Americans have long recognized the value of broadcast TV stations and their significant contributions to local communities.

Yet, imagine a world where your primary news source is dominated by national pay-TV networks. A consolidation and concentration of news eliminating the ability of television viewers in small town USA to turn to their trusted local TV broadcasters for breaking news, severe weather updates, school closings and emergency alerts and warnings.

Could this possibly happen?

That’s what’s at stake as Congress looks to modernize the nation’s communications laws for the 21^st century.

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.

Daily reminders of the irreplaceable value of local broadcast TV are a constant.  This past month, TV reporters risked life and limb to provide 24/7 boots-on-the-ground coverage of several snowstorms that brought bone-chilling temperatures and record-setting snowfall levels to the Northeastern region of the country.  New England has been characterized as the “Ice Box of America” with parts of Massachusetts and Maine recording more than 100 inches of snow in the past month.  Television viewers impacted by these deadly storms were able to stay informed and take actions to ensure their safety.

The inherent value of broadcasters extends beyond lifeline reporting to the very communities they serve.  Local TV stations help create 1.5 million jobs nationwide, contribute more than $730 billion in annual Gross Domestic Product and generate millions annually in fundraising efforts.  A recent fundraiser by Raycom Media-owned NBC affiliates in Mississippi raised $218,000 for long-term rebuilding and recovery initiatives following deadly tornadoes that ripped through the central portion of the state last December.

Univision recently raised $15.5 million in just two days for children with life-threatening or debilitating diseases.  The “Hearts for People” telethon broadcast last December in major cities across the country will help more than 600 children in 38 states.  Examples of these altruistic contributions by broadcasters are endless.

Broadcast TV covered the social unrest following the Ferguson Verdict, and also gave voice to the peaceful political protests that followed in cities across the country.  The public megaphone of broadcast TV helped carry the voice of the community to local governments, creating opportunities for community activists to meet with local city police officials to discuss their public safety concerns.

Investigative reporting by local TV stations is an ongoing commitment and on any given day reporters across the country are working to uncover serious problems that could impact their viewers.  Take for example the recent investigative series by ABC News 7 (KGO-TV) in San Francisco focusing on complaints by Covered California patients who are alleging that the physician networks offered by participating insurance companies are inadequate and are jeopardizing their ability to access quality health care.  The California Department of Managed Health Care is investigating the matter.

Historically, the powerful reach and influence of local broadcast TV has served as a change agent for those seeking to voice their concerns and advance social progress. Given its integral role in American culture, local broadcast TV empowers citizens to stand up for what they believe in and it helps to serve as a bridge between the public and government on the key societal and political issues of the day.

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.  After all, local TV stations rely not only on advertising sales to sustain their business, but revenue generated from programming deals reached with pay-TV providers to redistribute their content via retransmission consent.

Washington’s pay-TV lobby falsely claims that it’s broadcast TV programming fees that are driving up the cost of paid television service, but in reality these costs remain a small fraction of what customers pay for on their monthly bills.

It’s Congress that will decide whether to allow TV broadcasters to continue to freely negotiate with pay-TV providers for the fair market value of their content.

The ability of local broadcast TV stations to serve our nation’s local communities rests on the existence of viable revenue streams that Congress has traditionally made available to promote local television service.  Compromising the ability of local TV stations to compete for such revenue streams would create a regulatory imbalance that would threaten the unique benefits of localism and ultimately jeopardize the future of local broadcast TV.

Are federal regulators prepared to set a bright regulatory line for their engagement in what today are otherwise recognized as highly successful private business negotiations between companies?  For the sake of local communities across America, let’s hope not.

Kenny is director of Public Affairs for TVfreedom.org, a coalition of local broadcasters, community advocates, network TV affiliate associations and other independent organizations advocating for preserving the retransmission consent regime. He is a former press secretary at the FCC.

See original post on The Hill’s Congress Blog.

Read More

Congress must explore consumer impact before deciding fate of basic tier

By Robert C. Kenny | February 11, 2015

In the coming weeks the US House Energy and Commerce Committee is expected to unveil a comprehensive legislative package of video reforms meant to update the nation’s Communications Act to reflect a modern and robust marketplace that, over the past decade, has been built on a healthy array of digital and high-speed broadband platforms.

