In the Matter of "PETITION FOR
RECONSIDERATION" OF ETHEL C. HALE AND W. PAUL WHARTON OF RENEWAL OF
LICENSE GRANTED STATION KSL,
File No. BR-4081
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
16 F.C.C.2d 340 (1969); 15 Rad. Reg.
2d (P & F) 458
RELEASE-NUMBER: FCC 69-40
January 15, 1969 Adopted
BY THE
COMMISSION: CHAIRMAN HYDE AND COMMISSIONERS ROBERT E. LEE AND WADEWORTH VOTING
TO DENY AND ISSUING A STATEMENT; COMMISSIONERS BARTLEY, COX, AND JOHNSON VOTING TO GRANT AND ISSUING STATEMENTS;
COMMISSIONER H. REX LEE NOT PARTICIPATING.
[*340] 1.
This matter coming on for consideration by the Commission and there
being an equally divided vote of the Commissioners participating thereon;
2. It is ordered, That the petition for
reconsideration Is denied.
FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, BEN F. WAPLE, Secretary.
STATEMENT
OF CHAIRMAN HYDE AND COMMISSIONERS LEE AND
1. The Commission has before it the
"Petition for Reconsideration" filed November 7, 1968 by Ethel C.
Hale and W. Paul Wharton directed against the Commission's action of October 4,
1968 granting the application of KSL, Inc., for renewal of license of station KSL,
2. In order to better understand this
situation, a statement of the pleadings is necessary:
July 31,
1968. -- The Commission received a
letter dated July 29 from Ethel C. Hale and W. Paul Wharton of
August
14, 1968. -- The Commission received
another letter dated August 10 from Miss Hale and Mr. Wharton. Petitioners submitted information on the
corporate interrelationship between the licensee, other broadcast stations,
newspaper interests, and, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. A list of
[*341] the business interests of
the officers and board of directors of KSL, Inc., was appended. The complainants asserted that the
information showed a "dominant influence by the economic corporations of
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints (LDS, Mormon)" and that
this is "* * * inimical to the interest and well being of citizens in the
area of their influence."
August
30, 1968. -- The Commission sent KSL, Inc., a copy of the contents of the
letter received July 31, insofar as it pertained to KSL and asked for its
response to the complaints.
September
16, 1968. -- The Commission received a reply from KSL, Inc., in which it
answered the allegations, stating that instead of controlling the content of
news KSL employs three national wire services and receives news from its
September
27, 1968. -- The Commission sent a copy of the August 14 letter from Hale and
Wharton to KSL for comment. KSL was
advised to send copies of all further correspondence on this matter to the
complainants.
September
30, 1968. -- The Commission received another letter from complainants which
essentially reiterated their previous complaints against the station.
September
30, 1968. -- The Commission received a letter from KSL, Inc., stating that its
Washington counsel had noted the August 10 letter in the license file and also
that the license for renewal of KSL did not appear on the public notice listing
those Utah stations whose licenses were renewed, which notice was released on
September 26, 1968. KSL thereupon replied to the allegations contained in the
August 10 letter as follows: The information contained in the letter with
respect to other business interests was well known to the Commission and
evinced no violation of any Commission policy or rule. KSL pointed out that
there are other stations in the Salt Lake City market which are not owned or
controlled by the Mormon Church; that there are two competing daily newspapers
and six weekly newspapers in the Salt Lake City area, only one of which is
owned by the Mormon Church, and that the coowned newspaper and broadcasting
station are under separate management and compete vigorously with all media in
the area. It discussed generally the
right of religious organizations to become licensees of broadcast stations an
the fact that newspaper ownership of broadcast interests does not bar grant of
a broadcast license. Finally, in answer
to arguments that the station favors the interests of the Mormon Church, the
licensee referred to panel programs featuring spokesmen for both sides on a
"liquor-by-the-drink" referendum despite the editorial position of
the station and the position of he Mormon Church opposing adoption of he referendum. Licensee also referred to the fact that
businesses owned or associated with the Mormon Church pay regular advertising
rates and are afforded no special treatment, and in fact, according to a recent
station survey, purchase more time on competing stations than on KSL.
3. On October 4, 1968, after carefully
considering all of the material submitted in this matter, the Commission
determined, on balance, that a grant of the application for renewal of license
for station KSL would serve the public interest, convenience and necessity and
adopted a letter directed to Miss Hale and Mr. Wharton explaining the reasons
for the action. Three Commissioners
voted to grant the KSL renewal and one Commissioner dissented. One Commissioner was present but did not
participate.
