Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554


In the Matter of

Extension of the Filing Requirement 
For Children’s Television Programming  
Reports (FCC Form 398)
)
)
)
)
)


MM Docket No. 00-44


REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING

   Adopted:  September 14, 2000	Released: October 5, 2000

Comment Date: December 18, 2000
Reply Comment Date: January 17, 2001

By the Commission:	Chairman Kennard issuing a statement; Commissioner Furchtgott-Roth dissenting 
and issuing a statement; Commissioner Powell issuing a statement; Commissioner 
Tristani concurring in part, dissenting in part, and issuing a statement. 


I.  INTRODUCTION
1. In this Report and Order we make a number of changes to the children’s educational 
television reporting requirements of commercial broadcast television licensees.  First, we extend 
indefinitely the requirement that commercial broadcast television licensees file with the Commission 
their quarterly Children’s Television Programming Reports (FCC Form 398).  The Commission’s rules 
currently state that such reports shall be completed quarterly and filed on an annual basis for an 
experimental period of three years, from January 1998 through January 2000.  These reports are required 
to be filed electronically.  Second, we  require broadcasters in the future to file these reports on a 
quarterly basis, at the time they are prepared, rather than annually.  Finally, we also announce herein a 
number of revisions to be made to FCC Form 398 to make the information contained in the form clearer 
and more useful to the public and the FCC.  The actions we take herein will assist the Commission in 
continuing to enforce the Children’s Television Act of 1990 (“CTA”) and our rules implementing the 
CTA by facilitating monitoring by the FCC and the public of the amount and quality of educational 
television programming for children and industry compliance with the Commission’s children’s 
educational programming requirements.  We also adopt a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to 
seek comment on whether broadcasters should be required to provide their completed Children’s 
Television Programming Reports at their own websites.
II.	BACKGROUND
2. Data indicate that children spend, on average, almost three hours a day watching 
television.   In view of the significant impact this medium has on children, Congress has concluded that 
television should be contributing to children’s development.  The CTA requires the Commission, in its 
review of each television broadcast license renewal application, to “consider the extent to which the 
licensee … has served the educational and informational needs of children through the licensee’s overall 
programming, including programming specifically designed to serve such needs.”   In enacting the CTA, 
Congress found that, while television can benefit society by helping to educate and inform children, there 
are significant market disincentives for commercial broadcasters to air children’s educational and 
informational programming.   The objective of Congress in enacting the CTA was to increase the amount 
of educational and informational programming available on television.   The CTA places on every 
licensee an obligation to provide such programming, including programming specifically designed to 
educate and inform children, and requires the FCC to enforce that obligation.
3. In August 1996, the Commission adopted its current educational programming rules to 
strengthen its enforcement of the CTA.   The Commission’s rules include several measures to increase  
the availability of programming “specifically designed” to serve children’s educational needs (otherwise 
known as “core” programming) and to facilitate public access to information about such programming.  
These measures include a requirement the licensees identify core programming at the time it is aired and 
in information provided to publishers of television guides.   Licensees are also required to designate a 
children’s liaison at the station responsible for collecting comments on the station’s compliance with the 
CTA.  Furthermore, the rules establish a definition of “core” programming as well as a three-hour-per- 
week processing guideline pursuant to which broadcasters airing at least three hours per week of 
programming that meets the definition of “core” will receive staff-level approval of the CTA portion of 
their renewal applications. 
4. One of the most important public information measures adopted by the Commission in 
1996 was the requirement that licensees complete a Children’s Television Programming Report, FCC 
Form 398, each calendar quarter and place the report in the station’s public inspection file.   
Broadcasters are required to separate the children’s programming reports from other materials they 
maintain in their public files.   The Commission required that these quarterly reports be filed jointly with 
the Commission on an annual basis for an experimental period of three years.   Among other things, 
these reports identify the educational and informational programs aired by the licensee over the previous 
quarter and the days and times these programs were regularly scheduled, the age of the target audience 
for each program, and the average number of hours per week of core programming broadcast over the 
past quarter.  Licensees must include in the reports an explanation of how each core program meets the 
definition of “core” programming adopted by the Commission.  Stations must also identify in their 
reports the core programs the station plans to air during the next calendar quarter.  The Commission 
makes the reports available at its website.
5. The public information initiatives, including the Children’s Television Programming 
Reports, are an integral part of the children’s programming rules.  These measures are designed to ensure 
that the public, and especially parents, has access to information regarding the educational programming 
being aired by broadcasters so that parents and others can help achieve the goal of the CTA to increase 
the amount of educational programming available on television.  Facilitating public access to the 
information contained in the Children’s Television Programming Reports helps achieve the goals of the 
CTA in a number of ways.  Parents who have access to information about educational programming, 
such as the titles of programs, the times they are regularly scheduled to air, and the age for which the 
programs are intended, can select such programming for their children to watch, thereby increasing the 
audience for such programs and the incentive of broadcasters to air, and producers to supply, more such 
programs.  The information contained in the reports can also be used by parents, educators, and others 
interested in educational programming to monitor a station’s performance in complying with the CTA 
and the Commission’s rules.  In this way, the public can play an active role in helping to enforce 
children’s programming requirements.  Finally, requiring broadcasters to identify programming they rely 
upon to meet their obligation to air educational programming makes broadcasters more accountable to 
the public.  Improving broadcaster accountability minimizes the need for government involvement to 
enforce the CTA and helps to ensure that broadcasters, with input from the public, rather than the 
Commission determine which television programs serve children’s educational needs.  
6. In the Children’s Programming Report and Order, the Commission also required that a 
children’s program be “regularly scheduled” to be counted as core programming for purposes of meeting 
the three-hour-per-week processing guideline, i.e., -- a core children’s program must “be scheduled to air 
at least once a week” and “must air on a regular basis.”   The Commission stated that television series 
typically air in the same time slot for 13 consecutive weeks, although some episodes may be preempted 
for programs such as breaking news or live sports events.  The Commission noted that programming that 
is aired on a regular basis is more easily anticipated and located by viewers, and can build loyalty that 
will improve its chance for commercial success.  The Commission stated that it would leave to the staff 
to determine, with guidance from the full Commission as necessary, what constitutes regularly scheduled 
programming and what level of preemption is allowable.  Subsequent to the adoption of the Children’s 
Programming Report and Order, and in response to requests from the ABC, CBS, and NBC networks 
that local stations be given flexibility to reschedule episodes of core programs that are preempted by live 
network sports events without adversely affecting the program’s status as “regularly scheduled,” the 
Mass Media Bureau has allowed the networks limited flexibility in preempting core children’s 
programming.   Specifically, within certain limitations, the Bureau advised that preempted core 
programs could count toward a station’s core programming obligation if the program were rescheduled.  
The Bureau also indicated that it would revisit this limited flexibility regarding preempted core 
programming based on the level of preempted programs, the rescheduling and broadcast of the 
preempted programs, and the impact of promotions and other steps taken by the stations to make 
children’s educational programming a success.
7. In April 2000, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rule Making  proposing 
to amend section 73.3526(e)(11)(iii) of the Commission’s rules to extend indefinitely the requirement 
that broadcasters file their Children’s Television Programming Reports with the Commission.  The 
Notice also sought comment on whether reports should be filed with the Commission quarterly, at the 
time they are prepared, rather than annually.  Finally, the Notice asked commenters to address whether 
any changes should be made to FCC Form 398 to make the reports more informative and easier to 