The Committee is centering its focus on changes to the regulatory regime for video services that hinge on greater consumer access, choice and affordability to the television programming they prefer to watch through this expanding collection of service options. There is also concern in some sectors of industry that many of the local market rules that now exist to ensure consumers’ access to local broadcast TV programming are “outdated” and in need of an overhaul in today’s marketplace.

Lawmakers, however, as part of the Communications Act update must ask:

Are the current Congressional rules that help advance localism and preserve cable customers’ ability to access local broadcast TV programming at affordable monthly prices beneficial in today’s marketplace? Given the current state of the US video marketplace and consumer trends, the answer is yes.

In addition to the lifeline reporting that local TV stations provide to America’s television viewers 24/7 in times of emergency, there is a legitimate conversation that must be led by lawmakers and policymakers regarding the economic impact that the elimination of the basic tier will have on the millions of US households that today subscribe to cable TV’s most affordable service option.

Moreover, is cable’s push for elimination of this consumer-friendly policy really warranted in today’s marketplace? The answer is no, particularly in light of cable operators’ continued local market dominance over the nation’s video services. One could argue that elimination of the basic tier provision on cable systems would hurt consumers seeking affordable access to broadcast TV stations, particularly in smaller markets.

Today, a single cable company provides service to 50 to 90 percent of all paid television subscribers in one-quarter of all local television markets in the US.

Yet, despite this continued local market dominance, cable operators are urging Congress to eliminate the rule. The cable industry has failed to provide an adequate justification in the public interest as to why this rule should be eliminated.

By eliminating the basic tier provision, cable operators in effect could remove local broadcast TV stations from the cheapest cable programming package and force low-income households to pay more than three times the amount to get it back as part of more expensive expanded basic or premier programming packages.

In fact, a subscription to the expanded basic cable programming bundle – which is one tier higher than the basic tier – has increased by approximately 188 percent since 1995, further illustrating the tremendous barrier to affordability for seniors on fixed incomes and low-income subscribers who have historically relied on the cable’s basic tier to access local broadcast TV news and programming.

US households that subscribe to cable’s basic tier may not be able to afford higher-priced cable programming packages, nor have affordable alternatives for service in smaller TV markets. This was the basis under which Congress enacted this important consumer protection in the first place.

In fact, cable companies could choose to place local TV stations on separately priced tiers, forcing customers to pay extra for the full complement of local broadcast television and access to diverse local news reporting and real-time emergency alerts and warnings in their communities.

The potential impact on millions of US cable subscribers must be fully explored as part of Congressional efforts to update the Communications Act before a final policy decision is made on the fate of cable’s basic tier.

With more consumers considering cutting the cable cord altogether or choosing more affordable bundled programming packages, the consumer benefits associated with the basic tier have never been more apparent and it remains a viable option for US cable subscribers.

* * * *

Kenny is director of Public Affairs for TVfreedom.org, a coalition of local broadcasters, community advocates, network TV affiliate associations, and other independent organizations. He formerly served as press secretary at the FCC.

Read More

Robert C. Kenny, director of public affairs for TVfreedom.org, writes in Broadcasting & Cable about the importance of local broadcast television in today’s communications ecosystem.  As new technologies continue to change the way Americans watch video programming, broadcasters continue to provide a vital, entertaining and important service to millions of Americans on a daily basis.

Read the full piece here. 

Read More

YouTube Link: Is Local Broadcast TV Dead or Alive? You Make the Call… This new TVFreedom video captures the spirit of the day’s activities during the November 23, 2014 “Broadcast TV Liberation Tour” at Washington, DC’s Eastern Market. More than a thousand enthusiastic DC-area residents came out to the event to experience the power and reach of free, local broadcast TV. As the video illustrates, millions of consumers across America are content with watching broadcast television in their own homes via an antenna on a high-quality picture instead of subscribing to pay-TV service in today’s broadband world. In response to the large crowd that came out to receive a free digital broadcast TV antenna during the event, Richard Schneider, President and founder of Antennas Direct summed it up best, “…there is a demand in the United States for free over-the-air television and as a country we’re actually moving back to over-the-air. What better way to get the word out that this isn’t only vibrant, but that one of the fastest growing products in consumer electronics is over-the-air (broadcast TV).” To view the video, click here.

