Key Takeaways
- •The hearing debated the relevance of the 39% national TV audience reach cap in the digital age, especially concerning the proposed Nexstar-TEGNA merger.
- •Chris Ruddy (Witness) argued that FCC regulations favor conglomerates, citing Newsmax's lower compensation compared to Nexstar's NewsNation despite higher ratings due to market leverage.
- •Senator Cruz (Republican-TX) pressed Curtis LeGeyt (Witness) on why NewsNation might receive higher fees than Newsmax despite lower viewership, with LeGeyt denying Nexstar's market power.
- •Republicans and Democrats disagreed on the FCC's authority to modify the 39% ownership cap, though both expressed bipartisan concern for the future of local journalism.
- •Congress is urged to consider statutory changes to the 39% cap and address AI's impact on local journalism, with the FCC's vote on the Nexstar-Tegna merger pending.
Read the full transcript
Starting at $350/mo
- Full hearing transcripts
- Speaker timestamps with video verification
- Organization & competitor mentions
- Same-day delivery
- Personalized summaries
30-day money-back guarantee on all paid plans.
Hearing Analysis
Overview
On February 10, 2026, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing titled "Media Ownership in the Digital Age" to examine the relevance of long-standing broadcast ownership regulations. Led by Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA), the hearing focused on whether the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should maintain, modify, or eliminate the 39 percent national television audience reach cap. The discussion was set against the backdrop of the pending Nexstar-TEGNA merger and the rapid rise of unregulated streaming services and Big Tech platforms.
Chairman Cruz opened the hearing by noting that while broadcast media once held a monopoly on American culture, the rise of cable, satellite, and the internet has fragmented audiences. He questioned whether rules established in 1996 and 2004 remain sound policy or if they now unfairly hobble broadcasters competing against global tech giants. Ranking Member Cantwell emphasized the crisis in local journalism, noting a sharp decline in the number of local reporters and expressing concern that further consolidation, such as the Nexstar-TEGNA deal, would reduce the diversity of local voices and place more content behind paywalls.
Key Testimony
The witness testimony highlighted a sharp divide within the industry. Chris Ruddy, CEO of Newsmax Media, argued strongly against lifting the 39 percent cap. He contended that media conglomerates like Nexstar Media Group use their massive market leverage to extract exorbitant retransmission (retrans) fees from cable operators, which in turn drives up consumer bills. Ruddy testified that Nexstar’s reach already effectively exceeds the cap due to the "UHF discount" and warned that allowing a single company to reach 80 percent of households would decimate independent media and consolidate newsrooms. He cited data showing that retrans fees have risen over 2,000 percent since 2010, contributing to an affordability crisis for consumers.
In contrast, Curtis LeGeyt, President and CEO of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), argued that the ownership rules are "analog era" relics that disadvantage local stations. LeGeyt asserted that broadcasters are competing for advertising and viewership against "behemoths" like Google, Meta, Netflix, and Amazon, which face no such ownership restrictions. He argued that scale is essential for broadcasters to fund expensive local news operations and secure sports rights. LeGeyt cited data showing that as broadcasters gained scale over the last decade, the total hours of locally produced news actually grew by nearly 50 percent.
Thomas Johnson, a partner at Wiley Rein LLP and former FCC General Counsel, provided a legal perspective, arguing that the FCC possesses the statutory authority to modify or eliminate the 39 percent cap. He suggested that the "modify its rules" language in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the 2004 appropriations act granted the Commission ongoing discretion. Johnson argued that the current cap ironically protects national networks while preventing local affiliates from gaining the leverage needed to demand programming that reflects local community values rather than those of "Hollywood and New York."
Overview
Steven Waldman, President of Rebuild Local News, focused on the "information scarcity" facing American communities. He reported a 75 percent drop in local journalists over the last 20 years and warned that the vacuum is being filled by polarizing national news and social media. Waldman remained neutral on the ownership cap but urged that any policy changes be contingent on maintaining or increasing the number of local reporters. He also highlighted the threat of Artificial Intelligence (AI), noting that AI companies use local news content to train models without compensating the original creators, further eroding the business model for journalism.
Policy Proposals
Policy proposals discussed included the bipartisan COPIED Act, introduced by Sen. Cantwell and Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), which aims to prevent AI companies from using journalistic content without consent. Other proposals included tax credits for local news hiring and small business advertising, as well as "mitigation fees" on Big Tech to fund community journalism. Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-MA) advocated for direct government investment in local reporting to ensure accountability at the school board and municipal levels.
