WPC 2?BJ ZCourier3|jCourierTimes New Roman Bold@`7s@#HP LaserJet 4M (PCL) ROOM 712HPLA4MPC.PRSXj\  P6G;\=ρXPTimes New RomanTimes New RomanCourier6X@`7s@#2:q KTimes New RomanCourierTimes New Roman BoldCourier Bold<r5ddd,sd6X@`7@\ @^5q.$h';U7G;A 7'A , *(# es::*PWPCco+" r"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd2 XFK7wx7jC:, Xj\  P6G;XP<r5ddd,sd6X@`7@zy.X80,IX\  P6G;P7nC:,Xn4  pG;X"i~'^09CSS999S]+9+/SSSSSSSSSS//]]]Ixnnxg]xx9?xgxx]xn]gxxxxg9/9MS9ISISI9SS//S/SSSS9?/SSxSSIP!PZ9+ZM999+99999999S/xIxIxIxIxIlnIgIgIgIgI9/9/9/9/xSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxSxIxSxRxSxSxS]SxIxIxInInInZnIxigIgIgIgIxSxSxSxZxSxZxS9/9S999Su]ZZxSg/gCg9g9g/xSbxSxSxSxSxn9n9n9]?]?]?]ZgFg/gMxSxSxSxSxSxSxxZgIgIgIxSg9xS]?g9xSi+SS88WuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNfx6X@`7X@?xxx,-x `7X<~9nnn,Fcn6X@`7&@x7jC:, Xj\  P6G;XP<r5ddd,sd6X@`7@zy.X80,IX\  P6G;P|7nC:,Xn4  pG;X<?xxx,>fx6X@`7X@?xxx,-x `7X<~9nnn,Fcn6X@`7&@}:nnn,-on `7& 2 X   N X-w  Federal Communications Commission`(#DA 97392 ă  yxdddy Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 `(# In reply refer to: x` `  hh@hpp  xx 1800E1 %February 18, 1997  X-`s(# Released: February 26, 1997 ă  X_- CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Meredith Corporation Licensee, WOFL(TV) 35 Skyline Drive Lake Mary, FL 32746 Dear Licensee:   xThis letter constitutes a NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE in  x}the amount of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) pursuant to Section 503(b) of the  xCommunications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 503(b), under authority delegated to the  x=Chief of the Mass Media Bureau by Section 0.283 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 0.283,  xfor repeated violations of the Commission's rule limiting the amount of commercial matter that may be aired during children's programming.   xIn the Children's Television Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101437, 104 Stat. 9961000,  X- xcodified at 47 U.S.C. Sections 303a, 303b and 394, Congress directed the Commission to adopt  X- xrules, inter alia, limiting the number of minutes of commercial matter that television stations may  xair during children's programming, and to consider in its review of television license renewals  xthe extent to which the licensee has complied with such commercial limits. Accordingly, the  xzCommission adopted Section 73.670 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. 73.670, which limits the amount  x>of commercial matter which may be aired during children's programming to 10.5 minutes per  xhour on weekends and 12 minutes per hour on weekdays. The Commission also reaffirmed and  xclarified its longstanding policy that the entire duration of a program associated with a product,  xin which commercials for that product are aired (a "programlength commercial") would be  x/counted as commercial matter for the purpose of the children's television commercial limits.  X- xzChildren's Television Programming, 6 FCC Rcd 2111, 2118, recon. granted in part, 6 FCC Rcd  X- x]5093, 5098 (1991). The commercial limits became effective on January 1, 1992. Children's  X -Television Programming, 6 FCC Rcd 5529, 5530 (1991).   xOn October 1, 1996, you filed an application for renewal of license (FCC Form 303S)  xfor Station WOFL(TV), Orlando, FL (BRCT961001ZR). Section III, Question 4 of that  xapplication indicates that during the previous license term WOFL(TV) failed to comply with the  xlimits on commercial matter in children's programming specified in Section 73.670 of the  xCommissions Rules. Exhibit 2 to that application states that between February 27, 1992, and  xAugust 2, 1996, WOFL(TV) exceeded the Commission's children's   television commercial limit  xrules and policies on 33 occasions. Of these 33 violations, one