The FCC’s proposal to allow FM translators to rebroadcast the signals of AM stations as a fill-in service has been published in the Federal Register setting the dates for comment.  Comments in the proceeding will be due by January 7, 2008, with Reply Comments due on or before February 4, 2008.  As we wrote back in August (available here), the Commission’s rule making proposes to allow FM translators to rebroadcast the signal of AM stations – and potentially to originate programming during those nighttime hours when a daytime-only AM station is not permitted to operate.  The proposal is to permit AM stations to operate FM translators in an area that is the lesser of a circle 25 miles from their transmitter site or within their 2 mv/m daytime service contour.  In proposing the changes in its rules, the Commission raised a number of questions on which it seeks public comment, including whether the proposal is in the public interest, whether there should be a cap on the number of translators an AM station can employ, and whether an extension beyond the AM station’s 2 mv/m contour should be permitted.  Please see the FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rule Making or our earlier blog entry for further information.  Comments can be filed with the Commission in paper or electronically via ECFS, and should refer to MB Docket No. 07-172.

As the Commission held its last localism hearing in Washington on Halloween night, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s views on how the FCC should insure that stations are responsive to their communities became somewhat clearer.  In his opening statement, the Chairman outlined a set of actions that could be taken by the FCC to insure more service to the public.  While emphasizing the importance of efforts to encourage new entrants into broadcast ownership, the Chairman’s proposals to add new regulatory requirements, including requiring that a station be manned during all hours of operation, may well have the result of making it more difficult for any new entrant (or for existing smaller operators) to profitably operate their stations.  In addition, he has offered proposals that would seemingly require cable and satellite carriage of in-state television stations not in a system’s DMA – a proposal sure to cause concern to stations in DMAs that straddle state lines.

The Chairman’s statement includes the following proposals:

  • Requirements for uniform filings by broadcasters quantifying their public service – presumably their news and information programming and the public service announcements that they provide
  • Requiring that stations have manned main studios during all hours of operations (not just during business hours)
  • Allowing flexibility for LPFM stations to be sold, but adopting new rules to insure that such stations are used for local programming, not something provided from a network or other programming source
  • Providing television viewers the ability to get an in-state television stations on cable and satellite even if the county in which they reside is "home" to a DMA with stations in another state
  • Capping the number of applications accepted from the 2003 FM translator filing window – which might result in the dismissal of hundreds of applications that have effectively been frozen for 4 years

Continue Reading Shape of Things To Come: New Public Interest Obligations, Changes in TV DMAs and More Flexibility For LPFM

Joining Fred Thompson and Stephen Colbert (see our stories here and here), Presidential candidate Barack Obama appeared briefly on Saturday Night Live last night and delivered that iconic line – "Live From New York, It’s Saturday Night!"  But does his appearance trigger equal opportunities for television stations that aired the program and, if so, would any candidate actually request that time?  Unlike the Thompson and Colbert appearances, Obama was on broadcast television, not cable, so the question of whether equal opportunities applies to cable networks was not implicated.  And, unlike the appearances that candidates have made on talk shows (see our discussion of the broad exemption from equal opportunities given to news interview programs, here), it would be difficult to argue that the Obama appearance was in the context of a news interview program. 

But, would any candidate request the equal opportunities to get 10 or 20 seconds of equal time?  What kind of message could an opposing candidate get out in that limited amount of time (and I must admit that I didn’t have my stopwatch working, so it could have been even less time) – and how much more publicity would such a request give to Obama (and Saturday Night Live)?  And such a request could raise the issue of who is a legally qualified candidate – as no registration papers for the Presidential primaries have been filed yet in most states – though the standard for legally qualified candidates for President are not as black and white as they are for other political candidates (see our discussion of this issue in our entry on the short-lived Colbert candidacy).  So, in this case, we can really stayed tuned – at 11:30 eastern time on Saturday night – to see what comes next…..

At its Oct. 31 open meeting, the Commission adopted an Order declaring exclusive access and service clauses in video contracts between cable operators and multiple-dwelling units (MDUs) — think apartment buildings — to be unenforceable.  According to the FCC, such exclusive contracts can be harmful, and it expects that the rule change will result in greater choice for consumers and competition among video services providers.  The Commission launched a further proceeding to determine whether it should take similar action against exclusivity clauses entered into by Direct Broadcast Satellite television providers, private cable operators, and other multichannel video programming providers.  The further proceeding will also explore whether the Commission should prohibit other types of exclusive arrangements in the provision of video services.  It is unclear when this order will become effective.  The text of the decision has not yet been released, but once the new Order become effective, the rules will apply to existing as well as future contracts as the FCC did not provide any transition or grandfathering period for existing agreements.  Given Chairman Kevin Martin’s sense of urgency for this issue, the FCC is likely to release that text as soon as possible.  Representatives of various interest groups, including cable operators, have indicated publicly their intention to challenge the order in court.  For more details about the Commission’s action please see DWT’s recent bulletin. 

