Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version
Click here for Concurring Statement of Commissioner Michael J. Copps
Click here for Concurring Statement of Commissioner Kevin J. Martin
Click here for Statement of Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein
********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
This document was converted from Microsoft Word.
Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.
All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.
Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.
If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.
*****************************************************************
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the matter of )
)
Infinity Broadcasting )
Operations, Inc. ) File No. EB-02-IH-0109
) NAL/Acct. No. 200332080010
Licensee of Station WKRK-FM ) FRN 0003476074
Detroit, Michigan ) Facility ID #9618
)
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Adopted: February 20, 2004 Released: March 5, 2004
By the Commission: Commissioners Copps and Martin concurring and
issuing separate statements; Commissioner Adelstein issuing a
statement.
1. In this Memorandum Opinion and Order (``Order''), we
deny a petition for reconsideration filed by Infinity
Broadcasting Operations, Inc. (``Infinity''), licensee of Station
WKRK-FM, Detroit, Michigan, of a Forfeiture Order issued in this
proceeding on December 8, 2003. The Forfeiture Order assessed a
monetary forfeiture in the amount of $27,500 against Infinity for
willful broadcast of indecent material in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1464 and 47 C.F.R. § 73.3999, during the ``Deminski and Doyle
Show'' on January 9, 2002 between 4:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.
2. Reconsideration is appropriate only where the
petitioner either shows a material error or omission in the
original order or raises additional facts not known or existing
until after the petitioner's last opportunity to present such
matters. WWIZ, Inc., 37 FCC 685, 686 (1964), aff'd sub nom.
Lorain Journal Co. v. FCC, 351 F. 2d 824 (D.C. Cir. 1965), cert.
denied, 383 U.S. 967 (1966); 47 C.F.R. § 1.106(c). A petition
that simply repeats arguments previously considered and rejected
will be denied. Bennett Gilbert Gaines, 8 FCC Rcd 3986 (Rev. Bd.
1993). Infinity's petition repeats its constitutional argument
regarding the indecency standard as well as its arguments
regarding the Commission's statements in the NAL that it would
consider initiating revocation proceedings for serious violations
and may treat separate utterances as separate violations.1
Review of Infinity's petition and the Forfeiture Order reveals
that the Forfeiture Order contains no material error or omission.
We have already considered, and rejected, Infinity's arguments
regarding the constitutionality of the indecency standard. 2
Moreover, as we indicated in the Forfeiture Order,3 we need not
address Infinity's arguments regarding the circumstances in which
it would be appropriate to initiate revocation proceedings due to
serious or repeated violations or to find multiple violations in
a single program because we do not impose those sanctions in this
case. These issues can best be considered in the context of
specific cases.4 We therefore deny Infinity's petition.
3. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section
405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (``Act'')5 and
Section 1.106 of the Commission's Rules,6 Infinity Broadcasting
Operations, Inc.'s petition for reconsideration of the Forfeiture
Order IS DENIED.
4. Payment of the forfeiture shall be made in the manner
provided for in Section 1.80 of the Commission's Rules7 within 30
days of the release of this Order. If the forfeiture is not paid
within the period specified, the case may be referred to the
Department of Justice for collection pursuant to Section 504(a)
of the Act..8 Payment may be made by mailing a check or similar
instrument payable to the order of the Federal Communications
Commission, to the Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box
73482, Chicago, Illinois 60673-7482. The payment should note the
NAL/Acct. No 200332080010 and FRN 0003476074. Requests for full
payment under an installment plan should be sent to: Chief,
Revenue and Receivables Group, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington,
DC 20554.
5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall
be sent by Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Stephen
Hildebrandt, Vice President, Infinity Broadcasting Operations,
Inc., 2000 K Street, NW, Suite 725, Washington, DC 20006.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Marlene H. Dortch
Secretary
CONCURRING STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL J. COPPS
Re: Infinity Broadcasting Operations, Inc., Licensee of Station
WKRK-FM, Detroit, Michigan, Memorandum Opinion and Order
I concur in the decision to reject Infinity's arguments that
enforcement of the indecency statutes is unconstitutional.
Nonetheless, I continue to believe that the majority's fine of
$27,500 is insufficient and not even a slap on the wrist to
Infinity for airing what can only be described as a vulgar and
disgusting broadcast.
CONCURRING STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER KEVIN J. MARTIN
Re: Infinity Broadcasting Operations, Inc., Licensee of Station
WKRK-FM, Detroit, Michigan, Memorandum Opinion and Order
As I have said repeatedly in this and other proceedings, I
am disappointed that a majority of the Commission refuses to use
the full extent of our statutory authority to fine broadcasters
who violate the indecency laws.9
While I agree that Infinity Broadcasting Operations, Inc.
violated our indecency regulations during the broadcast of the
``Deminski and Doyle Show'' on January 9, 2002, I continue to
believe the fine of $27,500 is inadequate, and therefore I concur
in this Order. I would have found several violations within this
program and assessed the statutory maximum for each violation,
for a total fine of over $200,000.
STATEMENT OF
COMMISSIONER JONATHAN S. ADELSTEIN
Re: Infinity Broadcasting Operations, Inc., Licensee
of Station WKRK-FM, Detroit, Michigan; Memorandum
Opinion and Order
I am pleased that today we deny a reconsideration petition
and allow this case to proceed. I strongly supported the
imposition of the statutory maximum forfeiture amount against
Infinity Broadcasting Operations, Inc., licensee of station WKRK-
FM, Detroit, Michigan, for the willful broadcast of grossly
indecent language during the ``Deminski and Doyle Show'' on
January 9, 2002. The material was some of the most egregious
broadcast indecency that I have yet encountered. I am
disappointed that the licensee in this case continues to
challenge this sanction rather than accept responsibility for
such an extreme violation of our rules.
_________________________
1 Infinity Broadcasting Operation, Inc. Petition for
Reconsideration 1, 2-10 (filed January 7, 2004).
2 Infinity Broadcasting Operations,Inc., FCC 03-302, ¶ 5
(released December 8, 2003) (``Infinity Forfeiture Order'').
3 Id. at ¶ 7.
4 See FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726, 742 (1978)
(plurality opinion) (contextual approach is ``appropriate for
courts as well as the Commission when regulation of indecency is
at stake . . .'').
5 47 U.S.C. § 405.
6 47 C.F.R. § 1.106.
7 47 C.F.R. § 1.80.
8 47 U.S.C. § 504(a).
9 See, e.g., Infinity Broadcasting Operations, Inc., Licensee of
Station WKRK-FM, Detroit, Michigan, Notice of Apparent Liability,
18 FCC Rcd. 6915, 6939 (2003) (Separate Statement of Commissioner
Martin, urging the Commission to fine violators ``per
utterance'').