WEBVTT - FCC's Brendan Carr Talks Approval Times, Paramount-Warner, Disney 

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:07.360
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg audio studios, podcasts, radio news.

0:00:07.760 --> 0:00:13.119
<v Speaker 2>Atas are increasingly shaping America's space race. The FCC decides

0:00:13.280 --> 0:00:17.799
<v Speaker 2>who gets access to spectrum, approves satellite communications systems, and

0:00:17.960 --> 0:00:20.720
<v Speaker 2>is now confronting the next frontier of the space economy,

0:00:20.800 --> 0:00:25.240
<v Speaker 2>from orbital data centers to direct a device connectivity. Joining

0:00:25.280 --> 0:00:28.600
<v Speaker 2>us now is FCC Chairman Brendan Karr to discuss the

0:00:28.600 --> 0:00:32.760
<v Speaker 2>future of space communications, spectrum wireless policy before we turn

0:00:32.800 --> 0:00:35.800
<v Speaker 2>to some of the major media issues facing the commission.

0:00:36.440 --> 0:00:38.400
<v Speaker 2>Chem and Karr, thank you so much for being back

0:00:38.440 --> 0:00:41.479
<v Speaker 2>on Bloomberg Tech. Should we start with maybe the more

0:00:41.600 --> 0:00:47.240
<v Speaker 2>nascent area of SpaceX's business plan, which is orbital data center.

0:00:48.600 --> 0:00:51.040
<v Speaker 2>I think a lot of value to the audience and

0:00:51.040 --> 0:00:54.200
<v Speaker 2>to Americans is could you just explain how the FCC

0:00:54.320 --> 0:00:58.279
<v Speaker 2>regulates orbital data center, why it has a role in

0:00:58.440 --> 0:01:03.240
<v Speaker 2>oversight of how much material from a compute perspective will

0:01:03.240 --> 0:01:04.640
<v Speaker 2>be in orbit above vith.

0:01:05.720 --> 0:01:06.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's your question.

0:01:06.720 --> 0:01:10.640
<v Speaker 3>So at the SEC, and frankly all across the Trump administration,

0:01:10.760 --> 0:01:13.959
<v Speaker 3>we're focused on two things. One, we want to make

0:01:14.000 --> 0:01:17.319
<v Speaker 3>sure that consumers are right away feeling a difference in

0:01:17.360 --> 0:01:19.120
<v Speaker 3>their life, and right now we're seeing that on the

0:01:19.120 --> 0:01:23.000
<v Speaker 3>connectivity front, with speeds are up, prices are down, competition

0:01:23.080 --> 0:01:26.039
<v Speaker 3>is intensifying. But the second piece coast your question, which

0:01:26.080 --> 0:01:29.240
<v Speaker 3>is what are the fundamental regulatory changes we can do.

0:01:29.520 --> 0:01:31.839
<v Speaker 3>They're going to pay off for consumers in the long run,

0:01:32.120 --> 0:01:33.920
<v Speaker 3>and a lot of that has to do with the

0:01:34.000 --> 0:01:37.440
<v Speaker 3>emerging space economy. To your point, we're seeing many, many

0:01:37.480 --> 0:01:40.760
<v Speaker 3>more things go into orbit, whether it's all of this

0:01:40.920 --> 0:01:44.600
<v Speaker 3>new generation of low worth orbit satellites or data centers,

0:01:44.800 --> 0:01:46.600
<v Speaker 3>and so the SEC has a role to play one

0:01:47.000 --> 0:01:49.480
<v Speaker 3>to make sure that everyone has the spectrum access they

0:01:49.520 --> 0:01:51.720
<v Speaker 3>need in order to launch those but even things like

0:01:51.800 --> 0:01:54.440
<v Speaker 3>orbital debris end up hanging off of a lot of

0:01:54.440 --> 0:01:57.480
<v Speaker 3>the SEC's authorizations, and of course that's in conjunction with

0:01:57.800 --> 0:02:00.560
<v Speaker 3>a broader group of regulators as well.

0:02:00.600 --> 0:02:04.200
<v Speaker 2>When SpaceX or another player comes to the SCC seeking

0:02:04.240 --> 0:02:08.679
<v Speaker 2>approval to deploy data centers in the form factor of

0:02:08.720 --> 0:02:12.519
<v Speaker 2>a satellite into orbit, what are the considerations by which

0:02:12.560 --> 0:02:15.320
<v Speaker 2>the SEC decides approval to block approval.

