Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr has put the Public Broadcasting System and National Public Radio on notice that he has ordered an investigation into those outlets for violating federal law by airing paid advertisements. //

As Carr says in his letter, it is one thing to credit underwriters, but you cross the line into advertisement when they "promote the contributor's products, services, or businesses, and they may not contain comparative or qualitative descriptions, price information, calls to action, or inducements to buy, sell, rent, or lease." //

Musicman
24 minutes ago
Let them run all the advertising they want...and cut off ALL government funding. I remember when this all started as “educational” TV. Ha! Now it’s propaganda TV and radio.

Not for chatting with pilots.

In practical

That said, in practical the FCC is not able to enforce the corresponding regulation and transceivers are freely available.

Still if an unlawful transmission disrupts or interferes with legitimate services or causes an incident, FCC and/or FAA may investigate and take the author to a court.

Bands available to the general public for private/business use

Services/frequencies open to the general public, without constraints on the content of the message include:

• Citizen Band Radio Service (CB), HF, no license required.
• Family Radio Service (FRS), UHF, no license required
• Multi Use Radio Service (MURS), VHF, no license required
• General Mobile Radio Service (GMRS), UHF, license required

There are other services, like the radioamateur service, open to the general public, but the license is granted after passing an exam and the content of the messages is (at least on the paper) constrained to technical topics related to radio experiments.

Mario Nawfal @MarioNawfal

BREAKING: MEGA MILITARY CONTRACTOR CAUGHT FAKING SATELLITE DATA TO TAKE DOWN STARLINK

SpaceX just exposed a dirty ploy by Lockheed Martin and Omnispace to block Starlink’s direct-to-cell service.

Lockheed’s partner allegedly rigged their aging satellite to fake interference and filed bogus FCC complaints, trying to stop Starlink from dominating the 5G space.

In a bombshell FCC filing, SpaceX revealed how Omnispace manipulated its MEO satellite to “intentionally detect” Starlink signals—despite the satellite barely being operational.

SpaceX slammed the claims as “bizarre,” accusing Omnispace of creating “artificial conditions” to fake interference.

The plot thickens: Omnispace refused standard coordination talks and went as far as licensing through Papua New Guinea to dodge regulations.

It’s all part of an effort to sabotage Starlink’s $34.9 billion future in global communications.

Will the FCC see through this sham, or will Lockheed’s shady tactics derail Starlink’s revolution?

The FCC’s war on Musk may have contributed to Helene’s death toll, which is already at 138 Americans across six states, with many hundreds still missing. //

Among the serious problems facing rural victims is an inability to communicate with potential rescuers as roads are washed out, telecommunications are down, electricity is out, and people are facing fatal flooding.

It didn’t have to be this way.

In 2020, the Federal Communications Commission awarded Musk’s Starlink an $885.5 million award to help get broadband access to 642,000 rural homes and businesses in 35 states. A subsidiary of SpaceX, Starlink is a satellite internet system delivering high-speed internet to anyone on the planet. The plan would work out to less than $1,400 per linkup, same-day delivery of the necessary hardware, and only a few hours to get up and running.

Some 19,552 households and businesses in North Carolina would have had access to Starlink if they desired. Of the 21 worst-hit counties in North Carolina, the FCC-funded Starlink program would have served all or part of 17 of them, according to multiple officials. The FCC suddenly canceled that grant in 2022, a few months before Joe Biden suggested that the federal government find ways to go after Musk, a former Democrat who began criticizing some of the Democrat Party’s support of censorship of and lawfare against political opponents. After a challenge from SpaceX, the FCC reaffirmed its decision to cancel the award in 2023. //

The National Labor Relations Board went after Tesla over its dress code. The Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are also investigating Musk and his companies. //

Joe Biden named Kamala Harris the Broadband Czar in April 2021 and placed her in charge of a $100 billion slush fund for broadband projects. At the Commerce Department, a $42.5 billion subset of that program was launched in 2021, with guidance written to limit the ability of Starlink to compete for contracts. The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program was supposed to fund programs in all 50 states. It has been a complete failure.

More than three years later, not a single rural American family or business has been connected to broadband through the program. At best the groundwork will begin four years after the launch and won’t finish until 2030 at the earliest. For that much taxpayer money, Starlink could be provided to 140 million people, and without the wait, observers noted.

