Blitzing the Statehouses
NFL Network Goes Local in Its Push For Cable Carriage
By R. Thomas Umstead & Linda Haugsted -- Multichannel News, 11/11/2007 7:00:00 PM
With a week to go before it kicks off its second season of live National Football League game telecasts — and with no resolution for its distribution woes in sight — NFL Network is hoping to score carriage wins in state legislatures.
Lawmakers in at least four states have either offered or threatened to introduce bills that would either force carriage disputes between cable networks and operators in front of an arbitrator.
With both sides unwilling to budge from positions — NFL Network wants basic-cable distribution; Comcast, Time Warner and Cablevision Systems want to place the 24-hour national sports network on a sports tier — NFL Network executives say a legislative end run maybe the only course of action that will settle the dispute fairly.
The network will air live the Nov. 22 Indianapolis Colts-Atlanta Falcons game — the first of eight live pro-football telecasts on Thursday and Saturday nights this season. Its last game of the year (Dec. 29) features the New York Giants and so-far-unbeaten New England Patriots.
“That's what's going to solve this [dispute],” NFL Network communications director Seth Palansky said of the political process.
“You can't have a negotiation with Comcast, Time Warner and Cablevision when they own content and the pipe [and] they're not interested in fair business,” Palansky said. “Arbitration is a huge risk, but that's the place where this has to be solved.”
In Texas, state Sen. Kim Brimer (R-Fort Worth) and state Rep. Corbin Van Arsdale (R-Houston) have threatened to introduce consumer-focused legislation during the state's next legislative session that would at a minimum establish a “third-party dispute resolution process” concerning cable programming.
Brimer, in a press release, pointed to carriage disputes pitting such sports networks as NFL Network and the mtn: Mountain Sports Network, owned by the college-sports Mountain West Conference, against cable operators such as Time Warner Cable and Comcast.
“Cable companies need to focus on giving their customers what they want — which is football — and they need to come to grips with the fact customers are paying enough already,” Brimer said in a statement. “Asking them to pay an extra $10 a month to see the most popular events on television is ridiculous.”
In Illinois, state Sen. Dale Risinger (R-Peoria) last week introduced legislation dubbed “The Fair Access and Independent Resolution Act (FAIR Act)” in which an arbitrator would solve disputes between program providers and cable companies that own channels competing with said providers. According to the legislation, the arbitrator would select between the competing proposals for carriage.
“Illinois citizens have become frustrated with the stalemate between Insight and Comcast and independent channels NFL Network and Big Ten Network,” Risinger said. “This legislation is about standing up for the fans and for cable consumers.”
Wisconsin state Sen. Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay) and Rep. Kitty Rhoades (R-Hudson) also announced plans to introduce the Badger state's own “Fair Access to Networks” (FAN) legislation.
The FAN legislation will establish a dispute-resolution system to allow an independent arbiter to select between the competing proposals for carriage.
“There is no reason that all Wisconsin fans should not be able to see the Wisconsin-Ohio State game or the Packers-Cowboys game in November. While the cable companies and the sports networks continue their dispute, Wisconsin's sports fans continue to lose,” said Hansen. “By setting up a fair and neutral arbitration system, we can put an end to this fight and give consumers access to the networks they want.”
But a bill in Ohio calling for outside arbitration in carriage disputes was derailed.
HB 377, which would have given program providers the ability to submit a case for commercial arbitration 90 days after a request for carriage, was not referred to committee during the state House of Representatives' Nov. 7 session — the first step in the consideration process.
The Ohio bill could still be considered in 2008, during the second session of the House, Ohio Cable Telecommunications executive director Johnathon McGee said, but House Speaker Jon Husted (R-Kettering) has publicly stated a preference for not interfering in commercial contracts.
Palansky was confident the Ohio bill would move forward. “It was never intended to happen this year,” he said.
No related content found.
VIEW ALL GALLERIES
