Nate Noy Lodges Formal FCC Complaint Against WKRC
By Nate Noy
Below is a copy of my formal FCC request and response I sent to legal counsel for WKRC. The big boys have picked the proverbial wrong little guy to mess with this time.
Nate
FCC Letter
Dear Ms. Cooper,
My name is Nathan Noy and I am a Federal Candidate for the U.S. House in the Second Congressional District of Ohio. I am writing you to lodge a formal complaint against WKRC Television 12 in Cincinnati, Ohio for a willful violation of 47 USC Section 315.
Facts
My FEC # is: H6OH02268. I am registered as an Independent and I am endorsed by the Reform Party and America First Party.
I am certified as a write-in candidate by the Board of Elections.
I have taken part in all local League of Women Voters candidate's forums and debates as well as other forums in the District.
I was given proper FCC access to interview opportunities by Channel 19 and Channel 9 TV and 700 and 1050 Radio.
Complaint
At 11:00am EDT on 10/15/06 WKRC Channel 12 aired a debate between Jean Schmidt and Victoria Wulsin the two major party candidates on its Newsmakers program. I was willfully denied an opportunity to take part in this event and Channel 12 was on ample notice of my candidacy given they had previously interviewed me as part of another elections coverage event.
The debate in question was one in a series of Congressional debates that not only were aired by WKRC but also were actually sponsored by the station.
I have attempted to negotiate a fair alternative settlement with the station to provide me with fair access per 47 USC Section 315; however talks with legal counsel for WKRC have reached an impasse.
Given the above I am requesting that the FCC enforce 47 USC Section 315 and that the FCC forces the station to conduct a special taping and airing of the Channel 12 Newsmakers program that MUST air prior to the election with a similar audience reach per the code. Alternatively, I request that the FCC enforce the penalty provisions of 47 USC Section 317 and revoke the WKRC license to broadcast.
Legal counsel for WKRC maintains a legal position that this illegal act falls within the exceptions of the code.
The key distinction between the legal argument presented to me by counsel for WKRC and this specific issue is that Channel 12 scheduled and sponsored a series of debates for ALL Congressional candidates and willfully excluded me. There is NO bona fide "news story" here, the "campaign" is THE news story. The legislative intent of the code is very clear and I believe there is NO exception for WKRC here.
If WKRC does not comply with the above request prior to the November 7, 2006 election I am formally requesting that the FCC revoke their license. Please advise as to the proper process that must be followed to bring this issue to fruition. I am fully prepared to enter into the Federal Court System if resolution of this issue requires such and I will obtain legal counsel of my own to achieve this end if necessary.
Please advise as how to properly proceed.
Regards,
Nate Noy
513-259-7782
Letter to WKRC Legal Team
Mr. Coy:
While I respect your legal analysis of this issue I disagree with you on the issue raised by this point of law and the legislative intent behind 47 USC Section 315.
Therefore, I intend to file a formal complaint with the FCC and request revocation of the WKRC FCC license.
My previous correspondence to WKRC was meant to be seen as a viable workaround for the station. I am now requesting a special taping and airing of the Channel 12 Newsmakers program that MUST air prior to the election.
The key distinction between the cases you cited and this specific issue is that Channel 12 scheduled and sponsored a series of debates for ALL Congressional candidates and willfully excluded me. There is NO bona fide "news story" here, the "campaign" is THE news story. The legislative intent of the code is very clear and I believe there is NO exception for WKRC here. Therefore, unless WKRC schedules a special episode of Newsmakers, preempts other programming and airs this with a similar audience reach I will pursue this FCC complaint to its final and complete resolution by the FCC and the federal court system. If WKRC prefers to pay your firm 100X more for legal fees then it would have lost in revenue by accepting my previous offer then I guess they simply do not understand the theory of a cost-benefit analysis.
I have been contacted by members of the Green Party and other interested parties for this case. Our goal will be for the FCC and the Courts to sanction WKRC by revoking its license to broadcast. This will be a watershed case in our opinion and we believe it will serve as a strong precedent for future actions by other FCC licensed entities.
I wish you the best in this fight. However, I believe as long as the courts follow the letter of the law and the legislative intent of the code in this matter there is little question that our side will prevail and WKRC will have made one of the poorest business decisions in the history of broadcasting.