was fifteen seconds in duration;  xLeight were 30 seconds in duration; three were one minute in duration; one was one minute and  x-30 seconds in duration; one was three minutes and 30 seconds in duration; and 19 were program"),**qqn("ԫ xlength commercials. The conventional overages are attributed to inadvertence, human error  xjand/or faulty equipment. The programlength commercial violations are attributed human error  xby station employees, or to inclusion of programrelated commercial matter by the programs'  X- xproducers or suppliers. Finally, you indicate that corrective action, e.g., additional instructions, directions and/or admonitions to station employees, were taken after each of the listed violations.   }xWOFL(TV)'s record of exceeding the Commission's commercial limits on children's  x=television programming during the last license term constitutes a repeated violation of Section  x#73.670 of the Commission's rules. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 503(b) of the  xCommunications Act, Meredith Corporation is hereby advised of its apparent liability for  xforfeiture in the amount of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) for its apparent repeated violation  xof Section 73.670 of the Commission's Rules. The amount specified was reached after  xconsideration of the factors set forth in Section 503(b)(2) of the Communications Act, and, in  xkparticular, the following criteria: (1) the number of instances of commercial overages; (2) the  xlength and nature of each such overage; (3) the period of time over which such overages  xoccurred; (4) whether or not the licensee established an effective program to ensure compliance;  xand (5) the specific reasons that the licensee gives for the overages. These criteria are appropriate  x.in analyzing violations of the commercial limits during children's programming, since they take  Xb- xinto account, inter alia, "the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation, and, with  x?respect to the violator, the degree of culpability", as required under 503(b)(2)(D) of the  X4- xNCommunications Act. See Clear Channel Television, Inc. (KTTU(TV)), 10 FCC Rcd 3773  X-(1995); Northstar Television of Erie, Inc. (WSEETV), 10 FCC Rcd 3779 (1995).   ?xDuring the last license period, WOFL(TV) exceeded the children's television commercial  xzlimits on 33 occasions. This is a high number of violations. In addition, 19 of the violations  xwere programlength commercials. Overages of this number, nature and magnitude mean that  x=children have been subjected to commercial matter greatly in excess of the limits contemplated  x[by Congress when it enacted the Children's Television Act of 1990. Congress was particularly  xkconcerned about programlength commercials because young children often have difficulty  xdistinguishing between commercials and programs. S. Rep. No. 227, 101st Cong., 1st Sess. 24  x(1989). The fact that some of the programlength commercials occurred because of program xlrelated commercial material included in programs provided to the station by a network or  xisyndicator does not absolve WOFL(TV) of responsibility for the violations. The Commission has  xconsistently ruled that a licensee's reliance on a program's producer or syndicator for compliance  xwith our children's television rules and policies will not excuse or mitigate violations which do  X- xoccur. See, e.g., Max Television of Syracuse, L.P. (WSYT(TV)), 10 FCC Rcd 8905 (1995); Mt.  X - x=Mansfield Television, Inc. (WCAXTV), 10 FCC Rcd 8797 (1995); Boston Celtics Broadcasting  X!-Limited Partnership (WFXT(TV)), 10 FCC Rcd 6686 (1995).   