4. After the grant of the renewal, the
Commission received the following documents:
October
17, 1968. -- Miss Hale and Mr. Wharton in a letter dated October 15 entitled
"Petition for Reconsideration of Decision" asserted they had not had sufficient
time to rebut the replies filed by KSL, Inc.
They pointed out that they were private citizens and were trying to
collect data to substantiate their claims.
They questioned the date on which the Commission acted on the
renewal [*342] application; whether or not the application
was voted on by a majority of the Commission; and, whether participation of
Chairman Hyde was proper because he is a member of the Mormon Church. They also inquired as to whether the
Commission complied with section 5(e) of the Communications Act by informing
Congress that the KSL application had been pending for over 3 months and
whether the rights conferred by section 6(a) of the Administrative Procedure
Act applied to them.
October
28, 1968. -- The Commission replied by letter to the above communications
pointing out the requirements of section 405(a) of the Communications Act and
section 1.106 of the Commission's rules relating to the requirements for the
filing of petitions for reconsideration.
Copies of these sections were included with the letter and the sections
were explained.
November
4, 1968. -- The Commission received from Miss Hale and Mr. Wharton a letter
purporting to be a response to KSL's letters of September 16 and September 30,
1968, which were received and considered, prior to action on KSL's renewal
application. The main contensions may
be summarized as follows:
Religion.
-- "The religious question overshadows all local problems." They
summarized their position by stating "We are not asking for less RELIGION;
we are asking for more RELIGIONS." Complainants concluded that KSL favors
The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints over all other religions.
The
program entitled "Public Pulse" is allegedly announced as
"presented in cooperation with the Deseret News." Miss Hale and Mr.
Wharton stated that this announcement belies the assertion of the station that
the radio station and the newspaper are in competition.
They complain
that they have seldom heard a Catholic service on the station and have never
heard a Buddhist, Muslim, or humanist service.
Also, they "* * * deplore the lack of programming of Negro
religious services."
Political
Content. -- Under this heading, Miss Hale and Mr. Wharton reiterated their
allegation that viewpoints presented in programs over KSL are weighted to one
side on most controversial issues, and that the time provided over the
"Public Pulse" program to persons who wish to present contrary
viewpoints is not, in the judgment of the petitioners, sufficient. They also claim that public service
announcements are "politically oriented." For example, announcements
are given for Radio Free Europe but allegedly not for UNICEF.
Newspapers.
-- They disputed licensee's statements with respect to the financial viability
of the Deseret News and also disputed the disclaimer of a close relationship
between the Deseret News and the Mormon Church.
News
Content. -- Miss Hale and Mr. Wharton claimed that they are convinced that news
is selected to favor the viewpoints of the current administration of the Mormon
Church. They stated that an interview
with Mayor Hatcher of
They disputed
the statement by KSL that the Kearns-Tribune has "long been identified
with Catholic interests." Complainants did not dispute the station's
contentions that both sides were presented in the
"liquor-by-the-drink" referendum but concluded that other national
and international issues were more important and, presumably, should have been
given more coverage over KSL. Miss Hale
and Mr. Wharton alluded to farm holdings of prominent Mormons and repeated
their view that too much time is devoted to farm programming. They intimated that "unseen ties"
between the licensee and other corporations color the programing judgment of
the licensee. No specifics were offered
to back up this allegation.
Finally,
Miss Hale and Mr. Wharton disputed the station's statements with respect to the
number of times they participated in the Herb Jepko telephone program and
listed 16 suggestions for changes in KSL's program policies.
Although
they referred to "3 tapes" to be submitted "under separate
cover," no tapes have been received by the Commission.
[*343]
5. We now come to the
"Petition for Reconsideration." The petitioners largely reiterated
the contentions of their letter of October 15, 1968; questioned the manner in
which the Commission has handled this matter and averred that they had
insufficient time to offer material to the Commission in rebuttal to the
assertions made in the replies filed by KSL, Inc., because they were not
advised of the Commission's action in granting the renewal application. Again, the petitioners questioned the fact
that the license was renewed by a vote of a majority of a quorum of the
Commission, and the fact that Chairman Hyde, a member of the Mormon Church,
voted on the renewal application. Further,
they inquired as to whether section 5 (e) of the Act was complied with and
whether they have a "right to appear" before the Commission under
section 6(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act. They also stated that "We believe the Commission has acted
arbitrarily on the bureau, level, and unjustly, in having refused to
investigate our charges."
