Articles Posted in Ownership Law & Regulation

Published on:

By

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit today issued a decision vacating the FCC rule effectively banning television Joint Sales Agreements (“JSAs”) and threatened to throw out all of the FCC’s remaining broadcast ownership rules if the FCC does not complete its required “quadrennial” review of those rules by the end of 2016.

The case returned broadcasters and advocacy groups to this court for its third major decision on the FCC’s broadcast ownership rules since 2004.  This time around, the case addressed three issues:  public interest groups’ request that the court require the FCC to adopt a new definition of “eligible entity” aimed at promoting female and minority broadcast ownership; broadcasters’ request that the court vacate all broadcast ownership rules due to the FCC’s failure to complete the statutorily mandated quadrennial reviews of those rules; and broadcasters’ request that the court vacate the FCC’s rule making television JSAs an attributable ownership interest.

The first two of these issues date back to the FCC’s 2002 biennial review of its ownership rules.  Congress mandated that the Commission conduct periodic reviews of its broadcast ownership rules, originally every two years, but later extended to every four years, in the 1996 Telecom Act.  The Commission undertook reviews in 2002 and 2006 that resulted in orders that were appealed to the Third Circuit.  Thereafter, the Commission consolidated each still-pending quadrennial review with the succeeding one, with the result that the FCC has not concluded a review or updated its ownership rules since 2006.

In its 2002 biennial review, the FCC modified certain of its broadcast ownership rules, including changing its definition of a radio market, with the result that its ownership rules for radio stations were actually more restrictive.  The FCC grandfathered existing radio station combinations that would have exceeded the new limits, but required those combinations be broken up and brought into compliance with the new standards if sold.  To encourage female and minority ownership, the Commission excluded “eligible entities” from the new rules, allowing those meeting the definition to acquire a combination that would otherwise have to be split up under the revised radio ownership rules.

Other similar FCC rules also rely on the definition of an “eligible entity”, making that definition central to the FCC’s efforts to increase female and minority ownership.  The FCC has been using a definition of “eligible entity” based on revenue that was developed by the Small Business Administration, arguing that the test will survive judicial scrutiny because it is not based on race or gender.  However, advocacy groups have countered that there is no evidence that the definition actually enhances female and minority ownership, as opposed to small business entity ownership.  The Third Circuit agreed in 2011, finding the Commission’s use of the definition to be arbitrary and capricious.  However, since the Commission has not completed its required quadrennial reviews, the definition has remained in place, contrary to the Third Circuit’s order that the FCC adopt another definition.

Five other ownership rules, the local television ownership rule, the local radio ownership rule, the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule, the radio/television cross-ownership rule, and the dual network rule have similarly gone without an update since 2006.  The court lamented that this lack of review has left broadcasters subject to rules that are decades old, preventing parties from taking advantage of deregulatory options the FCC has considered, but not acted on.  It specifically highlighted the continued existence of the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule, which was created in the 1970s.  The FCC determined more than a decade ago that the rule is no longer necessary, but it remains on the books because the FCC has not successfully concluded the required quadrennial reviews to eliminate it.

The court dissected the rationales the Commission espoused to justify rolling each quadrennial review into the next one and found that they did not justify the years-long delay.  It stopped short, however, of granting the requested invalidation of all broadcast ownership rules, finding that the delays do not yet justify doing so.  Instead, the court mandated that the Commission go to mediation with the public interest groups to set a timetable for defining “eligible entity”, and based on a promise by the FCC that the Chairman would circulate a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for revised ownership rules by June 30, gave the agency until the end of the year to take comments, reach a decision completing the 2010 and 2014 quadrennial reviews, and issue new broadcast ownership rules.