0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:18.440
<v Speaker 3>Well, the first thing for us is we want to

0:02:18.480 --> 0:02:20.799
<v Speaker 3>go much more quickly. You know, when I took over,

0:02:20.919 --> 0:02:23.840
<v Speaker 3>we launched we called a Build America agenda, and a

0:02:23.919 --> 0:02:27.320
<v Speaker 3>key piece of that is boosting America's space economy. And

0:02:27.320 --> 0:02:29.639
<v Speaker 3>it used to be when we would get satellite applications

0:02:29.639 --> 0:02:31.160
<v Speaker 3>that would come in, we would get you know, one

0:02:31.240 --> 0:02:34.600
<v Speaker 3>or two or three a year, and we would do individualized,

0:02:34.720 --> 0:02:38.960
<v Speaker 3>bespoke custom reviews. And what we're fundamentally changing is to

0:02:39.360 --> 0:02:42.400
<v Speaker 3>an assembly line mindset. In fact, we're going to vote

0:02:42.480 --> 0:02:45.560
<v Speaker 3>this month to change how we run our Space Bureau

0:02:45.639 --> 0:02:49.120
<v Speaker 3>operations so to'll be objective criteria and if you hit those,

0:02:49.400 --> 0:02:52.760
<v Speaker 3>you should expect much faster SEC approvals. In fact, we've

0:02:52.800 --> 0:02:56.160
<v Speaker 3>cut the backlog of SEC approvals down by about half.

0:02:56.240 --> 0:02:59.880
<v Speaker 3>We're moving much faster, and so we're giving people objective criteria.

0:03:00.120 --> 0:03:01.200
<v Speaker 1>Hit that way, we can.

0:03:01.240 --> 0:03:04.079
<v Speaker 3>End up improving you know, thousands or hundreds of thousands

0:03:04.080 --> 0:03:07.520
<v Speaker 3>of applications, whereas before our processes would take us, you know,

0:03:07.639 --> 0:03:09.640
<v Speaker 3>months or years to do a small handful of that.

0:03:11.000 --> 0:03:13.520
<v Speaker 2>Away from orbital data sense, it's a big focus right

0:03:13.520 --> 0:03:16.160
<v Speaker 2>now is the wireless networks in the context of space.

0:03:17.200 --> 0:03:21.760
<v Speaker 2>Prior iterations of the SEC debated and looked at a

0:03:21.919 --> 0:03:25.760
<v Speaker 2>fourth national wireless network with echo start right. And I

0:03:25.800 --> 0:03:29.000
<v Speaker 2>think I'm right in saying, Chairman car you were critical

0:03:29.400 --> 0:03:34.760
<v Speaker 2>of prior approaches to that future market. What has happened

0:03:34.800 --> 0:03:39.400
<v Speaker 2>in the interim is that the SEC has handed some

0:03:39.440 --> 0:03:43.160
<v Speaker 2>of those same licenses to SpaceX for starlink. What do

0:03:43.240 --> 0:03:48.320
<v Speaker 2>we interpret it through that mechanism.

0:03:46.920 --> 0:03:49.160
<v Speaker 3>Well, you're right, there was a mindset several years ago

0:03:49.280 --> 0:03:53.800
<v Speaker 3>that said we have to have four separate standalone mobile

0:03:53.800 --> 0:03:56.640
<v Speaker 3>wireless providers, let alone many other competitors that we have

0:03:56.720 --> 0:03:59.720
<v Speaker 3>in the broader connectivity market. And people said that if

0:03:59.760 --> 0:04:03.520
<v Speaker 3>you didn't have four, that prices would rise for consumers

0:04:03.640 --> 0:04:06.040
<v Speaker 3>or speeds would slow down. And we haven't seen that

0:04:06.080 --> 0:04:10.320
<v Speaker 3>obviously at all. We've completed the process of facilitating Dish

0:04:10.720 --> 0:04:13.960
<v Speaker 3>Echo Star effectively exiting the market when it comes to

0:04:13.960 --> 0:04:17.279
<v Speaker 3>mobile wireless, and consumers continue to benefit from a lot

0:04:17.320 --> 0:04:20.359
<v Speaker 3>of price competitions. It's a great time for consumers, but

0:04:20.360 --> 0:04:22.480
<v Speaker 3>it's also a really good time for companies because we're

0:04:22.480 --> 0:04:25.280
<v Speaker 3>taking a lot of the costs, unnecessary costs out of

0:04:25.320 --> 0:04:26.240
<v Speaker 3>the system, whether.