prepare. For example, the Notice asked whether there were revisions to the form that would make it 
easier for the reader to determine the number of times core programs are preempted and to obtain 
information about the rescheduling of any preempted episodes.  
III.	ISSUE ANALYSIS
A.  Filing Requirement Extension.  
8. Background.  As noted above, we proposed in the Notice to continue indefinitely the 
requirement that licensees file their quarterly Children’s Television Programming Reports with the 
Commission.  No comments were filed objecting to this proposal. 
9. Discussion.  We will extend indefinitely the  requirement that broadcasters file FCC 
Form 398 with the Commission.  As we stated in the Notice, the requirement that reports be filed with 
the Commission is an important part of the emphasis placed in our children’s programming rules on 
improving the flow of information to the public about educational programming.  Filing permits the 
Commission to place the reports on our website, making this information easily accessible in one central 
location.  Members of the public can view reports from a number of stations easily without having to 
contact each station individually.  As we also stated in the Notice, continuation of the filing requirement 
is also important to ensure that the Commission itself has access to information regarding licensee 
compliance with the children’s programming rules.  Without the annual filing requirement, licensees 
would be required to report to the Commission on their station’s children’s educational programming 
only once every eight years, at the end of the license term.  Extension of the license term to eight years 
necessarily places a stronger emphasis on facilitating public monitoring of licensee compliance with the 
rules, to assist the FCC in its enforcement role.  The Center for Media Education (“CME”), Peggy 
Charren, the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, and thirteen other 
academics and organizations interested in children’s programming issues (collectively referred to herein 
as “CME et al.”) filed joint comments strongly supporting extension of the Children’s Television 
Programming Report filing requirement.   These commenters agree that the requirement that 
broadcasters file their quarterly reports with the Commission is one of the “principal ingredients” of the 
children’s television public information initiatives and is necessary for effective monitoring and 
enforcement of the CTA.   The National Association of Broadcasters (“NAB”), the only other 
commenter to file in response to the Notice, stated that it does not object to the continuation of an annual 
filing requirement.   
10. We agree with CME et al. that extending the filing requirement indefinitely is important 
to permit the Commission to continue to inform the public about the availability of educational 
programming and to ensure that broadcasters are meeting the obligations set forth in the CTA and our 
rules.  As we stated in the Notice, evidence also indicates that a variety of organizations, including CME, 
the National Institute on Media and the Family, and the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the 
University of Pennsylvania, use the reports to track national trends in children’s television programming 
and to develop tools to inform parents and others about children’s programming.   In addition to these 
groups, CME et al. notes that other organizations use or plan to use the reports, including the American 
Center for Children and the Media, the Center for Research on the Effects of Television, the Center for 
Educational Priorities, Children Now, the Media Literacy Online Project, and Mediascope. CME et al. 
also notes that the reports are integral to the academic research undertaken at centers such as the 
Children and Media Project in the Department of Psychology at Georgetown University, and the Center 
for Communication and Social Policy at the University of California at Santa Barbara. 
11. The Commission has reviewed all of the reports filed since commencement of the FCC 
filing requirement, and has used the information in the reports to evaluate industry practices in 
connection with preemption of children’s programming.   In addition, the Commission staff is currently 
preparing an analysis based on the data reflected in reports filed over the past three years.  In adopting 
the children’s programming rules, the Commission stated it would monitor the broadcast industry’s 
children’s educational programming performance for three years based upon the Children’s Television 
Programming Reports filed with the Commission, and would review the reports at the end of the three-
year period and take appropriate action as necessary to ensure that stations are complying with the rules 
and guidelines.  
B.  Quarterly Filing 
12. Background.  We also sought comment in the Notice on whether our rules should be 
revised to require that Reports be filed quarterly, at the time they are prepared, rather than once a year.  
We tentatively concluded that requiring reports to be filed quarterly was unlikely to impose a significant 
additional burden on licensees, especially as reports are required to be filed electronically.
13. Discussion.  In addition to extending the filing requirement, we will require broadcasters 
to file their Children’s Television Programming Reports with the Commission on a quarterly basis, at the 
time the reports are prepared, rather than annually.  Section 73.3526(e)(11)(iii) currently requires that the 
report for each calendar quarter be filed in the station’s public inspection file by the tenth day of the 
succeeding calendar quarter.   Beginning January 10, 2001, we will require that reports for each quarter 
be filed electronically with the Commission by the same date the report is due to be placed in the 
station’s public inspection file.
14. We agree with CME et al. that quarterly filing with the Commission will provide the 
public and the Commission with more current information on the educational and informational 
programming offered by broadcasters to meet their obligation under the CTA and our rules.  Among 
other things, the reports include information on the core educational and informational programs the 
licensee plans to air during the next calendar quarter.  The purpose of requiring licensees to report this 
information is to permit parents, teachers, and others to better anticipate and plan for the viewing of 
educational programs by children.  Facilitating timely public access to the station’s schedule of core 
educational and informational programs for the succeeding calendar quarter will permit parents and 
others to use this information more effectively to plan their children’s television viewing.  CME et al. 
suggests that quarterly filings will be more helpful to parents, and argues that they will also allow 
researchers to report more timely on programming trends for the annual television season, which could 
influence programming for the subsequent television season.    
15. NAB opposes a quarterly filing requirement, arguing that licensees appear to be 
complying with the children’s television programming rules and that there is no demonstrated need for 
increased reporting requirements.   While we agree that the reports filed since our revised children’s 
television programming rules became effective indicate that virtually all licensees claim to be airing at 
least 3 hours per week of programming that meets our definition of programming “specifically designed” 
to meet the educational and informational needs of children, we believe that improving public access to 
the information contained in the reports will assist parents and others interested in selecting programs for 
 children to watch.  As noted above, assisting parents in choosing educational programming for their 
children may possibly increase the commercial success of such programming and thereby prompt 
broadcasters to increase the amount of educational and informational broadcast television programming 
available to children – one of the underlying goals of our children’s programming public information 
initiatives.  More timely information will also assist those interested in monitoring station performance 
under our rules, thus assisting the Commission in its enforcement role. 
16. As reports must now be prepared and placed in the station’s public inspection file on a 
quarterly basis, we continue to believe that requiring these quarterly reports to be transmitted 
electronically to the Commission on a quarterly basis, rather than once a year, will not impose a 
significant additional burden on licensees. In this regard, we note that more than seventy percent of 
licensees already voluntarily file their reports quarterly.  Reports are currently required to be filed 
electronically with the Commission, and the Commission makes an electronic version of a blank FCC 
Form 398 available on its website to be used by licensees to prepare their quarterly submissions.  As 
CME et al. suggests, transmitting the reports to the Commission quarterly rather than annually should 
require very little additional time and effort on the part of licensees.   In view of the benefits of quarterly 
filing with the FCC and the minimal additional burden this will impose on licensees, we believe that 
quarterly filing is warranted.
C.  Changes to FCC Form 398
17. Background.  Finally, we also requested comment in the Notice on  possible changes to 
FCC Form 398 that would make the Children’s Television Programming Reports more informative or 
easier to prepare.  Specifically, we asked whether there are revisions to the form that would make it 
easier for the reader to determine the number of times core programs are preempted and to obtain 
information about the rescheduling of any preempted episodes. 
18. CME et al. suggested that FCC Form 398 be revised to provide more information 
regarding (1) why a broadcaster has preempted a children’s educational program, (2) which program 
guide publishers are not printing the programming information provided by local broadcasters, and (3) 