Against this backdrop, the court considered the third issue before it—broadcasters’ challenge to the Commission’s decision to attribute television JSA arrangements that had been routinely treated as non-attributable before.  The FCC adopted this rule of its own accord in 2014, arguing that JSAs involving more than 15% of another in-market station’s airtime gave one station influence approximating ownership over the other station, thereby enabling it to evade the limitations of the Commission’s local television ownership rule.  Broadcasters argued, however, and the court agreed, that the Commission could not “expand the reach” of the local television ownership rule without justifying the rule’s continued existence in the first instance in a quadrennial review.

The court’s decision sets in motion activity on a number of fronts.  First, the Commission, while in the midst of its first-ever broadcast incentive auction, will have to participate in mediation with public interest groups.  Second, the Commission will have to quickly finalize a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that it represents has been in the works for some time.  Third, it will have to collect comments and reply comments, perhaps complete new ownership studies, analyze the record these actions create, and in the next six months, conclude proceedings that have been underway for more than 10 years.

If this timeline is to be accommodated, comment periods will have to be short, extensions of comment deadlines may not be available, and resources the Commission might put toward other activities may need to be reallocated.  Despite having ten years since the 2006 quadrennial review, reasoned decision making may have to give way to rushed decision making.

As a result, broadcasters should start prepping now to participate in the proceeding.  By necessity, it will be fast-moving, and strange things can happen in fast-moving proceedings.  Getting the right result in this quadrennial review will require a lot of effort, and summer vacation just got a lot shorter.

 

 

Published on:

By and

May 2016

Noncommercial radio stations licensed to communities in Michigan and Ohio and noncommercial television stations licensed to communities in Arizona, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming must electronically file their Biennial Ownership Reports by June 1, 2016. Licensees must file using FCC Form 323-E and must also place the form as filed in their station’s public inspection file. Television stations must ensure that a copy of the form is posted to their online public inspection file at https://stations.fcc.gov.

On January 8, 2016, the Commission adopted a single national filing deadline for all noncommercial radio and television broadcast stations like the one that the FCC established for all commercial radio and television stations. The new deadline will not become effective until the revised rule is published in the Federal Register. Until then, noncommercial radio and television stations should continue to file their biennial ownership reports every two years by the anniversary date of the station’s license renewal application filing deadline.

A PDF of this article can be found at Biennial Ownership Reports are due by June 1, 2016 for Noncommercial Radio Stations in Michigan and Ohio and Noncommercial Television Stations in Arizona, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Published on:

By

In a Report and Order that has been in the making since at least 1998, the FCC yesterday adopted new ownership reporting forms for both commercial and noncommercial broadcast stations. The FCC’s goal in adopting these new forms is to enhance the completeness and accuracy of its broadcast ownership data by (i) again imposing a unique identifier for each attributable interest holder—one that is tied to that individual’s Social Security Number (SSN); (ii) collecting race, gender and ethnicity data from noncommercial licensees as it has for some time now from commercial licensees; and (iii) consolidating the noncommercial biennial ownership report filing deadline with that of biennial ownership reports for commercial broadcast stations, which will now be December 1 of odd-numbered years for both commercial and noncommercial stations. In the process, the FCC has modified the reports to incorporate a number of reforms requested by broadcasters and their counsel to eliminate redundant and burdensome idiosyncrasies, glitches, and design flaws in the current commercial ownership reporting form.  This will hopefully alleviate at least some of the pain involved in filing what has been one of the FCC’s most duplicative and burdensome forms.

For the past several years, the FCC has required commercial broadcast licensees to include in their ownership reports a unique identifier, called a Federal Registration Number (FRN), for each attributable interest holder.  When first imposed, stations objected to the FRN mandate because the FCC requires individuals seeking an FRN to supply their full SSN to the Commission. In an attempt to quell that outcry, the FCC created a temporary solution called a Special Use FRN (SUFRN), that broadcasters could utilize when attributable interest holders balked at providing their SSNs.

