Frequently Asked Questions

What is TVfreedom.org and who is involved in it?
What are TVfreedom.org's principles?
Why is this important to consumers?
Why is the retransmission consent debate in Washington, D.C., important to local communities?
Should Congress step in and legislate around TV service disruptions?
Are retransmission consent fees the reason for rising cable bills?
How are broadcasters shaping the future of TV?


WHAT IS TVFREEDOM.ORG AND WHO IS INVOLVED IN IT?

TVfreedom.org is a coalition of local broadcasters, community advocates, network affiliate boards, multicast networks, manufacturers and other independent broadcaster-related organizations. We believe that cable and satellite TV providers should be held accountable for stifling innovation and repeatedly using their own customers as bargaining chips while increasing their record profits. In a fair and free market, programming is accessible and valued.

For a list of our members click here.

Return to Top


WHAT ARE TVFREEDOM.ORG'S PRINCIPLES?

We believe in a robust entertainment market that promotes competition and provides consumers with the cutting-edge local and network programming they love.

We believe in local broadcasting, which provides community-specific, culturally relevant local news, weather and emergency information while offering essential public safety and public health information to local communities.

We believe cable and satellite TV providers should treat all channels fairly – and that programmers should compensate channels based on the ratings, popularity and quality of the programming each channel provides to viewers.

We believe cable and satellite TV providers should stop creating artificial TV blackouts in hopes of persuading policymakers to tilt the negotiation process in their favor. Today, 99% of carriage related negotiations are resolved without programming disruption to consumers.

We believe pay-TV providers should fairly compensate the local broadcast stations and content creators who seek to bring viewers popular TV shows, sports, local news and emergency information.

We believe customers deserve more openness and transparency on their monthly pay-TV bills.

We believe Congress should initiate legislation to advance pay-TV transparency reform, including lawsto protect America’s television viewers from the pay-TV industry’s exploitive billing and business practices.

We believe in a television future that capitalizes on new technologies and the dynamism of the private marketplace to provide TV viewers with the high quality, cutting-edge programming they love.

We believe consumers should get refunds on their monthly bills for programming blackouts created by cable and satellite providers.

We believe that consumers should have real choice in the pay television marketplace, without the burden of onerous early termination fees.

Return to Top


Why is this important to consumers?

Consumers are too often held hostage by the control that powerful pay-TV companies wield over their choices and pricing. Consumers are seeking the freedom and ability to access their favorite television programming at an affordable price. We believe it’s time big pay-TV service providers who are taking advantage of the situation, tell the truth and give consumers the ability to simply watch TV free of their extra fees and threats. The interests of consumers should be a top priority.

Return to Top


Why is the retransmission consent debate in Washington, D.C., important to local communities?

The retransmission revenue that broadcasters receive from pay-TV companies is critical to local newsrooms and public service programming. This investment in technology and personnel ensures that in times of weather emergencies, security threats and other crises, local newsrooms are well equipped to provide accurate and timely information. It was Congress’ foresight that forged a national commitment and set forth policies to ensure that every American has access to diverse local broadcast TV news and opinions, investigative reporting, timely emergency information and a reliable communications medium capable of airing their opinions and advancing the public interest.

For 75 years, TV broadcasters—as trustees of the public airwaves—have served as first-informers in times of disaster and crisis; often representing the only reliable and trusted source for timely, accurate and relevant local news and information. Working hand-in-glove with the nation’s public safety officials, local broadcasters are there when Americans seek critical life-saving information. The power of regional investigative reporting by local broadcasters regarding issues related to health care, consumer fraud and political corruption cannot be dismissed and remains incredibly important to America’s television viewers.

If not for local broadcast TV stations carrying the voice of the community and delivering lifeline reporting to America’s television viewers, then who would serve in this vital role? It is highly unlikely that cable networks could duplicate, with any level of consistency or success, what broadcast TV stations provide to their viewers year round.

As Congress moves forward with its media and video reform agenda, it’s crucial for lawmakers to factor in what’s needed to help advance the principles of localism for the benefit of America’s television viewers.

Return to Top


Should Congress step in and legislate around TV service disruptions?

No. The current free-market process provides incentives for both parties to come to mutually beneficial arrangements, which is why negotiations are completed with no service interruptions or fanfare the great majority of the time. Many months before a contract expiration, broadcasters typically reach out to pay-TV carriers to begin negotiations. In fact, 99% of carriage related disputes are resolved through good faith negotiations, without service disruption to consumers. In the handful of instances where agreements are not easily reached, there is a distinct pattern: since January 2013, 67 percent of the time, an impasse involves Time Warner Cable, DirecTV or DISH – the same big companies begging for government intervention.

Pay-TV companies have created and are advancing a false political crisis in order to ask Congress and the FCC to create new rules to benefit their bottom line. They claim that broadcast retransmission fees are responsible for higher cable bills. The facts are clear: cable bills have risen faster – sometimes double – the rate of inflation since 1999, long before broadcasters received cash compensation for their signals.

Return to Top


Are retransmission consent fees the reason for rising cable bills?

No. In fact, retransmission consent fees make up only two cents of every dollar for pay-TV provider’s operating costs. The truth is, cable bills have risen faster – sometimes double – the rate of inflation since 1999, long before broadcasters received cash compensation for their signals. Even with record revenues, cable and satellite companies continue to beg Congress to lower their costs in order to increase their profits and stock prices —not to save consumers money.

Return to Top


How are broadcasters shaping the future of TV?

Broadcasters are at the front lines of innovation in the video marketplace. From new, cutting-edge content to emerging technologies, broadcasters are embracing the future of TV, while pay-TV companies are stifling innovation and strong-arming consumers with forced cable packages, early termination fees and other outdated policies in an effort to boost record profits.

For non-pay-TV subscribers, over-the-air broadcasting offers locally-focused news, community reporting, emergency services and sports free of charge. Broadcast content is by far the most popular programming available and one of the biggest draws to pay-TV subscribers. Broadcast-TV programming adds significant value and appeal to the pay-TV consumers’ service experience.

Broadcast program ratings are significantly higher than programming offered by cable channels. With competition at an all-time high and broadcasters leading the way on the cutting-edge programming that is reshaping the TV landscape, now is not the time to eliminate broadcasters’ ability to negotiate fair, market-based compensation with pay-TV providers who resell that broadcast signal as part of their paid television services.

As trustees of the public airwaves and the nation’s trust, broadcasters have spent billions over the years to enable those airwaves to deliver local news and programming to their viewers. It’s because of local TV stations’ commitment to their viewers that broadcast TV has become an irreplaceable communications medium and remains deeply ingrained in American culture.

Return to Top