Martin Tees Up Multicast Must-Carry FCC Item, Lacking Unanimous Support
FCC Chmn. Martin is circulating an order on the 8th floor to mandate multicast must-carry that could be placed on the open meeting agenda as soon as next month, said sources. The order would reverse a previous Commission vote (CD Feb 11/05 p1) that said cable operators don’t need to carry all of broadcasters’ DTV streams beyond the primary one, according to a partial draft provided to us late Tues.
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.
Martin is relying on the support of Robert McDowell, whose nomination as 5th commissioner was cleared by the Senate last week, said industry sources. But at least one other commissioner doesn’t support the item being circulated, said a source. Comrs. Adelstein and Copps have said they'd revisit multicast must-carry rules only if public interest obligations were discussed (CD April 27 p9). Officials in Copps and Comr. Tate’s offices didn’t comment by press time. An aide to Copps declined comment.
The multicast item could be postponed until the July FCC agenda meeting because it would be “unusual” for a commissioner to vote on such a controversial item after just days on the job, said sources. Martin could nix the item entirely if he won’t get a unanimous vote, a strategy he’s taken with a split Commission. A spokeswoman for Martin declined comment.
The must-carry item seeks public comment on how broadcasters and cable should follow the rule and whether cable operators or their customers should pay for set top boxes. “We're encouraged by reports that Chairman Martin is revisiting” the subject, the NAB said. NCTA renewed its opposition. “The FCC already has twice rejected a multicasting mandate,” said a spokesman for the group: “No new evidence has been presented that justifies a different result.”