The FCC has now introduced another alternative to obtaining a full FRN, called the Restricted Use FRN (RUFRN), available only for use in filing ownership reports. The FCC considers the RUFRN to be a superior solution to the SUFRN (had enough acronyms yet?) because the SUFRN collected no information whatsoever about the person to which it was assigned and therefore did not further the FCC’s goal of increased accuracy in the ownership data being collected. The basis for the FCC’s belief in the superiority of the RUFRN is that in order to apply for a RUFRN, an individual must supply the FCC with their full name, date of birth, home address, the last four digits of their SSN, and all of that individual’s previously used FRNs and SUFRNs. This information will not be made publicly available, but will enable the FCC to uniquely identify each attributable interest holder in a broadcast station.

Noncommercial broadcasters in particular still oppose the FCC’s efforts to collect such personal data, since the Commission’s multiple ownership rules do not even apply to them, and they worry that the data breaches and hacks that have afflicted other federal agencies will eventually affect the FCC as well.  Commissioner Pai’s separate statement is particularly worth reading in that regard.  While the FCC will allow continued use of a SUFRN, it will permit such use only where an interest holder has refused to apply for a RUFRN or to provide the broadcaster in which it holds an interest with the information needed to obtain a RUFRN for that investor.  The FCC has indicated that stations are at risk of significant enforcement actions should the SUFRN option be abused. With the new RUFRN in place, the FCC will fix its search engine so that the “search by FRN/RUFRN” function will actually return a list of the broadcast stations in which the holder of the searched FRN/RUFRN has an attributable interest.

The FCC also consolidated the ownership report filing deadline for noncommercial stations with that of commercial stations, and extended that date an extra month, from November 1 to December 1 of odd-numbered years, to allow more time for all U.S. broadcast stations to draft their reports, hit the file button, and crash the Commission’s filing system.  Here’s hoping that the FCC will make the biennial filing system available well in advance of October 1, 2017 to allow more time for the increased number of filers to draft and file their reports by the December 1 deadline.

As expected, the FCC revised the ownership report form for noncommercial licensees to collect race, gender and ethnicity information for all interest holders, just as it now does for commercial licensees. In addition, for both commercial and noncommercial filers, it will now be possible to select more than one ethnicity from the list to better report those who identify as being multiracial, a change required by OMB.

In a welcome expression of candor, the Commission conceded that the current version of the commercial station ownership report form has led to widespread errors in those reports, undermining the integrity of all ownership data reported. In light of that big admission, the FCC adopted a number of simplifications suggested by broadcasters that will hopefully ease the filing burden and increase the accuracy of the information submitted. Here are the highlights:

  • A parent company will be able to report its ownership interest in multiple licensees on the same form. Previously, each ownership report could only contain data about a single licensee. As a result, companies that held their broadcast licenses in separate licensee subsidiaries had to file multiple parent company reports, most of which were identical to one another except for the substitution of one licensee name and call sign(s) for another.  The multiple duplicative reports clogged the filing system, causing it to grind to a halt for all filers, even those with simpler reporting structures.
  • There will be no more spreadsheets.  Because the FRN search function never worked and only one licensee could be reported per ownership report, it was nearly impossible to determine whether an interest holder reported on one station’s report also had an interest in stations reported in another report.  The FCC’s fix to this was to have broadcasters prepare spreadsheets, some of which were thousands of lines long, and upload them to the ownership reports.  This again slowed the system for all filers and the spreadsheets were difficult to read, undermining the transparency the FCC was seeking.  Now, if additional stations need to reported, they can be added directly in the form itself.
  • Additional options and questions will be added to make the form itself more useful to the FCC.  These include allowing filers to indicate whether they are organized as a Limited Liability Company, and whether an ownership interest is held jointly, such as a stock interest that is held by spouses as tenants by the entirety.  The new forms will also require filers to indicate whether they are a Tribal Entity, which furthers the Commission’s diversity goals, as well as to list those that are deemed to have an attributable interest in a station due to a Local Marketing or Joint Sales agreement.