6. Notwithstanding their disclaimers of lack of
notice with respect to the Commission's action of October 4 granting KSL's
renewal application, the letter received October 17 from Miss Hale and Mr.
Wharton entitled "Petition for Reconsideration of Decision" raised
questions indicating that both had knowledge of the Commission's action (see
par. 4, supra). Moreover, after having
been apprised by telephone on November 5 that the petitioners had not received
the public notice of October 8, 1968, the Chief of the Broadcast Bureau sent
them a copy of the public notice.
Despite the petitioners' assertions that they had insufficient time to
offer material in rebuttal, they have in fact filed such material as referred
to in paragraph 4, supra.
7. The Chief of the Broadcast Bureau advised
Miss Hale and Mr. Wharton in a letter dated October 28, 1968, that the vote of
a majority of a quorum of the Commission is sufficient to conduct Commission
business. We point out that section
4(h) of the Communications Act states that four members shall constitute a
quorum. It is a well established
principle of procedure that a majority of a quorum can conduct business. See
8. As to the section 5(e) contention, the
report sent to Congress by the Commission in accordance with section 5(e) of
the Communications Act on November 1, 1968 listed the KSL application as
pending for 90 days as of September 30, 1968.
Petitioners also have been accorded their rights pursuant to section
6(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act.
n1
n1 Petitioners have urged that
Chairman Hyde should not participate because he is an "important
member" of the Mormon Church. But
it is well established that churches may be broadcast licensees (e.g., Kansas
City Broadcasting Co., Inc., 5 Pike & Fischer, Radio Reg. 1057 (1952);
Loyola University,
12 Pike & Fischer, Radio Reg.
1115 (1957), affirmed Noe v. FCC, 260 F. 2d 739 (D.C. Cir 1955): Riverside
Church of the City of New York, 19 Pike & Fischer, Radio Reg. 81
(1960). When the applications of such
churches come before the Commission in various proceedings, the Commission
members of the same faith are not disqualified on that ground. nor, similarly,
are appellate judges. F g.,
9.There
are some threshold procedural arguments raised by the licensee. Thus, on November 19, 1968, the Commission
received from [*344] the licensee an opposition to the petition
for reconsideration which requested the Commission to dismiss the petition for
lack of standing on the part of the petitioners. In response to the opposition,
on December 9, 1968, the Commission received further communications dated
December 7, 1968, from petitioners in which they reassert their right to
petition this Commission. The essence
of the procedural argument is that the requirements of section 309(d)(1) 'that
petitioners set forth specific allegations of fact sufficient to show that they
are parties in interest), and of Office of Communications of United Church of
Christ v. FCC, 359 F.2d 994 (D.C. Cir. 1966) (that petitioners must have a
legitimate interest in the proceedings, by showing that they are responsible
representatives of groups representative of the listening public, rather than
speaking for only individuals) and of section 1.106(c) of the rules (governing
petitions for reconsideration) have not been met. There are certainly substantial procedural issues raised. However, we need not pursue these issues in
view of our disposition of the case on the merits. In this connection, we note further that whether on a formal or
informal basis, Congress has sought to encourage the submission to the
Commission of pertinent information by listeners at the time of renewal of
license. See, e.g., section 311(a) and
its legislative history. We therefore
turn to a consideration of the substance of the petition for reconsideration
and related pleadings.
10. The petition for reconsideration itself does
not provide new material for consideration.
We have fully reviewed all of the material filed by pertitioners and the
licensee prior, and subsequent, to the October 4, action. Much of this material is repetitious and
argumentative rather than factual. The
petitions provide no factual basis for their opinions with respect to the alleged
evils engendered by the Mormon Church's control of broadcast and other properties,
and there is no apparent violation of the Communications Act or Commission
rules or policy by this licensee. Many
of the areas at which petitioners direct their fire simply involve programming
judgments or policies which lie within the licensee's judgment and
discretion. Without going into all the
matters, we shall treat briefly the following as representative:
(i) News
-- Against petitioners' allegations that its news operations are biased and do not
serve the public interest, the licensee cites the awards it has won in this
field; the fact it employs three network wire services and a large number of
other news services precisely for the purpose of giving its listeners the
broadest possible view of all local, network and international news; and that
it carries the CBS News "live" from the network. Against this, petitioners cite two examples,
which do not at all constitute significant extrinsic evidence of slanting the
news but rather come within the ambit of licensee judgment as to the manner of
covering and presenting news events.
