WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) is blasting Deltavision Media’s decision to demand “egregious” retransmission fees from Verizon for its WSYT Fox affiliate and MyNetworkTV station in Syracuse, N.Y.

“Deltavision Media is a new player in broadcasting, but it’s already trying to score a financial goal while kicking consumers out of the game,” said ATVA spokesman Hunter Wilson. “Ahead of a critical contract deadline next week, Deltavision Media is threatening a TV blackout that would impact FIFA World Cup 2026 programming, demanding exorbitant retransmission fees with no concern for the thousands of families who are excited to watch their favorite match. Holding the world’s biggest sporting event hostage is no way to introduce yourself to the business.”

The ATVA, which is backed by Verizon and other pay TV groups, claimed that Deltavision Media, a Mississippi-based regional media company launched in August 2025, has proven to be an uncooperative negotiating partner with Verizon, “delaying its initial proposal and then demanding staggering rate increases – even compared to the already-inflated standards typical of Big Broadcaster retransmission consent demands.”

If the blackout does occur it would impact nearly 20,000 Verizon customers in the Syracuse, N.Y. market.

In its statement, the ATVA noted that it continues to lobby for reforms in the ways retransmission consent agreements are conducted.

“Since 2010, broadcasters have levied more than 2,500 TV blackouts and increased retransmission consent fees by an overwhelming 2,000 percent,” the group said. “American consumers continue to pay the price for outdated regulations that allow broadcasters to weaponize TV blackouts, deliberately targeting live sports, local news and other popular TV.”

The NAB and broadcasters have pushed back against those arguments arguing that broadcast content is typically the most popular content on pay TV platforms and that increased retrans fees fund important local news and the cost of popular sports rights like the World Cup.

TV Tech has reached out to WSYT for comment.

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) has submitted a letter to the Federal Communications Commission (arguing that broadcasters are using loopholes to evade meaningful agency review of broadcast transactions.

ATVA is backed by pay TV providers and associations.

In the filing, ATVA said that under the 1996 Telecom Act, the FCC is required to review transactions involving television stations to ensure they serve the public interest.

ATVA also noted that the commission must evaluate potential harms to consumers and local communities, including higher prices, reduced competition and diminished local news coverage when a broadcast station group owner tries to combine two or more major national broadcast network affiliations within a single market.

Increasingly, however, ATVA noted that broadcasters are exploiting loopholes to sidestep reviews.

ATVA’s filing contends, for example, that Sinclair is using “affiliation swaps” loopholes to avoid reviews.

Rather than directly acquiring a competing station with a major network affiliation, ATVA cited examples of where Sinclair first acquired that station’s network programming rights—such as ABC content—a transaction that does not trigger the review process.

It can then place that programming on a secondary digital “multicast” channel of a station it already owns, temporarily carrying, for example, both CBS and ABC programming under a single broadcast license.

Then, ATVA argued, Sinclair submitted an application to acquire the now stripped-down station itself. Because the second station no longer carries a “Big Four” network at the time of the sale, the resulting transaction appears less significant on paper and often receives only a cursory review. After the deal is approved, Sinclair can then shift the ABC programming back to the newly acquired station, the ATVA contended.

“Sinclair’s recently approved transactions demonstrate how broadcasters use affiliation swaps or changes to consolidate within local markets while avoiding Commission review or public comment,” the letter said. “The Commission should put an end to these practices. It should modify its rules in order to ensure proper oversight over such transactions, and to limit the increasingly widespread consolidation in the television marketplace.”

ATVA also stressed that Sinclair CEO Chris Ripley told Wall Street analysts during an April 30 first-quarter earnings call that duopolies, or “double-ups,” are core to Sinclair’s strategy due to their inherent operating efficiencies.

ATVA made the filing as part of the quadrennial regulatory review.

WASHINGTON—Associations backed by the pay TV industry have voiced significant opposition to the NAB’s proposals for speeding up the transition to NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0.