Finally, the Report and Order indicates that the FCC is also making a number of common sense changes to the functionality of the ownership report filing system, including sub-form cloning, auto-fill mechanisms, data saving and validation routines, and enhanced checking for inconsistent data.  If these terms sound like Greek to you, then you clearly have not been involved in the filing of ownership reports at the FCC.  If that is indeed the case, count yourself fortunate, and rejoice that the FCC has taken steps to alleviate that mysterious pain broadcasters experience in odd-numbered years.

Published on:

By

October has come and gone, and now the season is upon us—filing season, that is!  Though winter is coming, December will be a hot month for radio and television FCC filings. Failure to meet any of these filing deadlines could result in fines or lost opportunities, putting a real damper on the holidays.  With that in mind, we’ve compiled a summary of some of the major upcoming filing obligations and deadlines.

  • December 1: Annual DTV Ancillary/Supplementary Services Reports (FCC Form 2100 Schedule G)

Commercial television, digital Class A television, and digital LPTV stations must electronically file by December 1, 2015 FCC Form 2100 Schedule G, the Annual DTV Ancillary/Supplementary Services Report for Commercial Digital Television Stations, regardless of whether they have received any income from transmitting ancillary or supplementary services. If a digital station provided ancillary or supplementary services during the 12-month time period ending September 30, 2015, and received compensation for doing so, that station is required to pay to the FCC five percent of the gross revenue from such services concurrently with the filing of Form 2100 Schedule G.

Note that this Report was formerly known as FCC Form 317.  With the introduction of the FCC’s new Licensing and Management System, it is now FCC Form 2100 Schedule G.

For a more detailed summery of this filing requirement, you can review our Annual DTV Ancillary/Supplementary Services Report Client Advisory.

  • December 1: Annual EEO Public File Reports for AL, CO, CT, GA, MA, ME, MN, MT, ND, NH, RI, SD, and VT

Station Employment Units (“SEUs”) that have five or more full-time employees and are comprised of radio and/or television stations licensed to communities in Alabama, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Dakota, or Vermont must by this date place in their public inspection file and post on their station website a report regarding station compliance with the FCC’s EEO Rule during the period December 1, 2014 through November 30, 2015.

December 1 is also the mid-point in the license renewal term of radio stations licensed to communities in Alabama and Georgia; therefore, by this date radio SEUs with 11 or more full-time employees in these states must electronically file the FCC Form 397 Broadcast Mid-Term Report along with copies of the SEU’s two most recent Annual EEO Public File Reports.

We’ve prepared an Annual EEO Public File Report Client Advisory with more information regarding these obligations.

  • December 1:  Biennial Ownership Reports for Noncommercial  Stations in AL, CO, CT, GA, MA, ME, MN, MT, ND, NH, RI, SD, and VT (FCC Form 323-E)

In addition to their Annual EEO Public File Reports, noncommercial television stations licensed to communities in Colorado, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, or South Dakota, and noncommercial radio stations licensed to communities in Alabama, Connecticut, Georgia, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, or Vermont (other than sole proprietorships or partnerships composed entirely of natural persons) must electronically file by December 1, 2015 their biennial ownership reports on FCC Form 323-E, unless they have consolidated this filing date with that of other commonly owned stations licensed to communities in other states. The FCC Form 323-E does not require a filing fee.

Note that the Commission’s August 6, 2015 Order extending the biennial ownership report filing deadline for commercial television and radio stations to December 2 does not apply to these Form 323-E filings for noncommercial stations.

Our Noncommercial Station Biennial Ownership Report Client Advisory has more information on this filing requirement.

  • December 2: Biennial Ownership Reports for Commercial Stations (FCC Form 323)

All commercial radio, full-power television, low-power television, and Class A television stations must electronically file by December 2, 2015 their biennial ownership reports on FCC Form 323 and pay the required FCC filing fee. This year, the fee is $65.00 per station. As a reminder, the FCC extended the usual November filing deadline to December through an Order released this summer, giving commercial licensees an additional month to prepare their reports while maintaining the “as of” reporting date of October 1, 2015.

