Federal Communications Commission DA 99-2262
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Federal Communications Commission DA 99-2262 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 Released: October 21, 1999 Wilfredo G. Blanco Pi 1800C1-AJ Licensee, Station WAPA (AM), San Juan, Puerto Rico 99040379 134 Domenech Avenue 99050453 Hato Ray, Puerto Rico 00198 99070332 Dear Licensee: This letter concerns the operation of WAPA(AM), San Juan, Puerto Rico. By letter dated June 24, 1999, we inquired into possible violations of Section 325(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended ("the Act"), 47 U.S.C. § 325(a), and Section 73.1207 of the Commission©s Rules ("the Rules"), 47 C.F.R. § 73.1207. In pertinent part, these provisions prohibit broadcasters from retransmitting programs or portions of programs of other broadcasters without the express authority of the originating station. Our letter cited complaints alleging that, on March 11, April 16, and May 20, 1999, WAPA rebroadcast segments of the programming of Station WKAQ (AM), San Juan, without first obtaining WKAQ©s consent to the rebroadcasts. In your response, dated July 19, 1999, you admit that WAPA rebroadcast three segments of WKAQ©s programming, on March 11, April 16, and May 20, 1999, without first obtaining permission from WKAQ to do so. You claim, however, that this conduct was justified "as a matter of self-defense" in response to "defamatory and offensive conduct by WKAQ" through one of its employees. Specifically, you claim that Luis Francisco Ojeda, of WKAQ, has engaged in a protracted campaign of insults against you for more than a year. As evidence of this campaign, you cite the WKAQ programming excerpts which WAPA rebroadcast, in which Mr. Ojeda accused you of corruption, collusion in fraudulent conduct, and referred to you as "... undesirable ... opportunistic ... pirhanas ... unscrupulous foreigners ... swindlers and opportunists," among other things. You also state that WKAQ provoked you into rebroadcasting the excerpts by "disseminating falsities and engaging in personal attacks" against you, and you contend that you "had to defend" yourself by airing the excerpts in question, as you felt that this was the best defense against the alleged personal attacks. Notwithstanding Mr. Ojeda©s comments, we disagree with your assertion that your rebroadcasts of WKAQ©s programming were justified. Although Section 73.1207 does provide certain specific exceptions to the prohibition on rebroadcasting another broadcaster©s programs without prior consent,1 your admitted conduct does not fall within any of those exceptions. While it is clear from your response that you found Mr. Ojeda©s comments extremely offensive and distressing, you may not simply ignore your obligations under the Rules. As the licensee of WAPA, you had a readily available forum from which 1 Section 73.1207 allows, under specific conditions, the rebroadcasting of certain EAS communications, some programs originated by foreign broadcast stations, time signals originated by the Naval Observatory and National Bureau of Standards, and messages from stations of the National Weather Service, without prior authorization from the originating station. See 47 C.F.R. § 73.1207(b)(l), (b)(4), and (d). 17749 Federal Communications Commission DA 99-2262 to respond to Mr. Ojeda©s comments, and you could easily have done so without violating Section 73.1207. To the extent you believe the statements made by Mr. Ojeda amounted to a personal attack as defined by Section 73.1920 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. § 73.1920, you failed to satisfy the requirements of the Commission©s Rules.2 Accordingly, it appears that you repeatedly violated Section 325(a) of the Act and Section 73.1207 of the Rules by rebroadcasting portions of WKAQ©s programming, without authorization, on three separate occasions between March and May, 1999. However, given WAPA©s previous history of compliance with the Commission©s rules and regulations, and the extenuating circumstances which precipitated the violations at issue, we find that a monetary forfeiture is not warranted in this situation. Consequently, we admonish you for this apparent rule violation, and caution you to take greater care in the future to ensure full compliance with Section 325(a) of the Act and Section 73J1207 of the Rules^ © Sincerely, ,;© \ t Norman Goldstein, Chief Complaints & Political Programming Branch Enforcement Division Mass Media Bureau cc: E. Ashton Johnson. Esquire J. Richard Carr, Esquire (El Mundo Broadcasting Corporation) 2 In pertinent part, Section 73.1920(a) provides that a personal attack is one made upon the honesty, character, or integrity of an identified person or group, during the course of a presentation of views on a controversial issue of public importance. In sucli cases, the licensee is required, no later than one week after the attack occurs, to notify the person or group attacked of the date, time, and identification of the broadcast, provide a script, tape, or an accurate summary of the attack, and offer a reasonable opportunity to respond over the licensee©s facilities. 17750.