In filing with the Federal Communications Commission, which has launched an inquiry into rules impacting the rollout of ATSC 3.0 broadcasts [FCC GN Docket No. 16-142 Authorizing Permissive Use of the “Next Generation” Broadcast Television Standard], the NCTA, the American Television Alliance (ATVA) and others have criticized NAB proposals that the FCC should set a firm cutoff date for ATSC 1.0 broadcasts and eliminate requirements to simulcast 1.0 content on the newer 3.0 broadcasts.

In its Jan. 20 filing, the NCTA. which represents major cable providers told the FCC that the transition “to ATSC 3.0 should remain market based, and the Commission should reject broadcasters’ requests for government intervention. Instead, the government should continue to prioritize protecting consumers from any harmful impacts.”

More specifically, the NCTA comments argued that “the simulcasting requirements in the Commission’s rules remain essential at this point in the transition given the broadcast industry’s decision to use a non-backwards compatible technology. The Commission should not foist the substantial costs of a premature conversion to ATSC 3.0 on consumers and MVPDs by abandoning the simulcasting and substantially similar protections at this time.”

Filings by the NAB, Pearl TV and other broadcasters have pushed for the end of simulcasting rules because it would free-up spectrum and allow them to better showcase the benefits of the new 3.0 broadcast standard.

The NCTA also argued that the FCC “should also reject any calls to grant must-carry rights to 3.0 signals. In today’s video marketplace, must carry requirements are no longer supportable under the First and Fifth Amendments. Extending must carry requirements to 3.0 signals would only exacerbate these constitutional infirmities.”

The filing argued that “MVPD distribution of ATSC 3.0 signals also presents numerous technical challenges, including issues that implicate the Commission’s existing rules regarding broadcast must carry and retransmission consent. The Commission should remain mindful of these challenges as the transition progresses.”

In terms of must-carry for 3.0 broadcasts, the NCTA argued that “requiring cable operators to incur additional substantial costs to upgrade their equipment to meet new carriage obligations would have significant economic impacts on regulated cable operators and interfere with their investment-backed expectations. In today’s highly competitive marketplace for video, these burdens are more severe and represent a far greater economic impact on cable providers than was the case when courts have considered these issues in the past.”

The NCTA also contended that “The Commission should also ensure that broadcasters’ use of spectrum serves the public interest and meets statutory requirements concerning ancillary and supplementary services, and it should take steps to contain any anti-competitive effects stemming from broadcast stations’ transition to ATSC 3.0.”

The NCTA warned that implementation of the broadcast standard posed a number of anti-competitive threats to the video market and argued that the FCC should adopt policies that would avoid those problems.

“If the Commission decides to permit stations to flash cut to ATSC 3.0 despite the early state of the transition and lack of demand from consumers, it should take additional steps to limit and contain the inevitable anti-competitive effects and harm to MVPDs and consumers,” the NCTA argued.

“The Commission should affirmatively require that patents relevant to the ATSC 3.0 standard be licensed on a reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) basis,” the NCTA urged. “Of significant concern, there has already been patent infringement litigation involving alleged ATSC 3.0 functionality where the jury awarded the patentee an ongoing royalty of $6.75 per television for four patents, exorbitantly higher than the rates for the two existing patent pools for ATSC 3.0 patents.

"Specifically, a pool comprising over 11,000 patents operated by Avanci charges $2-$3 per unit, and a pool of 50+ patents administered by Via Licensing Alliance similarly charges under $3 per unit. Constellation’s excessive royalty award prompted LG to suspend inclusion of ATSC 3.0-compatibility in its TVs for the U.S. market. This type of `patent ambush’ is particularly worrying given that many patents in the field claim patent-ineligible subject matter (as LG is arguing in the pending litigation), but it can take years of litigation to invalidate such patents.”

In its filings, the American Television Alliance also argued that the transition posed significant technical issues for pay TV operators and that they should not be required to invest significant amounts of money to comply with Must carry rules.

The ATVA said it “continues to be open to `voluntary and market-driven’ adoption of ATSC 3.0” and said the FCC should continue its “voluntary and market-driven” approach.

