the democrats voting in favor of reinstating the regulation. Frankly, it is difficult to believe that in 2024 the FCC would keep such ancient regulations.  Radio exists in a hyper-competitive market, and stations should be able to use those formats on their facilities that allow them to compete effectively. You can see a copy of the Commission's decision here.

At its meeting on Thursday, June 6, the FCC will be open a proceeding to look at major changes to the Class A, LPTV, and TV translator rules. The key question is whether the Online Public File requirements that apply to full-service stations should be applied to these other services. The Commission will also look at technical and operational changes to its rules. Specifically, the FCC will be looking to: Seek comment on whether to require top-four network-affiliated LPTV stations to comply with the same online public file (OPIF) requirements applicable to full power and Class A television stations, or alternatively, whether OPIF requirements should be applied to LPTV stations that are among the top-four TV stations in each market based on the Nielsen ratings. Propose to adopt procedures for LPTV stations to establish an OPIF, and propose to make public inspection and political broadcasting rules applicable to all LPTV stations. Propose technical and operational amendments to our rules, including whether to: o   Amend the method for calculating the maximum distance that a displaced or channel-sharing station may move under our displacement rule. o   Clarify the maximum distance that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations may move under our minor modification rule. o   Require that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations specify a community of license within their station’s contour. o   Adopt minimum operating and defined minimum video program requirements for LPTV stations. o   Require stations in the LPTV Service seek authority to change designation and maintain a call sign consistent with their class of service. o   Specify requirements pertaining to emissions masks. o   Prohibit LPTV/TV translator station operations above TV channel 36. o   Clarify the circumstances in which LPTV/TV translators stations are eligible for displacement. These new proposed rules would increase the regulatory burdens placed on these stations. We will watch this proceeding closely. You can see the text of the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking here.

A recent article in Radio Ink reported on a study by Katz indicating the strength of radio's “reach.” According to the article, “As radio remains a favorite of American adults across generations, new data is showcasing how heavily AM/FM is consumed, even among “super” TV and internet users. However, radio also plays a crucial role in reaching those less engaged with other media. Katz Radio Group‘s analysis of national Nielsen Scarborough data highlights that radio reaches 91% of adults aged 25-54 weekly, with an average daily listening duration of 1 hour and 12 minutes.” The analysis is worth reading. You can see the complete article in Radio Ink here.

The AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act took another step towards passage last week. As we reported, the legislation H.R. 8449 was set for a vote before the House Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce. The bill was approved and has been sent to the full House Energy and Commerce Committee for a vote. It is expected to pass the full committee and will then move to the full House of Representatives. In a press release, bill sponsor Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) released the following statement: “Earlier today, Representatives Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Chairman of the Innovation, Data, and Commerce Subcommittee, and Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Ranking Member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, introduced the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act of 2024.  This bipartisan and bicameral legislation recognizes that AM radio is an essential communication tool during emergencies, and for decades has been a source of news, entertainment, sports, and music for tens of millions of drivers. As such, the legislation directs the Department of Transportation to require automakers to include AM broadcast radio installed as standard equipment in new motor vehicles, ensuring access to AM broadcast stations, or digital audio AM stations, in every car at no additional cost.” As noted last week, there are now two versions of the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act. The initial legislation, H.R. 3413, has more than 250 votes. The new version H.R. 8449 is slightly different, giving automakers more time to come into compliance. The support for the original H.R. 3413 will transfer over to H.R. 8449. The new bill, H.R. 8449, will now become the legislative vehicle that will move through the House. More importantly, H.R. 8449 is exactly the same as the Senate version of the bill, S.1669. This will make it easier to pass legislation. We are delighted to see this legislation move forward. We will keep you informed as the bill moves through both the House and Senate. You can see the text of the legislation here. You can see a video of the vote before the House Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce here.

Prospecting, propensity, and predisposition, aka "The Three P's," have significant influence over broadcast revenue outcomes, either catapulting you beyond projected gains or creating challenges to surpassing your budget goals. As seasoned and professional sellers and managers, it's vital to uphold a dedicated commitment to the fundamental purpose of our profession. Each day, our focus must be on a singular mission: assisting people and bringing opportunities for success to their businesses. Winning in sales requires moving prospects and clients towards closing a deal from the outset of every interaction and consistently highlighting the unique value our audience brings to advertisers. A strategic approach to our cold calls and attempts to upsell existing clients affords us a distinct advantage over competitors. We hope you will join us as we delve deeper into these strategies and more! The webinar will feature Chris Fleming, President of CD Media Consulting. Chris Fleming has thirty-plus years of experience in broadcast media sales and management. His methods and practices have brought large-scale success in big and small markets. Chris teaches success based on key areas of focus - the drivers of the sales business. Everything else is window dressing. This webinar is provided free of charge to NYSBA members in good standing. You must register in advance here.

