Cable Rejects Low-Power TV Must Carry
Time Warner, CVS, NCTA Argue Against Mandatory Distribution Of Class-A Stations
By Ted Hearn -- Multichannel News, 7/31/2008 4:12:00 PM
Washington -- Cable operators are rejecting a proposal by Federal Communications Commission chairman Kevin Martin that would allow hundreds of local TV stations to demand cable carriage for the first time.
Martin has endorsed new rules that would require cable operators to distribute so-called Class A stations, which operate at low power and have very limited mandatory cable access today.
Martin, who has not teed the issue up for a vote, is hoping that cable carriage will increase the value of Class A stations, making it easier for them to raise capital to finance their upgrades to all-digital transmission.
But the cable industry claims the FCC isn't empowered to help Class A stations in the manner Martin wants.
“[Federal law] unambiguously precludes granting full must-carry rights to Class A stations,” Time Warner Cable said in comments filed Wednesday at the FCC.
NCTA and Cablevision Systems Corp. joined Time Warner in arguing that the FCC has no authority from Congress to act on behalf of Class A stations and that placing further demands on cable bandwidth to accommodate TV stations would violate the First Amendment.
“NCTA has long supported efforts to promote diversity in the communications arena. But forcing cable carriage of all Class A low-power television stations is not the way to achieve that goal, and Congress has not given the FCC authority to do so,” NCTA said in its FCC comments.
All 1,756 full-power TV stations, commercial and noncommercial, have a legal right to demand cable carriage under a 1992 law upheld by the Supreme Court and celebrated by the National Association Broadcasters.
The NAB -- which represents hundreds of full-power independent affiliates of ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox -- filed comments at the FCC, but it was silent on questions related to mandatory carriage of Class A stations.
“NAB did not address the low-power TV issue, because our board has not taken a formal position on it,” said NAB spokesman Kris Jones.
Amy Brown, executive director and secretary of the Community Broadcasters Association, the trade group for low-power TV stations, said she had “no clue” why NAB didn't toss its support behind its low-power brethren.
“Maybe it's competition in the marketplace for ad dollars or dominance. Maybe just plain arrogance,” Brown said.
The country's 556 Class A stations do not have cable carriage rights except in limited circumstances in some of the most rural parts of the country. Low-power TV signals travel about 20 miles compared with full-power signals whose range extends as far as 80 miles.
Although full-power stations need to cut over to all-digital transmission on Feb. 17, 2009, low-power stations are not legally beholden to the same deadline.
In February, NAB created a low-power TV committee after Martin realized that potentially millions of digital-to-analog TV converter boxes being subsidized with federal tax money would not pass-through analog signals, cutting off low-power TV stations from their audience.
To help solve the problem, Martin urged cable operators to carry 2,800 low-power TV stations on a voluntary basis where capacity was available.
-
Low power stations were designed to give communities a local voice in the market that cannot be accomplished by full power stations. Cable companies should be required to carry LPTV stations. With digital channels, bandwidth is not as big of an issue unless the customer is watching it. The FCC needs to go against cable in favor of the local programmers (both low power and local access channels) in order to preserve the localism necessary in our communities.
David Croyle - 8/3/2008 12:09:00 AM EDT -
This looks like another step by the current FCC/Administration to favor the right wing religious broadcasters, who dominate use of low power tv outlets. Maybe the Republican commissioners will push it through, but it's mainly looks like an over-reach by an FCC commissioner trying to set up his future political career, at the expense of the TV industry.
Jim OBrien - 8/1/2008 2:13:00 PM EDT -
The United States has approximately 550 Class A stations, not 2,800. About 150 already have cable carriage. This proposal would only affect around 400 stations. It would definitely provide MORE diversity and MORE localism. A small group controls the majority of the cable systems. Many own 49% of the channels, the legal limit, and have sweetheart deals with the rest. This has created a monopoly of power in the cable industry causing the death of diverse news and destroying communities’ local voices. The argument from the cable industry and existing cable channels is rubbish. Nowhere in The Federal Code of Regulations does it state that Class A stations cannot have cable carriage or the FCC cannot mandate their carriage on cable systems. “Violation of free speech†- more rubbish. The frequencies used by cable companies are owned by the public and federally licensed by the FCC to the cable operator, a fact the cable industry would like to ignore. Therefore cable systems ARE subject to FCC regulations. A violation of free speech would pertain to the content on a cable channel, not the system as a whole. Carriage of Class A stations will not cause any hardship to the cable industry or existing cable channels. It would definitely provide MORE diversity and MORE localism.
Frederick St. John - 8/1/2008 11:29:00 AM EDT -
Why cable? Full-power stations will have multiple digital channels available for use. Why not require each of them to use some of their new channel capacity to broadcast the low-power stations in their area? Seems as logical and justifiable as requiring cable operators to use their channel capacity.
Bobby J. - 8/1/2008 10:19:00 AM EDT -
It's time for the Government to insure everyone is treated equally. If the FCC granted a license to operate on any TV channel, it should insure that the local cable company carries it. The FCC granted the license for the station to serve the needs of the community, reguardless of the license class, therefore, the cable industry should carry every licensed operator.
C. C. Willwerth - 8/1/2008 9:46:00 AM EDT
Low-Power TV Trade Group Shuts Down
08/13/2009For Cable, 9/11 Might Become Kevin/Eleven
02/10/2010Cable: No LPTV Must-Carry
08/03/2008Comcast Fighting Must-Carry For Class A
10/08/2008
