Image Credits: @nittygritty_photo on Unsplash (Unsplash License)

---

Background

The Communications Act of 1934 was introduced for the preferable federal regulation of broadcast media, which included media channels such as radio communications and television. In the summer of 1934, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Communications Act into law, establishing the Federal Communications Commission––an independent agency of the federal government that monitors both domestic and international telecommunications. The initial reaction by the public was mixed; the Communications Act of 1934 both put some limits on broadcast media, creating frustration in the industry, and established better regulation on what content was allowed to be shared, helping some parents take a breath of relief.   

Addressed Under the Act

The Communications Act of 1934 has seven subchapters that refer to regulations on different facets of the broadcasting industry––some of which people refer to as intervention on free American media. 

The Act assigns frequencies and rates as well as determining standards and public interest. The establishment of the Communications Act of 1934 builds a ground on which the Federal Communications Commission, FCC, has furnished with more detailed regulation. On a national scope, due to the Communications Act of 1934, common carriers are required to “establish appropriate policies and procedures for the supervision and control of its officers and employees,” including the condition of approved authorization in the case of access to “interception of communications.” The media channels affected by this regulation are also subject to submitting a set of rules and policies that are ratified to fit into the framework of the Act to the Federal 

Communications Commission.

 The Act not only concerns the conditions and policies of the broadcasting industry, but also makes certain powers available to the president of the United States. In such cases, the president would be able to “prioritize” national security communications and provide federal control of those communications over the momentary freedom of the broadcasting industry.

Amendments

The Act has been amended many times, though the most significant and drastic amendment was made on January 3, 1996. The Act of 1934 was repealed and replaced with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. This new Act was the first vital revamp of the United States telecommunications policies in nearly 65 years, and it focused on telephone services, radio and television broadcasting, and manufacturing of telecommunications equipment. As a response to demands of free media by consumers, the Communications Act of 1996 aimed to reduce regulation of broadcasting while also promoting a competitive nondiscriminative profit-making market that provides high quality content to consumers.

Backlash and Revisions

Although there have been amendments to the original act as a response to the backlash from both broadcasters and consumers, the regulations are still seen as a limitation on free media today. With the expansion of the use of the internet, there have also been complaints about the volume of government supervision, which led to the revision of policies relating to the internet by the Federal Communications Commission in 2014. In this revised proposal, FCC’s Chairman, Tom Wheeler, comments on treating broadband providers like “common carriers,” which would then increase regulation on them compared to internet providers given Title II of the Communications Act of 1934.  

A more recent proposal, in 2020 by Chairman Ajit Pai of FCC, brings into question the distribution of Network Outage Reporting System (NORS) and Disaster Information Reporting System (DIRS) with state and federal agencies with the presumption of the outage data being confidential given the “sensitive nature of this data to both national security and commercial competitiveness.” Chairman Pai also proposes the limitation of access to NORS and DIRS filings after the “effective date of this framework to address potential concerns that service providers may have” on the filings they submitted to FCC. The proposal focuses on national security and welfare, and addresses the need of sharing critical media and communications data when the state needs it. 

One criticism of the Federal Communications Commission was that it held back on promoting diverse viewpoints, pointing out that it showed insufficient content regulation. Addressed under the fairness doctrine in Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, an individual’s right to respond to criticism, discussion of public issues, and fair coverage of each side of them were decided by the Supreme Court. The case brought attention to how the government should take steps to ensure many sides of a variety of public issues are covered, which, in result, would result in more rational political decisions. 

The Communications Act of 1934 led to significant changes in the American broadcast industry, and changed how certain aspects of what we call “free media” are viewed. It created ground for discussion and representation of more diverse issues and stories. The competition and corporate aspect of broadcast media and cable TV was enhanced; necessary regulations on who could view what type of content were established. Although many changes were brought into light, America’s current thoughts on the Communications Act of 1934, or the Federal Communications Commission, although appreciative, are led by skepticism by many citizens. As global trends and topics change, there are increased concerns and new demands given the speed of technological improvements and changes in media, it is only apparent that there will be many more changes to the Communications Act of 1934 in the future. The Federal Communications Commission is constantly working on finding a common ground between free media on the demand of consumers and the needs of the state for governance.