Read More

TVfreedom.org member, Antennas Direct, has embarked on a bus tour around the country to give away free high-definition antennas to Americans, so that consumers can “cut the cord” and enjoy free, over-the-air broadcast television without subscribing to pay-TV’s monthly stranglehold. See a piece authored by Antennas Direct’s Director of Public Affairs, Jeremy Nulik, about the bus tour’s stop in Toledo, Ohio.

See the full piece here. 

Read More

Just in time for the upcoming holiday season, the poster child of bad pay-TV behavior is up to his usual bully-boy tactics.

Dish Network’s Charlie Ergen, the Sir Charles of TV Blackouts, has blacked out CNN and is now threatening to do the same with the TNT and CBS programming.

Sorry, Sir Charles. America is not that gullible.

There’s a reason Dish subscriber totals have remained flat over the past year, with nearly as many subscribers discontinuing service as those signing up with the satellite provider.  In fact, Dish has experienced a net loss of 16,000 pay-TV subscribers through the first three quarters of 2014.

Dish has joined two other pay-TV companies, Time Warner Cable and DirecTV, to form the American Television Alliance. ATVA’s strategy, led by the big three, is simple — to manufacture as many TV blackouts of both cable networks and local broadcast stations as possible in hopes that Congress will “reform” a system that ATVA’s members have deliberately tried to break.

Case in point, DirecTV is entering into its own programming talks with the AMC network and there is no guarantees that an agreement will quickly be reached between the two companies.

It’s a brazen approach, worthy of three pay-TV companies that annually are rated among the worst companies in America.

ATVA—which should consider changing its name to the American TV Blackout Alliance—has the audacity to profess itself “pro-consumer.”  The ‘big three,’ Dish, DirectTV and Time Warner Cable, have been at the heart of 90% of all retransmission consent disputes with broadcasters alone since January 2013.

Dish’s current programming dispute with Turner Broadcasting, now in its third week, has no clear end in sight.  Also beyond view is any potential relief for Dish customers who must bear the burden of Ergen’s most recent programming blackouts involving CNN, TruTV the Cartoon Network and other channels.

Reports indicate that Dish is also strong-arming Turner Broadcasting by demanding that the video programmer include its most popular cable channels — TNT and TBS — in the current discussions for fair compensation, even though the contract term for those channels has yet to expire with Dish.

According to news reports, retransmission consent talks between Dish and CBS are leading nowhere as well, with only a few short weeks remaining before the contract expires.

Separately, AMC recently felt compelled to take unusual marketing steps to warn DirecTV subscribers, via commercials, that they may lose access to their channel and its popular show “The Walking Dead” if the cable network is unable to successfully negotiate a new programming distribution deal with DirecTV by early December.

The pay-TV linchpin knows exactly what it is doing and their gamesmanship of the system is getting tiresome for their subscribers.

For the sake of American consumers and the continued evolution of the video marketplace, let’s hope that Washington lawmakers and thought-leaders alike see through the American TV Blackout Alliance’s regulatory ploy in programming disputes with cable networks and broadcasters.

There’s no true rationale for rewarding their bad behavior in the marketplace.

Robert C. Kenny is director of Public Affairs for TVfreedom.org, a coalition of local broadcasters, community advocates, network TV affiliate associations and other independent organizations advocating for preserving the retransmission consent regime. He is a former press secretary at the FCC.

Read More

By Robert C. Kenny | November 3, 2014

America’s pay-TV lobby, led by the American Cable Association (ACA) and the American Television Alliance (ATVA), continue their non-stop campaign to distort facts and put forward half-truths in an effort to divert public attention away from runaway programming costs for pay-TV subscribers. Using every means at their disposal, they continue pressuring Washington lawmakers for new laws and policies that would separate out local broadcast TV stations from existing cable package offerings and, instead, would require consumers to purchase these popular local TV channels on an ‘a la carte’ basis.

This is one component of a grand strategy to use government intervention to fundamentally alter the nation’s existing video market in order to provide the pay-TV industry with an irreversible competitive advantage over the broadcast television industry for local advertising dollars. Ironically, their proposal is known as ‘Local Choice.’ The irony lies in the fact that their ‘a la carte’ plan– for broadcast channels exclusively– would ultimately increase the cost for pay-TV subscribers to access nation’s most popular local TV programming and news on cable and satellite TV systems, while forcing them to continue paying for cable channels as part of bundled programming packages.