“From the MVPD perspective, the most significant concern about ATSC 3.0 is that the format is not backwards compatible with MVPDs’ existing distribution architecture, and many current set-top-boxes and consumer devices cannot support ATSC 3.0 streams and related features,” it stressed. “Developing ATSC 3.0 compatibility would require MVPDs to incur substantial costs for new equipment and system changes to receive and process ATSC 3.0 signals. Even then, most MVPDs could not deliver ATSC 3.0 signals to consumers. In other words, whatever improvements broadcasters might make to their signals using ATSC 3.0 are highly unlikely ever to accrue to MVPD subscribers and thus MVPD expenditures to accommodate ATSC 3.0 would be a dead weight loss.”

“We, therefore, urge the Commission to maintain the simulcasting requirement (and the substantially similar requirement),” the group concluded. “If the Commission were to decide otherwise, however, it should at a minimum require broadcasters—whether electing retransmission consent or must-carry—to deliver signals to MVPDs in a 1.0-compatible format at their cost. Otherwise, the Commission would be asking MVPDs (and their subscribers) to incur substantial costs to downconvert broadcast signals without any benefit to those subscribers. This would be arbitrary and capricious.”

The group also contended that “the primary benefits of the ATSC 3.0 transition appear not to be improvements to broadcast television, but rather the ability of broadcasters to use ATSC 3.0 signals for unrelated services like datacasting. This real possibility that broadcasters could use the vast majority of their spectrum for services other than free, over-the-air television raises significant legal questions, including under the Communications Act, FCC rules, and the Administrative Procedure Act—especially if MVPDs and their subscribers are expected to pick up the tab for such services.”

The full filing by the NCTA is available here.

The full filing by the ATVA is available here.

[This article is part TV Tech’s ongoing coverage of the FCC and NextGen TV; articles about the comments and filings from other companies and associations with different perspectives on these issues can be found here and here.]

WASHINGTON—In the runup to what could be another blackout of broadcast TV stations, the American Television Alliance (ATVA) has released a statement complaining that a retransmission dispute between Mission Broadcasting and Verizon might result in two stations being dropped from the Fios lineup next week.

Neither Verizon or Mission has commented publicly on the contract, which will expire on Dec. 15 according to The Desk.

The issue of a potential blackout was first raised by ATVA, which is funded by pay TV groups and counts Verizon as a member.

If an agreement is not reached, Verizon customers in Albany, N.Y. could lose access to Mission's WXXA (Fox) in Albany, N.Y. and WNAC (Fox) in Providence, R.I.

In a statement issued Dec. 10, ATVA attacked Mission for demanding “exorbitant retransmission consent fee increases for programming that is free over the air.”

“Mission Broadcasting is the latest broadcaster to threaten TV blackouts for FOX and CW affiliates in key markets while demanding unjustified retransmission fee hikes that raise costs for American consumers,” said ATVA spokesman Hunter Wilson. “These tactics underscore the urgent need for retransmission consent reform and exemplify how broadcasters exploit disruptions to extract excessive profits, sidelining viewers who rely on affordable access to local stations.”

TV Tech has reached out to Mission for comment.

WASHINGTON—As expected, pay TV groups have filed objections with the Federal Communications Commission arguing that the agency should not eliminate ownership caps on broadcast station groups because it would harm the pay TV industry and raise prices for consumers.

In filings, the NCTA–The Internet and Television Association and the American Television Alliance (ATVA) also questioned whether the FCC had the authority to lift the ownership rules, arguing that only Congress has that authority.

The ATVA also cited research showing that further consolidation would not improve or expand local news and the NCTA downplayed the impact of the rules on broadcasters saying that “a broadcaster that takes full advantage of the UHF discount can reach 78% of the nation without running afoul of the cap.”

“Raising or eliminating the cap is beyond the Commission’s authority and would harm consumers by granting broadcast station groups additional leverage to demand even higher retransmission consent fees,” the NCTA said.

In a separate filing, the ATVA took a similar position concluding that the “ATVA believes that the FCC’s national television multiple ownership cap remains critical to competition in the market for retransmission consent. Consolidation poses a significant threat to consumers’ wallets. It would lead to higher retransmission consent fees and, in turn, increase the cost of service for MVPD subscribers. Accordingly, we urge the Commission to reject the broadcasters’ proposals to modify or eliminate these rules.”