At the same Oct. 31st meeting, the Commission also adopted a Second Report and Order extending a number of cable franchising rules that previously applied only to new video competitors to incumbent cable operators.  Earlier this year, the Commission had adopted rules streamlining the local cable franchising process for new video entrants (i.e., telephone companies) and clarifying that certain payments often demanded by local franchise authorities would be considered franchise fees and therefore counted against the 5 percent franchise fee cap.  By its Second Report and Order adopted this week, the Commission decided to extend many of these rules to incumbent cable operators as well.  According to Chairman Martin, extending these rules to incumbent cable operators will help level the playing field between new entrants in the video delivery market and existing operators.  For more details about the Commission’s Second Report and Order, please see DWT’s recent bulletin on the issue. 

The Commission’s Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“Further NPRM”) regarding the next generation Emergency Alert System (“EAS”) has been published in the Federal Register, setting the date for Comments as December 3, 2007 and the date for Reply Comments as December 17, 2007.  This summer, the Commission adopted a Report and Order extending its EAS Rules to wireless services, and adjusting the rules to better serve the needs of persons with disabilities and non-English speakers.  The Report and Order also expanded the base of EAS participants, included state-level and geographically targeted EAS alerts, and improved coordination with state and local governments.  A copy of the FCC’s Report and Order and the Further NPRM can be obtained here. 

The Further NPRM raises additional questions regarding how the EAS rules can be adjusted to ensure that non-English speakers and persons with disabilities are reached by EAS messages.  In addition, the Further NPRM seeks input regarding whether local, county, tribal, or other state governmental entities be allowed to initiate mandatory state and local alerts, and if so, what standards or requirements be imposed in initiating an EAS message.  Finally, the rulemaking seeks comment on options for ensuring that the EAS operates as designed in an emergency, and posits several options for measuring performance.  Comments can be filed with the Commission in paper or electronically via ECFS, and should refer to EB Docket No. 04-296. 

This afternoon the Commission announced that it will hold its sixth and final public hearing on media ownership issues in Seattle, Washington on Friday, November 9, 2007.  The hearing will be held from 4 to 11 PM at the Town Hall in Seattle, and will conclude the Commission’s tour around the country to gather information on media ownership to assist it in reworking its media ownership and cross-ownership rules.  A copy of today’s public notice is available here.  More importantly, the timing of this final public hearing seems consistent with Chairman Martin’s publicly announced target of wrapping up the Commission’s reconsideration of the multiple ownership rules by the end of the year. 

The Chairman apparently remains undeterred by congressional calls to slow the rule making process down.  Yesterday, the Senate Commerce Committee announced that it would hold a hearing on media ownership on Tuesday November 6th, and today the House Energy & Commerce Committee has followed suit by announcing that it will hold its own hearing on the issue on December 6th.  While these hearings may put more pressure on the Commission to refrain from enacting new rules this year, by concluding its ownership tour next week, the Commission appears to still be aiming for a December action on the issue.  And according to at least one news article, the Chairman is aiming to publicly outline his media-ownership proposals by November 13th, in theory to advance those proposals before a vote at the next FCC Open Meeting tentatively set for December 18th.  Stay tuned.

Twice this week, the FCC released decisions denying applications proposing city of license changes for AM stations proposing to take away the only station licensed to one community and move it to another.  In its order adopting simplified city of license changes (see our previous posts including those here and here), the FCC refused to change its policy of not allowing the removal of an established radio station which is the only station licensed to a community except in cases where an extraordinary showing justifying a  waiver of the rules could be made.  The two cases decided this week show that merely moving to a community with greater population (even one which has no other station licensed to it) will not, in and of itself, justify a waiver of the rules.  Thus, stations which are the only station licensed to their communities are effectively blocked from changing cities of license without  providing a "back-fill", i.e. moving another station so that it can be licensed to the community that would otherwise be abandoned.