The FCC’s anti-Musk efforts come at the same time that the Democrat-run agency fast-tracked a shocking application by a group backed by the Democrat Soros family to purchase more than 200 radio stations across the country.

RF Caution/Warning/Danger signs

“The FCC is dishonestly claiming that it is promoting equity and fairness. However, the FCC is just seizing control over business decisions, funneling resources to politically preferred constituencies.” //

Congress, in the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure bill, delegated to the FCC the task to “ensure that all people of the United States benefit from equal access to broadband internet access.”

In fact, the agency found no evidence of intentional discrimination, but the leftists on the FCC used Congress’ delegation as an excuse to force equity and diversity mandates ranging from controls over discounts, language options, and credit checks to marketing and advertising.

SpaceX also faulted the FCC for relying on Ookla speed tests:

For instance, the Bureau's decision arbitrarily penalized SpaceX—and only SpaceX—for not meeting RDOF speed requirements years before SpaceX had any obligation to do so. The arbitrariness of applying this unstated standard exclusively to SpaceX was only compounded by the Bureau's reliance on Ookla nationwide speed tests without any notice that it planned to use such tests and even though those nationwide averages included areas that would not be served by RDOF. Even so, Starlink likely recorded the fastest speeds of any operator in the locations eligible for RDOF funds... Starlink has also deployed its service in advance of all RDOF deployment milestones and well ahead of most, if not all, RDOF awardees.

Instead of carefully crafting a framework that identifies bad actors, describes their discriminatory actions, and outlines solutions to them, the FCC just assumes everyone is guilty. The regulators will treat any entity that tries to build up the next generation of internet access as purveyors of systemic injustice. The agency’s order does not give tangible examples of violations but operates under the premise that it should punish all broadband internet companies.

The regime applies to every company in the broadband internet space. It even applies to the small business contractors who build and maintain the infrastructure. These operators and technicians simply build where governments have permitted them to construct cell towers or lay fiber. But if the FCC deems that their work promotes discrimination, then bureaucrats will investigate and punish the workers on the frontlines.

This bureaucracy will hamstring the entire internet ecosystem. The rules will hinder industry leaders from developing and deploying new technologies that could transform internet access. Companies might fear that the FCC will interpret their best efforts as discrimination if all communities do not have an “equitable” opportunity to adopt the innovations. //

For example, in Pennsylvania, the population of Amish residents in Lancaster County is more than 39,000. As we learned from last month’s emergency alert test, there are quite a few Amish individuals who enjoy digital connectivity. If the FCC does not think enough Amish people subscribe to cell phone plans or use Wi-Fi in their barns, then the agency has granted itself the authority to investigate the supposed shortcoming as a violation of the digital discrimination order. Think of the absurdity: The FCC could actually punish a provider for not selling cellphones to enough Amish people. With this new regime, it is clear there are no limits to what the FCC will consider a breach. //

Instead of an arbitrary and undefined regime, the FCC would better serve the nation by establishing a framework that encourages cities and municipalities to promote the deployment of next-generation internet access. Too many communities, such as New York City, are dragging their feet. Others, like San Jose, are delaying deployment by charging internet providers exorbitant fees to build out these transformative networks.

It is clear the FCC’s rules are not concerned with improving internet access and upward mobility. Instead, they’re intended to dramatically expand the federal government’s power. There are real challenges to closing the digital divide, but the new order will not help that effort.

Now is the time to empower creators and innovators who are bringing new ideas to life. The FCC should work to promote new opportunities and technologies that will enable upward mobility rather than create a regime that punishes entrepreneurs who dare to take chances.

As exhausting as it is to read that list, the FCC itself says it is not an exhaustive list. The Biden administration’s plan empowers the FCC to regulate every aspect of the internet sector for the first time ever. The plan is motivated by an ideology of government control that is not compatible with the fundamental precepts of free market capitalism.

But it gets worse.

The FCC reserves the right under this plan to regulate both “actions and omissions, whether recurring or a single instance.” In other words, if you take any action, you may be liable; and if you do nothing, you may be liable.

There is no path to complying with this standardless regime. It reads like a planning document drawn up in the faculty lounge of a university’s Soviet Studies Department.