More specifically, the ATVA argued that lifting the rules and allowing further consolidation would send the pay TV industry into a death spiral that would also severely harm broadcasters by reducing the money they get from subscriber fees.

“Modifying or eliminating this rule would lead to even more broadcaster consolidation, which would result in consumers paying even more for signals that are otherwise free over the air,” said the ATVA, which is backed by telcos like Verizon, major pay TV operators like Charter, the NTCA Rural Broadband Association, satellite providers Dish and DirecTV and others. “As broadcasters increase their national reach, particularly the larger ones with the highest retransmission consent fees (e.g., Nexstar), they obtain additional leverage in retransmission consent negotiations. This enables them to obtain higher rates for popular programming, carriage and payments for unpopular programming, and onerous non-price terms. MVPDs, in turn, pass at least some, if not most, of these increases along to consumers. The record evidence for this is overwhelming and broadcasters do not seriously dispute it….In the end, ownership deregulation will harm broadcasters by contributing to the vicious cycle of price increases and subscriber defections that is already underway. When higher retransmission consent rates oblige MVPDs to raise prices, subscribers defect—often to streaming services that do not carry broadcasters. This leaves broadcasters with revenue shortfalls, which they seek to remedy through even higher prices—causing more MVPD subscribers to leave for streaming services. Thus, in the long term, national ownership deregulation will not help broadcasters fix their `existential’ crisis.”

In its filing, the NCTA noted that “Commission data already shows that retransmission consent costs continue to rise substantially year over year under the current 39% cap. Retransmission consent revenue increased by 31% from 2019 to 2023 ($11.5 billion to $15.1 billion) and more than 135% when compared to 2015 levels ($6.4 billion)—despite MVPDs’ decline in subscribership. The Commission should not take action that would grant broadcast station groups even more leverage and compound these costs and resulting consumer price increases.”

The ATVA also to aim at the broadcasters claim that consolidation would strengthen their ability to expand local news coverage, a critical issue at a time when cuts in public media and the ongoing collapse of the newspaper industry are likely to further reduce sources of local news.

"Broadcasters argue that they need to consolidate in order to save local news," the ATVA noted. "They claim that, if they are permitted to consolidate, they will in turn “subsidize” expensive news operations. This claim is unfounded, and the Commission cannot reasonably rely on it. In 2021, we engaged Thomas Hubbard, a Professor of Economics at Northwestern University, to examine such claims, which he found could not withstand scrutiny. Professor Hubbard first explained that the evidence did not show that local news was in any sort of `crisis.' He found that the total number of hours of local news had increased between 2014 and 2019, even in smaller markets, regardless of consolidation. He also found that local consolidation did not lead to increased local news. No broadcaster has presented evidence showing that national consolidation inevitably (or even generally) leads to more local news."

"Any such evidence would, moreover, have to account for the fact that national consolidation can lead to duplication of purportedly `local' news across a station group’s stations," the group also contended. "Newsmax, for example, cited a study showing that the largest station groups are the most likely to rely on `outside' sources of content in their local newscasts. Other studies suggest a more mixed relationship between size and investment in local news. Newsmax points to debt-financed consolidation in the radio industry as having led to much less local news on those stations, and predicts that the same would happen here in the wake of further consolidation."

The full NCTA filing is here; the ATVA filing is here.

The Newsmax filing opposing lifting the ownership caps is here.

The National Association of Broadcasters is hitting back at critics who oppose its proposal to phase out the current ATSC 1.0 DTV over-the-air standard and transition to ATSC 3.0 (aka NextGen TV).

In February, the NAB filed a petition with the FCC to phase out ATSC 1.0 in two phases: In 2028, the top 55 DMAs (designated market areas) would be allowed to shut down 1.0, with the rest of U.S. DMAs doing so by 2030. The association said the current transitory phase, in which one station in a market hosts other stations also broadcasting 3.0, is preventing TV stations from taking full advantage of 3.0, which combines traditional radio frequency broadcast with internet protocol, allowing broadcasters to transmit higher resolution video, multichannel audio, advanced alerting and interactive advertising and programming.