what efforts broadcasters are making to publicize the existence and location of their Reports (question 
8).   CME et al. also suggests that broadcasters be required to post their reports on their website, that the 
FCC’s own children’s television webpage be made more user-friendly, and that Form 398 be revised to 
reflect the station’s license renewal date. 
19. Preemption Report. The Commission required that programming must be “regularly 
scheduled” to qualify under the three-hour guideline.  This requirement was based on the fact that 
programming that is aired on a regular basis is more easily anticipated and located by viewers, and 
therefore more likely to be seen by its intended audience.  Although acknowledging that preemption 
might occur, the Commission expected that preemption of core programming would be rare.  The Mass 
Media Bureau staff has recently reviewed a random sample of the Children’s Television Programming 
Reports, and determined that the average preemption rate by stations affiliated with the largest networks 
during the past two years is nearly 10%, and has been as high as 25% during a quarter when a large 
number of sports programming commitments.  Given this level of preemption, and the difficulty that 
some members of the public and the Commission staff have experienced in interpreting the information 
set forth in Form 398, we wish to gather more information about the circumstances of preemption to 
ensure that our preemption policy does not thwart the CTA.  
20. To make the information in the Children’s Television Programming Reports clearer and 
to improve public access to information about educational and informational programming and licensee 
compliance with the CTA and our rules, we will make a few revisions to FCC Form 398.  Currently, 
question 5 of FCC Form 398 requires broadcasters to list, among other information, the title of each core 
educational and informational program aired by the station during the past calendar quarter, the days and 
times the program is regularly scheduled, the total times the program aired, the number of preemptions 
and, if the program was preempted and rescheduled, the date and time the program was aired.  From the 
way this question is currently worded and formatted, it is difficult to determine from the responses to this 
question exactly how many times each core program was preempted during the calendar quarter, whether 
the preempted episode was eventually aired and, if so, when the program was aired.   In addition, as 
CME suggests, it would be useful to know the reason for each preemption.  Although we encourage 
stations to reschedule core programming preempted for breaking news, even if programs preempted for 
breaking news are not rescheduled they can count toward the three-hour-per-week core programming 
guideline.  We cannot currently determine whether a program was preempted for breaking news or 
another reason, and thus whether the program must have been rescheduled and aired in order to count 
toward the three-hour guideline.  Finally, we would also like to know if licensees made efforts to notify 
viewers and publishers of program guides of the date and time their rescheduled programs would air.   
To address these issues, we will revise question 5 of FCC Form 398 to gather more information about 
preempted core programs during the quarter and add as an addendum to the form a “Preemption Report” 
to be completed for each preempted core program during the quarter.  The Preemption Report will 
request information on the date of each preemption, if the program was rescheduled the date and time the 
program was aired, and the reason for the preemption (e.g., we will ask the licensee to pick a reason from 
among several options, including breaking news).  We will also ask licensees to indicate whether 
promotional efforts were made to notify the public of the time and date the rescheduled program would 
air.  This data will provide more complete information regarding the level of preemption of core 
programs and station practices in rescheduling such programs.  This information will in turn allow the 
FCC and interested members of the public to continue to monitor the impact of preemptions generally on 
the availability of core programs.
21. Program Guide Information.  We will also revise question 4 of FCC Form 398 in order 
to collect more extensive data about the information furnished by licensees to publishers of program 
guides regarding core programming aired by the station.  Section 73.673(b) of our rules requires 
commercial television station licensees to provide information identifying core programming, and the 
age group for which the program is intended, to publishers of program guides.  In adopting this 
requirement, we noted that program guides are an effective means of providing parents with advance 
notice of scheduling of educational programs, and that such information can assist both parents in finding 
suitable programs for their children and others who wish to monitor station performance in complying 
with the CTA.  While we noted that we cannot require guides to print this information, we stated that the 
information is more likely to be included in program listings if broadcasters routinely provide it. 
22. Question 4 as currently written asks whether licensees have provided information to 
publishers of program guides as required by our rules, with the licensee indicating “yes” or “no.”  We 
will revise this question to ask licensees to identify by name the program guides to which information 
was provided, but decline to require broadcasters to indicate in their reports whether the program guides 
to which the information was provided actually published this information.  Our purpose in making this 
change is twofold.  First, we agree with CME et al. that requiring broadcasters to list the publishers to 
whom information was submitted will provide parents, the public and the Commission useful data by 
which to judge a broadcasters good-faith efforts to comply with our goal of facilitating public access to 
information about educational programming.  Second, and perhaps more important, requiring 
broadcasters to provide this information will help in identifying those publishers that decline to include 
information about educational programming in their program guides.  Studies examining the impact of 
the children’s programming rules have concluded that many parents still do not know which programs 
carry educational labels, and that the widespread failure of program guides to include information 
identifying core educational programming contributes to this problem.   It does not appear that any 
newspapers or program guides routinely include in their television listings the symbols identifying core 
programs.  Requiring stations to identify publishers to which information about core programs is being 
provided will allow parents and others to encourage other program guide publishers to include this 
information in their TV listings.  As broadcasters are already required by our rules to provide 
information to program guide publishers, it should not be difficult for broadcasters simply to identify 
those publishers on their quarterly programming reports.  We disagree with CME et al., however, that 
broadcasters should be required to indicate in their reports whether the program guides to which 
information was provided actually published this information.  As NAB argues, tracking what was 
actually published could impose a significant burden on broadcasters.   Once publishers that have been 
provided with information are identified by licensees in their reports, interested members of the public 
can monitor those publications and urge them to include educational children’s program identifiers.      
23. License Renewal Date.  Finally, as CME et al. suggests, we will also add a question to 
FCC Form 398 requiring the station to indicate its license renewal date.  This information is readily 
available to broadcasters and easy to provide, and will be useful to members of the public interested in 
monitoring station compliance.
24. Revised Form 398.  We will amend Section 73.3526 of the Commission’s rules as set 
forth in Appendix A and FCC Form 398, Children’s Television Programming Report, to reflect the 
changes discussed above.  We direct the Mass Media Bureau to revise FCC Form 398 accordingly and 
submit it to OMB for approval.  
IV. FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING
25. Background. In the Notice, we encouraged broadcasters to make the Children’s 
Television Programming Reports available on their own websites.   CME et al. proposes that 
broadcasters be required to post their reports on their internet websites. NAB, however, argues that a 
requirement that licensees post FCC Form 398 on their own websites would be duplicative. 
26. Discussion.  We tentatively conclude that if a broadcaster maintains a website, it must 
post its quarterly report on that site at the same time that it places it in the station’s public file.  Although 
the Children’s Television Programming Reports are available in a central location on the FCC’s website, 
we believe that members of the public may look first to their local broadcast station, rather than the 
Commission, for information about the programming of the station.  Our inclination is to allow stations, 
at their option, either to post the quarterly reports on the station's own internet website, or to create a link 
on the station's website directly to either the FCC's children's television webpage or to the station's most 
recent quarterly report on the FCC's children's television website.  We note that NAB argues that it may 
cost stations more to provide the required form at their websites.  Allowing stations simply to create a 
link to the FCC's website provides a less costly alternative.  This option also responds to NAB's concern 
about any unnecessary duplication of effort associated with making the reports available both on the 
FCC's and the station's  websites.  Broadcasters must currently retain a paper copy of the report in their 