Industry Impact
Notable exchanges occurred when Chairman Cruz questioned LeGeyt on the market power of Nexstar. Cruz pointed out that Newsmax reportedly has five times the viewership of Nexstar’s NewsNation but receives lower fees, suggesting that Nexstar uses its broadcast station leverage to force carriage of its cable channels. LeGeyt disputed the characterization, arguing that no broadcaster has true market power when compared to the scale of Big Tech. Additionally, Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM) raised concerns about the independence of the FCC, citing social media posts from President Trump and FCC Chairman Brendan Carr that appeared to "rubber-stamp" the Nexstar-TEGNA merger before a formal review.
Overview
The hearing concluded with a general consensus among several members, including Cruz and Cantwell, that any significant decision regarding the Nexstar-TEGNA merger or the national ownership cap should be subject to a full Commission-level vote at the FCC rather than being decided at the bureau level. While the committee members remained divided on the merits of consolidation, there was a shared recognition that the financial viability of local news is in a state of emergency, requiring either regulatory relief for broadcasters or new legislative protections against the dominance of Big Tech and AI.
Transcript
[Gavel sounds.] Good morning. We interrupt this program for a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on media ownership in the digital age. For over a century, broadcast media stood at the epicenter of American historical and cultural life. It brought the nation classics like I Love Lucy and shaped the music landscape with Elvis or the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show. Twitter being what it is, I watched the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan Show yesterday. And wow, they were young. It showed Americans the realities of war, the wonder of the Apollo 11 moon landing, and the defining political moments of their time, from the Nixon-JFK debate to President Reagan's clarion call to tear down this wall. Through these shared viewing experiences, broadcasters helped to embed iconic moments in the collective American consciousness. The media's power to frame events and shape public perception is substantial. So it is understandable why Congress placed limits on broadcast media ownership, intended to prevent a monopoly on programming and viewpoints. Indeed, for much of the last century, holding a broadcast license was often called a license to print money. With limited competition, station owners commanded massive audiences and steady profits. But that era has passed. Cable and satellite ushered in 24/7 news, while the internet and mobile technologies unleashed a wave of streaming services, news and entertainment sites, and social media, flooding American screens with endless content and fragmenting what were previously universal audiences. Today, broadcasters are fighting to stay competitive against media and tech companies with national and often global reach. This raises an important question: are long-standing broadcast media ownership rules still relevant in the digital age? And if so, to what extent? In recent years, some of these rules have been rolled back or eliminated. Whether more reform is needed or if today's status quo remains sound policy is what we will explore today. In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress anticipated the rise of today's competitive market by directing the FCC to periodically review its broadcast ownership rules with an eye towards deregulation. That's what statute says right now. Every four years, the FCC was to decide whether to repeal or modify any regulation that no longer served the public interest. One rule, however, was deliberately set out: the national TV audience reach cap. In 2004, Congress specifically directed the FCC to set this cap at 39 percent of U.S. television households, and it has remained at the same level for 22 years. Now, as several major mergers loom, the FCC is considering lifting or eliminating this cap. Some argue that lifting the cap will allow broadcasters to scale, to invest more in local news outlets across the country, and to better compete with deep-pocketed tech companies. Others say lifting the cap will consolidate viewpoints and hand control over to newsrooms in New York and Hollywood, choking out local views. But more fundamental than the optimal policy is the law. It may be the case that the FCC cannot modify the 39 percent cap because Congress set that number in statute. I look forward to hearing these perspectives and more today. If there's one thing that's clear, it's this: current media ownership rules were written in a vastly different technological age. The days when broadcasters built a uniform global village across America's living rooms is over, as media has splintered into thousands of websites, TikTok accounts, podcasts, and other forms of content, each catering to its own niche audience. Yet even in this fragmented landscape, the media's ability to shape national discourse remains incredibly powerful, making questions about market concentration as important as ever. This hearing is designed to inform Congress in answering these questions. Should Congress revisit underlying statutes, and does the FCC have appropriate authority or flexibility to address today's evolving media landscape? I'm grateful to our witnesses for being here today to help us in this effort. And I now turn to Ranking Member Cantwell.
Read the full transcript
Starting at $350/mo
- Full hearing transcripts
- Speaker timestamps with video verification
- Organization & competitor mentions
- Same-day delivery
- Personalized summaries
30-day money-back guarantee on all paid plans.
Not ready to subscribe?
Get a free daily digest with hearing summaries ranked by relevance.
Already have an account? Log in
