Gray Media calls for elimination of ‘unconstitutional’ broadcast regulations

Gray Media has filed detailed comments in the Federal Communications Commission’s “Delete, Delete, Delete” proceeding, urging the agency to eliminate what it describes as outdated and unconstitutional regulations that specifically target broadcasters while leaving digital competitors unregulated.

In its April 11, 2025, filing, Gray argued that the FCC’s “systemic over-regulation” of local broadcast stations dates back to the 1930s, when broadcasting was “the technological disruptor” – but the regulatory framework has failed to evolve despite dramatic changes in the media landscape.

The company cites explicitly Commissioner Brendan Carr’s recent characterization of the current situation as a “break glass moment for America’s broadcasters,” who face “unprecedented headwinds and competition, including from their largely unregulated Big Tech competitors.”

“While these regulations have always been a millstone around the industry’s neck, they didn’t stop broadcasting from becoming the pre-eminent provider of news and information in local markets across the county,” Gray stated in its filing. “The harm these regulations caused to broadcasters’ competitiveness and efficiency was long hidden by the power of mass media and the absence of competitors that could micro-target programming and advertising to erode mass audiences.”

Gray’s filing targets three categories of regulations it believes should be eliminated: structural ownership rules, programming mandates and reporting requirements.

The structural ownership regulations, found in Section 73.3555 of the FCC’s rules, receive particular criticism. Gray argues these rules lack statutory authority following the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision, which changed the framework for judicial statutory construction.

“The Communications Act says nothing about structural ownership rules like the ones maintained by the Commission,” Gray stated in its filing, adding that the Major Question Doctrine “prohibits the Commission from adopting rules that touch on matters of economic significance without clear statutory authority.”

Beyond legal arguments, Gray contends the ownership rules actively harm local broadcasting by preventing efficient combinations that would strengthen local news operations.

Advertisement

“Too many independent stations in a market are more likely to lead to less local service than more because local news production is expensive and there just isn’t enough revenue in many markets to support a large number of separately owned news producing stations,” the filing stated.

Gray also challenges several programming mandates as unconstitutional infringements on broadcasters’ First Amendment rights, including children’s programming requirements, issues/programs lists, foreign sponsorship identification rules and certain Emergency Alert System regulations.

Regarding children’s programming requirements, Gray writes that they “clearly are inconsistent with modern Supreme Court jurisprudence regarding compelled speech.”

The company suggests replacing specific programming mandates with a simple certification that stations meet the educational and informational needs of children.

On the issue of foreign sponsorship identification, Gray argues that the rules “are premised on the idea that broadcasters and American television viewers are gullible and wouldn’t be able to recognize propaganda for what it is. This is a false premise, which is why the record evidence was so thin.”

The company concludes by urging the FCC to act quickly, stating that the current regulatory framework “check[s] practically every box in the Public Notice as favoring repeal.”