• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, July 16, 2026

What is in the public interest when it comes to local TV journalism?

Is there a formula, process, or a bunch of collective hunches to determine this?

That's what is at the heart of the FCC upcoming early August meeting, where there is little doubt it will eliminate the 39% ceiling on U.S. households coverage that limits the number of TV stations one media company can own.

How will the FCC do it? The specific details are unclear. The FCC and its chairman Brendan Carr use terms such as allowing deals to go ahead that are "trusted" and "community-focused." Carr contributed his view this week to the publication Breitbart.

The FCC argues the local TV stations need more resources -- which means money and investment, to do a better job to compete with unregulated national digital media/TV/streaming operations like Netflix and YouTube.

It says it might allow some proposed deals to go ahead that would result is a higher than a 39% coverage. But not all -- depending on their analysis the job the companies are doing.

So... how does that work, exactly? 

Will they look at a specific local TV news coverage for an entire year, for example, and determine that there are too many stories focused on alleged corruption of some city and/or state governments, or too many "positive" stories covering that beat?

What about ones that equally show both sides of a story?

Let's dig a little deeper: What if they have been doing a series or stories about a major local area automotive dealer that have been somewhat misleading to potential consumers in terms of car prices? And what about other stations that are not following that story?

Of course, the next level could be one of conflict: What if that dealer is also major advertiser on local TV stations?  How would the FCC decide -- perhaps another move in taking away a TV station license?

This issue around “trust” is a word that FCC keeps using around these subjects -- but what's the formula and process?

An opinion March story in Public Knowledge is where a columnist writes: “‘Public interest’ has no strict, mathematical definition, public advocacy groups warn that case-by-case reviews grant the FCC highly subjective, unchecked power.” 

The column goes on wonder how Carr and FCC can determine that late-night comedy and news coverage critical of the administration fail to serve the public interest.

Carr says local TV stations need more resources and money. Thus, the $6.2 billion Nexstar Media purchase of mid-size TV station Tegna group makes sense.

He adds this in the op-ed piece: “Many local broadcast TV stations are getting hollowed out as a result and turning into little more than mouthpieces for programming produced in New York and Hollywood.”

So it’s not about  “trust” -- but about a new generation of wannabe billion-dollar media companies deciding what is in the "community interest."