station public inspection file until final action has been taken on the station's next renewal of license.   
We seek comment on whether broadcasters that elect to maintain the reports on their own station 
websites should be required to maintain these reports on the website until final action has been taken on 
the station's next license renewal application. . 
27. Because the Commission’s own website provides a central location where the public can 
access reports from all stations in their community and across the country, we want to ensure that the 
information on our website is easily accessible by the public.  In response to a request from CME et al., 
the Commission staff has created a link directly from its internet homepage to its children’s television 
webpage.  We note that interested organizations can create links directly from their own websites to our 
children’s television website if they choose. 
V.	CONCLUSION
28. In this Report and Order, we revise our rules to continue indefinitely the requirement 
that commercial broadcast television licensees file their quarterly Children’s Television Programming 
Reports with the Commission, and to require that these reports be filed quarterly rather than annually.  
We also make a number of revisions to FCC Form 398 to make the information in the reports clearer and 
more useful to the Commission and the public. These measures are designed to permit us to continue to 
enforce the CTA and our rules implementing that statute, and to improve public access to information 
about licensee compliance with their obligations to provide educational and informational programming 
for children.
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
29. Comments and Reply Comments.  Pursuant to Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's 
rules, 47 C.F.R. §§  1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before December 18, 2000 
and reply comments on or before January 17, 2001.  Comments may be filed using the Commission's 
Electronic Filing System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies.  See Electronic Filing of Documents in 
Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 Fed. Reg. 24,121 (1998).
30. Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to 
<http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html>.  Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be 
filed.  If multiple docket or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, however, 
commenters must transmit one electronic copy of the comments to each docket or rulemaking number 
referenced in the caption.  In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should include their full 
name, postal service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking number.  Parties may also 
submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail.  To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, 
commenters should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and should include the following words in the body 
of the message, "get form, <your e-mail address."  A sample form and directions will be sent in reply.
31. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each filing.  If 
more than one docket or rulemaking number appear in the caption of this proceeding, commenters must 
submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number.  All filings must be sent 
to the Commission's Secretary, Magalie Roman Salas, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications 
Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, S.W.; TW-A325, Washington, D.C. 20554.
32. Parties who choose to file by paper should also submit their comments on diskette.   These 
diskettes should be submitted to: Wanda Hardy, 445 Twelfth Street, S.W.; 2-C221, Washington, D.C. 
20554.  Such a submission should be on a 3.5 inch diskette formatted in an IBM compatible format using 
WordPerfect 5.1 for Windows or compatible software.  the diskette should be accompanied by a cover 
letter and should be submitted in "read only" mode.  The diskette should be clearly labeled with the 
commenter's name, proceeding (including the docket number (MM Docket No. 00-44), type of pleading 
(comment or reply comment), date of submission, and the name of the electronic file on the diskette.  
The label should also include the following phrase "Disk Copy - Not an Original."  Each diskette should 
contain only one party's pleadings, preferably in a single electronic file.  In addition, commenters must 
send diskette copies to the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service, Inc., 445 
Twelfth Street, S.W.; CY-B402, Washington, D.C. 20554.
33. Ex Parte Rules.  This is a permit-but-disclose notice and comment rulemaking proceeding.  
Ex parte presentations are permitted except during the Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are 
disclosed as provided in the Commission's Rules.  See generally 47 C.F.R. Sections 1.1202, 1.1203, and 
1.1206(a).
34. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.  With respect to the Further Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis ("IRFA") is contained in Appendix C.  As 
required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Commission has prepared an IRFA of the 
expected impact on small entities of the proposals contained in this Further Notice.  Written public 
comments are requested on the IRFA.  In order to fulfill the mandate of the Contract With America 
Advancement Act of 1996 regarding the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, we ask a number of 
questions in our IRFA regarding the prevalence of small business in the television broadcasting industry. 
 Comments on the IRFA must be filed in accordance with the same filing deadlines as comments on the 
Notice, but they must have a distinct heading designating them as responses to the IRFA.  The 
Commission’s Consumer Information Bureau shall send a copy of this Further Notice, including the 
IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration in accordance with 
Section 603(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, Pub. L. No. 96-354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. § 601 et 
seq. (1981), as amended.
35. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis.  This Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
may contain either proposed or modified information collections.  As part of our continuing effort to 
reduce paperwork burdens, we invite the general public to take this opportunity to comment on the 
information collections contained in this Further Notice, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1996.  Public and agency comments are due at the same time as other comments on the Further Notice.   
Comments should address: (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper 
performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; (b) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (c) ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.  In addition to filing comments with the 
Secretary, a copy of any comments on the information collections contained herein should be submitted 
to Judy Boley, Federal Communications Commission, 445 Twelfth Street, S.W., Room C-1804, 
Washington, D.C. 20554, or via the Internet to jboley@fcc.gov and to Edward Springer, OMB Desk 
Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725 17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20503 or via the Internet to 
edward.springer@omb.eop.gov.  
36. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis.  This Report and Order has been analyzed with 
respect to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and found to impose new or modified reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements or burdens on the public.  Implementation of these new or modified 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements will be subject to approval by the Office of Management and 
Budget as prescribed by the Act.
37. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.  Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 
1980, as amended, see 5 U.S.C. § 604, the Commission’s Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for this 
Report and Order is attached as Appendix B.
38. Additional Information.  For additional information on this proceeding, please contact 
Kim Matthews, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418-2130.
ORDERING CLAUSES
39. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to authority contained in sections 4(i),  
303, and 308 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i ), 303, and 308, and 
the Children’s Television Act of 1990, 47 U.S.C. §§ 303a, 303b, Part 73 of the Commission’s rules, 47 
C.F.R. Part 73, IS AMENDED as set forth in Appendix A below.
40. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. § 
801, et seq., the amendments set forth in Appendix A SHALL BE EFFECTIVE January 1, 2001.  
Children’s Television Programming Reports for the fourth quarter of 2000, due to be filed with the 
Commission by January 10, 2001, should be completed using the current FCC Form 398.  The 
Commission will revise its electronic version of FCC Form 398 to reflect the changes adopted herein.  
Reports for the first quarter of 2001, due to be filed by April 10, 2001, should be completed using the 
revised form. 
41. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission’s Consumer Information Bureau, 
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this Report and Order and Further Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making, including the Initial and Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analyses, to the Chief 
Counsel for the Small Business Administration.
42. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 155(c), the Chief, Mass 
Media Bureau, is GRANTED DELEGATED AUTHORITY to implement the changes to Form 398 
adopted in this Report and Order.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Magalie Roman Salas
Secretary




