August 2008

Is fairness rule fair?

The Religion News Service's Rao writes that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi policy that required broadcasters who sent out specific messages to set aside time for opposing views. Such a move would "really make it impossible to preach the whole counsel of God," said Rich Bott, the owner of Kansas-based Bott Radio Network, which broadcasts Christian programming across 10 states. It would also, he said, likely put him out of business. Put in place nearly 50 years ago, the doctrine was an FCC regulation that policed the airwaves at a time when there were few other sources of information. It never carried the full weight of the law. By the 1980s, with the advent of cable television and multiple opportunities to air differing opinions, the policy fell out of favor and was finally ditched by the FCC in 1987. While Speaker Pelosi hasn't offered legislation to reinstate the policy, she has signaled that she supports its revival, and said a bill introduced by Rep. Mike Spence (R-IN) to permanently kill it will not be considered by the Democratic-controlled House. Most critics say the doctrine is unlikely to be reinstated, and is being used by the left as an empty threat, and by the right as a rallying cry. Still, Christian broadcasters are bracing for its reemergence, said Frank Wright, president of the National Religious Broadcasters. "This is not the time to despair," he said. "If all these bad things happen, we're going to sue immediately."

Blocking or Metering: A False Choice

An illustration of why the Federal Communications Commission's decision to prohibit blocking by Internet service providers is unlikely to lead to a radical, industry-wide switch to metering. Among the conclusions of the brief:

1) It is a false choice to suggest that since Internet service providers cannot arbitrarily block online content, they will be forced to meter. There are a whole host of other non-discriminatory options available to providers that are more effective at managing congestion.

2) Talk of metering is not new and has nothing to do with the FCC's laudable decision to prohibit providers from blocking applications. Cox has had bandwidth caps in place since 2003 but was still caught blocking applications. Time Warner floated plans to meter as early as 2002.

3) Metering is the wrong solution for Internet users. History shows that consumers strongly prefer simple, flat-rate pricing to metering. They do not want to look over their shoulder and face surprise higher monthly bills. This is likely to encourage all subscribers - not just high-bandwidth users -- to curb their Internet use.

4) Metering is bad business for Internet service providers. Not only does it decrease Internet use, it discourages the development of and demand for new and innovative applications that give the Internet its value. ISPs that meter are likely to see a subscription drop that hurts their bottom line.

5) There are strong financial incentives at play that actually make it very unlikely that ISPs will make the drastic switch to metering. Congestion should be treated as a short-term problem, while continued investments are made to keep pace with demand. Offering simplicity and abundance is the best outcome for users, providers and the future of the Internet.

Obese Kids: Time for Media to Act

[Commentary] The current childhood obesity epidemic is a stark but preventable phenomenon. One in three children is overweight in America today. This puts our country on a predictable trajectory leading to millions of overweight adults unless urgent steps are taken. Based on the Federal Trade Commission's recent announcement that $1.6 billion was spent by food and beverage companies in 2006 to market products to children and teenagers, the issue of advertising to children isn't going away. Nor is the use or influence of licensed characters by media companies in the cross-promotion of food and beverage products. As the head of a nonprofit media company with science-based nutritional guidelines for any food product our brand is associated with, I continue to urge our industry counterparts to play a stronger role in establishing and supporting advertisements that will positively influence children's healthy habits for life. This isn't a bottom-line question, but rather how we can help participate in the process to improve children's health and the viability of the next generation. All of the blame cannot be placed on the food and beverage industry; media companies also shoulder some of the responsibility, and it is simply good business for us to do our part. Now all relevant parties should consider how far they are willing to go in becoming part of the solution. The stakes are simply too high should self-regulation fail. (Knell is president and CEO of Sesame Workshop.)

Dingell to FCC: Consider Licensing White Spaces

House Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell (D-MI) asked the Federal Communications Commission to consider licensing the so-called white spaces between digital-TV channels. While the FCC has been considering allowing unlicensed mobile devices to use the spectrum for wireless broadband, among other things, Chairman Dingell suggested that a licensing proposal, at least for some of the spectrum, could help to mitigate the concerns of broadcasters and wireless microphone users about interference. It could also raise some money for the treasury. He noted the FCC's testing of the unlicensed devices. The FCC said Friday that it picked the Majestic Theater in New York for testing those devices' use of the white spaces between TV channels and wireless microphones. Chairman Dingell said, "As the Commission proceeds, it is my hope that it gives all due consideration to all proposals concerning the best use of the white spaces, including those proposals to license some or all of the spectrum available," in a letter to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin.