For a more detailed summary of this filing requirement, check out our Commercial Station Biennial Ownership Report Client Advisory.

  • December 18: Spectrum Auction Applications (FCC Form 177)

As we posted last month, the FCC released its Auction Application Procedures Public Notice, announcing the filing window and application procedures to be used for broadcast stations wishing to participate in the spectrum auction. The auction application form, FCC Form 177, must be filed by each licensee interested in participating in the auction.  The application filing window opens at 12 p.m. Eastern Time on December 1, 2015 and runs until 6 p.m. Eastern Time on December 18, 2015.

After the December 18 deadline for filing Form 177, (1) no major changes may be made to the application (e.g., changing the bid options or licenses offered in the auction, or, except in certain circumstances, making major ownership changes), and (2) the Form 177 must be updated within five days of the applicant learning that information in the form is no longer accurate.

FCC staff will send letters to individual applicants indicating that the applicant’s form is (1) complete, (2) rejected, or (3) incomplete or deficient in a minor way that may be corrected. In the case of the third option, the letter will specify a deadline for submitting a corrected application, and applications that are not corrected by that time will be dismissed with no opportunity to refile.

With so many FCC deadlines stacking up in December, we recommend broadcasters start preparing their reports and applications sooner rather than later.  As Dr. Seuss reminded us:

How did it get so late so soon?
It’s night before its afternoon.
December is here before its June.
My goodness how the time has flewn.
How did it get so late so soon?

Published on:

By

Around this time every year, you typically see an abundance of articles in the trades making predictions about what the FCC will do in the coming year. It has become such a rite of the new year that I’ve even joked about it in past posts.

This year, however, I have noticed much less predictive commentary about the FCC, and it isn’t hard to understand why. 2014 is so far looking like a “to be continued” year, forcing FCC soothsayers to concede that it’s hard to say precisely how 2014 will differ markedly from 2013 at the FCC.

For example, 2014 was originally supposed to be the Year of the Broadcast Spectrum Incentive Auction. However, after the confusion surrounding the federal Affordable Care Act website demonstrated that “set a deadline to launch and it will surely be figured out by then” might not be the optimal approach to complex government projects, Chairman Wheeler agreed with much of the broadcast industry that it will take more time to get such a complicated undertaking right. As a result, he announced last month that the auction is now likely a mid-2015 event. While buying health insurance is indeed complicated, it is ditch-digging compared to designing the Broadcast Spectrum Incentive Auction (official motto: “The Broadcast Spectrum Auction–Making quantum mechanics look easy since 2010”).

Similarly, Chairman Wheeler also last month took media ownership proposals being considered internally at the FCC under the prior Chairman off the table in order to give a “fresh look” at the FCC’s media ownership rules. By statute, the FCC is required to review its media ownership rules every four years and eliminate any that are no longer in the public interest. The tabled proposals were part of the still-in-process 2010 quadrennial review, increasing the likelihood that the 2010 proceeding will now be rolled into the 2014 quadrennial review (official motto: “It’s 2014 already?”).

So does this mean 2014 will be boring for media watchers? Not at all. First, one reason for the dearth of breathless predictions is the relatively recent arrival of Chairman Wheeler. A new Chairman can bring many surprises, and as he has succeeded so far in holding many of his cards close to his vest, it’s too early to tell just what all may be on his 2014 wish list. What he will do in 2014 therefore remains more a matter of speculation than prediction, leading many prognosticators to hold back for the moment.

Second, even if 2014 ends up being a quiet year of incremental change at the FCC, there is plenty to keep things interesting on the media front outside of the FCC. First and foremost, last week’s announcement that the Supreme Court is jumping into the Aereo fray ensures that there will be some dramatic developments in 2014. Similarly, the 2014 elections promise to be a significant event for many media outlets, both in terms of bringing political ad dollars through the door while affecting the political balance of a Congress that has promised a rewrite of the Communications Act of 1934 in the next few years.

