On June 18th, 2010, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in response to an enquiry by the Missouri Broadcasters Association forwarded to the FCC by Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster, decided that U.S. Senate write-in candidate Glenn Miller had not shown enough evidence of being what is called a "bonafide" candidate, and so they advised the MBA that its radio affiliates could refuse to accept Miller's campaign ads without incurring liability, even if they accept his opponents' ads. KSDK Channel 5 and KCTV Channel 5 have now published brief stories.
Update July 3rd: You can now read the FCC's 63-page ruling HERE.
But the FCC didn't have the courtesy to communicate this decision directly to Miller. Instead, they communicated it only to the MBA. The only way Glenn Miller found out about it was when he was surfing the Internet on June 28th and accidentally found the MBA's own statement announcing the decision and advising its affiliates that they didn't need to accept Miller's ads. He posted the MBA's statement on the Vanguard News Network Forum. In their statement, the MBA insinuates that Glenn Miller established a bogus write-in candidacy solely for the purpose of using broadcasters as a megaphone to deliver his own personal message, despite the fact that he paid for the radio ads and he has run for elective office on several previous occasions in both Missouri and North Carolina. You can read the MBA's full statement at the bottom of this post, after the jump.
Paragraph (f) of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations (47 CFR 73.1940) suggests that a "bonafide candidate" is a candidate who has engaged to a substantial degree in activities commonly associated with political campaigning. Such activities normally would include making campaign speeches, distributing campaign literature, issuing press releases, maintaining a campaign committee, and establishing campaign headquarters (even though the headquarters in some instances might be the residence of the candidate or his or her campaign manager). Not all of the listed activities are necessarily required in each case to demonstrate a substantial showing, and there may be activities not listed herein which would contribute to such a showing. But even though it plainly states that "not all of the listed activities are necessarily required", the MBA seized upon this as a convenient excuse for their affiliates to weasel their way out of their obligations. Update June 30th: The Kansas City Star now reports specifically why the MBA and the Attorney General didn't consider Glenn Miller to be legally qualified (or "bonafide"); he didn't have a campaign committee, a central office, or issue regular news releases at the time.
And now the FCC has apparently upheld their efforts. But although Glenn Miller is temporarily stymied by the decision, not only does he give NO sign of quitting his campaign, but is actively exploring the possibility of filing suit either against the specific Missouri radio stations who decided to refuse his ads, or against the Missouri Broadcasters Association. I recommend he sue both, since the MBA took up the stations' case. Miller is soliciting advice and assistance in this VNN Forum thread.
It's obvious that even those radio station accepting Miller's ads were discomfited with them from the very outset. Most preceded the ads with disclaimers distancing themselves from the ads. And once they got their opening, they immediately moved to evade their obligations to air the ads, all of which are archived HERE. Unlike groups like Occidental Dissent and the American Third Position Party, which direct their outreach primarily towards the intellectual stratum, Glenn Miller was directing his outreach towards the White working class, and his syntax reflected it. But regardless of how this turns out, Glenn Miller has rendered a valuable service to the White community; appearances on radio shows like Howard Stern reached hundreds and perhaps thousands of White who may not have been aware of overt resistance to the Jewish-manipulated multicultural agenda and who otherwise may not have heard the message of White liberation. Miller also gave widespread publicity for the most prominent spokesman of the Cause today, Dr. David Duke.
Here's the MBA's full statement (emphasis via boldface/italics is mine):
Statement of the Missouri Broadcasters Association:
In April of this year, the Missouri Broadcasters Association joined by Chris Koster, Attorney General of the State of Missouri and Zimmer Radio of Mid- Missouri, Inc., filed a request for declaratory ruling with the Federal Communications Commission to determine whether Miller is a “bona fide” write-in candidate for United States Senate entitled to mandatory reasonable access to Missouri’s broadcast airwaves. Mr. Miller responded and several additional pleadings were filed by both parties.
Frazier Glenn Miller has made demand on Missouri broadcasters to broadcast his messages based on his claim to be a legally qualified candidate for U.S. Senate from Missouri. The declaratory ruling request sought a determination to resolve the legal uncertainty whether Miller was a bona fide candidate entitled to avail himself of the mandatory access provisions of §312(a)(7) of the Communications Act. An individual seeking to qualify as a write-in candidate bears the burden to make a “substantial showing” that he is a bona fide candidate for office. In their submission, Petitioner’s contend that Miller failed to provide a sufficient showing such that a reasonable broadcaster would have to conclude that he had met that burden.
On Friday, June 18, 2010, the Missouri Broadcasters Association was advised by telephone that the FCC’s response to its petition would be in the form of informal, oral advice. The advice was received from the Media Bureau’s Policy Division staff. The advice was that, on the facts and pleading submitted by all parties, including Mr. Miller, it would not be unreasonable for Missouri broadcasting stations to determine that Miller is not a bona fide write-in candidate and therefore, Missouri broadcasters may deny him access to broadcast their stations.
This advice is an affirmation of the position taken by the MBA, Attorney General Koster and Zimmer Broadcasting and the FCC, prior to the filing of our petition. It confirms that a broadcaster who decides that Miller has not established himself to be a bona fide write-in candidate would not be acting unreasonably. Therefore, in our view, a Missouri broadcaster would not be held liable for having denied access retroactively.
The MBA continues to believe that Mr. Miller’s demands for mandatory access were an abuse of the privilege contained in the Communications Act for bona fide candidates. The Communications Act creates a special mandatory-access rule only for federal candidates, carefully limited to party nominees and those who are “bona fide,” or active and credible in the circumstances of the particular race. This result validates the MBA’s position in its petition and reply comments that Miller has not established himself to be a bona fide candidate. Miller is merely attempting to use broadcasters as a megaphone for his message, and broadcasters are not required to allow themselves to be used as a purveyor of personal views merely upon the claim of candidacy for federal office.
Should you have further questions or concerns in this regard, you are invited to call Don Hicks of the Missouri Broadcasters Association or MBA Washington Counsel Gregg Skall (202-857-4441) for further clarification.