0:04:26.040 --> 0:04:27.840
<v Speaker 1>It's permitting reform, whether it's.

0:04:27.720 --> 0:04:30.919
<v Speaker 3>Allowing providers to retire these old copper networks that they

0:04:30.960 --> 0:04:32.920
<v Speaker 3>had to subsidize in addition.

0:04:32.800 --> 0:04:33.839
<v Speaker 1>To their new networks.

0:04:33.880 --> 0:04:36.880
<v Speaker 3>And so this old view of having to have four

0:04:36.920 --> 0:04:38.080
<v Speaker 3>individual mobile.

0:04:37.800 --> 0:04:40.120
<v Speaker 1>Wireless providers or the sky would fall.

0:04:40.400 --> 0:04:42.359
<v Speaker 3>We didn't buy, And obviously I think the evidence is

0:04:42.360 --> 0:04:44.760
<v Speaker 3>coming in to show that this new theory is correct.

0:04:46.560 --> 0:04:49.719
<v Speaker 2>You so sold Bloomberg last week that you have not

0:04:50.000 --> 0:04:58.480
<v Speaker 2>had substantial conversations with SpaceX about their wireless ambitions. Substantial conversations,

0:04:58.480 --> 0:05:02.640
<v Speaker 2>so chem cars, decisive conversations of any degree of substance

0:05:02.640 --> 0:05:03.720
<v Speaker 2>with SpaceX about it.

0:05:04.960 --> 0:05:06.320
<v Speaker 1>No, I don't think I've had any of much.

0:05:06.360 --> 0:05:08.520
<v Speaker 3>I guess if I hadn't used a substantial maybe I would

0:05:08.560 --> 0:05:11.559
<v Speaker 3>have avoided the follow one question. But I don't recall

0:05:11.640 --> 0:05:14.440
<v Speaker 3>having any conversations with them about that. Look, I do

0:05:14.520 --> 0:05:17.200
<v Speaker 3>think one of the things we're really excited about is

0:05:17.240 --> 0:05:21.240
<v Speaker 3>this new emerging trend towards direct to sell technology. We

0:05:21.320 --> 0:05:23.159
<v Speaker 3>can go straight from one of these low worth orbit

0:05:23.200 --> 0:05:26.800
<v Speaker 3>satellites right to a handset. Obviously Starlink is doing that,

0:05:26.800 --> 0:05:30.080
<v Speaker 3>we've facilitated them getting from Spectrum to do it. But

0:05:30.120 --> 0:05:33.200
<v Speaker 3>also Amazon is looking to do it, ast space Mobile

0:05:33.279 --> 0:05:35.560
<v Speaker 3>is looking to do it. So we want every single

0:05:36.040 --> 0:05:37.799
<v Speaker 3>competitor in this sector to do well.

0:05:39.240 --> 0:05:39.840
<v Speaker 1>Overall.

0:05:40.000 --> 0:05:42.520
<v Speaker 2>You know, the SEC has done quite a large body

0:05:42.560 --> 0:05:44.919
<v Speaker 2>of work to come up with some kind of regulatory

0:05:44.920 --> 0:05:48.919
<v Speaker 2>framework I think right for direct to device. The accusation

0:05:49.160 --> 0:05:54.719
<v Speaker 2>is of maybe favoritism towards SpaceX. You've also denied several

0:05:54.720 --> 0:05:58.080
<v Speaker 2>of their requests. How are you going about building out

0:05:58.120 --> 0:05:58.960
<v Speaker 2>that framework?

0:06:01.240 --> 0:06:03.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, a couple of things. On direct to sell in particular.

0:06:03.760 --> 0:06:05.560
<v Speaker 3>You know, our view was to have two or three

0:06:06.080 --> 0:06:09.839
<v Speaker 3>facilities based providers in that segment so that the United

0:06:09.880 --> 0:06:11.800
<v Speaker 3>States could lead the world in that. And that's something

0:06:11.800 --> 0:06:14.159
<v Speaker 3>I think it's really important to President Trump is that

0:06:14.360 --> 0:06:17.560
<v Speaker 3>US lead when it comes to these new emerging technologies,

0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:19.560
<v Speaker 3>and we are in really good position to do that.