While such events will create an interesting 2014 regardless of what the FCC has on its menu, it’s meeting the daily deadlines that keeps media businesses going, and meeting the legal deadlines that keep broadcasters in particular operating. For example, while the state by state radio license renewal application filing cycle concludes in 2014, the TV renewal cycle continues on throughout this year and into 2015.

One way, however, that 2014 will differ from 2013 is that October 1, 2014 marks the every-three-years deadline for TV stations to send their must-carry/retransmission consent elections to cable and satellite carriers. Given the growing importance of retrans dollars for broadcasters, and the fact that, at least with regard to cable, a failure to make an election results in a default election of must-carry, these elections are critically important (in contrast, note that failure to send an election to DirecTV or Dish leads to the opposite result, a default election of retransmission consent, just to make it as confusing as possible).

To help broadcasters navigate the less-exciting but still critically important deadlines that keep their licenses intact, at the end of 2013 we published the 2014 edition of our annual Broadcasters’ Calendar. It can be found on the right side of the CommLawCenter main page, as well as at the Communications Publications section of Pillsburylaw.com.

Also, to stay up to date on industry events, keep an eye on our main page Interactive Calendar, as we upload numerous 2014 industry events, including NAB shows, state broadcasters associations conventions, and Pillsbury seminars and webinars on a variety of communications-related subjects. Predicting may be more fun, but knowing your regulatory deadlines keeps the lights on. Regardless, as 2014 reveals itself, I have little doubt that there will be a lot to talk about, and make predictions about, here at CommLawCenter.

Published on:

By

As our own Lauren Lynch Flick reported last month, the deadline for commercial broadcast stations to file their biennial ownership reports with the FCC, which the FCC in August moved from November 1st to December 2nd, and then in November moved from December 2nd to December 20th, has now been moved up, but just by a little.

In a Public Notice released today, the FCC announced that:

The Media Bureau previously issued an order granting requests to extend the 2013 biennial ownership report filing deadline to December 20, 2013. Subsequently, a power outage of the FCC headquarters building’s electrical systems, as required by the District of Columbia Fire Code, was scheduled. The Commission’s systems, including CDBS, will become unavailable after business hours on the evening of the filing deadline. The outage is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. on December 20, 2013. Filers must complete electronic filing of their 2013 biennial Ownership Report for Commercial Broadcast Stations prior to that time to comply with the filing due date.

Because the FCC’s website has been known to struggle on days where large numbers of filings are due, broadcasters should generally avoid filing documents on their due date unless there is good reason to do so. However, one benefit of electronic filing has been the ability to file after normal business hours, when traffic on the FCC’s filing databases eases. That will not be possible this year, and for those on the West Coast, the 7 p.m. (Eastern) deadline means that they will need to get their ownership reports on file by 4 p.m. Pacific time, before their business day actually ends.

As a result, broadcasters will need to be extra vigilant this year to ensure that they don’t find themselves trying to file their ownership reports late in the day on December 20th, only to realize that the FCC’s filing system is moving at the speed of molasses from the high volume of filers. When the lights go out at the FCC on December 20th, so will your chance of a timely filing.

Published on:

By

A few minutes ago, the FCC released an Order extending the December 2, 2013 deadline for commercial broadcast stations to file their biennial ownership reports to December 20, 2013. The extension is meant to respond to the fact that the FCC took its website (including the Consolidated Database System used for preparing and filing reports and applications) offline during the October government shutdown. Because of this, broadcasters were prevented from preparing their voluminous ownership reports until the FCC reopened and the website was reactivated.

Since the biennial ownership report requires filers to provide their ownership information as it existed on October 1, 2013, broadcasters normally have sixty days after the October 1 reporting date to prepare and submit their reports. By extending the deadline to December 20, the FCC is seeking to maintain that sixty day preparation period.

