Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Medium

PT129 S4 P1 Q3 Explanation

The FCC and Public Interest

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsLocate DetailLaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

The United States government agency responsible for overseeing television and radio broadcasting, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), had an early history of addressing only the concerns of parties with an economic interest in broadcasting—chiefly broadcasting companies. The rights of viewers and listeners were not recognized by the FCC, which regarded them merely hearing. Consequently, the FCC appeared to be exclusively at the service of the broadcasting industry.

A landmark case changed the course of that history. In 1964, a local television station in Jackson, Mississippi was applying for a renewal of its broadcasting license. The United Church of Christ, representing Jackson's African American population, petitioned the FCC for a hearing about the broadcasting policies of that station. The church citizens' groups representing community preferences would begin to enter the closed worlds of government and industry.

The church appealed the FCC's decision in court, and in 1967 was granted the right to a public hearing on the station's request for a long-term license. The hearing was to little avail: the FCC dismissed much of the public input and granted a full renewal to the station. The church appealed as such, should be accorded the right to challenge the renewal of the station's broadcasting license.

The case established a formidable precedent for opening up to the public the world of broadcasting. Subsequent rulings have supported the right of the public to question the performance of radio and television licensees before the FCC at renewal time every three years. Along with racial issues, a range of other matters—from political viewpoints—are now discussed at licensing proceedings because of the church's intervention.

What this question is testing

Locate Detail

Topic

The author is telling the story of a regulator (the FCC) that used to ignore the public — and the church group that, through a long court fight, forced it to listen.

Framework

Highlight Noteworthy. The author isn't arguing against an opposing view — they're celebrating a turning point and explaining how it happened.

Main Point

Here's the simpler version: for a long time, only broadcasters had a seat at the FCC table. A church group representing African American Mississippians tried to get a hearing about a segregationist station, and the FCC kept brushing them off. They sued, lost, sued again, and finally a judge took the unusual step of yanking the station's license — and ruled that citizens' groups should have the right to challenge license renewals. That ruling cracked the door open. Now the public regularly weighs in at licensing time.

P1: The closed-door FCC

The FCC was set up to listen to broadcasters, full stop. Ordinary viewers and listeners couldn't speak at hearings unless they were applying for a license themselves.

P2: The Jackson case

The United Church of Christ, on behalf of Jackson's Black residents, petitioned about a segregationist station. The FCC dodged: said the church lacked economic interest, granted a short probationary renewal, and (somewhat suspiciously) accepted the misconduct claims while still letting the station keep going. The author flags that the real motive was keeping citizens' groups out of the room.

P3: The courts force the issue

The church appealed, got a hearing, and lost again at the FCC. They appealed a second time. This time the judge skipped the FCC entirely, revoked the license, and ruled that citizens' groups have a right to challenge renewals.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
3.

Which one of the following statements is affirmed by

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong4% picked this

    The broadcasting industry's economic goals can be met most easily by minimizing the attention given to the interests

    While the FCC had an early history of addressing only the concerns of parties with an economic interest in broadcasting (first paragraph), the passage does not speak to the easiest way for the broadcasting industry to meet its economic goals.

  2. Unsupported5% picked this

    The FCC was advised by broadcasters to bar groups with no economic interest in broadcasting from hearings

    The passage indicates that this position was held by the FCC (first paragraph), but it does not say that they were advised by broadcasters to hold this position.

  3. Contradiction5% picked this

    The court ruled in the case brought by the United Church of Christ that the FCC had the ultimate authority to decide

    The court ruled in the case brought by the United Church of Christ that the church members were performing a public service and should be accorded the right to challenge the renewal of the station’s broadcasting license (third paragraph).

  4. Correct76% picked this

    Before the United Church of Christ won its case, the FCC would not allow citizens' groups to speak as members of

    Why this is right

    This is supported in the first paragraph.

    Skill tested: Locate Detail · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Too Strong10% picked this

    The case brought by the United Church of Christ represents the first time a citizens' group was successful in getting its concerns about

    The case represents a change at the FCC (fourth paragraph), but not with governmental agencies more generally.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free