In a blog post, NAB Chief Legal Officer and Executive Vice President Rick Kaplan criticized comments made by representatives of the Consumer Technology Association and NCTA—The Internet & Television Association during a meeting with FCC officials last month. ACA Connects, the American Television Alliance (ATVA), and the LPTV Broadcasters Association also attended that meeting, but Kaplan’s remarks were aimed squarely at CTA and NCTA. A summary of the meeting was filed with the FCC.

'Another Day, Another Reflexing Innovation-Blocking FCC Filing'
During the meeting, the CTA reiterated its longstanding position that the transition to ATSC 3.0 should remain voluntary and “a mandatory transition to ATSC 3.0 would harm consumers by imposing costs for consumers, stifle innovation, and levy unneeded regulations.”

Kaplan denigrated the group’s criticisms as “another day, another reflexive, innovation-blocking FCC filing from the usual suspects—cable lobbyists, legacy advocacy groups and industry players who oppose anything that might strengthen free, over-the-air broadcasting or challenge the dominance of their own outdated business models. Their latest attack on ATSC 3.0—the NextGen TV broadcast standard already delivering improved video, immersive audio, innovative interactive features and more—is as predictable as it is tired.”

“Let’s be clear,” Kaplan added, “these groups aren’t protecting the public, they’re protecting their turf.”

In response to the groups’ criticisms that phasing out 1.0 would be too costly for consumers, Kaplan noted that while broadcasters are working to strengthen free over-the-air TV, “our competitors are busy finding new ways to extract more money from viewers every month by diverting viewers to paid streaming services and apps they monetize.”

He accused CTA of using “faulty logic” when estimating the $80 price difference between TVs with NextGen TV capability and those without. Kaplan said such a claim ignores the fact “that those models often include other premium features that drive up the cost.

“For example, many of the TVs that include NextGen tuners also offer 8K video, higher-end display technologies, high refresh rates and upgraded speakers,” Kaplan said. “The manufacturers who are actively embracing ATSC 3.0—many of whom are ironically ‘represented’ by CTA—are delivering real value to consumers and helping to modernize free, over-the-air television. We should be celebrating this innovation—not undermining it.”

He also noted the irony in NCTA’s criticism that forcing consumers to adopt 3.0 would stifle innovation, adding that 3.0 allows broadcasters to innovate without the influence of “Big Tech.”

'What Are They Afraid Of?'
Kaplan also said cable TV shouldn’t be afraid that a mandated end to 1.0 would harm them and that they should support innovation that could help cable companies in turn, as long as they want to spend the money.

“Pay-TV providers built their empires reselling broadcast television,” he said. “Now they don’t want to invest in updates to stay current? Or are they afraid that a stronger over-the-air platform might allow more viewers to drop the costly monthly cable bill? As we know all too well, these companies simply do not want to pay for anything, whether its broadcasters’ signals, spectrum it uses to compete with licensed users or—as everyone knows—actual customer service.”

The broadcast industry is also among the most-efficient spectrum users, Kaplan said, adding that using spectrum for services other than traditional over-the-air TV should be welcomed.

He also addressed concerns from the LPTV Broadcasters Association, which also had representatives at the FCC meeting, noting that the NAB’s filing proposes that LPTV stations be exempted in the mandated transition. He also added that the NAB “has asked the FCC to allow non-commercial educational broadcasters more time to transition if needed. The answer isn’t to stall the entire industry. It’s to provide targeted support, not blanket inaction.”

He added: “It’s also rich for massive pay-TV companies to suddenly be advocating on behalf of small broadcasters. The irony here is not lost on anyone.”

Kaplan accused NCTA and CTA of being “yesterday’s gatekeepers” who are not working in the public interest. “Let’s stop pretending this ragtag opposition speaks for the public,” he concluded. “It’s not clear that NCTA or CTA know what the public interest is … the future is here.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Standard General held a media conference on Jan. 23 and filed a response to critics with the FCC arguing that the deal was in the public interest and that delays in approving its proposed acquisition of Tegna had cost it at least $22 million, enough to hire 422 news employees at the Tegna stations. 