0:06:19.680 --> 0:06:22.279
<v Speaker 3>There are always lots of stories about SEC taking action

0:06:22.400 --> 0:06:25.560
<v Speaker 3>to benefit Starlink or SpaceX, and I get it, it

0:06:25.640 --> 0:06:28.080
<v Speaker 3>probably results in more clicks, but the reality is that

0:06:28.160 --> 0:06:32.159
<v Speaker 3>we are uplifting every single operator or business that's in

0:06:32.200 --> 0:06:35.640
<v Speaker 3>the space economy, or taking actions that benefit Amazon, LEO,

0:06:35.839 --> 0:06:42.280
<v Speaker 3>that benefit many smaller providers as well, so reflect Orbit Logos, Ast,

0:06:42.440 --> 0:06:45.560
<v Speaker 3>Space Mobile of course SpaceX as well. So there's many

0:06:45.600 --> 0:06:48.680
<v Speaker 3>many companies in this sector that are benefiting from our

0:06:48.760 --> 0:06:51.560
<v Speaker 3>new mindset at the FCC, which is to go faster

0:06:51.920 --> 0:06:54.120
<v Speaker 3>with these approvals. We don't want to get stuck naval gazing.

0:06:55.240 --> 0:06:58.400
<v Speaker 2>We're live on Bloomberg Television and on Bloomberg Radio. This

0:06:58.520 --> 0:07:01.360
<v Speaker 2>is Bloomberg Tech speaking with that CC Chairman Brendan Karr.

0:07:01.520 --> 0:07:06.440
<v Speaker 2>There's also a technical consideration about spectrum, which is why

0:07:06.520 --> 0:07:10.880
<v Speaker 2>is it important, Chairman, for a direct to device provider

0:07:10.960 --> 0:07:14.040
<v Speaker 2>to have exclusive spectrum use in and amongst everything else

0:07:14.040 --> 0:07:14.920
<v Speaker 2>that's happening up there.

0:07:16.440 --> 0:07:18.320
<v Speaker 3>Well, it's a very efficient way to operate to have

0:07:18.440 --> 0:07:21.680
<v Speaker 3>your own spectrums. We've been very open to spectrum deals.

0:07:21.720 --> 0:07:23.520
<v Speaker 3>On the one hand, we've had about one hundred and

0:07:23.560 --> 0:07:26.400
<v Speaker 3>thirty billion dollars worth of deal flow go through the

0:07:26.440 --> 0:07:30.200
<v Speaker 3>FCC this Trump administration, not just mobile wireless, but across

0:07:30.200 --> 0:07:32.920
<v Speaker 3>the board, and we're moving hard on spectrum as well,

0:07:32.920 --> 0:07:36.000
<v Speaker 3>and not just direct to sell. We're voting this month

0:07:36.080 --> 0:07:39.880
<v Speaker 3>to create one hundred and sixty megahertz of new spectrum

0:07:39.880 --> 0:07:42.720
<v Speaker 3>for midband offerings and what's called the C band, and

0:07:42.800 --> 0:07:44.760
<v Speaker 3>it's effectively going to create what we're referring to as

0:07:44.800 --> 0:07:48.880
<v Speaker 3>a super band of four hundred and forty megahertz wide

0:07:49.040 --> 0:07:52.360
<v Speaker 3>channel for midband spectrum for five G for six G.

0:07:52.760 --> 0:07:55.320
<v Speaker 1>But you're right on the satellite side as well.

0:07:55.160 --> 0:07:57.520
<v Speaker 3>So SpaceX has access to I think it's sixty five

0:07:57.560 --> 0:08:00.160
<v Speaker 3>megahertz of spectrum that they can use for direct to

0:08:00.200 --> 0:08:03.720
<v Speaker 3>sell Amazon just now that they are looking to purchase

0:08:04.080 --> 0:08:07.040
<v Speaker 3>Global Star, which also has spectrum that could be used

0:08:07.200 --> 0:08:09.720
<v Speaker 3>for direct to sell technology. So you see a lot

0:08:09.760 --> 0:08:12.440
<v Speaker 3>of the players in this space ast as well that

0:08:12.520 --> 0:08:15.800
<v Speaker 3>are looking to obtain their own spectrum rights so they

0:08:15.800 --> 0:08:19.720
<v Speaker 3>can stand alone and offer that service in a compliment

0:08:20.000 --> 0:08:22.200
<v Speaker 3>to existing connectivity.