Last week, FCC Chairwoman Rosenworcel announced that she would open a proceeding to enact labeling rules for broadcasters regarding political AI. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would be voted by the FCC on “circulation.” This is a common procedure where each commissioner votes independently, but without holding a meeting. According to Chairwoman Rosenworcel’s press release, the proposal would aim to increase transparency by: Seeking comment on whether to require an on-air disclosure and written disclosure in broadcasters’ political files when there is AI-generated content in political ads, Proposing to apply the disclosure rules to both candidate and issue advertisements, Requesting comment on a specific definition of AI-generated content, and Proposing to apply the disclosure requirements to broadcasters and entities that engage in origination programming, including cable operators, satellite TV and radio providers, and section 325(c) permittees. Importantly, the proposed rules would not seek to prohibit such content, only the disclosure of any AI-generated content within political ads. The proposed rules drew a sharp rebuke from FCC Commissioner Brenden Carr. In a separate statement, he said: “There is no doubt that the increase in AI-generated political content presents complex questions, and there is bipartisan concern about the potential for misuse,” Carr said. “But none of this vests the FCC with the authority it claims here. Indeed, the Federal Election Commission is actively considering these types of issues, and legislators in Congress are as well. But Congress has not given the FCC the type of freewheeling authority over these issues that would be necessary to turn this plan into law.” He also stated that the FCC should not be changing the rules of the road in the middle of an election. He noted that new rules would simply “muddy the waters.” Despite these objections, we assume Chairwoman Rosenworcel has the necessary 3 (democratic) votes to move forward with the new regulations. This proceeding raises many of the same issues we are now confronting as part of the recent New York political AI law. How can stations be responsible for the use of AI in political ads if they are unable to detect it? That is the fundamental question in play. While we are working to correct the recently passed New York law, the FCC proposal adds another layer of complexity. The FCC’s proposal raises the possibility of a conflict between federal and state law. We are working hard to make sure stations are not caught in the middle. You can see Chairwoman Rosenworcel’s press release here. Read Commissioner Carr’s statement here. You can see an article on the subject by noted communications attorney David Oxenford here.

The Department of Justice opened a rule-making proceeding soliciting comments on changing the classification of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act from a Schedule 1 to a Schedule 3 drug. It has released its proposal, but it has not yet published it in the Federal Register. Any decision regarding the reclassification of marijuana is months away. In reaching a decision, the Secretary and the Attorney General must consider eight factors set forth in the law: The drug’s actual or relative potential for abuse. Scientific evidence of its pharmacological effect, if known. The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the drug or other substance. Its history and current pattern of abuse. The scope, duration, and significance of abuse. What, if any, risk there is to public health. Its psychic or physiological dependence liability; and Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled. As we noted previously, the reclassification of marijuana does not mean marijuana will be legalized or deregulated. Reclassification is not the same as New York’s decision to allow recreational cannabis use.  As the DOJ stated in its notice: “If marijuana is transferred to schedule III, the regulatory controls applicable to schedule III controlled substances would apply, as appropriate, along with existing marijuana-specific requirements and any additional controls that might be implemented, including those that might be implemented to meet U.S. treaty obligations.  The manufacture, distribution, dispensing, and possession of marijuana would also remain subject to applicable criminal prohibitions under the CSA.  21 U.S.C. 841–844.  In addition, marijuana would remain subject to applicable provisions of the FDCA.  For example, under the FDCA, a drug containing a substance within the CSA’s definition of “marijuana” would need FDA approval to be lawfully “introduce[d] or deliver[ed] for introduction into interstate commerce,” unless an IND is in effect for that drug. See 21 U.S.C. 355(a), 355(i), 331(d).  To date, although there have been INDs for drugs containing a substance within the CSA’s definition of “marijuana,” no such drugs have been approved by FDA. DOJ is seeking comment on the practical consequences of rescheduling marijuana into schedule III under the relevant statutory frameworks.” Accordingly, if cannabis is reclassified, stations will still have significant limitations on advertising cannabis in New York. Stations are licensed by the federal government and must comply with federal cannabis laws, even if they are stricter than New York law, which has legalized recreational cannabis.  Nonetheless, it is a step in the right direction. We will follow this proceeding closely. You can see the DOJ’s Press Release here. You can see the DOJ’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking here. You can see an analysis regarding the legal risks of cannabis advertising by noted communications attorney David Oxenford here.

