RED LION BROADCASTING CO. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367 (1969)
MR. JUSTICE WHITE :
We need not and do not now ratify every past and future decision by the FCC with regard to programming. There is no question here of the Commission's refusal to permit the broadcaster to carry a particular program or to publish his own views; of a discriminatory refusal to require the licensee to broadcast certain views which have been denied access to the airwaves; of government censorship of a particular program contrary to 326; or of the official government view dominating public broadcasting. Such questions would raise more serious First Amendment issues. But we do hold that the Congress and the Commission do not violate the First Amendment when they require a radio or television station to give reply time to answer personal attacks and political editorials.
It is argued that even if at one time the lack of available frequencies for all who wished to use them justified the Government's choice of those who would best serve the public interest by acting as proxy for those who would present differing views, or by giving the latter access directly to broadcast facilities, this condition no longer prevails so that continuing control is not justified.
Even where there are gaps in spectrum utilization, the fact remains that existing broadcasters have often attained their present position because of their initial government selection in competition with others before new technological advances opened new opportunities for further uses. Long experience in broadcasting, confirmed habits of listeners and viewers, network affiliation, and other advantages in program procurement give existing broadcasters a substantial advantage over new entrants, even where new entry is technologically possible. These advantages are the fruit of a preferred position conferred by the Government. Some present possibility for new entry by competing stations is not enough, in itself, to render unconstitutional the Government's effort to assure that a broadcaster's programming ranges widely enough to serve the public interest.
In view of the scarcity of broadcast frequencies, the Government's role in allocating those frequencies, and the legitimate claims of those unable without governmental assistance to gain access to those frequencies for expression of their views, we hold the regulations and [395 U.S. 367, 401] ruling at issue here are both authorized by statute and constitutional. 28 The judgment of the Court of Appeals in Red Lion is affirmed and that in RTNDA reversed and the causes remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
FindLaw | Cases and Codes
Jillian, while I am not making any argument that would suggest the Federal Govt. has no interest or right to regulate the spectrum of public airwaves. What I am suggesting is two things, one is that when the Court rendered it's decision in the Red Lion case it was clear that the argument was a limited spectrum argument and does it violate the stations First Amendment if equal time is given. While both these questions were addressed, today the limited spectrum agrument does not apply and if you read the entire decision you will see that Court even suggest as the spectrum grows there is merit in revisiting the issue. Further, the Court in the decision does not suggest IMHO an allotment for equal time in so much as it suggests time to rebutt and that time as far as my read is concerned is left open to interpretation. So given that , it would appear that a radio station would have every right to allocate whatever time they deem necessary for such issues, if it even gets that far after a legal challenge, which after the spectrum argument is presented I don't believe it will. The other thing I am suggesting, is that any law or rule imposed would apply to ALL liberal and conservative and would in effect cut both way's and may not have the desired effect of it's intended victems, so in that case, it would be much more prudent to just turn off what you or anyone else finds not to their liking or compete in the market place and build an audience. IMO a radio station is a business and as long as the on-air personalities are making money for them, they could care less what their views are.
