Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Sponsorship Identification Requirements for ) MB Docket No. 20-299 Foreign Government-Provided Programming ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF MINNESOTA PUBLIC RADIO Minnesota Public Radio (“MPR”), licensee of over 40 full power, non-commercial educational (“NCE”) FM radio stations, hereby submits these reply comments in response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC” or “Commission”) in the above-captioned proceeding.1 As is explained further herein, MPR urges the Commission to exempt NCE licensees from any foreign programming disclosure requirement it adopts in this proceeding. I. DISCUSSION. MPR’s stations serve Minneapolis-St. Paul and surrounding communities. MPR’s news stations broadcast popular, highly-relevant, and multi-faceted programs that inform, challenge and occasionally amuse, including programming from the BBC World Service. MPR has selected each of these programs based on its independent judgement as a broadcaster and believes that each provides valuable news, insights, and commentary for American audiences. With respect to BBC World Service programming specifically, MPR believes the news and analysis of the day’s global events provided by the programming is of considerable interest to American viewers and provides 1 In re Sponsorship Identification Requirements for Foreign Government-Provided Programming, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, FCC 20-146, MB Docket No. 20-299 (rel. Oct. 26, 2020) (“NPRM”). a unique perspective not available elsewhere. Other broadcasters agree—BBC World Service programming is carried on nearly 600 non-commercial educational stations across the country. In total, the BBC World Service reaches a weekly audience of more than 6.2 million people in the United States. In the NPRM, the Commission proposes to amend its sponsorship identification rules to require disclosure “if a foreign governmental entity has paid a radio or television station, directly or indirectly, to air material, or if the programming was provided to the station free of charge by such an entity as an inducement to broadcast the material.”2 No foreign governmental entity pays MPR to air programming, nor does any foreign governmental entity provide programming to MPR free of charge as an inducement to broadcast the material. Indeed, with respect to the BBC World Service, it is MPR, through its division American Public Media (“APM”), that pays the BBC a licensing fee in order to air BBC World Service programming, not the other way around. More specifically, APM, a distributor of non-commercial educational programming in the U.S.,3 enters into an agreement with the BBC whereby APM pays the BBC for the right to distribute BBC World Service programming in the United States. MPR stations (along with any other stations wishing to carry BBC World Service programming) then pay APM a fee for the right to broadcast the programming.4 Without paying this fee, stations would not have access to BBC World Service programming. 2 Id. at para. 3. 3 APM is, in fact, one of the largest producers and distributors of public radio programming in the world. APM distributes programs such as Live from Here, Performance Today, and Marketplace, that reach 20 million listeners on nearly 1,000 radio stations nationwide each week. It is also the largest producer and distributor of classical music programming in the country. 4 See also Comments of REC Networks, MB Docket No. 20-299, at 7 (filed Dec. 24, 2020) (“REC Comments”) (“These relationships, which are in sharp contrast to commercial broadcasters being approached by the Russian and Chinese governments to purchase time, further demonstrate that 2 Given the flow of consideration, the FCC’s proposed rules seemingly would not require stations to broadcast additional disclosures when airing BBC World Service programming.5 Yet, as other commenters have correctly noted, the NPRM “muddies the scope of its proposal by subsequently suggesting a much broader scope for the enhanced disclosure.”6 For example, the NPRM suggests that a standardized disclosure would be required whenever a foreign governmental entity furnishes program material to a station at nominal cost as an inducement to broadcast such material.7 The NPRM does not define “nominal cost.”8 Consequently, the proposed rules could “unintentionally sweep in a much broader swath of programming and advertising” than that which the Commission correctly identifies as being problematic—i.e., … the NCE licensee’s intention [is] to present external broadcasts as a part of the NCE licensee’s educational objectives and not motivated by profit.”). 