It is hard to see how this plan would benefit consumers. So then why do pay-TV lobbyists continue to push this agenda? Quite simply, it’s all about profit.

As money making machines, America’s cable and satellite TV companies continue to expand profits and reduce service with precision through extraneous fees and charges that consumers now are all too familiar with on their monthly pay-TV bills.

According to a recently released report from the consulting firm EY, cable will lead the entire media and entertainment industry in 2014 despite declines in subscribers with an eye-popping 41 percent profit margin. The Satellite TV industry is right behind with an expected profit margin of 26 percent.

ACA and ATVA continue to expend a great deal of time and effort arguing that the nation’s most-watched and popular broadcast TV programming on pay-TV will increase from $4.9 billion this year to approximately $9.3 billion in 2020, yet purposely remain silent on the unfathomable expected annual cost increases that will be triggered by cable network programming and regional sports networks. By 2020, cable channel programming and regional sports networks are expected to top $50 billion and $10 billion respectively (based on SNL Kagan projections). These cost increases for less popular cable channels will dwarf those for popular broadcast-TV programming.

Blinded by the potential financial windfall they’ll reap as a result of broadcast-TV-only ‘a la carte’ through increased local advertising dollars, the pay-TV cabal is now engaged in a full-throttled effort to hide this truth from their subscribers. Instead, ACA member cable systems and smaller cable systems like MetroCast Communications, which serves parts of southern Maryland, is now sending letters to subscribers to notify them of increases in broadcast TV programming, but not for the hundreds of less popular cable channels they also pay for. In fact, this week, MetroCast sent a letter to its customers stating that in January 2015 the cost for local broadcast TV stations will increase from $1.50 to $5.05 on their nearly $80 monthly pay-TV bill.

Like other cable and satellite TV providers, MetroCast now itemizes charges for broadcast TV programming on subscribers’ monthly bills, but fails to separate out other programming costs for cable channels. The gamesmanship of the pay-TV cabal can’t be trusted.

Monthly programming costs for cable channels, such as TNT and TBS, among hundreds of others, now approaches $40, and that doesn’t include costs for HBO, Showtime and regional sports networks that subscribers may opt to purchase as part of their pay-TV service. But the pay-TV cabal continues to ignore the growing elephant in the room.

Why haven’t ACA member cable systems addressed the excessive and ever-increasing costs subscribers pay annually in equipment rental fees? Pay-TV consumers now pay an estimated $7 billion annually in equipment rental fees for DVRs and set-top boxes. To put these costs in perspective, the monthly rental fee for one DVR ($12), is three to four times the amount it costs to receive the full complement of local broadcast TV programming from ABC, CBS, Fox and NBC through a pay-TV subscription.

Shouldn’t the pay-TV industry offer subscribers a lease-to-purchase option for DVRs and set-top boxes as part of service contract renewals?

Furthermore, why haven’t cable and satellite TV providers taken any proactive measures to overhaul their truth-in-billing practices for the benefit of customers? For an industry apparently concerned with consumer cost-savings, they could start in their own backyard by implementing a series of necessary reforms to help eliminate billing errors that have plagued pay-TV subscribers for years.

Isn’t it time for a national conversation about what’s really driving up consumers’ monthly cable and satellite TV bills instead of focusing on one aspect of the bill: the cost of broadcast TV?

The pay-TV cabal should be concerned about comprehensive reform in the U.S. video marketplace, instead of attempting to skirt the real issues and distorting the truth.

* * *

Robert C Kenny is the Director of Public Affairs for TVfreedom.org, a coalition of local broadcasters, community advocates, network TV affiliate associations, and other independent organizations; he formerly served as Press Secretary at the FCC.

Read More

Dish is a shining example of the pay-TV industry’s greed-driven culture…

By Robert C. Kenny | October 24, 2014

Dish network, once a new, vibrant upstart in the U.S. video marketplace, is now a satellite television heavyweight, prominently known for poor service and its pervasive lack of concern for its own customers and employees.