(ii)
Fairness -- As to fairness, the licensee sets out its policy to comply with the
fairness doctrine and the personal attack rules and cites a recent example of
its fairness with respect to coverage of a controversial issue involving the
Mormon Church. It also describes the
program, "Public Pulse," which is another forum for the expression of
viewpoints. Petitioners cite the fact
that KSL carries a number of controversial issue programs, but this fact does
not raise an issue of compliance with the fairness doctrine. See Applicability of the Fairness Doctrine
in the Handling of Controversial Issues of Public Importance, 29
(iii)
Favoritism to the Mormon Church -- Petitioners charge that the licensee favors
the Mormon Church in its programing efforts.
The licensee points out that
[*345] of course it presents religious programs for the Mormon Church,
since 70 percent of its coverage area are adherents of the Mormon Church. But other religious groups, such as, for
example, the Catholic Church, are also afforded time. Further, it points to one particular program, on which representatives
of every major denomination have appeared, including, contrary to petitioner's
allegation, Buddhists and humanists.
Finally, it states that all Mormon Church associated or owned businesses
pay regular rates and are afforded no special treatment; that only six such
accounts are on KSL and with only minimal schedules.
We do
not believe it necessary to continue the above analysis. The point is that
petitioners' complaint is largely one for the judgment of the licensee, to be
made on the basis of all such contacts with his listening public. It is not, however, a matter coming within
this agency's ambit whether the "Herb Jepko Show" allows discussion
of controversial issues, or whether on "Public Pulse," a show which
does, there is a 3 to 4 minute limitation per call, or whether the licensee
should carry more information about air pollution (as well as the present
warnings against smoking) or more reports on "food purity," equally
with other "health admonitions." These are all part of the many
programming judgments which every licensee is called upon to make in light of
the many competing demands for limited broadcast time.
11. Finally, on the concentration issue, we
adhere to what was stated in our previous ruling. We would also note here that the critical issue is whether a
grant would result in a concentration of control inconsistent with the public
interest. We do not believe that any
such finding can be appropriately made.
There is an independent newspaper voice (see our previous ruling), and
in the broadcast field, there are in Salt Lake City two other commercial
television stations, one educational television station, one FM educational
station, six other FM stations, and 11 other AM stations, not controlled by the
Mormon Church. Similar recitations of
ample competing media could be made when the matter is viewed on a regional
basis.
12. In sum, while complaints from the listening
public are always welcome and will receive careful consideration, fairness and
the proper discharge of our responsibilities require that action on those
complaints meet the standard laid down by Congress in the Communications Act --
that there be substantial and material questions of fact or issues going to the
public interest, before we designate a licensee'sapplication for hearing. Cf. section 309(d)(1). That standard has not been met here; indeed,
we note that other than on the concentration issue, even the dissenting
Commissioner from our previous ruling stated that he was "* * * satisfied
that by most standards [these] stations have performed as well as or better
than most others in the broadcast industry * * *"
13. In view of the foregoing, we would deny the
petition for reconsideration on its merits and would affirm the Commission's
action of October 4, 1968, finding that the renewal of the KSL license serves
the public interest, convenience and necessity.
STATEMENT
OF COMMISSIONER ROBERT T. BARTLEY
I vote
to reconsider the KSL renewal and to set it for evidentiary hearing, on the
Commission's own motion, to determine whether, in light of the licensee's
interrelated commercial interests, there is an
[*346] undesirable concentration
of control of mass media or a situation which would tend unduly to further or
to concentrate economic dominance over the population of the Salt Lake City
market. See Hershey Broadcasting Co.,
Inc. 22 R.R. 1071, 1072.
I voted
against a grant without hearing of recent applications by the licensee of KSL
or related companies for acquisition of station WRFM, New York City (1966); and
stations KMBC and KMBR-FM, Kansas City, Mo. (1967), raising therein the
question of how the multiple ownership situation would, in fact, serve the
public interest.
I
believe that the overall situation should be explored fully in an evidentiary hearing
on the above-referenced issues.
