Bobby

“MY GRANDMOTHER, CARRIE MEEK, WAS A TRAILBLAZING CONGRESSWOMAN. APPROVED BY KENDRICK MEEK. PAID FOR BY KENDRICK MEEK FOR GINGRESS KENDRICK DEMOCRAT FOR CONGRESS”  at 2.8s

best match only 2.8s at 13.1% height (needs >= 4s, >= 4% height)

“[26.8s] I'm Kendrick Meek and I approve this message.”  at 26.8s

The audio transcript contains a full spoken approval statement at 26.8s: "I'm Kendrick Meek and I approve this message." This is legally equivalent to the required template "I am {candidate_name} and I approve this message" — the only difference is the contraction "I'm" for "I am", which 11 CFR 110.11(c)(3)(i) treats as satisfying the spoken statement of authorization (the regulation itself permits either the candidate's approval statement in this form). The deterministic check likely failed on exact-string matching of "I am" versus "I'm". The statement is spoken by the candidate, identifies him by name, and is clearly audible (corroborated by the matching on-screen text at 27.2s–30.0s plus the "APPROVED BY KENDRICK MEEK / PAID FOR BY KENDRICK MEEK FOR CONGRESS" disclaimer). The one_time_minimum timing requirement is met since it occurs once within the ad.

“APPROVED BY KENDRICK MEEK. PAID FOR BY KENDRICK MEEK FOR CONGRESS | KENDRICK DEMOCRAT FOR CONGRESS”  at 2.8s

This rule only triggers when the ad is paid for by a third party (someone other than the candidate's own authorized committee). Here the payor shown on screen throughout is 'Kendrick Meek for Congress,' which is the candidate's own principal campaign/authorized committee (matching the sponsor metadata), and the speaker is the candidate himself ('I'm Kendrick Meek and I approve this message'). There is no indication of any third-party payor \u2014 no other organization, PAC, or committee is named anywhere in the transcript or on-screen text. Because paid_by_third_party is false, 11 CFR 110.11(b)(2) does not apply; the appropriate provision would be 110.11(b)(1) (authorized committee payor), which the ad's 'Paid for by Kendrick Meek for Congress' disclaimer appears to address (with an additional 'Approved by Kendrick Meek' line). Note for the human reviewer: if it were later established that the payor entity is distinct from the candidate's authorized committee, the on-screen text 'PAID FOR BY KENDRICK MEEK FOR CONGRESS ... APPROVED BY KENDRICK MEEK' would be substantively equivalent to the required phrase, though the cumulative clearly-legible display time and the fragmented/low-legibility renderings would need separate scrutiny against the 4-second / 4%-height parameters (the longest clean segments are ~2.4s at 14.1% and ~2.8s at 13.1%, which together exceed 4 seconds but are non-contiguous).

“[27.2s-30.0s, 2.8s visible, 13.1% of frame height] IM KENDRICK MEEK AND I APPROVE THIS MESSAGE. APPROVED BY KENDRICK MEE. PAID FOR BY KENDRICK WEEK FOR CONGRESS — plus recurring "PAID FOR BY KENDRICK MEEK FOR CONGRESS" at 2.8s, 4.8s, 6.4s, 7.6s, 8.8s, 9.6-12.0s, 12.8-13.6s, 14.0-14.4s, 17.6s, 23.2s”  at 27.2s

The rule's template phrase ("This advertisement was sponsored, paid for, or furnished... by X") is not present verbatim, which is why the string match failed. However, 47 CFR 73.1212 is satisfied by any clear statement identifying the sponsor, and the on-screen text contains the standard legally-equivalent formulation "PAID FOR BY KENDRICK MEEK FOR CONGRESS" (alongside "APPROVED BY KENDRICK MEEK"), which names exactly the sponsor in the metadata. The OCR shows this lower-third disclaimer recurring in fragments from ~2.8s through the end of the 30s spot — including near-continuous detection from ~8.8s to 14.4s and a clean 2.8s block from 27.2s-30.0s — indicating a persistent on-screen disclaimer whose cumulative and effectively continuous display well exceeds the 4-second minimum (the gaps are consistent with OCR dropout on a moving/low-contrast frame rather than the text disappearing). Residual doubt concerns the 4% minimum height: the detected block heights that include the disclaimer are large (6.7%-14.1%), but those bounding boxes also contain the big caption text, and the frames where only the disclaimer/tagline lines were isolated (6.4s at 3.1%, 6.8s at 2.6%, 8.4s at 1.7%) suggest the fine-print sponsor line itself may render at roughly 2-3% of frame height, below the 4% threshold. On balance I score this as satisfying the substantive sponsorship-identification requirement, but a human reviewer should verify the rendered text height of the "PAID FOR BY" line, since that single dimension could flip the result to a fail.

“[26.8s] I'm Kendrick Meek and I approve this message. | On-screen: "APPROVED BY KENDRICK MEEK. PAID FOR BY KENDRICK MEEK FOR CONGRESS" (recurring throughout, incl. 27.2s-30.0s)”  at 27.2s

47 CFR 73.1212(d) applies only where films, records, transcriptions, talent, scripts, or other material/service are furnished to the station *as an inducement to broadcast* a political or controversial-issue program — i.e., free or below-cost material supplied to the licensee rather than a purchased spot. The evidence here shows a conventional ~30-second paid candidate spot: the on-screen text repeatedly states "PAID FOR BY KENDRICK MEEK FOR CONGRESS" and "APPROVED BY KENDRICK MEEK," and the audio closes with the standard candidate authorization ("I'm Kendrick Meek and I approve this message"). Nothing in the transcript or on-screen timeline suggests material was furnished to a broadcaster as an inducement; such paid spots are governed by 73.1212(a)/(b), not (d). Accordingly the trigger condition (uses_furnished_material) is not met and the beginning-and-end announcement obligation does not attach. Note two contingencies for the human reviewer: (1) even if 73.1212(d) were deemed triggered, the ad is ~30 seconds — under 300 — so the proviso permits a single announcement, which the closing sponsorship ID would satisfy in substance ("Paid for by Kendrick Meek for Congress" is legally equivalent to the "sponsored, paid for, or furnished" formulation); (2) however, if the reviewer insists on the audio channel specifically, the spoken track contains only the approval statement and no aural "paid for by" sponsor identification, so a finding of applicability would likely produce a fail on the audio channel. Given the absence of any indication of furnished/inducement material, not_applicable is the better call.