Mediacom Fleshes Out 'Cooling Off' Retrans Talk Proposal; NAB Continues ATVA War of Words

company made suggestions for changes to the totality of circumstances test of good-faith retrans talks (see 1512020029). In the filing, Mediacom urged the FCC to consider a rule wherein not agreeing to extend an expiring agreement -- short of talks being at an impasse -- is evidence of bad-faith negotiating, while an impasse declaration would trigger a 60-day cooling off in which the existing arrangement stays in place and the multichannel video programming distributor could arrange for a substitute station. During that cooling off, refusing to submit to a fast track mediation would be presumptively bad faith, Mediacom said. It also suggested an alternative wherein the cooling off period/mediation requirement kicks in 90 days before the expiration date, with mediation required if no agreement is reached during the first 30 days of that 90-day period. Mediacom also detailed its suggestions that insisting on a contract expiration date that differs from the end of the three-year retrans consent cycle should be a presumptive violation of good-faith negotiation, and its proposal that the agency adopt a rule requiring a bargaining party to give a reason -- and substantiation for that reason -- for rejecting the other side's offer. And it suggested the FCC adopt a rule making it a presumptive good-faith violation to refuse to negotiate for retrans consent on a local station or local system basis. That "would mitigate a station group's ability to use the leverage it has ... to bring up the price obtained for less valuable properties," Mediacom said. Its representatives at the meeting included General Counsel Joseph Young. In a separate filing Friday in the docket, NAB fired back at American TV Alliance proposals (see 1602190044) for retrans consent rules. "The more ATVA objects to criticisms that pay TV providers’ primary goal in this proceeding is to lower their programming costs, the more glaringly apparent that goal becomes," NAB said. "We can think of no instance in which the Commission, of its own volition, has injected itself into the marketplace in the manner that ATVA and pay TV providers desire; namely, to purposefully reduce the ability of one industry to compete in the marketplace in a manner that will serve the profit-minded interests of another industry." In a statement, ATVA said, "The evidence here speaks for itself. When broadcasters charge crazy prices for their supposedly 'free' signals, our members have to pass that on to viewers. If new FCC rules provide some relief, our members can, too.”