Minow, Fowler: Strip FCC of Indecency-Enforcement Authority

A trio of former Federal Communications Commission chairmen, including the most iconic critic of TV content and a symbol of deregulation, joined to ask the Supreme Court to strip the FCC of its power to regulate indecency entirely, saying that it is on a "Victorian crusade" that hurts broadcasters, viewers and the Constitution. Former Democratic chairman Newton Minow may have famously dubbed TV a "vast wasteland" back in the 1960s, but he is ready to let TV programmers in this century have more say over content if the alternative is the current FCC. Seconding that opinion was former Republican chairman Mark Fowler, who once likened TV to a toaster with pictures and became a symbol of the deregulatory 1980s. Also weighing in on a brief to the court Friday was James Quello, former broadcaster and longest-serving Democratic commissioner. The trio were joined by other former FCC commissioners and staffers including Henry Geller, former general counsel at the FCC; Glen O. Robinson, a former commissioner and said to be principal author of the brief; Kenneth G. Robinson, a former FCC legal adviser; and .Jerald Fritz, senior VP and general counsel for Allbritton Communications.

ABC Affiliates Weigh In at Supreme Court

ABC stations asked the Supreme Court not to revisit the legal justification for the Federal Communications Commission's indecency-enforcement standards, but they said the FCC was clearly out of bounds to find that a Fox broadcast violated those standards. In their brief, the affiliates said the FCC policy both violated the Administrative Procedures Act and strayed too far from the narrow confines of the Pacifica decision. But they explicitly said the court did not need to address the underlying constitutionality of the FCC's indecency-enforcement powers. That differs from the filing of the ABC network and other networks, which called on the court to rethink the Pacifica decision, which is the underpinning of FCC indecency enforcement. They also differed from the networks in not asking the court to reconsider the entire broadcast-regulatory framework, saying it was also not necessary "to revisit Red Lion Broadcasting Co. vs. FCC, 395 U.S. 367 (1969), which affirmed the statutory public-trustee regulatory framework for the broadcast media."

Small Operators See Relief

Small cable operators could be just days away from scoring a major political victory at the Federal Communications Commission concerning the carriage of local TV stations' digital signals. With FCC Chairman Kevin Martin's support, the agency appears close to exempting a whole class of small MSOs from burdensome must-carry rules after broadcasters go all-digital on Feb. 17, 2009. According to FCC and industry sources, the new rules would provide relief for all cable systems, regardless of channel capacity, that have 2,500 subscribers or fewer and are not owned by Comcast or Time Warner. All cable systems at 552-Megahertz of capacity or less would be covered, with no limitation on ownership or number of subscribers. The new rules could be adopted at the FCC's Aug. 22 monthly open meeting, if not sooner.

FCC's Martin To Support Quiet Period

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin has agreed in principle to bar TV stations from pulling their signals from cable systems around the time of the Feb. 17, 2009, transition to digital television. The idea for a "quiet period" so that carriage disputes did not interfere with the DTV transition was first proposed to the FCC in April by five cable-operators, including Mediacom Communications, Charter Communications and GCI Cable. At this point, Martin and the operators don't agree on the length of the quiet period. In their filing, the MSO said the duration of the quiet period should run from the date the FCC approved the idea until May 31, 2009. Chairman Martin has proposed two quiet periods for the other four FCC members to consider: Either Jan 15, 2009, to Feb 28, 2009, or Dec 15, 2008, to Feb 28, 2009.

Yahoo makes its Google search advertising agreement public

Yahoo on Friday released a copy of its controversial search advertising partnership agreement with Google, marking the first time details of the deal have been made publicly available. However, it is heavily redacted. The agreement was included as an exhibit to Yahoo's quarterly financial statement, which the Internet search pioneer filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Under the agreement, Yahoo will serve up Google's advertisements alongside its own search results. Yahoo has previously said it does not believe its open-ended deal is anticompetitive, citing it is under no obligation to run a certain number of Google's ads, or give its competitor's ads favorable placement on its search results pages. Microsoft, however, contends the deal is anticompetitive in that it pushes two of the top three players in the Internet search advertising market together. And in addition to the antitrust issues, legislators have raised concerns about potential privacy concerns regarding the search advertising partnership.

With Large Underserved Areas, Idaho Seeks to Establish Statewide Educational Network

The state of Idaho took a step toward a broadband strategy with the March 2008 passage of H. 543, a bill that establishes a statewide broadband network. The Idaho network will be similar to the Utah Education Network, and hence used primarily for educational purposes. Still, the network would also aid both industry and government, wrote Sharon Fisher of NewWest.net, an online media company. The bill seems to rebuff provider Qwest Communications' assurances that the majority of people residing in Idaho and desiring high-speed Internet access already have it, wrote Fisher. Mark Reed, who manages a fiber-optic network for the city of Idaho Falls, said there remain some rural areas in the state that have merely one broadband provider. The network connects all city sites and has also built out fiber-to-the-premise capabilities that are leased to commercial areas. In an interview, he said that Idaho "can do better" than it currently is doing on broadband.

Benton

Search