5 See NPRM at para. 10 (noting that “the rules state that the programming itself (i.e., any ‘film, record, transcription, talent, script, or other material or Service of any kind’) if provided as an inducement for the station to broadcast the programming will trigger the requirement to include the sponsorship identification.”). See also Comments of National Public Radio, Inc., MB Docket No. 20-299, at 9 (filed Dec. 28, 2020) (“NPR Comments”) (“Yet, merely licensing programming from a source traceable to a foreign government is not enough to require sponsor identification based on the underlying statute and the Commission’s current rules. Rather, there must be an inducement to broadcast, even in the case of a ‘political program or any program involving the discussion of a controversial issue,’ which has long drawn heightened regulatory scrutiny. Absent such inducement, the broadcast represents the broadcaster’s editorial decision, not the putative sponsor’s.”). 6 Comments of America’s Public Television Stations and the Public Broadcasting Service, MB Docket No. 20-299, at 2 (filed Dec. 23, 2020) (“APTS Comments”). 7 NPRM at para. 30. 8 MPR would not characterize the fees paid for BBC World Service programming as “nominal.” Nevertheless, the broadening of the proposed rule to include “nominal” payments creates regulatory uncertainty and suggests the rule could be applied broadly to encompass beneficial foreign programming. 3 foreign propaganda that “attempts to sway American opinions on public or political issues or sow discontent.”9 Having to air disclosures at the beginning and end of every BBC World Service program would be burdensome to NCE broadcasters like MPR, and could cause some stations to discontinue carrying the programming. The BBC World Service schedule is such that three to four different programs can air within a single hour. In fact, some BBC World Service programming is only 60- or 90-seconds in length, including programming created specifically for the United States and only aired here. The on-air time required to air disclosures at the beginning and end of each program would add up quickly and constitute a significant burden on stations, particularly when considered in the context of other required disclosures such as station identification announcements and underwriting acknowledgements. Moreover, the disclosure announcements would be disruptive for the listening audience, serving to annoy more than inform. Given this burden and disruption, MPR agrees with REC Networks that NCE broadcasters should be exempt from foreign programming disclosure requirements.10 The Communications Act already prohibits NCE licensees from making their broadcast facilities available to “any person for the broadcasting of any advertisement.”11 “Advertisement” is defined to include “any message or other programming material which is broadcast… in exchange for any remuneration, and which 9 Comments of National Association of Broadcasters, MB Docket No. 20-299, at 2 (filed Dec. 28, 2020) (“NAB Comments”). 10 REC Networks Comments at 7-8 (“[I]t is REC’s clear position that NCE stations (both full- service and LPFM) must be exempt from the requirement to broadcast such disclosures.”). See also APTS Comments at iv (noting that “NCE stations are already prohibited from selling airtime by Section 73.621” and questioning whether “the entire Notice is intended to be moot as concerns [public broadcasters].”). 11 47 U.S.C. § 399B(b)(2). 4 is intended… to express the views of any person with respect to any matter of public importance or interest.”12 Thus, NCE broadcasters are already prohibited from engaging in the conduct that spurred the FCC to propose the foreign programming sponsorship ID rule.13 Any additional disclosure requirements could have the effect of chilling beneficial speech as NCE broadcasters decline to broadcast any foreign programming—including that “in which the foreign governmental entity has no editorial control, the involvement of the foreign governmental entity is minimal and/or there is no attempt whatsoever to influence American politics or policies”14—rather than air intrusive disclosure announcements.15 Moreover, it would make little sense to impose additional requirements on underwriting acknowledgements that NCE stations must air to acknowledge financial contributions from donors that support particular programs.16 Such acknowledgments can be made for identification purposes only17 and cannot promote the views of the donor.18 As NPR explains, “Since the purpose of an NCE station’s underwriting acknowledgment is to identify a program or station sponsor, no 12 Id. at (a)(2). The term “advertisement” also includes programming intended “to support or oppose any candidate for political office.” Id. at (a)(3). 13 See, e.g., NPRM at para. 1 n.4 (citing an article describing the lease of a Washington, D.C.- area station by the Chinese state radio CRI ); id. at para. 13 n.42 (citing an article describing payments made to a broadcaster to air Russian propaganda). 14 NAB Comments at 10. 15 Alternatively, the FCC could explicitly clarify that licensing arrangements such as that described herein do not trigger any foreign programming sponsorship ID announcements. 16 47 C.F.R. § 73.1212(a); see also 47 U.S.C. § 317. 17 Minority Television Project, Inc, Licensee of Noncommercial Educational Television Stations KMTP-TV, San Francisco, California, 17 FCC Rcd 15646, DA 02-1945, ¶ 29 (rel. August 9, 2002).

Load more