The joint filing by lawyers representing Standard General, Tegna and the Cox Media Group with the FCC comes at the end of the comment period for the FCC’s review of the proposed acquisition. 

Speaking with reporters on a virtual call, Standard General's managing partner and chief investment officer Soohyung (“Soo”) Kim argued that the transaction was in the public interest given their commitments to local news and would advance the cause of diversity in broadcast TV ownership by creating the largest minority-owned, woman led broadcaster. 

"We believe in the power and the value of local news and we want to make it better by helping the industry evolve to meet it challenges of the digital age,” Kim said, pointing to his track record in investing in local news. “The track record speaks for itself. We have never reduced local content. We've increased newsroom staffing at our current stations by 20%. In fact, in our 12 year history in broadcasting we’ve added more than 40,000 hours of local news. We've been clear from the beginning that we intend to grow the new operations and last month to be submitted formal commitments to our regulators….not to reduce jobs for at least two years.”

Kim also stressed that they provided regulators with a commitment not to “not to step up retransmission consent rates” and that Tegna’s largest pay TV distributor, Comcast recently “agreed to continue its current retransmission consent agreement.”

“Through these commitments, we're simply formalizing what we intended and communicated at the beginning,” he said. “This transaction is a win for employees, a win for local news gathering, a win for the local broadcast ecosystem, and above all, a win for the communities and our stations will serve.”

Kim also stressed that by going private, they would be able to make the kind of multi-year investments in local news and in transforming the company that would have been difficult for Tegna as a public company.” 

“We are willing to make long term investments without risking an adverse market reaction by requiring full controls,” he said. “We can invest for the long term…to meet the challenges of an evolving industry and in doing so, hopefully need a resurgence of local television broadcasting.”

Kim also pointed to the fact that the FCC had just released its annual report on the ownership of broadcast stations that showed only eight of the country’s 1,365 full power commercial broadcast TV stations were majority owned by Asian Americans. “This transaction would create America's largest minority-owned, women-led broadcaster,” he said. “This deal would increase the number of Asian American owned commercial broadcast TV stations by more than 700%.”

Kim and the joint filing with the FCC also stressed that deal would not lead to consolidation in the industry and that the number of stations owned by Tegna after the transaction would be less than it currently owns. 

In the joint filing, Standard General addressed complaints by Dish and the ATVA group representing pay TV operators. In FCC filings, the ATVA said that Standard General’s promises regarding retransmission consent agreements did not go far enough. 

Those filings included concerns regarding Apollo Global Management involvement in the deal. Apollo is providing some financing for the deal and Apollo’s Cox Media Group is buying some Tegna stations. 

The filing noted that worries about Standard General and Apollo working together to boost retransmission consent fees was misplaced because Standard General has 100% ownership of the company and that Apollo would not be involved in the management.  

The filing also complained that delays in approving the deal were proving costly.

“The delay in approving the Applications and unlocking the public interest benefits of the  Transactions has been harmful to the public, and to the employees and potential new employees  of Tegna,” the filing said. “The delay has stalled Standard General’s ability to invigorate newsrooms across the  country and left Tegna in limbo, as its employees work in uncertainty and consider how denial  of the Applications would increase risks to their job security in a darkening economic time. As  has been widely reported, `[m]any media and tech companies have laid off employees in recent weeks as the advertising market sours.’ Tegna, as a publicly traded company without a controlling shareholder, would be impacted more than most broadcasters by the intense pressure  of the public markets to cut costs as recessionary concerns mount.”

“While these harms are substantial and apparent, they defy easy quantification,” the filing admitted. “What can  be easily quantified, however, is one obvious aspect of the direct economic harm to Tegna. As  the Commission is aware, the Merger Agreement contains a `ticking fee’ that each day escalates  the price that must be paid to departing shareholders for each share of Tegna stock. As a  result, the purchase price of Tegna has been increasing every day since November 22, 2022,  and as of today, that increase now exceeds $22 million dollars. To put that in perspective, based on RTDNA’s most current survey of median salaries for television news jobs, 98 including journalists, that $22+ million dollars would be enough to pay a year’s salary for over 420 additional news employees at Tegna stations. That is nearly nine additional news employees per market. Equally dramatic is the impact of further delay. Each day of further delay would be enough to pay a year’s salary for an additional news employees, and the ticking fee will shortly increase by 50%, magnifying this harm.”  