APPENDIX A
Rules

Part 73 of Title 47 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations is amended to read as follows:
PART 73  RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:
AUTHORITY:  47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.
2. Section 73.3526 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(11)(iii) to read as follows:
§ 73.3526 Local public inspection file of commercial stations.
***
(e) Contents of the file.  The material to be retained in the public inspection file is as follows:
*** 
	(11)(iii) Children’s Television Programming Reports.  For commercial TV broadcast stations, on 
a quarterly basis, a completed Children’s Television Programming Report (“Report”), on FCC Form 398, 
reflecting efforts made by the licensee during the preceding quarter, and efforts planned for the next 
quarter, to serve the educational and informational needs of children.  The Report for each quarter is to 
be placed in the public inspection file by the tenth day of the succeeding calendar quarter.  By this date, a 
copy of the Report for each quarter is also to be filed electronically with the FCC.  The Report shall 
identify the licensee’s educational and informational programming efforts, including programs aired by 
the station that are specifically designed to serve the educational and informational needs of children, 
and it shall explain how programs identified as Core Programming meet the definition set forth in § 
73.671(c ).  The Report shall include the name of the individual at the station responsible for collecting 
comments on the station’s compliance with the Children’s Television Act, and it shall be separated from 
other materials in the public inspection file.  The Report shall also identify the program guide publishers 
to which information regarding the licensee’s educational and informational programming was provided 
as required in § 73.673(b), as well as the station’s license renewal date.  These Reports shall be retained 
in the public inspection file until final action has been taken on the station’s next license renewal 
application.  Licensees shall publicize in an appropriate manner the existence and location of these 
Reports.      











APPENDIX B

FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS	

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),  an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) 
was incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Notice).  The Commission sought written 
public comment on the proposals in the Notice, including comment on the IRFA.  One comment was 
received in response to the IRFA.  This present Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms 
to the RFA. 

Need for, and Objectives of, the Adopted Rules

The Report and Order amends Section 73.3526(e)(11)(iii) of the Commission's rules to continue 
indefinitely the requirement that commercial broadcast television licensees file with the Commission, on an 
annual basis, their quarterly Children's Television Programming Reports (FCC Form 398).  The 
Commission's rules currently state that such reports shall be filed on an annual basis for an experimental 
period of three years, from January 1998 through January 2000.  Continuation of the filing requirement will 
permit the Commission to continue to enforce the Children's Television Act of 1990 ("CTA"), and its rules 
implementing the CTA, by monitoring the amount and quality of educational television programming for 
children and industry compliance with the Commission's children's educational programming requirements. 
The Report and Order also requires that the reports be filed with the Commission quarterly, at the time they 
are prepared, instead of annually, which will make available to the public more timely information about the 
educational and informational programming aired by the licensee during the preceding calendar quarter and 
planned to be aired during the succeeding quarter.  Finally, the Report and Order also makes a number of 
revisions to FCC Form 398 to make the information in the reports clearer and more useful to the 
Commission and the public. Specifically, the Report and Order adds a “Preemption Report” to FCC 
Form 398 to be completed for each preempted core program during the quarter requesting information on 
the date of each preemption, if the program was rescheduled the date and time the program was aired, 
and the reason for the preemption.  The revised form also asks whether promotional efforts were made to 
notify the public of the time and date the rescheduled program would air, and requires licensees to 
identify the program guide publishers provided information about the licensee’s core educational 
programming.  Finally, licensees must indicate on the revised form the station’s next license renewal 
date. These measures are designed to permit us to continue to enforce the CTA and our rules 
implementing that statute, and to improve public access to information about licensee compliance with 
their obligations to provide educational and informational programming for children.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to the IRFA
The SBA, in an ex parte letter dated August 31, 2000, asked that we issue a supplemental IRFA if we 
choose to implement three proposals made by CME: posting the reports on the Internet, reporting on the 
names of the program guides that a licensee provided children programming information and whether the 
information was published, and an explanation of why children's programming was preempted.   As 
noted, we are issuing a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to address the use of the Internet to post 
the reports, and an IRFA is included for that FNPRM.  For the programming guide proposal, our existing 
rules already require licensees to report children's programming to publishers of program guides.   We 
did not adopt the proposal that licensees monitor whether publishers have published the programming 
information.  Thus, the only portion of the CME proposal we adopt here is the minimal requirement that 
a licensee report to us the names of the publishers provided the licensee's programming information, data 
that the licensee already has to comply with 47 C.F.R. § 73.673(b).  This is hardly a burdensome 
requirement.  Finally, we adopt CME's proposal that Form 398 include an explanation why children's 
programming is preempted.  As we note at paragraph 20 of the Report and Order, we believe this 
addition is necessary and in the public interest.  We have devised a simple, non-burdensome checklist 
addition to the form.  This does not, as the SBA claims, duplicate any other information on the form, 
including question 11, which is an optional catchall explanatory question.  

These modifications to Form 398 are logical outgrowths of the NPRM.  We do not think that it was 
Congress' intent in passing the RFA to require supplemental a IRFA every time a proposed rule is 
modified as a logical outgrowth of the original proposal after the issuance of the NPRM especially when 
the economic impact of the adopted rule on small entities is not substantial.  Indeed, such an approach 
would render the RFA's notice requirements more onerous than the notice requirement of the 
Administrative Procedure Act.  Here the IRFA specifically noted that the Commission was proposing to 
continue the existing requirement to file Children Television Programming Reports and indicated that the 
NPRM sought comment on this proposal as well as other issues.  See Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 
15 FCC Rcd 6326, 6331 Appendix A, g.  The Notice also sought comment on possible changes to the 
form.  Specifically, the Notice stated, “Finally, we ask commenters to address whether any changes 
should be made to FCC Form 398 to make the Reports more informative or easier to prepare.  For 
example, are there revisions to Form 398 that would make it easier for the reader to determine the 
number of times core programs are preempted and to obtain information about the rescheduling of any 
preempted episodes?”    

