The Media and Democracy Project (MAD) has formally appealed what it describes as a “flawed decision” by the FCC Media Bureau to dismiss its challenge against the license renewal of Fox-owned WTXF in Philadelphia. The appeal, announced this week, criticizes the bureau’s handling of legal standards and character qualifications for broadcast license holders.
MAD co-founder Brian Hansbury expressed strong dissent, stating, “The decision by previous FCC leadership to ignore Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch’s serious character flaws, highlighted in multiple court decisions, was as misguided as the current Chair’s decision not to resurrect MAD’s petition. The adjudicated factual findings in the Dominion case, undisputed by Fox, form the backbone of our petition and clearly distinguish it from frivolous challenges against other networks.”
The appeal systematically critiques the FCC’s decision on several key points:
Character Matters: MAD argues that the bureau’s interpretation of Section 309(k) of the Communications Act contradicts both FCC precedents and the statute itself. The group points out that the bureau cherry-picked past FCC orders while ignoring decisions that supported a broader interpretation of character reviews, including those not directly linked to station operations.
Fox’s Misconduct Shocks the Conscience: The appeal claims the bureau wrongly concluded that misconduct at an affiliated entity is irrelevant to a station’s license renewal. MAD insists that Fox’s actions were so egregious they should have triggered the “shock the conscience” standard, which allows for consideration of character issues even if not formally adjudicated by the FCC.
Fox’s Actions Are Not Protected by The First Amendment: MAD clarifies that their petition is not a First Amendment issue, supported by legal filings from Floyd Abrams, a noted First Amendment attorney. The contention here is not about Fox’s right to broadcast but about the implications of broadcasting falsehoods, especially when these actions have significant democratic repercussions.
FCC Chair Rosenworcel’s Decision Was Politically Motivated: MAD accuses the previous FCC chair of conflating their substantive petition with politically motivated complaints for headline gains. They argue that their challenge was based on judicial findings from the Dominion lawsuit, which confirmed Fox’s dissemination of false election narratives. Additional court decisions highlighted by MAD also paint a picture of Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch engaging in manipulative corporate practices.
Alfred Sikes, former Republican FCC chair, supported MAD’s stance, stating, “Character cannot be disassembled—you cannot separate it. Character is character, whether it is done at a broadcast station or a cable channel. The FCC has a duty to overrule this order and hold a hearing so the commission can follow the evidence.”
The appeal enjoys backing from a bipartisan coalition of media and FCC veterans, including former FCC commissioners, executives from Fox, and notable figures in journalism and media policy, who collectively urge the FCC to reconsider its decision on the grounds of legal, ethical, and public interest standards.
The outcome of this appeal could set significant precedents for how character qualifications are considered in broadcast licensing, potentially affecting the landscape of media regulation in the U.S.
Please follow us on Facebook and X for more news, tips, and reviews. Need cord cutting tech support? Join our Cord Cutting Tech Support Facebook Group for help. You can find Luke on X HERE.