STATEMENT
OF COMMISSIONER KENNETH A. COX
I
believe we should reconsider our action renewing the licenses of KSL, KSL-FM,
and KSL-TV -- and of the other stations having interlocking business relations with
their licensee -- for the reasons set forth in connection with my dissent to
the original action taken on October 4, 1968.
In
addition, while the petition for reconsideration is still not as factually
specific as I would like -- which is quite understandable when private parties
are complaining of the broadcast service they receive -- I think petitioners
have now raised questions about KSL's fairness in handling controversial
issues, personal attacks, and the provision of full informational service to all
significant elements in the community sufficient to justify exploration of
these matters in a hearing.
KSL
Renewal [In the matter of Petition for Reconsideration * * *]
DISSENTING OPINION OF COMMISSIONER NICHOLAS JOHNSON
This
matter comes to the Commission on reconsideration from an action taken in a
three-to-one "majority" vote announced October 8, 1968. I was absent from the country at the time of
initial consideration. The action was
taken by "circulation," rather than waiting for the next regular
Commission meeting on October 9. Had I
been accorded the opportunity to participate in this case initially I would
have dissented. I now dissent to the
Commission's refusal to grant reconsideration in this case.
The
primary issue in this renewal proceeding is the media ownership structure in
[*347]
The Mormon Church owns, in
The
Mormon Church also owns a TV-AM-FM in Idaho Falls, Idaho; a TV-AM-FM in
Seattle, Wash.; an AM-FM in Kansas City, Mo.; an FM in New York City; a private
international shortwave station in New York City; a 5.12 percent interest in
the Times-Mirror Corp. of Los Angeles; and it is the applicant for an AM-FM in
the Los Angeles area. The other daily
newspaper in
But the
Mormon Church is not only a media baron of substantial proportions, it is also
a significant industrial conglomerate corporation. Its holdings are reported to include a 50 percent interest in the
Utah Idaho Sugar Co. (beet sugar); its $20 million investment in the Los
Angeles Times; a 25 percent interest in Zion's Cooperative Mercantile
Institution (a Salt Lake City department store); Hotel Utah and Hotel Temple
Square in Salt Lake City; Beneficial Life Insurance Co. (insurance in force of
$535 million); Home Fire Insurance Co.; Deseret Book Store; Deseret Farms,
Inc.; Deseret Farms of Florida, Inc.; Zion's Securities Corp. (real estate
management); a trucking company; a pineapple plantation; three large ranches in
Canada; a total of 600 farms, 40 mills, factories, and salvage stores; a 6,500
acre sugar plantation in Hawaii; and 360,000 acres (another source indicates
700,000 acres) in Florida. [Material in
this part is drawn from Mullen, The Latter-day Saints 205-07 (1966); Whalen,
The Latterday Saints in the Modern World 152-53 (1964); and Turner, The Mormon
Establishment 102-36, 267-94 (1966).]
[*348]
The Commission has before it substantial complaints about this
cartelization of media and its association with dominant economic power. Two citizens of
n1 I
refer to the statement of Chairman Hyde, Commissioner Robert Lee, and
Commissioner Wadsworth who, while not a majority on reconsideration, were a
majority for the initial renewal decision.
In
renewing the KSL license over petitioners' protests the three Commissioners
ignore the question of the economic power of the Mormon Church industrial
conglomerate; ignore the questions raised by the joint venture operations of
the supposed independent media voices to which the three Commissioners refer;
and offer no analysis of the competitive market situation in Salt Lake City --
in spite of the strong evidence of domination and concentration of control in
the hands of KSL and its business compatriots.
As to the numbers of AM and FM stations, the three Commissioners have
apparently not learned that numbers of stations equal neither sufficiently
effective competition to satisfy the antitrust laws nor satisfactory evidence
that media domination is consistent with our "public interest"
standards for the marketplace of ideas.
Accepted measures of competition depend on a detailed market analysis,
including an evaluation of shares of the market. As recently as last week, even this Commission saw the need to
set for hearing the WGN application to acquire an FM in
The
three Commissioners' willingness to sustain renewal without adequate
substantive explanation flies in the face of the court's concern in the WGN
case:
When the
subject of surveillance is as sensitive as that involved here, when there is no
hearing at which the full facts are brought out, promoting confidence that all
relevant facts and aspects have been considered and that the public interest
would be served by the grant, when the affirmative finding of public interest
required by Congress does not appear expressly, when there is no opinion or
other statement providing a reasoned application of articulated standards to
the facts of the case, and when the Commission has at least some concern that
under today's conditions the public interest requires a strict approach, there
exists a combination of danger signals that cannot be ignored or bypassed.
