FCC Seen Balking on Cable Retransmission Consent Gripes
Cable operators are unlikely to get the FCC to change retransmission consent rules, since Chmn. Martin and other officials there think the issue is one for Congress, industry lawyers said. Cable wants to discourage broadcasters from charging for carriage and force them to carry affiliated non- broadcast channels in exchange for carrying over-the-air signals, Howard Barr, American Cable Assn. (ACA) COO Robert Shema and other attorneys said.
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’s priorities don’t include retransmission consent, a lawyer representing large operators said: “The chairman’s office has certain priorities in terms of what he wants to accomplish, and it’s very specifically focused on those kinds of things that get done on a rocket-docket kind of schedule. But if it’s not a priority, it’s not likely to get much movement.” An FCC spokesman declined comment.
Staffers on the 8th floor have said they don’t plan to act on retransmission consent tweaks ACA wants, Shema said: “It was not an issue that was pressing for them, it was an issue that needed to be dealt with in Congress… As you look to the FCC in regards to retransmission consent, we don’t see any relief coming.”
NCTA doesn’t have a position on retransmission consent, said a spokesman. That’s likely because the group’s members include programmers owned by broadcasters, said a lawyer. Cablevision, Charter and Time Warner didn’t respond to requests for their positions on retransmission consent. “Comcast hasn’t taken an active position,” said a spokeswoman, declining further comment. A Cox spokesman said: “We're not commenting about retrans beyond our historical concerns relative to network abuse.” Cox has said broadcasters shouldn’t link the right to carry local content with national non-broadcast networks.
Congress isn’t likely to act anytime soon on cable’s carriage complaints, said a broadcast attorney, echoing cable officials on the improbability of FCC action. “I would expect continued rumblings of Congressional interest,” the lawyer said: “It seems unlikely that Congress will tackle this issue in light of the more pressing issues before them.” The chance of Congress getting involved sooner than next year became nil once a plan by Reps. Bass (R-N.H.) and Deal (R-Ga.) to address cable concerns stalled, lobbyists said (CD May 17 p6).
Another hurdle for cable is continuing Congressional and Commission scrutiny regarding indecency, rising rates, and sports carriage disputes, said pay-TV lawyers and an investor. “The industry just seems to be in the public eye, be it rates or the indecency and obscenity issues [that] have been front and center for a while,” Barr, who represents small cable operators, said: “I don’t see any reason for there to be a letup.” Being in a public hot seat complicates matters for cable, Gabelli Value Fund’s Chris Marangi said: “Partly driven by Kevin Martin’s stance on cable, cable has obviously faced some difficulty on must carry, a la carte, the Adelphia approval -- you name the issue.”
The FCC is unlikely to reset cable system ownership limits before doing so for broadcasters, pay-TV lawyers have said. That could stymie cable operators like Comcast, Marangi said: “Comcast, I'm sure, would like to own the Cablevision systems.” The companies declined comment, and the Dolans haven’t said publicly that Cablevision is for sale. “If the Dolans want an active auction, should they decide to sell the company, Comcast needs to have a free hand from the regulators to bid,” Marangi said: “The clock is ticking at the FCC.”