Noncommercial broadcasters whose biennial ownership reports are due on December 2, 2013 (radio stations licensed to communities in Alabama, Connecticut, Georgia, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Rhode Island and noncommercial television stations licensed to communities in Colorado, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota) should be aware that this extension does not apply to noncommercial ownership reports. Barring further action by the FCC, noncommercial stations in the listed states should continue to plan on filing their ownership reports by the current December 2, 2013 deadline.

Published on:

By and

This morning, the FCC’s proposal to eliminate the UHF Discount was published in the Federal Register, establishing the comment and reply comment dates for that proceeding. Comments are due December 16, 2013, and reply comments are due January 13, 2014.

Under current law, no individual or entity is permitted to hold an interest in broadcast TV stations that, in the aggregate, reach more than 39 percent of U.S. television households. While this if often shorthanded as “no broadcast group can reach more than 39% of the population”, the rule is actually more restrictive than that. Since it applies not just to broadcast groups but to individuals, the rule prohibits an investor from holding 5% of the voting stock of two different TV groups if those otherwise unconnected groups’ stations together reach more than 39% of the population. Similarly, the rule would be violated if an individual served as a director for both companies.

Fortunately, the rule’s impact on broadcast investment has been lessened by the FCC’s UHF Discount, under which the FCC counts only half of the population in a station’s market towards the 39% cap if the station operates on a UHF channel (14-51) rather than on a VHF channel (2-13). Because most digital television stations operate on UHF channels, the practical effect has been to permit a group or individual to hold interests in TV stations located in markets representing more than 39% of the population (note, however, that the rule still counts every TV household in the market against the 39% cap, even where the station does not actually serve those households with an over-the-air signal).

The FCC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to eliminate the UHF Discount on the theory that while UHF stations had weaker coverage than VHF stations in an analog world, VHF frequencies are not well suited to digital transmissions, and it is now VHF stations that are suffering from poor coverage. That is accurate, but it would seem to be an argument for also creating a VHF Discount rather than eliminating the UHF Discount. While it is true that the FCC provided UHF stations with an opportunity to increase their operating power in transitioning to digital television if they could do so without creating interference to other stations, the guiding principal of making channel allotments in the DTV transition was replicating analog service areas, meaning that UHF analog stations were given digital allotments replicating their flawed analog coverage.

Oddly, however, the NPRM looks past that history, focusing instead on the fact that UHF stations and VHF stations are now much more equivalent because of VHF’s digital woes. While the 39% ownership cap, and how it is calculated, may well merit revisiting, the NPRM explicitly makes the decision to forego an examination of the 39% cap and how compliance with that cap should be calculated, and instead limits the FCC’s review to whether the UHF Discount should be eliminated.

In his dissent to the NPRM, FCC Commissioner Pai noted this fact, chiding the FCC for putting on its regulatory blinders while plunging ahead on the UHF Discount:

[B]ecause we are proposing to end the UHF discount, we should ask whether it is time to raise the 39 percent cap. Indeed, this step is long overdue notwithstanding any change to the UHF discount. The Commission has not formally addressed the appropriate level of the national audience cap since its 2002 Biennial Review Order, and it has been nearly a decade since the 39 percent cap was established. The media landscape has changed dramatically in the many years since. I’ve spoken a lot about the importance of reviewing our rules to keep pace with changes in technology and the marketplace, and I wish today’s item had done so with respect to this issue in a comprehensive manner.

Like the story of the blind men and the elephant, the FCC’s NPRM thrusts out its hand, touching only one aspect of the FCC’s ownership rules, and risks discovering later that there is much more to the elephant than its tail.

Published on:

By

A few moments ago, on its own motion, the FCC released an Order extending the 2013 deadline for commercial radio and television stations (including Class A and LPTV stations) to file their biennial ownership reports with the FCC. The reports, which are normally due on November 1 of odd-numbered years, must include ownership information that is accurate as of October 1 of that year.