We believe that the final rule is clearly a logical outgrowth of that proposed in the Notice and IRFA and 
that the changes to the programming reports will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small licensees.   As explained above, neither of the changes to Form 398 will have a 
significant economic impact.  Reporting the names of program guides simply requires licensees to 
provide information they already have as a result of the requirements of a pre-existing rule.  The check-
box reporting of reasons for preempting children's programming is of a minimum burden on licensees.  
We therefore certify pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 605(b) that these two changes to Form 398 will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rules Apply
The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of 
small entities that will be affected by the rules.   The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as 
having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small business 
concern” under section 3 of the Small Business Act.   A small business concern is one which: (1) is 
independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any 
additional criteria established by the SBA. 
Small TV Broadcast Stations.  The SBA defines small television broadcasting stations as television 
broadcasting stations with $10.5 million or less in annual receipts.   BIA Research Inc. reports that 784 
out of 1221 commercial television stations (64%) have annual revenues less than $10.5 million.   Thus, 
we estimate that 784 or fewer commercial TV broadcast stations are small businesses, as defined by the 
SBA.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements
The Report and Order continues the requirement that commercial broadcast television stations file with 
the FCC a copy of their quarterly Children’s Television Programming Reports on FCC Form 398.  In 
addition, the Report and Order requires that these reports be filed on a quarterly basis, as they are 
prepared, rather than annually.  Finally, the Report and Order makes a number of changes in FCC Form 
398 to make the information in the reports clearer and more useful to the FCC and the public. 
Specifically, the Report and Order adds a “Preemption Report” to FCC Form 398 to be completed for 
each preempted core program during the quarter requesting information on the date of each preemption, 
if the program was rescheduled the date and time the program was aired, and the reason for the 
preemption.  The revised form also asks whether promotional efforts were made to notify the public of 
the time and date the rescheduled program would air, and requires licensees to identify the program 
guide publishers provided information about the licensee’s core educational programming.  Finally, 
licensees must indicate on the revised form the station’s next license renewal date
Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives 
Considered
The Report and Order requires licensees to identify in their Children’s Television Programming Reports 
the program guide publishers to whom information regarding the licensee’s educational and 
informational children’s programming was provided.  Although commenters also advocated that 
licensees be required to state whether this information was actually published, the Report and Order 
declines to impose this additional obligation on licensees because we believe that this might have 
constituted a significant economic impact without an adequate resulting benefit.   In addition, although 
commenters proposed requiring that licensees be required to identify in their reports the precise efforts 
made to publicize the existence and location of the reports as required by 47 C.F.R. § 73.3526(e)(11)(iii), 
this proposal was not adopted in the Report and Order. 
Report to Congress
The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to 
Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. § 801(a)(1)(A).  In addition, the 
Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, including the certification and FRFA, to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.  A copy of the Report and Order, 
certification, and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.  See 5 
U.S.C. §§ 604(b) and 605(b)

APPENDIX C
INITIAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS
	As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. § 603 ("RFA"), the Commission has 
prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis ("IRFA") of the expected impact on small entities of the 
proposals contained in the attached Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making.  Written public comments are 
requested with respect to the IRFA.  These comments must be filed in accordance with the same filing 
deadlines for comments on the rest of the Further Notice, but they must have a separate and distinct 
heading, designating the comments as responses to the IRFA.  The Commission shall send a copy of this 
Further Notice, including the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration in accordance with the RFA, 5 U.S.C. § 603(a).

	a. Reasons Why Agency Action is Being Considered.  Our goal in commencing this proceeding 
is to seek comment on the tentative conclusion to require commercial television broadcasters that 
maintain a website to post their quarterly Children’s Television Programming Reports on that site at the 
same time that they place the reports in the station’s public inspection file.  We also seek comment on 
whether broadcasters should be required to maintain the reports on the website until final action has been 
taken on the station’s next license renewal.
	
	b. Need For and Objectives of the Proposed Rule Changes. Although the Children’s Television 
Programming Reports are available in a central location on the FCC’s website, the FCC believes that 
members of the public may look first to their local broadcast station, rather than the Commission, for 
information about the programming of the station.  We invite comment on this view and ask commenters 
to provide detailed information on any costs or other burdens associated with requiring those stations that 
maintain websites to post their quarterly reports on the sites. 

	c. Legal Basis.  Authority for the actions proposed in the Further Notice may be found in Sections 
4(i) and 303, 307, and 336(d) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303, 
307, and 336(d), and in the Children’s Television Act of 1990.

	d. Recording, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements.  The Further Notice invites 
comment on the tentative conclusion to require commercial television broadcasters that maintain a 
website to post their quarterly Children’s Television Programming Reports on that site at the same time 
that they place the reports in the station’s public inspection file.  We also seek comment on whether 
broadcasters should be required to maintain the reports on the website until final action has been taken 
on the station’s next license renewal.

	e. Federal Rules that Overlap, Duplicate, or Conflict with the Proposed Rules.  The rules under 
consideration in this proceeding do not overlap, duplicate, or conflict with any other rules.

	f. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Rules Would Apply.  
Under the RFA, small entities may include small organizations, small businesses, and small governmental 
jurisdictions. 5 U.S.C. § 601(6).  The RFA, 5 U.S.C. § 601(3), generally defines the term "small business" 
as having the same meaning as the term "small business concern" under the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 
§ 632.  A small business concern is one which: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not 
dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration ("SBA").  Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies 
"unless an agency after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the SBA and after opportunity for 
public comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of 
the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the Federal Register.  

	Small TV Broadcast Stations. The SBA defines small television broadcasting stations as television 
broadcasting stations with $10.5 million or less in annual receipts.   BIA Research Inc. reports that 784 out 
of 1221 commercial television stations (64%) have annual revenues of less than $10.5 million. 

	The requirement to prepare quarterly Children’s Television Programming Reports applies to 
commercial broadcast television stations.  Thus, we estimate that 784 or fewer commercial TV broadcast 
stations are small businesses, as defined by the SBA. 
	
	g. Any Significant Alternatives Minimizing the Impact on Small Entities and Consistent with the 
Stated Objectives: The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered 
in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) 
the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the 
resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or 
reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, 
standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities. 5 U.S.C. § 
603( c).

This Further Notice invites comment generally on the tentative conclusion to require commercial television 
broadcasters that maintain a website to post their quarterly Children’s Television Programming Reports on 
that site at the same time that they place the reports in the station’s public inspection file.  We also seek 
comment on whether broadcasters should be required to maintain the reports on the website until final 
action has been taken on the station’s next renewal license.  We seek comment on whether there is a 
significant economic impact on any class of small licensees as a result of any of these proposals.  Any 
significant alternatives presented in the comments will be considered.  


STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN WILLIAM E. KENNARD 

Re:  	In the Matter of Extension of the Filing Requirement for Children’s Television 
Programming Reports (FCC Form 398) (MM Docket No. 00-44)

Television is among the most powerful influences in our children’s lives.  That influence 
can be overwhelmingly positive because the medium has incredible potential to educate and 
enlighten our children.  Or, television programs may raise concerns about children’s exposure 
to excessive advertisements or inappropriate content.  Broadcasters have an obligation to serve 
the public interest, including the specific needs of children.  Since the passage of the Children’s 
Television Act, broadcasters, parents, child advocates, and government have worked together to 
provide parents with educational programming choices for their children.

The Report and Order adopted today recognizes the success of the children’s educational 
programming guidelines and rules.  By their own reports, broadcasters have been providing not 
only the required three hours of educational programming each week, but an average of four 
hours each week.  We must continue to ensure that parents have access to this critical 
information about the educational programming.  

However, we missed a unique opportunity to advance the public interest in this area by 
not adding a very simple and logical requirement for broadcasters to describe their efforts to 
increase the public’s awareness of children’s programming as disclosed in the Children’s 
Television Programming Reports, Form 398.  Recent studies indicate that too many parents still 
lack information about educational and informational programming.  The current form only 
asks whether a broadcaster publicizes the existence and location of the station’s Report.  Public 
interest and child advocacy organizations raised significant questions in this proceeding about 
the extent of broadcasters' efforts to publicize these Reports.  Requiring broadcasters to 
describe briefly their efforts would promote the goals of the Children’s Television Act and 
would not place undue burdens on licensees.   I strongly encourage broadcasters to respond to 
the concerns of parents and advocates and to provide this information voluntarily. 