In one case decided this week, the broadcaster proposed to move its AM station to a community that had three times the population of the one that it was proposing to leave.  The Commission rejected the move, finding that the residents of the current community should be able to rely on continued service from that station.  This was true even though other stations could be received in the community, as the Commission reminded licensees that their primary responsibility is to serve the needs of their city of license, and that this primary service cannot be duplicated by the secondary service provided by a station licensed to another town or city. 

Continue Reading FCC Says No To City of License Change Taking Away Community’s Only Radio Service

In a Public Notice designed to clarify any ambiguity that has arisen from the extension of Daylight Savings Time into November, the FCC on Friday made clear that AM daytime-only stations should continue to use the power levels for October "advanced" operations for Pre-Sunrise (PSRA) and Post Sunset Authority (PSSA) during the first three days of November, until Daylight Savings Time ends on November 4.  We’ve written about some of the issues for AM stations with Daylight Savings Time here and here.

In an unusual action, Commissioner Michael Copps last week publicly released a letter he wrote to Chairman Martin ( whose office is just down the hall from Copps’ office on the Eighth Floor of the FCC’s headquarters in Washington) urging the Chairman to initiate a proceeding to determine if the News Corporation’s acquisition of the Wall Street Journal is in the public interest.  Copps points to the fact that the company currently owns another daily newspaper published in New York (the New York Post) as well as two full power television stations (WWOR and WNYW) in the market.  While recognizing that the FCC has previously ruled that national newspapers should not be counted for purposes of the FCC’s newspaper- broadcast cross ownership limitations which currently bar local ownership of broadcast stations and daily newspapers in the same area.  This exception for national papers was principally decided in connection with Gannett’s USA Today, headquartered in the Washington DC area, where Gannett also owns a TV station.  Copps argues that, despite the USA Today precedent, this situation nevertheless demands further review for two reasons: 1) the local concentration of two TV stations and two widely-read local newspapers and 2) the national concentration that will result in two of the five most widely read newspapers in the country being commonly owned with one of the four major television networks, as well as the owner of many other outlets of communication spread throughout the country.

One seemingly unique aspect of the Copps request is that he is asking that the FCC investigate the acquisition of a newspaper, over which the FCC has no direct jurisdiction.  In fact, in the past, TV companies have purchased newspapers that they could not own consistent with the cross-ownership rules, with the understanding that they would divest one of these interests by the time that the next license renewal for the television station came up (or ask for a waiver of the rules at that time).  This would be necessary as the FCC would have jurisdiction over the duopoly through the renewal application.  In recent years, there have been companies which have bought newspapers in their television markets, taking the risk that, by the time the television station renewal was filed, the FCC’s cross-ownership rules would have changed.  And they are now left pursuing waivers in connection with their renewal applications.  In this case, while the FCC would not have jurisdiction over the acquisition of the Journal, they would have jurisdiction over the pending TV renewal applications.

Continue Reading Copps Calls for FCC Proceeding to Consider News Corporation’s Acquisition of Wall Street Journal

The FCC announced Wednesday that it will hold an open meeting and its Sixth Localism Hearing on October 31, 2007 at the Commission in Washington, DC.  Combining its standard agenda with a further hearing on localism, the Commission intends to begin its meeting at 9 AM and conclude by 2PM.  A copy of the FCC’s public notice is available here. 

The Localism Hearing portion of the program continues the string of hearings conducted around the country in recent years.  As we’ve written earlier, the Localism Hearings were part of a larger proceeding begun in response to the controversy after the 2003 multiple ownership rules and seek to gather input on how well broadcasters are serving the needs of their local communities .  The Oct. 31st meeting will include a presentation by the Media Bureau summarizing the record that the FCC has compiled thusfar on localism, as well as a period for comment by the public.  Commissioners Copps and Adelstein issued a press release on Wednesday, denouncing the hearing as last minute and unfair, stating:  "This is unacceptable and unfair to the public.  And it makes putting together an expert panel nearly impossible.  Is the Commission serious about allowing the public to participate in the agency’s decisionmaking?  Or is the goal to be able to claim that hearings have been held, even if the public has not had a chance to fully participate?”  It will be even more unacceptable and unfair if the meeting gets delayed and keeps folks from trick-or-treating with their kids. 

With respect to the agenda items on tap for the open meeting portion of the program, the Commission appears ready to act on a Report and Order concerning exclusive contracts for the provision of video services to multiple dwelling units, and a Second Report and Order regarding local franchising authorities and the awarding of cable franchises.