Because of today’s Order, however, the 2013 commercial ownership reports will be due on December 2, 2013 (December 1 is a Sunday). Despite the delayed filing date, the FCC indicates that the reports should still contain information that was accurate as of October 1, 2013.

Today’s move by the FCC is hardly unprecedented. When the FCC first implemented a uniform biennial ownership report filing deadline for commercial stations in 2009, it ended up extending the deadline a number of times because of issues related to the new reporting form, etc. Ultimately, the deadline for 2009 reports fell on July 8, 2010, creating a fair amount of confusion for station owners who had bought their stations between November 2009 and July 2010, and therefore found themselves filing ownership reports certifying as to the ownership structure of the prior station owner.

In 2011, the FCC delayed the ownership report filing deadline by just thirty days. The short delay, along with growing familiarity with the revised reporting form, resulted in a much smoother reporting process in 2011.

Now, explaining the need for an extension in 2013, the FCC states that “we are aware that some licensees and parent entities of multiple stations may be required to file numerous forms and the extra time is intended to permit adequate time to prepare such filings. We believe it is in the public interest to provide additional time to ensure that all filers provide the Commission with accurate and reliable data on which the Commission may rely for research and other purposes.” Despite the extension, the FCC is still encouraging licensees to file their ownership reports as early as possible.

While it is starting to look like these biennial extensions are becoming the norm given the complexity of reporting various ownership structures on the current form, it is risky for stations to start assuming that the deadline will always be extended. It would therefore be helpful if the FCC would permanently change the deadline so that licensees know they will always have sixty days to create and file the various biennial ownership reports required. Alternatively, the reporting form and process could be simplified so that completing the filing within 30 days would not be so difficult. Given the challenge that would present to the FCC, however, we may be seeing more of these ownership reporting extensions in the future.

Published on:

By

Recently, TVNewsCheck.com ran a short item noting that a large broadcast group (not a network owned and operated group) and a large multichannel video distributor (MVPD) successfully concluded carriage negotiations. There was no interruption of service. Given the successful outcome, I was surprised to see that someone posted a comment regarding the piece saying the deal illustrates why the FCC should tighten its broadcast ownership rules. No matter how many times I read comments of this sort, I am perplexed that people actually believe it’s a good thing for the government to mandate that broadcasters be the underdogs in all major negotiations that impact the quality and availability of broadcasters’ programming. If anything, government policy should encourage broadcasters to grow to a scale that is meaningful in today’s complex television marketplace. Not one of the other major distributors makes its programming available for free.

If independent (non-O&O) broadcasters aren’t permitted to achieve a scale large enough to negotiate effectively with upstream programmers and downstream distributors, you won’t have to wait long see high cost, high quality, high value programming available for free to those who choose to opt out of the pay TV ecosystem. It’s much better to have two, three or four strong competitors in each market, owned by companies that can compete for rational economics in the upstream and downstream markets, than to have eight or more weak competitors, few of which can afford to invest in truly local service or negotiate at arms-length with program suppliers and distributors.

For those who have not been paying attention, the television market has changed profoundly in the past 20 years. The big programmers and the big MVPDs have gotten a whole lot bigger. The largest non-O&O broadcast groups have grown too, but not nearly as much. Fox, Disney/ABC, NBCU and the other programmers are vastly bigger companies with incomparable market power vis-a-vis even the largest broadcast groups. The same is true of the large MVPDs, which together serve the great majority of television households.

There’s nothing inherently bad about big content aggregators and big MVPD distributors. And anyway, they are a fact of life. Despite their size, each is trying to deliver a competitive service and deliver good returns for shareholders. That’s what they are supposed to do, and in general (with a few exceptions) they serve the country well. But again, they are much, much larger than even the largest broadcast groups. If you believe that having a viable and competitive free television option is a good thing, that’s a problem.

So in response to the suggestion that the FCC further limit the scale of broadcasters, I reply: why does the government make it so damn hard for the only television service that is available for free to bargain and compete with vastly larger enterprises that are comparatively unregulated?

Continue reading →