Regards,
Nate Noy
Below is a copy of my formal FCC request and response I sent to legal counsel for WKRC. The big boys have picked the proverbial wrong little guy to mess with this time.
Nate
FCC Letter
Dear Ms. Cooper,
My name is Nathan Noy and I am a Federal Candidate for the U.S. House in the Second Congressional District of Ohio. I am writing you to lodge a formal complaint against WKRC Television 12 in Cincinnati, Ohio for a willful violation of 47 USC Section 315.
Facts
My FEC # is: H6OH02268. I am registered as an Independent and I am endorsed by the Reform Party and America First Party.
I am certified as a write-in candidate by the Board of Elections.
I have taken part in all local League of Women Voters candidate's forums and debates as well as other forums in the District.
I was given proper FCC access to interview opportunities by Channel 19 and Channel 9 TV and 700 and 1050 Radio.
Complaint
At 11:00am EDT on 10/15/06 WKRC Channel 12 aired a debate between Jean Schmidt and Victoria Wulsin the two major party candidates on its Newsmakers program. I was willfully denied an opportunity to take part in this event and Channel 12 was on ample notice of my candidacy given they had previously interviewed me as part of another elections coverage event.
The debate in question was one in a series of Congressional debates that not only were aired by WKRC but also were actually sponsored by the station.
I have attempted to negotiate a fair alternative settlement with the station to provide me with fair access per 47 USC Section 315; however talks with legal counsel for WKRC have reached an impasse.
Given the above I am requesting that the FCC enforce 47 USC Section 315 and that the FCC forces the station to conduct a special taping and airing of the Channel 12 Newsmakers program that MUST air prior to the election with a similar audience reach per the code. Alternatively, I request that the FCC enforce the penalty provisions of 47 USC Section 317 and revoke the WKRC license to broadcast.
Legal counsel for WKRC maintains a legal position that this illegal act falls within the exceptions of the code.
The key distinction between the legal argument presented to me by counsel for WKRC and this specific issue is that Channel 12 scheduled and sponsored a series of debates for ALL Congressional candidates and willfully excluded me. There is NO bona fide "news story" here, the "campaign" is THE news story. The legislative intent of the code is very clear and I believe there is NO exception for WKRC here.
If WKRC does not comply with the above request prior to the November 7, 2006 election I am formally requesting that the FCC revoke their license. Please advise as to the proper process that must be followed to bring this issue to fruition. I am fully prepared to enter into the Federal Court System if resolution of this issue requires such and I will obtain legal counsel of my own to achieve this end if necessary.
Please advise as how to properly proceed.
Regards,
Nate Noy
513-259-7782
Letter to WKRC Legal Team
Mr. Coy:
While I respect your legal analysis of this issue I disagree with you on the issue raised by this point of law and the legislative intent behind 47 USC Section 315.
Therefore, I intend to file a formal complaint with the FCC and request revocation of the WKRC FCC license.
My previous correspondence to WKRC was meant to be seen as a viable workaround for the station. I am now requesting a special taping and airing of the Channel 12 Newsmakers program that MUST air prior to the election.
The key distinction between the cases you cited and this specific issue is that Channel 12 scheduled and sponsored a series of debates for ALL Congressional candidates and willfully excluded me. There is NO bona fide "news story" here, the "campaign" is THE news story. The legislative intent of the code is very clear and I believe there is NO exception for WKRC here. Therefore, unless WKRC schedules a special episode of Newsmakers, preempts other programming and airs this with a similar audience reach I will pursue this FCC complaint to its final and complete resolution by the FCC and the federal court system. If WKRC prefers to pay your firm 100X more for legal fees then it would have lost in revenue by accepting my previous offer then I guess they simply do not understand the theory of a cost-benefit analysis.
I have been contacted by members of the Green Party and other interested parties for this case. Our goal will be for the FCC and the Courts to sanction WKRC by revoking its license to broadcast. This will be a watershed case in our opinion and we believe it will serve as a strong precedent for future actions by other FCC licensed entities.
I wish you the best in this fight. However, I believe as long as the courts follow the letter of the law and the legislative intent of the code in this matter there is little question that our side will prevail and WKRC will have made one of the poorest business decisions in the history of broadcasting.
Regards,
Nate Noy
posted by natenoy | 6:19 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home