DISSENTING STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER HAROLD W. FURCHTGOTT-ROTH

In the Matter of Extension of the Filing Requirement for Children’s Television 
Programming Reports (FCC Form 398), MM Docket No. 00-44.

I dissent from this Report and Order (“R&O”) on the extension of the filing requirement for 
children’s television programming reports, and also from the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(“FNPRM”) on mandatory web posting of the reports by broadcasters.

As for the changes to the rule regarding Form 398, I have several areas of disagreement.  First, I 
would not make permanent the filing requirement.   At the Notice stage of this proceeding, I expressed 
my view that the record revealed scant evidence that these reports accomplish the Commission’s asserted 
goals, including helping parents plan their children’s television viewing.   I see no more documentation 
now of the actual utility of these reports than I did then.  Second, given my skepticism regarding the 
actual need for these reports, I would not increase the procedural burden on broadcasters by requiring 
them to file the reports on a quarterly, as opposed to annual, basis.   Third and finally, I would not 
increase the substantive burden on broadcasters by asking them to provide more information in the form 
than they do now.  

In sum, these forms are of little real-world utility to start with.  Requiring broadcasters to 
fill out a still longer form and file them even more frequently accomplishes little more than 
imposing increased costs on broadcasters without any proof of the creation of corresponding 
benefits.

With respect to the question of mandatory web posting of the reports, as raised in the FNPRM,  
such a requirement is wholly unnecessary.  The FCC web site already provides these reports.  It is an 
inefficient use of broadcaster resources – particularly those of small broadcasters who may not have their 
own web sites but will be forced to create them in order to satisfy the proposed rule – to post the reports 
in a duplicative format or to require them to provide a link to the FCC site.

SEPARATE STATEMENT OF COMMISSIONER MICHAEL K. POWELL

Re: In the Matter of Extension of the Filing Requirement for Children's Television Programming 
Reports (FCC Form 398), MM Docket No. 00-44, Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed 
Rule Making
For the foregoing reasons, I respectfully dissent from this R&O and FNPRM.

	The Children's Television Act of 1990 ("CTA") requires that in reviewing a television 
broadcast renewal application,  the Commission must consider whether the licensee has served 
the "educational and informational needs of children through the licensee's overall programming, 
including programming specifically designed to serve such needs."   Under the Commission's 
implementing rules, a broadcaster can expect to satisfy the Commission's review, if it abides by 
its "processing guidelines."  The guidelines are, in essence, a safe harbor—if a broadcaster offers 
three hours of regularly scheduled children's educational programming per week, his application 
will be reviewed at the staff level and will be found to satisfy the CTA.  A broadcaster that does 
not elect to follow the guidelines can still satisfy the requirements of the CTA, if he 
"demonstrates a level of commitment to educating and informing children that is at least 
equivalent to airing three hours per week of core programming,"  through a different mix of 
education and information programming.  Commission rules also require broadcasters to 
complete quarterly Children's Television Programming Reports identifying core programming 
and to place them in their public files for inspection.  The central component of today's Order is 
to expand the reporting requirement.

I support two changes made to the Children's Educational Television Reporting 
requirements in this Order: the continuation of the reporting obligations and the change from an 
annual to a quarterly filing.  Neither of these are burdensome obligations and both requirements 
will make the information contained in the reports more readily available for purposes of 
enforcing the Children's Television Act of 1990.  Initially, I was less enthusiastic about 
expanding the substance of the reports, by modifying Form 398, but ultimately became 
comfortable that the modifications were modest and served valid purposes.  I do, however, write 
separately to highlight what I believe are those purposes.

The Children's Television Programming Reports serve two valid purposes: First, the 
reports serve as a contemporary record of a broadcaster's efforts to avail himself of the 
processing guidelines' safe harbor.  Television licenses come up for review only every eight 
years.  At the end of such a long period, it would be challenging for the Commission to verify a 
licensee's claim that it satisfied the guidelines, without a body of record evidence developed over 
the license period.  Second, by stations making these reports available for public inspection, the 
members of the community to whom a broadcaster is committed to serve will have a better 
understanding of their local stations' efforts.  Likewise, it will facilitate parents' efforts to plan, to 
a limited degree, what their children watch.

Throughout the Order, however, there is a third purpose suggested that I believe is 
untenable.  The Order regularly emphasizes that the reports allow the public to play an active 
role in helping the Commission "enforce" the children's programming requirements.  Similarly, 
the Order hails the reports as a way to facilitate "monitoring license compliance" and to assist the 
FCC in its "enforcement role."  The processing guidelines (consisting of three hours of regularly 
scheduled programming) are not accurately described as requirements.  Indeed, a broadcaster 
could air a different mix of programming, or very little children's programming during its license 
term and not, technically speaking, violate any rule.  The only consequence is that he may not 
avail himself of the safe harbor at the time his application is up for renewal. Thus, he may be 
placing his license at risk by not complying with the processing guideline, but he is not violating 
any rule. 

I highlight the nature of the processing guidelines to make the point that expanding our 
reporting requirements cannot rest on any notion of ongoing enforcement, for there is none to be 
had.  The extent of the reports must be justified, and constrained, by reference to the purposes of 
the CTA and our obligations in reviewing license renewal applications.  On balance, I think the 
changes today are supportable as measured by this standard.

One final note: Given that our rules do not specifically command broadcasters to air three 
hours per week of children's educational programming, they should be commended for doing so. 
 This Order demonstrates that a very substantial percentage of stations are offering this valuable 
programming.  Of course, this is self-interested to a degree, for it lowers the risk that their 
licenses will not be renewed.  But, it takes more than simple risk management to produce a 
quality children's educational program and many of the positive results we see today reflect the 
commendable joint efforts of government and the broadcasting community.
 


PARTIAL DISSENT OF COMMISSIONER GLORIA TRISTANI

IN THE MATTER OF THE EXTENSION OF THE FILING REQUIREMENT FOR 
CHILDREN’S TELEVISION PROGRAMMING REPORTS (FCC FORM 398): Report and 
Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making

I strongly support the extension of this filing requirement.  I also strongly support the 
modifications to FCC Form 398 that are designed to improve public access to the information 
contained in the form.  Ensuring the availability of information to consumers and parents about 
children’s television programs is a key obligation of the Commission and one that is shared with 
the broadcasters of such programs.

My partial dissent is very narrow and is rooted in the shared obligation with the 
broadcasters.  Our rules require broadcasters to publicize the “existence and location” of the 
information about their children’s television programs.  Question 8 of the form we amend today 
asks broadcasters if they have complied with the requirement that they publicize the availability 
of this information.  Question 8 is a yes or no question.  Studies submitted in the record of this 
matter demonstrate that, despite the availability of Form 398, parents are often unaware of the 
existence of these reports and about which children’s programs are educational and informational 
as well as the location of more detailed information about the programs.