0:08:21.640 --> 0:08:23.680
<v Speaker 1>Services Jem and Coard.

0:08:23.760 --> 0:08:26.760
<v Speaker 2>Just before the show started, Bloomberg broke some news in

0:08:26.800 --> 0:08:30.360
<v Speaker 2>a story that a group of about a dozen states

0:08:30.760 --> 0:08:34.200
<v Speaker 2>is poised to sue to block the Paramounts Guidance Warner

0:08:34.240 --> 0:08:37.160
<v Speaker 2>Brothers deal. I think they had been prior reporting that

0:08:37.400 --> 0:08:40.480
<v Speaker 2>various attorneys across those states have been preparing for that. Anyway,

0:08:40.960 --> 0:08:43.640
<v Speaker 2>I know that the FCC kind of has a nominal

0:08:43.760 --> 0:08:46.880
<v Speaker 2>role to look at the foreign financing of such a deal,

0:08:47.360 --> 0:08:49.720
<v Speaker 2>But I hope you appreciate to ask you about what

0:08:49.760 --> 0:08:53.920
<v Speaker 2>the latest is there and your reaction to a stateswide

0:08:54.200 --> 0:08:55.160
<v Speaker 2>antitrust suit.

0:08:57.080 --> 0:09:01.080
<v Speaker 3>Well, it's hard to see a real legitimate anti trust action,

0:09:01.240 --> 0:09:02.640
<v Speaker 3>but of course, you know, I leave it to the

0:09:02.800 --> 0:09:04.400
<v Speaker 3>anti trust experts to weigh.

0:09:04.200 --> 0:09:04.520
<v Speaker 1>In on this.

0:09:04.679 --> 0:09:06.600
<v Speaker 3>I did think it was interesting that there was a

0:09:06.600 --> 0:09:09.439
<v Speaker 3>statement at least attributed to the Californi Attorney General that

0:09:09.480 --> 0:09:12.679
<v Speaker 3>said that they would not sue if Paramount agreed to

0:09:12.720 --> 0:09:17.040
<v Speaker 3>spin off CNN. It's hard to conceive of a competition

0:09:17.160 --> 0:09:19.440
<v Speaker 3>any trust theory that takes you all the way up

0:09:19.440 --> 0:09:21.960
<v Speaker 3>to the point where owning or not owning CNN as

0:09:22.000 --> 0:09:25.480
<v Speaker 3>part of that broader group is a legitimate line that anti.

0:09:25.160 --> 0:09:26.840
<v Speaker 1>Trust or competition law would draw.

0:09:27.200 --> 0:09:28.800
<v Speaker 3>For our part, we do have a piece of this

0:09:29.000 --> 0:09:31.560
<v Speaker 3>with respect to some of the foreign investment, and we're

0:09:31.640 --> 0:09:34.480
<v Speaker 3>running a standard process on that, and we haven't made

0:09:34.559 --> 0:09:35.920
<v Speaker 3>a final decision there yet.

0:09:38.040 --> 0:09:42.040
<v Speaker 2>In recent interviews, you've also been asked, of course, about Disney,

0:09:42.880 --> 0:09:45.760
<v Speaker 2>and you've said that you've not made a decision on

0:09:45.800 --> 0:09:51.040
<v Speaker 2>whether to pool Disney's broadcast licenses over various diversity and

0:09:51.040 --> 0:09:55.760
<v Speaker 2>inclusion practices. Again, remind us of the SEC's remit in

0:09:55.840 --> 0:09:57.920
<v Speaker 2>that area, But what it would take for you to

0:09:58.200 --> 0:09:59.960
<v Speaker 2>look at a potential action.

0:10:01.760 --> 0:10:04.000
<v Speaker 1>With respect to Disney in particular.

