FR 2025-03800

The document from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) seeks public input on potential updates to the rules governing the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation (CALM) Act. This act was originally implemented to address the frequent issue of loud commercials disrupting television viewing. Despite a notable decrease in complaints following the initial implementation of the CALM Act, recent years have seen a resurgence in consumer dissatisfaction, prompting the FCC to consider revisions.

General Summary

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) contained in this document invites comments from industry stakeholders and consumers alike to assess the efficiency of the current rules. The FCC is particularly interested in addressing the loudness of commercials on traditional broadcasting platforms and is exploring the possibility of extending regulations to include streaming services, which have thus far been exempt from such oversight. The objective is to gather sufficient data to determine whether the implementation of new rules is necessary and feasible.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several areas of concern emerge from this document. Firstly, there is a lack of detailed explanation regarding what defines a "pattern or trend" of complaints that would necessitate FCC intervention. This ambiguity could result in inconsistent enforcement across different platforms and regions.

Moreover, the document does not clarify the potential costs or budget requirements associated with implementing updates to the CALM Act rules. This omission might make it difficult for stakeholders, especially smaller entities, to prepare for potential financial implications.

Another concern is the vague mention of "safe harbors" for compliance, which could lead to confusion among broadcasters and multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) about how to effectively adhere to FCC standards. Additionally, there is little information on any new technologies or industry practices that may influence the need for updated rules, leaving the rationale for potential changes somewhat opaque.

Impact on the Public

For the general public, the regulation and potential adaptation of these rules promise a more seamless and enjoyable viewing experience, devoid of the jolting volume spikes often caused by commercials. Enhanced oversight could ensure greater consistency in volume levels across both traditional and new media platforms, addressing a long-standing annoyance for viewers.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

While consumers stand to benefit from any advancements in volume control, the impact on broadcasters and MVPDs might be twofold. On the one hand, clearer, updated rules could streamline compliance and improve viewer satisfaction. On the other hand, the absence of specific details about potential rule changes and compliance criteria may create uncertainty and challenge smaller entities in particular, potentially leading to increased operational burdens.

For streaming platforms, which are currently unregulated in this aspect, this proposal represents a significant change. These platforms may face new compliance requirements if the FCC decides to extend its authority in response to feedback from this NPRM, impacting their operations and requiring potential adjustments in content delivery standards.

Conclusion

Ultimately, while the FCC's initiative aims to address persistent issues regarding commercial loudness, several aspects of the proposal need further clarification. The general public could experience improved viewing conditions, but industry stakeholders, particularly small businesses and emerging streaming services, might face new challenges that require careful consideration and planning. As the FCC deliberates on potential rule changes, transparency and clear guidelines will be essential for ensuring that all parties can adapt smoothly to any new regulatory requirements.

In the document regarding the Implementation of the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation (CALM) Act, there are several references to financial standards and benchmarks which help to provide context regarding the impact and scope of the proposed rule changes.

One key financial threshold mentioned is the $50,000 revenue benchmark used by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to determine electronic filing requirements for small exempt organizations. This benchmark sets a low threshold, suggesting that many small organizations could potentially be impacted by regulatory changes if their operations or reporting requirements were altered as part of these updates.

Additionally, the document highlights financial classifications by the Small Business Administration (SBA), where a business with $47 million or less in annual receipts is considered small within the television broadcasting industry. This classification is critical because it helps identify which entities might be considered small businesses under the current rulemaking, and therefore might face different compliance or financial burdens versus larger firms.

The commentary on revenue highlights that 657 firms had revenue of less than $25 million per year, emphasizing that a significant number of companies fall into this small business category. This is an important consideration given the regulatory environment is aimed at ensuring fair practices without disproportionately affecting smaller entities.

Furthermore, the document discusses the financial criteria for cable operators, marking a small cable operator as one with gross annual revenues not exceeding $250 million and operating fewer than one percent of all U.S. subscribers. Such delineations are pivotal in addressing concerns about how broad or stringent regulations might unfairly target or exempt entities due to their size and financial capacity.

In terms of small business qualifications related to other industries, there are mentions of revenue thresholds where, for instance, a "very small business" is defined by limits on gross annual revenues not exceeding $3 million and not exceeding $15 million over three years. These financial categories work hand in hand with potential updates to the CALM Act to ensure tailored compliance requirements that consider the financial standing of affected companies.

These financial references are indirectly connected to some issues identified in the document. For instance, there is a mention of the broad description of entities potentially affected by the proposed rules, which could cause uncertainty for small businesses about their impact. The classification of companies by their financial standing, such as annual revenue, helps mitigate this uncertainty by offering clearer benchmarks for stakeholders to assess their status.

In summary, the financial allocations and references in the document serve to outline which small businesses might be impacted by the proposed rules, helping to guide stakeholders in understanding their potential obligations. However, the absence of a detailed explanation of costs or budget allocations tied to implementing rule updates could lead to challenges in understanding the full financial impact on affected businesses.