Dish regularly generates harsh and unforgiving reactions from its customers and employees. The company’s track record is one of marketplace rule-breaking and misleading promotional tactics. Its behavior exemplifies the pay-TV industry’s penchant for exorbitantly high profits that do nothing to advance the public interest.

As Dish continues to seek statutory and regulatory advantages from both Congress and the FCC, consumers have a right to question whether an entity with a history of a fostering a poor work environment and providing dismal customer service should be granted government favors in the name of competition.

In 2009, 46 state attorneys general forced Dish to pay a $6 million settlement after officials found that the company used “improper” marketing and promotional tactics to sell its products and services. Dish was found guilty of hiding or omitting existing restrictions in satellite TV packages when advertising to potential or current subscribers.

This pay-TV provider has demonstrated a pattern of behavior that underscores an increasing disconnect from its customers in its search for greater profit margin. These actions and similar ones by other pay-TV providers makes clear why broadcast TV stations and cable channels find it increasingly difficult to reach agreement with Dish and others during negotiations for programming rights.

Dish is no stranger to stalled programming disputes that have led to the blackout of broadcast TV stations for their 14 million subscribers. Since January 2013, Dish has been directly involved in one-third of all reported retransmission disputes with broadcasters resulting in TV blackouts.

Moreover, Dish has been squarely in the middle of several programming disputes with cable networks in recent years. A memorable dispute between Dish and the AMC network in 2012 resulted in Dish customers losing access to the America Movie Channel, We TV and IFC for weeks.

Dish’s refusal to compromise continues to this day, evidenced by its ongoing stalemate with Turner Broadcasting over the rights to deliver Turner cable channels, CNN, TruTV, and the Cartoon Network, among others, to its customers. With an important election just days away, the timing of this stalemate couldn’t be worse for millions of Dish subscribers who may enjoy watching CNN for updates and breaking news on political races of importance to them.

Once again, Dish is the primary catalyst in causing TV programming blackouts in the marketplace, emphatically arguing that higher programming costs will be passed along to their customers.

Dish’s dispute with Turner Network could become increasingly heated in the next few weeks when additional stations, TNT and TBS, come up for renewal. While the dispute over rate increases amounts to pennies per customer, it could end up costing Dish subscribers access to NBA basketball games on those stations.

If Dish is really serious about finding cost savings for subscribers, it, along with all pay-TV companies, should give significant consideration to the costly impact excessive equipment rental fees are having on their customers and implement real solutions to reduce this charge and help lower monthly bills.

Dish is a shining example of the pay-TV industry’s greed-driven culture, and it needs to change.

Ironically, the company’s excessive anti-consumer behavior is helping fuel a major new push in Congress that could result in new and stronger consumer protections to guard against the confusing and deceptive billing practices of cable and satellite TV companies in America.

Congress, led by U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), is focused on bringing transparency and fairness to cable and satellite TV billing practices – an outcome that tens of millions consumers will whole-heartedly embrace across America.

Change can be for the better and we look forward to it.

* * *

Robert C Kenny is the Director of Public Affairs for TVfreedom.org, a coalition of local broadcasters, community advocates, network TV affiliate associations, and other independent organizations; he formerly served as Press Secretary at the FCC.

Read More

By Robert C. Kenny | October 16, 2014

The average American consumer spends nearly three hours each day online, including a half-hour devoted exclusively to watching video. 

Not surprisingly, recent studies confirm a strong relationship between television viewing and online video streaming – showing that the nation’s most prolific Internet users also watch the most TV.  Furthermore, an overwhelming majority of consumers strongly value television programming and the ability to watch it on multiple digital platforms. 

Broadcast TV remains among the most popular programming in America on every digital platform. According to Nielsen, the vast majority of video being viewed is professionally created content, like the shows commonly viewed on traditional broadcast TV networks.

These consumer trends present pay-TV companies and content providers – including broadcasters and cable networks – with new opportunities and challenges. Due to tighter household budgets, however, many subscribers find their options for TV severely limited. They have to either sign up for cheaper programming bundles or cut the pay-TV cord altogether. This puts the ball squarely in pay-TV’s court to do more to help consumers going forward.