0:10:04.080 --> 0:10:07.040
<v Speaker 3>The sc has three proceedings that are going on, or

0:10:07.080 --> 0:10:10.000
<v Speaker 3>sort of three buckets of issues, one starting all the

0:10:10.000 --> 0:10:12.520
<v Speaker 3>way back in March of twenty twenty five, I wrote

0:10:12.559 --> 0:10:16.400
<v Speaker 3>a letter to Disney leadership raising concerns about some of

0:10:16.440 --> 0:10:20.599
<v Speaker 3>their practices, including what we call invidious forms of DEI discrimination,

0:10:20.640 --> 0:10:24.040
<v Speaker 3>where there's potential evidence indicating that they may have been

0:10:24.080 --> 0:10:29.360
<v Speaker 3>discriminating with effective pay or compensation or workplace opportunities based

0:10:29.360 --> 0:10:31.520
<v Speaker 3>on race, gender, or protected characteristics.

0:10:31.720 --> 0:10:33.400
<v Speaker 1>There's a role for the SCC there.

0:10:33.640 --> 0:10:36.920
<v Speaker 3>We have particular rules on EEO policies and discrimination.

0:10:37.480 --> 0:10:39.480
<v Speaker 1>So we've been looking into that for quite a while.

0:10:39.520 --> 0:10:42.240
<v Speaker 3>In fact, we've been doing some letters of inquiry, our

0:10:42.360 --> 0:10:45.880
<v Speaker 3>versions of subpoena, and frankly, the view was that Disney

0:10:45.920 --> 0:10:49.000
<v Speaker 3>was being disingenuous in the way it was responding to

0:10:49.160 --> 0:10:52.280
<v Speaker 3>the FCC's inquiries, and so we took the next step

0:10:52.559 --> 0:10:56.800
<v Speaker 3>in our enforcement abilities, which was called in all of

0:10:56.880 --> 0:11:01.040
<v Speaker 3>Disney's broadcast licenses for early renewals. See has now applied,

0:11:01.559 --> 0:11:04.560
<v Speaker 3>and they have to demonstrate that they've been operating in

0:11:04.640 --> 0:11:08.120
<v Speaker 3>the public interests. There have been petitions to deny the

0:11:08.240 --> 0:11:11.839
<v Speaker 3>renewal of those Disney stations, and so the FC is

0:11:11.880 --> 0:11:13.720
<v Speaker 3>looking at all of that very carefully right now, to

0:11:13.720 --> 0:11:16.480
<v Speaker 3>your point, we've not made the final decision, but at

0:11:16.480 --> 0:11:20.199
<v Speaker 3>this point Disney is demonstrating, attempting to demonstrate that it

0:11:20.240 --> 0:11:23.000
<v Speaker 3>should get those licenses renewed and we'll ultimately see what

0:11:23.040 --> 0:11:23.800
<v Speaker 3>the record shows.

0:11:24.040 --> 0:11:25.600
<v Speaker 1>We have obviously a separate.

0:11:25.320 --> 0:11:27.600
<v Speaker 3>Issue going on with Disney right now with respect to

0:11:28.080 --> 0:11:30.400
<v Speaker 3>the View and their claims of the View being a

0:11:30.400 --> 0:11:33.560
<v Speaker 3>bonifide news program. But we have the DEI, the license

0:11:33.600 --> 0:11:37.000
<v Speaker 3>renewal in the View proceeding going. But more broadly, we're

0:11:37.040 --> 0:11:41.280
<v Speaker 3>trying to hold all broadcasters accountable to their public interest standard.

0:11:41.280 --> 0:11:44.520
<v Speaker 3>We have issued similar actions with respect to a number

0:11:44.760 --> 0:11:47.240
<v Speaker 3>of other broadcasters. I think for years people took the

0:11:47.320 --> 0:11:50.120
<v Speaker 3>view that broadcast TV should be treated just like cable

0:11:50.240 --> 0:11:52.680
<v Speaker 3>or a podcast or a newspaper. But that's not what

0:11:52.679 --> 0:11:55.040
<v Speaker 3>the Communications Act in Congress said, and so we want

0:11:55.040 --> 0:11:57.720
<v Speaker 3>to make sure that all broadcasters are in fact living

0:11:57.800 --> 0:11:59.479
<v Speaker 3>up to their public interest obligations.

0:12:00.400 --> 0:12:03.360
<v Speaker 2>FCC Chairman Brendan Carr joining us from our DC studio.

0:12:03.400 --> 0:12:04.240
<v Speaker 1>Thank you very much.

0:12:04.760 --> 0:12:05.200
<v Speaker 2>Indeed,