(Citizens Committee To Save WFMT-FM v. F.C.C. [D.C. Cir. 1968], No. 21,873,
decided July 30, 1968; slip opinion p. 9.)
[*349]
But there is a second important question that is linked to the problem
of media ownership. The petitioners
essentially have charged in their pleadings that the licensee uses its stations
to further its own economic and ideological interests in ways that are
inconsistent with the public interest.
These charges are serious. And a
review of all the pleadings indicates that petitioners have raised substantial
questions that cannot be resolved on the basis of pleadings -- questions which
preclude a grant of the renewals without a hearing.
Finally,
the three Commissioners question the standing of petitioners, while stopping
short of rejecting the petition for reconsideration on that ground. They cite the United Church of Christ case (
Office of Communication of United Church of Christ v. F.C.C., 359 F. 2d 994
[D.C. Cir. 1966]). One would think this
Commission had learned something as a result of the experience of that case. Apparently not. The three Commissioners assert that the petitioners "must
have a legitimate interest in the proceedings, by showing that they are
responsible representatives of groups representative of the listening public,
rather than speaking for only individuals" (par. 9). There is no explanation as to how the determination
was made that petitioners are not responsible representatives.
Perhaps
they rely on the lack of formal organizations.
But surely there are few people who do not recognize the ease by which
paper groups can be organized around a few activists. Corporations and trade associations have used this practice for
years. Private citizens have caught
on. But does this Commission really
intend to sacrifice the public interest on the altar of such hollow legalisms?
If
necessary, the interests of an individual member of the audience can be
identified. There is no such thing as
free television. The average homeowner
bears a proportionate share of the $20 billion national investment in radio and
television receivers (about $300 per home), the radio and television
advertising expense built into product cost (about $50 per home per year), the
cost of cable television service (about $60 per home per year for subscribers),
and a not inconsequential payment for repairs and electricity. These interests are, of course, in addition
to his interest as a part owner of the public's airwaves used by the
broadcaster in exchange for his commitment to program in the public interest.
The
court recognized in the United Church of Christ case that "* * * the
Commission has always viewed its regulatory duties as guided if not limited by
our national tradition that public response is the most reliable test of ideas
and performance in broadcasting as in most areas of life." (
The
theory that the Commission can always effectively represent the listener
interests in a renewal proceeding without the aid and participation of
legitimate listener representatives fulfilling the role of private attorneys
general is one of those assumptions we collectively try to work with so long as
they are reasonably adequate. When it
becomes clear, as it does now, that it is no longer a valid assumption which
stands up under the realities of actual experience, neither we nor the
Commission can continue to rely on it.
Concern
had been expressed by the Commission in that case that large numbers of groups
would seek to intervene, that the Commission would have to choose among groups,
that briefs and pleadings would have to be consolidated. The court found such fears substantially
outweighed by its desire to provide protection of the viewing audience.
It is
difficult to anticipate the range of claims which may be raised or sought to be
raised by future petitioners asserting representation of the public
interest. It is neither possible nor
desirable for us to try to chart the precise scope of patterns for the
future. The need sought to be met is to
provide a means for reflection of listener appraisal of a licensee's
performance as the performance meets or fails to meet the licensee's statutory
obligation to operate the facility in the public interest.
n2 On Oct. 15, 1968, petitioners
filed a petition for reconsideration in which they stated that they understood
that KSL had been renewed. (Apparently
petitioners, who were parties to the renewal proceeding, had not received
notification of the FCC renewal action released Oct. 8.) The response of the
Commission to this petition was a letter from the Chief of the Broadcast Bureau
mailed Oct. 28. (Because the petition
for reconsideration must be filed within 30 days, this delay on the part of the
Bureau was obviously prejudicial to petitioners.) He notified petitioners that
their filing did not comply with various procedural rule of this Commission,
calling their attention to, particularly subsection (f), of 47 CFR § 1.106.
This rule provides, in pertinent part, that "The petition for
reconsideration shall [be on] * * * double spaced typewritten pages."
Despite the delay in the Commission's response, substantially the same pleading
was refiled on Nov. 6, and is the basis for the Commission's action here.
I
dissent to the renewal of the KSL license without a decent inquiry by the FCC
into what I consider most serious charges.