WASHINGTON—Sometimes in Washington the best indicator that something big is brewing is when suddenly everyone clams up.  

Such is the case with the long simmering effort to impose retransmission consent regulations on streaming video carriage of local stations. Recent sub rosa negotiations are not very well hidden, since affiliate groups and lobbyists (including the National Association of Broadcasters) have submitted ex parte filings about their Federal Communications Commission meetings on the topic. Both FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel and NAB President Curtis LeGeyt have acknowledged that decisions are overdue on streaming retransmission policies for video via virtual multichannel video programming distributors.

10 p.m. Up for Grabs?
Moreover, the issue is bubbling up as the entire nature of the network/affiliate relationship is undergoing major revisions—from chatter about ceding the 10 pm (ET) programming hour back to affiliates (the network has decided to keep it for now) to the intense appeals from NBC, CBS, Fox and ABC for viewers to tune in directly to their streaming services, such as Peacock, Paramount+ and Hulu, thus bypassing local affiliates entirely. In addition, stations’ adoption of ATSC 3.0 and its IP implications could affect the retransmission requirements. 

The current chatter about vMVPD revenues comes amid forecasts that traditional retrans revenue to affiliates may drop from 50% to 39% of station income in the next few years, according to research firm BIA. Adding to the clout of networks’ (and other) streaming services is their libraries of off-network syndicated content, formerly a mainstay of independent stations (e.g. episodes of popular series such as “Seinfeld,” “The Office,” “NCIS” and “Friends”). Analysts wonder if audiences will tune into broadcast reruns if they can choose what to watch via streaming platforms. 

Yet, NAB, NCTA – The Internet & Television Association,  American Television Alliance (ATVA), the FCC and attorneys for stations and affiliate groups have all ducked TV Tech’s queries about what what’s going on, sometimes after initially agreeing to share updates on their negotiations but later saying that they couldn’t discuss activities because of current, unspecified conditions.  

NAB declined to respond to TV Tech’s questions about its streaming stance, but later that same week the association submitted an ex parte filing at the FCC describing its meeting at which it urged the commission to examine  “current streaming advancements [that] may affect the Commission’s calculus in determining whether virtual MVPDs should be deemed to be MVPDs.”  

At the same time, LeGeyt asked the FCC to classify vMVPDs as carriers that are subject to program-negotiation obligations.  NAB took that message directly to commissioners and their staffs in a series of November meetings. 

Some advocates had hoped that Congress would address the issue via new laws for retransmission fee guarantees, but those dreams were dashed by the mid-term election. A divided House and Senate are considered unlikely to agree on any communications financial issues and will “not pass much legislation,” a veteran media lawyer/lobbyist told TV Tech.

Much of the current effort is focused on the 2014 FCC proposed rulemaking that then-FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler initiated, which sought to determine if video services that are not facilities-based should be subject to the agency’s rules for  traditional MVPDs, such as cable or telco systems. In an interview with Politico Pro, LeGeyt said the NAB’s board wants the FCC to collect new feedback on the Wheeler proposal given “changes in the marketplace.”

Separately, Rosenworcel told Congress in November that she would welcome the chance to become involved in retransmission consent issues, particularly in disputes that affect viewer’s access to programs during blackouts of broadcast signals on MVPD systems.  She said the FCC would work with Congress, but emphasized that the FCC’s role would be to protect consumers if vMVPD fees or terms are excessive—with no mention of helping affiliates.

Affiliate Rift 
The retransmission situation also puts the spotlight on the growing rift between affiliates and networks. In a presentation to the FCC, four major networks’ affiliate groups pointed out that, “Unlike negotiations with traditional MVPDs where local television affiliates negotiate directly for the carriage of their FCC-licensed signals, the national Big Four broadcast networks have asserted near-total control over carriage negotiations with vMVPDs.” The group emphasized that deals are conducted “without any meaningful input from its non-owned Affiliate stations.”