At its June meeting, the FCC will begin a proceeding looking at increasing the regulation of Class A, LPTV, and translator stations. According to the FCC, these stations are now a mature part of the media market and should be subject to the online public inspection file (OPIF) regulations similar to those that apply to full-service stations. Whether to require top-four network-affiliated LPTV stations to comply with the same online public file (OPIF) requirements applicable to full power and Class A television stations, or Whether OPIF requirements should be applied to LPTV stations that are among the top-four TV stations in each market based on the Nielsen ratings. Adopt procedures for LPTV stations to establish an OPIF and propose to make public inspection and political broadcasting rules applicable to all LPTV stations. Propose technical and operational amendments including whether to: o   Amend the method for calculating the maximum distance that a displaced or channel-sharing station may move under our displacement rule. o   Clarify the maximum distance that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations may move under our minor modification rule. o   Require that Class A and LPTV/TV translator stations specify a community of license within their station’s contour. o   Adopt minimum operating and defined minimum video program requirements for LPTV stations. o   Require stations in the LPTV Service to seek authority to change the designation and maintain a call sign consistent with their class of service. o   Specify requirements pertaining to emissions masks. o   Prohibit LPTV/TV translator station operations above TV channel 36. o   Clarify the circumstances in which LPTV/TV translator stations are eligible for displacement. This proposal will impact a number of LPTV and Class A stations in New York. Indeed, a number of affiliates in New York markets rely on LPTV stations to reach their audiences. NYSBA will be keeping a close watch on this. You can see the FCC’s proposal here.

As we noted several weeks ago, the Subcommittee on Communications of the House Commerce Committee held hearings on the AM Radio For Every Vehicle Act. Legislation H.R. 3413 has more than 250 members of the house co-sponsoring the bill, with 17 members of the New York delegation signing on to the legislation. Congressman Frank Pallone, ranking member of the House Commerce Committee, has recently introduced a new version of the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act. It is also the same as the version that was discussed at the hearing. When introducing the legislation, his press release stated: “AM Radio stations play a critical role in our nation’s communications network, which is why I remain concerned that some automakers plan to phase out AM radio from their electric vehicle models. When Superstorm Sandy pummeled New Jersey over ten years ago, some of my constituents went days without power and telephone and internet connections. In the aftermath of the storm, they relied on broadcast AM radio stations – often in their vehicles – to get up-to-the-minute information like where to get water, gas, and groceries,” Pallone said. We support the new version of the bill. While it gives the automakers a little more time to implement the regulations, it ensures that AM radio receivers will remain in electric and internal combustion-powered vehicles. Moreover, it is exactly the same as the Senate Bill S.1669. Because it is the same, it will make it easier to pass both the House and Senate. We expect the legislation to be “marked up” for a vote before the House Commerce Committee shortly, perhaps as early as this week. This is the first step in moving the bill through the House of Representatives. This is a huge step forward, and one we strongly support. You can see Congressman Pallone’s press release here. You can see the new version of the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act here. You can see the text of the original H.R. 3413 here.

An interesting study appeared in a recent edition of Radio Ink. The article reported on an analysis entitled “What Women Want” prepared by Alan Burns & Associates. The article noted: “The 2024 edition, conducted in partnership with the Cumulus Media/Westwood One Audio Active Group, involved a comprehensive survey of 1,001 US women aged 15-64 between September 28 and October 6, 2023, using the MARU/Matchbox platform.  “What Women Want” also integrates data from multiple industry sources including Nielsen ratings, Edison’s “Share of Ear,” Katz Media, and Jacobs Media’s Techsurvey 2024. The research underscores a significant affinity among women for AM/FM radio, often equating the importance of their favorite stations to that of their smartphones, and ranking it higher than platforms such as Amazon, Netflix, Apple, Spotify, and TikTok.  This emotional connection presents a powerful opportunity for brands to leverage through targeted advertising.” You can find an analysis of the study in Radio Ink here.

Nominations are now being accepted for the 2024 Marconi Radio Awards through May 31. The Marconi’s honor excellence in radio broadcasting. Follow this link to the NAB Marconi Radio Awards webpage for more information and entry details. Award winners will be announced during a special dinner program at NAB Show New York on October 9, 2024. We hope you will be able to join us there! You can find out more information here.

RTDNA and the Google News Initiative are bringing training about digital tools for elections coverage to broadcast and digital newsrooms. This will equip journalists with cutting-edge resources and strategies for comprehensive election reporting. "With AI at the forefront of the tech and media during an election year, these tools and techniques have never been more important," said Mike Reilley, lead trainer for the initiative. "With the immediacy of the web and broadcast, reporters are under a lot of pressure to deliver news quickly. And these resources can help them deliver it accurately." This training is provided free of charge to NYSBA members in good standing. No registration is needed – just click here to attend on June 19. Click here for the session handout. Learn more about presenter Mike Reilley here.