Coupled with the deployment of revolutionary broadband technology across the nation, these economic pressures are driving rapidly changing viewing preferences. High-speed broadband services have empowered Americans to “cut the cord” and watch the shows they enjoy the most via a combination of free, over-the-air broadcast TV and online services — without being saddled with a $100-plus, per month, cable or satellite TV bill.

With tens of thousands of consumers cutting the pay-TV cord each year, Nielsen has characterized subscriber declines as a “real phenomenon.”

Moreover, a new trend known as “cord-shaving” has emerged among pay-TV subscribers, where consumers opt for smaller bundled programming packages – including affordable online access to specific content.  Based on the latest data, it is clear that a growing number of consumers are signing up for cheaper bundles that cost between $10 and $50, on average, to lower their monthly pay-TV bills.  In fact, $20 basic cable plans that include little more than broadcast and public access channels now account for 12% of pay-TV subscriptions nationwide, up from 8% just a few years ago.

These recent developments have heavily impacted the video marketplace. For example, the top 40 rated cable networks have collectively lost 3.2 million traditional pay-TV subscribers since 2010 due to cord-cutting and cord-shaving. Something has to give, right? No doubt this growing trend imposes significant pressure on pay-TV providers to adapt to this evolution of the video marketplace, not only with regard to subscriber-targeted marketing, but also in efforts to secure precious local advertising dollars in competition with TV broadcasters.

This may help explain why cable lobbyists are trying to persuade Washington lawmakers to eliminate broadcast TV from the lifeline basic service tier, which is the most affordable cable programming package now accessible to subscribers. The basic tier is not the enemy and, in fact, should be embraced by the pay-TV industry.

The basic tier is vastly important, guaranteeing cable subscribers’ access to local broadcast TV news and programming, weather updates and emergency alerts. Eliminating this provision would be extremely detrimental to cable subscribers and ultimately hurt the long-term sustainability of local TV stations in smaller markets that must fight as stand-alone operations against a consortium of big pay-TV companies for advertising sales.

Congress created the lifeline basic service tier to protect consumers’ access to local broadcast TV on cable systems. Given cable’s continued dominance in the majority of local television markets, and the fact that millions of cable subscribers now seek cord-cutting or cord-shaving as a way to lower their monthly bills, now, more than ever, the preservation of broadcast TV stations on cable’s basic tier remains a public necessity.

Instead of focusing on fighting the basic service tier provision on cable systems, the pay-TV industry should instead look inward, and develop new policies and protocols that establish transparency in monthly billing practices and mitigate erroneous charges.

If pay-TV providers were to implement improvements in billing practices, it may actually result in considerable cost savings on customer service expenditures over time, especially if upfront protocols are implemented that effectively identify and correct billing errors on behalf of consumers in the first place.

Hopefully, cable and satellite TV providers are up to the challenge and will move forward with others in Washington to help reshape America’s media landscape for the better. I am sure the American consumer would like to bank on it.

* * *

Robert C Kenny is the Director of Public Affairs for TVfreedom.org, a coalition of local broadcasters, community advocates, network TV affiliate associations, and other independent organizations; he formerly served as Press Secretary at the FCC.

* * *

Please visit the TVfreedom.org YouTube web page to watch consumer-friendly videos aimed at pushing back on the pay-TV industry’s gamesmanship in the marketplace and the ongoing abusive billing and business practices hurting consumers.

Read More

Today, TVfreedom.org Director of Public Affairs Robert C. Kenny writes in Broadcasting & Cable about the disconnect between the current reality of the video marketplace and the state of the regulatory framework crafted by the FCC. Kenny pays special attention to the unfair regulatory advantage that the FCC has given pay-TV over broadcasters with regards to JSAs. An excerpt:

“Government policies help influence the course of the communications industry and its impact on consumers and society at large. We bear witness to how sound regulatory policies, based on a fundamental understanding of markets and consumer preferences, can help foster an environment that enables technological innovation and convergence to drive investment, promote competition and enhance consumer choice.

That’s why it is essential that government action reflects the true state of the marketplace and is supported by a factual foundation that is data-driven and grounded on fact-based analysis. 

Yet, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the independent regulatory agency responsible for guiding communications policy, appears adrift from its traditional moorings of fact-based, data-driven decision-making.”

Read the full piece here.

Read More