TV Grudge Match Reignites

Over the weekend, broadcasters were due to notify cable systems what they want in exchange for the right to carry the signals of local TV stations. It is part of battle that is known in TV circles as retransmission consent. Retransmission consent is a powerful tool for companies owning both broadcast stations and cable networks. Some broadcasters want to force cable systems to pay cash to retransmit their local stations' signals as they've won in agreements with satellite TV operators and telephone companies getting into the video delivery business. Many broadcasters stagger the terms of the cable deals, so the three-year cycle doesn't apply to all 2,600 TV stations or 8,000 cable systems. And many stations lack the leverage to make demands. Stations with weak signals or weak programming will opt for “must-carry” status. That forces cable operators to carry the signals, but the cable operator isn't compelled to compensate any further (for example, providing prime channel position). The National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) estimates that 50% of stations opt for must-carry status. Most station groups and large operators will continue to do as they have done in the 12 years since retransmission-consent rules were enacted: without cash. Most broadcasters will be seeking full carriage of new “multicasting” channels, starting in space created by their switch to digital broadcasting. They'll want better terms and license fees for cable networks they own all or part of. Big operators are willing to disguise payments as advertising or cable-network fees, but they stubbornly resist straight cash-for-carriage deals.
[SOURCE: Broadcasting&Cable, AUTHOR: John M. Higgins]
(free access for Benton's Headlines subscribers)