Radio and television broadcasting may be more closely regulated than the press. The paramount right is the right of viewers and listeners to receive information of public concern, rather than the right of bradcasters to broadcast what they please.
The Court has upheld FCC orders requireing a radio station to offer free broadcasting time to opponents of political candidates or views endorsed by the station and to any person who has been personally attacked in the course of a broadcast, for a reply to the attack.
OTOH, a statute granting political candidates a right to equal space to reply to criticism by the newspaper violates the 1st amendment freedom of press. Decisions respecting size and content of newspapers are forbidden to government.
To promote diversity of information received by the public, the FCC may forbid ownership of a radio or television station by a daily newspaper located in the same community.
Because of a broadcast's ability to invade the privacy of the home, the 1st amendment does not forbid imposing civil sanctions on a broadcaster for airing a full monologue of patenetly offensive sexual or excretory speech even though it is not obscene, at least at those times when children are likely to be listening.
Congress violated the 1st amendment when it forbade any noncommercial educational station receiving a grant from public broadcasting from engaging in editorializing. This was the suppression of speech because of its content. Congress could deny persons receiving the federal funds the right to use those funds for editioral activities, but it could not condition the receipt of those funds upon a promise not to engage in any such speech.