To remedy this problem, and to respond to comments we have received, we should have 
amended Question 8 to require the broadcasters to state with specificity and in detail the efforts 
they have undertaken to make the information in Form 398 available to viewers and parents.  
Increasing public awareness of children’s television programs is a key component of ensuring 
parents have the tools they need to choose quality programs for their children.  Today we 
declined to amend Question 8 and make Form 398 a better tool for empowering parents.  On this 
point, I respectfully dissent. 











  	See, e.g., Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, Kids and Media at the New Millenium (Nov. 1999).
 	47 U.S.C. § 303b.
 	47 U.S.C. § 303a &b.  See also S. Rep. No. 227, 101st Cong., 1st Sess 5-9 (1989) (Senate Report).
 	See Senate Report at 1.
  	See Report and Order, Policies and Rules Concerning Children’s Television Programming, MM Docket 
No. 93-48, 11 FCC Rcd 10660 (1996) (“Children’s Programming Report and Order”).
  	47 C.F.R. § 73.673
  	47 C.F.R. § 73.671
  	47 C.F.R. § 73.3526(e)(11)(iii).
  	47 C.F.R. § 73.3526(e)(11)(iii).
  	47 C.F.R. § 73.3526(e)(11)(iii ) currently states:
For an experimental period of three years, licensees shall file these Reports with the 
Commission on an annual basis, i.e. four quarterly reports filed jointly each year, in electronic 
form as of January 10, 1999.  These Reports shall be filed with the Commission on January 10, 
1998, January 10, 1999, and January 10, 2000.
 	Children’s Television Programming Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 10711.
 	See, e.g., letters dated July 11, 1997 from Roy J. Stewart, Chief, Mass Media Bureau to: Martin D. 
Franks, Senior Vice President, Washington, CBS, Inc.; Alan Braverman, Senior Vice President & General 
Counsel, ABC, Inc.; Rick Cotton and Diane Zipursky, NBC, Inc. 
 	Notice of Proposed Rule Making, In the Matter of The Extension of the Filing Requirement For 
Children’s Television Programming Reports (FCC Form 398), MM Docket No. 00-44, 15 FCC Rcd 
6326 (2000) (“Notice”).

 	Notice at  11.
 	We received one comment in response to our Notice, and one reply comment.
 	The individuals and organizations who filed comments together with CME, Peggy Charren, and the 
Annenberg Public Policy Center are: the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry; the American 
Psychological Association; Sandra Calvert, Professor of Psychology at Georgetown University; the Center for 
Science in the Public Interest; Children Now; the Council of State School Offices; the Consumer Federation of 
America; Dale Kunkel, Professor of Communication at University of California at Santa Barbara; the National 
Association for Elementary School Principals; the National Alliance for Non-Violent Programming; the National 
Black Child Development Institute; the National Education Association; and the National PTA.
 	CME et al. Comments at 2.
 	NAB Reply Comments at 1.
 	Notice at  10.
 	CME et al. Comments at 3, note 3.  The Notice also pointed out that the Center for Research on the 
Influences of Television on Children at the University of Texas reviews local broadcasters’ reports as part of an 
annual evaluation of children’s programming in the Ausin, Texas market.  
 	See, e.g., The Effect of Preemption on Children’s Educational and Informational Programming, 1997-1998 
Television Season, DA 98-2306 (Nov. 1998). 
 	Children’s Programming Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 10726.
  	47 C.F.R.§ 73.3526(e)(11)(iii).
  	CME et al. Comments at 5.
  	NAB Reply Comments at 2.
 	CME et al. Comments at 4-5.
 	Notice at  11.
  	CME et al. Comments at 6-7.  The Commission declines to adopt CME’s recommendation regarding 
efforts to publicize the reports. 
  	CME et al. Comments at 7, n. 5 and 8-9.
 	For example, question 5 of the current form asks licensees to indicate the “total times aired” for each 
program.  This information is not broken down into the number of time the program aired at its regularly 
scheduled time, and the number of times preempted episodes were aired at a rescheduled time.
  	On behalf of their owned and affiliated stations, the ABC, CBS, and NBC networks have committed to 
provide publishers of program guides with the alternate date/time when the preempted show will air and/or to 
notify viewers of the alternate date/time.  See, e.g., July 11, 1997 letters, supra note 11.
 	Children’s Programming Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd at 10688-10689
 	See, e.g., Amy B. Jordan, Is the Three-Hour Rule Living Up to Its Potential?, An Analysis of Educational 
Television for Children in the 1999/2000 Broadcast Season, The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the 
University of Pennsylvania, 2000.
 	NAB Reply Comments at 5.
 	Notice at  6.
  	See NAB Reply Comments at 4.
 	47 C.F.R. § 73.3526(e)(11)(iii).
  	See 5 U.S.C. § 603.  The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. § 601 et seq., has been amended by the Contract With 
America Advancement Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA).  Title II of the 
CWAAA is the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).
  	See 5 U.S.C. § 604.
   	See Letter from Jere W. Glover, Chief Counsel for Advocacy and Eric E. Menge, Assistant Chief 
Counsel for Telecommunications, Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration, to William E. 
Kennard, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission, dated August 31, 2000.
    	47 C.F.R. § 73.673(b).
  	5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3).
  	5 U.S.C. § 601(3)(1980).
  	5 U.S.C. § 632.
  	13 C.F.R. § 121.201 (SIC Code 4833).
  	BIA Research Inc., MEDIA Access Pro Data Base, July 11, 2000.
  	See para. 22, supra.
  	13 C.F.R. § 121.201 (SIC Code 4833).
  	BIA Research Inc., MEDIA Access Pro Data Base, July 11, 2000.
  See supra at paras. 9-11.
  See Joint Concurring Statement of Commissioners Harold Furchtgott-Roth and Michael Powell, 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, In the Matter of Extension of the Filing Requirement for Children’s 
Television Programming Reports (FCC Form 398), MM Docket No. 00-44, 15 FCC Rcd. 6326 (2000) 
(“We are not prepared to conclude, without the benefit of further comment, that the filing of these reports 
necessarily accomplishes the goals for which they were intended.”).

  See supra at paras. 12-16.
  See supra at paras. 17-24.

  See supra at paras. 25-27.
 	In 1997, the Commission increased the license term for television stations from 5 years to 8 years.  See 
Implementation of Section 203 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, MM Docket No. 96-90, 12 FCC Rcd 1720 
(1997).  The 1996 Telecom Act also eliminated comparative renewals and directed the Commission to grant a 
broadcaster’s renewal application if statutory renewal standards are met.  See 47 U.S.C. § 309 (k); 47 C.F.R.
 § 73.3591.       

 	See In the Matter of Policies and Rules Concerning Children's Television Programming, MM Docket No. 
93-48, FCC 96-335, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 10660,  1 (1996).

 	Id,  5.
 	It is important to also note that the Children's Television Act does not strictly speaking require any 
programming during the license term, but only commands the Commission to consider the broadcaster's efforts 
when reviewing the application for renewal.
 
(Continued from previous page)   
(continued….)

 
 
	Federal Communications Commission	FCC  00-343




8



	Federal Communications Commission	FCC 00-343