Broadcasters and multichannel video programming distributors exchanged more words on retransmission consent deals late last week. Mediacom, which has criticized the FCC for not issuing an order changing retrans rules (CD Sept 2 p3), sent a letter to the agency saying broadcasters’ efforts to head off the changes are works of fiction. No retrans order is circulating at the commission, and none seems poised to soon, an agency official said.

Smaller TV stations and multichannel video programming distributors get a break from having to test the noise levels of ads that others insert into shows they carry. MVPDs with fewer than 400,000 subscribers and TV stations with annual sales below $14 million won’t need to regularly test the volume levels of all ads, and only monitor those they insert into programming. Bigger stations and systems would need to do testing to ensure programming from national cable channels or broadcast networks meets the Advanced TV Systems Committee’s A/85 recommended practice for keeping ads not much louder than the regular programming they appear within.

Don’t let multichannel video programming distributors use the FCC’s review of media ownership rules to “import retransmission consent issues” about MVPDs’ deals to carry TV stations, the NAB said. The association defended shared services agreements, which let separately owned TV stations in the same market share news and other services, against continued MVPD criticism of SSAs as letting broadcasters abuse retrans rules. “Recent filings by representatives of the MVPD industry were blatant attempts to use ownership rules to skew retransmission consent negotiations in their favor,” the NAB said. Cable, DBS and telco-TV companies had visited the eighth floor several times in recent weeks (CD Nov 22 p8) to try to get the quadrennial ownership review to further tackle the issue of SSAs.

New FCC ex parte rules were violated at least 11 times since taking effect June 1, a Communications Daily review of all filings and the agency’s own checks found. Some filings were made late -- from a day in many instances to a few weeks -- and others didn’t contain enough information on what was discussed during lobbying meetings. The filings were made by companies and associations big and small. They covered proceedings ranging from changing the Universal Service Fund to pay for broadband deployment to retransmission consent, ISP speeds, disabilities access legislation passed in 2010 and getting low-power TV stations to fully vacate the 700 MHz band for wireless broadband in the small portion they occupy.

Independent cable networks split with multichannel video programming distributors over an FCC proposal to extend a requirement that MVPDs not favor their own content over unaffiliated channels to more types of pay-TV companies. A program carriage notice of proposed rulemaking (http://xrl.us/bk3ueg) said any MVPD that owns content should be barred from discriminating in carrying independent channels on the basis of a programmer’s lack of affiliation with another subscription-video provider (CD Aug 2 p10). The American Cable Association, DirecTV and NCTA were among those that objected to that proposal. In other comments posted Tuesday to docket 11-131 (http://xrl.us/bmjswu), Verizon said the NPRM was right to exclude newer MVPDs. Indies that have filed program carriage complaints said they ought not to face discrimination from any pay-TV provider, even if it doesn’t own content.

Letting cable operators scramble broadcast TV and other basic channels in all-digital systems was largely backed in comments at the FCC. Scrambling is designed to cut down on signal theft and reduce pollution by eliminating the need for technicians to visit households to turn on and off video. Operators large and small, two nonprofits that had concerns with a first-of-its-kind waiver request made two years ago by Cablevision and local regulators each backed at least some of an FCC basic-tier encryption proposal. The regulators sought more conditions than what the commission’s October rulemaking notice proposed (CD Oct 17 p9).

Both sides of the debate on shared services agreements were disappointed in the timing of release of a Media Bureau order on a Honolulu SSA, and by what it said. Lawyers who filed the petition asking the commission to bar the deal said its release the day after Thanksgiving seemed designed to avoid attention. Foes of separately owned stations sharing news and other assets said the bureau should have found the SSA involving a major TV broadcaster and an investment firm violated rules barring two top-four rated stations from having common ownership within any market. Lawyers representing other TV stations said they worry that when licenses come up for renewal, broadcasters in SSAs could face questions because of what the order said about the Honolulu pact.

More ad agencies are expected to adopt a ban on discrimination in choosing which of all print, broadcast and pay-TV and online media to select in buying ads for clients. Some agencies large and small are in the process of implementing guidelines issued Oct. 26 from the industry’s main association. Others are likely to sign onto the guidelines. Many agencies already have policies in place to bar discrimination in ad purchases, according to industry executives we interviewed about the American Association of Advertising Agencies’ guidelines (CD Oct 27 p8). The rules, adopted four years after the FCC banned radio and TV stations from accepting contract terms that bar ads from being shown to urban or to Hispanic audiences, don’t apply to advertisers.

Google and Microsoft continue to take a different view than the MPAA on whose duty it ought to be to ensure subscription-video and broadcast TV programming is captioned when it’s sent online using Internet Protocol. The companies and the association reported in docket 11-154 (http://xrl.us/bmjc36) on meetings with staffers in the FCC bureaus working on an order to require such captions. Internet companies want the responsibility for ensuring traditional video programming is captioned when it goes online to lie with video program owners, while those representing VPOs, including the MPAA, want the responsibility to be with TV stations and multichannel video programming distributors.

Career FCC staffers are gearing up work toward a draft order to make TV station and subscription-video shows be captioned when they're transmitted using Internet Protocol. They're facing a Jan. 12 deadline to finish the rules on IP captioning. The forthcoming order has been the subject of debate among various industry stakeholders. Issues include whether video programming distributors (VPD) or video programming originators (VPO) should be responsible for captions, whether there should be technical standards, and the threshold for device size to require them to display IP captions, according to industry executives and agency officials.