December 5, 2025

Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
Federal Communications Commission
45 L Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20554

Re: Empowering Local Broadcast TV Stations to Meet Their Public Interest Obligations: Exploring Market Dynamics Between National Programmers and Their Affiliates, MB Docket No. 25-322

The undersigned conservative, free-market and pro-innovation organizations appreciate this opportunity to comment on the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) inquiry into market dynamics between national programmers and their affiliate stations. This instant comment follows a September 8, 2025, letter to Chairman Brendan Carr signed by representatives of the more than 20 undersigned organizations. That letter, attached hereto as an Appendix, expresses our views in greater detail, and we continue to stand by the principles articulated therein.

As an initial matter, we reiterate our broader appreciation for the efforts of Chairman Carr and the FCC to examine outdated rules and remove regulatory barriers across the communications marketplace. Those actions have already helped unleash investment, strengthen competition and encourage technological innovation, and they reflect the fundamental truth that competition and innovation thrive when government avoids intervening into markets fully capable of resolving issues on their own.

With the instant inquiry, the FCC has asked for information about how relationships between networks and affiliates have evolved, and whether those developments affect affiliates’ ability to meet their public interest responsibilities.

We collectively respect the FCC’s ongoing role in ensuring that licensees uphold those responsibilities. At the same time, however, we urge the FCC to maintain the same freemarket perspective that has guided its other reforms. The issues raised in this docket—while important—concern private commercial negotiations between independent businesses, each with its own incentives, strategies and competitive pressures. Any regulatory steps that risk drawing the federal government into dictating or unduly influencing the terms of those negotiations would be inconsistent with the deregulatory progress the FCC has championed to date.

The broadcast marketplace has undergone significant change, just like every other segment of the media industry. Shifts in bargaining leverage or programming strategies, however, do not suggest market failure. Quite the contrary, those shifts constitute a normal and healthy feature of dynamic competition. Affiliates have repeatedly shown the ability to respond to market conditions, make independent decisions and innovate in order to better serve their local communities—including, in some cases, deciding to end network affiliations. Those and innumerable other examples reflect a functioning market, not one that requires heightened federal oversight.

Accordingly, we appreciate that the Public Notice is framed as an information-gathering effort, not a proposal for new rules. As the FCC reviews the record, we encourage it to continue applying the same principle that has guided its broader deregulatory work so far: Federal agencies should avoid intervening in negotiations between private parties unless clearly required by law. The FCC already possesses myriad rules that protect the core elements of licensee control necessary for fulfilling public interest obligations. Enforcing those existing rules simply does not require the FCC to become a referee in private commercial contracting or to put a proverbial finger on the scale by imposing standards resembling rate regulation or bargaining mandates.

Our organizations remain committed to promoting policies that ensure American communications markets stay competitive, innovative and free from unnecessary government intrusion. We remain grateful for the FCC’s ongoing efforts in that direction, and urge it to maintain that approach in this proceeding as well.

Respectfully submitted,

Jeffrey Mazzella
President
Center for Individual Freedom

Phil Kerpen
President
American Commitment

Grover Norquist
President
Americans for Tax Reform

Justin Owen
President & CEO
Beacon Center of Tennessee

Ryan Ellis
President
Center for a Free Economy

Tom Schatz
President
Citizens Against Government Waste

Deborah Collier
Executive Director
Innovation and Technology Policy Center, Citizens Against Government Waste

Jessica Melugin
Director
Center for Technology and Innovation, Competitive Enterprise Institute

Matthew Kandrach
President
Consumer Action for a Strong Economy

James Czerniawski
Head of Emerging Technology Policy
Consumer Choice Center

James Erwin
Executive Director
Digital Liberty

Bartlett D. Cleland
Executive Director
Innovation Economy Institute

Tom Giovanetti
President
Institute for Policy Innovation

Rosemary Becchi
Founder & President
Jersey 1st

George Landrith
President
Frontiers of Freedom

Charles Sauer
Founder and President
The Market Institute

Pete Sepp
President
National Taxpayers Union

Daniel J. Erspamer
CEO
Pelican Institute for Public Policy

Karen Kerrigan
President & CEO
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council

David Williams
President
Taxpayers Protection Alliance

Turner Loesel
Policy Analyst
Center for Technology and Innovation, The James Madison Institute