Mitchell Presses FCC for Clarification on Content Rules
UNIVERSAL CITY, Cal. -- The lack of concrete FCC content rules continues to create an air of unease for PBS’s local stations, PBS CEO Pat Mitchell told TV critics here Sat. When the pubcaster sends out programs to its 170 licensees, she said, “we are sending out the version that we think complies with the guidelines as best we understand them. And the chilling effect that we're all worried about is exactly that; when they're not hard and fast and totally clear-cut, you do find yourself making decisions, second-guessing. And we do worry about that, along with our producers.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
When PBS sends out programs it believes comply with FCC guidelines, it’s still up to the local station to decide whether or not to air it if worries about fines, Mitchell said: “These regulations regarding obscenity and guidelines, in terms of standards, I hope will get further clarified. And PBS has joined a suit asking for that. We're a party to a petition to the FCC, that includes a lot of other broadcasters, asking for a review of this so that it doesn’t have the impact we've been discussing this morning.”
Despite frustration over the FCC’s moving target, Mitchell said, PBS never felt ideological pressure to change content: “There has gratefully always been this firewall between [PBS and] whoever was up on Capitol Hill, whether it was Democrats or Republicans. And if you look at our federal appropriations, they've been inching up for the last 5 years, and we've pretty much had the same party in power. And I also, by the way, don’t think that policy-makers in this country would think of mounting any kind of assault against public broadcasting because the local roots of this system are so strong, and it was so soundly defeated the last time it was tried. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting -- since they get the federal money and not us -- they really do represent the firewall.”
While the broadcast networks continue to seek extensions for the analog turn-off, Mitchell said she’s looking forward to the transition: “The one thing that we know is that PBS and the 170 public television licensees around this country are well-positioned in a couple of ways to move into this digital future and to claim leadership there and to provide some new services… Stations are already using the digital technology to get new education services to schools, to provide new community partnerships and civic space. And we're even piloting a Homeland Security enterprise where public broadcasting could become the new digital emergency alert system.”
In order to get the necessary resources to implement new opportunities, PBS is looking for new approaches, Mitchell said: “There’s going to be an auction of that spectrum. Everybody is laying claim to the proceeds. Is there a way to use that to build a trust fund? Congress is rewriting the Telecommunications Bill. Is there any policy element here that we might pursue that would provide a more sustainable funding model, new funding? This is not in place of appropriations, but in addition to all of our current sources so that we can do these new services. Recognizing that we've been leaving a lot of the philanthropic pie on the table because we had no national fund-raising apparatus or enterprise at all, we have set up the PBS Foundation, which is now working closely with our stations’ fund-raising efforts to identify mega-gifts. And in March, we'll be announcing the first very large gift to the PBS Foundation.”
Asked if HBO’s donation of 3 films crossed any lines, Mitchell termed it a win-win situation. “The upsides are HBO produced 3 fantastic films on subjects of great importance to the American people and to people all over the world: AIDS, genocide and the fear of terrorist attack from a dirty bomb,” she said. “They're giving us the broadcast rights so that we can increase the impact of this top-quality work. And then in addition, because this is what we do best, we will have an after-broadcast town hall discussion produced by WETA and the Council on Foreign Relations, where we'll put experts in the room on each of these subjects and allow the public to hear more, get more information, engage on the subject, and there again add value to the content beyond television. I think there will be more of these innovative partnerships coming forward.”
Mitchell said she hopes to make On Demand a consistent revenue stream: “We are launching a partnership with Comcast, Sesame Workshop, and HIT Entertainment, which… ensures that 2 of our top producers have a place where they can air their great programming that we are no longer airing on PBS, but that they do it with us.” Mitchell said the revenue “will come back to the National Program Service and its stations for the investment that we've made” as well as to the producing partners. While the programs will still be aired free on PBS stations, they will also be available on demand “with a differentiated schedule so they're not competing head to head.” The initial response has been favorable, Mitchell said: “We did a small pilot with Comcast in just, I think, 6 cities. And the demand for the PBS titles among parents went 85% higher than any other title being offered.”
The new technologies have taken on increased importance as the mindset behind corporate sponsorship has changed. Mitchell said PBS is dealing with a sponsorship environment in which media agencies have several options, including product placement on networks that allow it, and creating a whole new series that seems best to position their product: “That’s what we're up against in competing for those same dollars, and those dollars have gotten smaller. These budgets used to be corporate philanthropy budgets. They didn’t come out of advertising budgets; now they do.”
In the end, PBS is trying to position itself for the quickly approaching future, Mitchell said: “I don’t think anything in media is going to be the same 5 years from now but I do think we're going to be in a good position. One thing is for sure: None of us is going to be just broadcasters. Consumers are going to be looking at some menu, deciding what they're going to watch, when they're going to watch it, whether they're going to watch it on their PC, their television, their Blackberry, their phone and whether they're going to watch it in 10 minutes, 15 minutes, or 40 minutes… That’s a world happening right now. We want to make sure we're there anytime, anywhere.” -- Valerie Milano
TV Critics Notebook
CBS Chmn. Les Moonves denied his network is feeling any chilling effect from recent FCC rulings: “Obviously, we're still very upset with the FCC’s treatment of us. We are refusing to pay the fine and are pursuing that.” According to Moonves, the FCC “hasn’t sent any guidelines of content. We have told our producers, ‘Let’s not be stupid,’ but we are not changing content and are doing business as usual.” Responding to questions about the report on events surrounding 60 Minutes’ story on President Bush’s National Guard service, Moonves stood firm on his decision not to fire news chief Andrew Heyward but said the incident has forced the network to review long-held practices: “Perhaps they've relied on tradition. But it’s a different world than it was when Walter Cronkite was sitting behind the desk. It’s clearly time to redefine what network news is.” To that end, Moonves said the day of the single anchor may be drawing to a close. “Rather and Brokaw retiring gives us an opportunity. How do we make the news more relevant? Instead of voice of God or the lone guy preaching from the mountain, we need to try something different. Maybe it is reinventing the wheel.”