xFurther, the violations occurred from February 2, 1992, through August 2, 1996, an  xextended period of four years and six months. When the Commission delayed the effective date  x0of Section 73.670 of the Rules from October 1, 1991, until January 1, 1992, we stated that  x/"giving the additional time to broadcasters and cable operators before compliance with the  xcommercial limits is required will have the effect of enabling broadcasters and cable operators  X (- x=to hone their plans to ensure compliance...." Children's Television Programming, supra 6 FCC" (,))qq&"  xRcd at 5530 n.10. In view of the violations listed and the explanations offered in WOFL(TV)'s  xrenewal application, including the apparent need to repeatedly instruct and admonish station  xemployees in 1992, 1993 and 1994, as to the requirements of the children's television commercial  x{limits, it is clear that the station initially did not establish an effective program to monitor  xcompliance with the children's television commercial limitations. Further, the Commission has  x<repeatedly rejected human error, inadvertence and/or misunderstanding of the rules as a basis for  Xv- xexcusing violations of the children's television commercial limits. See, e.g., UTV of San  X_- x Francisco, Inc. (KBHKTV), 10 FCC Rcd 10986, 10987 & Note 1; Le Sea Broadcasting Corp.  XH- x(WHKE(TV)), 10 FCC Rcd 4977, 4978 (1995); Buffalo Management Enterprises Corp. (WIVB X1- xTV), 10 FCC Rcd 4959, 4960 (1995); Gannett Massachusetts Broadcasting, Inc. (WLVITV), 9  X - xFCC Rcd 1555 (1994); Ramar Communications, Inc. (KJTV(TV)), 9 FCC Rcd 1831 (1994);  X - xChannel 12 of Beaumont, Inc. (KBMTTV), 9 FCC Rcd 1825; WKBD, Inc., 8 FCC Rcd 5079  x=(1993). Finally, the fact that WOFL(TV) (and/or a program's producer or syndicator) may have  ximplemented policies to prevent subsequent violations of the Commission's children's television  xrules and policies does not relieve the licensee of liability for violations which have occurred.  X - xInternational Broadcasting Corp., 19 FCC 2d 793, 794 (1969); KBHKTV, supra 10 FCC Rcd  X- xat 10988; KEVN, Inc., 8 FCC Rcd 5077, 5078 (1993); R&R Media Corporation (WTWS(TV)),  Xy- x9 FCC Rcd 1715, 1716 (1994); Mountain States Broadcasting, Inc. (KMSBTV), 9 FCC Rcd  Xb- xl2545, 2546 (1994); WHP Television, L.P., 10 FCC Rcd 4979, 4980 (1995). Consideration of  XK- xall of these factors warrants a forfeiture in the abovespecified amount of $20,000. Cf.,  X4- xWSYT(TV), supra 10 FCC Rcd at 809697 ($20,000 forfeiture for 29 overages, including 18  X-programlength commercials).   xYou are afforded a period of thirty (30) days from the date of this letter "to show, in  xkwriting, why a forfeiture penalty should not be imposed or should be reduced, or to pay the  x=forfeiture. Any showing as to why the forfeiture should not be imposed or should be reduced  x>shall include a detailed factual statement and such documentation and affidavits as may be  x U"RI% pertinent." Section 1.80(f)(3) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. 1.80(f)(3). Other relevant  xLprovisions of Section 1.80(f)(3) of the Commission's Rules are summarized in the attachment to this letter.   {xNotwithstanding the substantial nature of the violations described here and the severity  x\with which we regard them, we find Meredith Corporation qualified to remain a Commission  x>licensee, and conclude that grant of the instant application would serve the public interest,  x-convenience and necessity. Accordingly, the application of Meredith Corporation for renewal of license for Station WOFL(TV), Orlando, FL (BRCT961001ZR), is hereby GRANTED. x` `  hh@FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION x` `  hh@Roy J. Stewart x` `  hh@Chief, Mass Media Bureau Enclosure cc: James E. Dunstan, Esq." (,))qq&"Ԍ  }:< #n6X@`7Fc&@#$// MEREDITH CORP., WOFL(TV) (Orlando, FL) DA 97 U"RI( 392 U"RI(  //$ $/ 300.503(b) FORFEITURES (NAL) /$  }:<$/ 73.670 COMMERCIAL LIMITS ON CHILDREN'S PROGRAMS /$#x6X@`7>fX@#  ?< #x6X@`7>fX@#