Affiliates’ dissatisfaction with how networks are treating them is surfacing from multiple sources. There are unconfirmable reports that the networks have negotiated retransmission consent agreements with YouTube TV on behalf of the affiliates, but affiliates contend that their slice of that payment is too small. Other reports indicate that Comcast recently loaded all the NBC affiliates onto its Peacock streaming platform, after which NBC affiliates’ leadership issued a supportive statement. Analysts told TV Tech that lethargic support suggested that Comcast/NBC offered a good-enough deal, but no match to conventional cable retransmission fees.

The network vs. affiliates tension regarding vMVPD deals was especially vivid at the Big Four networks’ affiliate associations session at the FCC. When executives of the groups met virtually with FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington and his staff earlier this year, they urged the commission to consider making online video distributors abide by the same retransmission consent rules as traditional MVPDs, according to the subsequent report of their law firm, Brooks Pierce. 

A new retransmission analysis by financial firm Matthew Lochte of Bond & Pecaro concludes that overall retrans fees have reached “mature equilibrium” thanks to cable cord cutting. The analysis, distributed by  the Media Financial Management Association (MFM), points out that especially “for smaller broadcast companies” the affiliation fees could “exceed total retrans revenues” from MVPDs and vMVPDs.”

Parrott Analytics, in its latest, lengthy analysis “The Value of Broadcast Television,”  builds a case for the symbiotic relationship between streaming video and broadcasting – although it focuses entirely on networks.

 Parrott points out that in 3Q22, “a whopping 33.8% of its U.S. audience demand” of streaming content is based on broadcast network series. Viewers easy “access to new recent installments of mainstream network programming is a major selling point, providing consumers with a convenient on-demand option and providing networks with extended exposure,” says Parrot’s study.

“The networks themselves, and their significant domestic reach, can help expand a streamer’s audience demographic while raising additional awareness,” the report continues. “Once users are exploring broadcast titles within a digital ecosystem, they tend to stay there. Linear network shows provide a strong affinity halo effect that keeps audiences on track for related consumption. “

Emily Barr, former president/CEO of Graham Media Group and a vigorous defender of local stations and network/affiliate collaboration, acknowledges the complications because “there are so many players in streaming.” She said she’d like to see a “more cooperative relationship” as vMVPD develops since the network/affiliate relations is based on local stations receiving retransmission revenue.

“If the networks want to keep a relationship with affiliates, they [must create}  a way to let the affiliates partake in the revenue,” Barr says, noting that, “There have been some discussions in that direction on behalf of some of the networks,” but that nothing conclusive has emerged.

Barr concedes that cord-cutting will continue to affect cable/satellite retrans revenue, but she foresees considerable revenue as the process unfolds, pointing out that networks are playing both sides, with investments to nurture some streaming services. “They’re trying to have a little bit of both [traditional retransmission plus direct-to-consumer streaming]” she said. But Barr stops short of predicting how the game will play out. 

Slowing Retrans Fee Growth
Rick Ducey, managing director of BIA, underscores affiliates’ growing reliance on retransmission fees, which “will continue to be a substantial” factor, now accounting for more than 50% of local stations’ revenue. BIA’s forecasts envision that retransmission revenues could go down to 39% by 2026, and that local stations will receive a “decreasing share of it” as networks demand higher reverse compensation fees because of ever-increasing programming rights costs. 

As for the current quiet ballet between broadcasters and digital platform operators, Ducey believes that “networks and affiliates boards have to negotiate what goes on the platform and determine what the split is.” He expects that affiliates will get “some economic benefit from vMVPDs” but notes that some major TV groups are already making such deals, much as they’ve done for their conventional retransmission agreements.  Obviously, no details are being made public yet. 

Ducey acknowledges that the networks have taken the lead in vMVPD negotiations on behalf of affiliates and “are probably not doing the best job for their affiliates.” He points out that local stations see cord cutting as impacting transmission fees, which will lead to “things getting more out of balance in favor of the networks.” Ducey agreed that when he probed into FCC or Capitol Hill involvement in this streaming retransmission issue, he also got “don’t want to talk about that” responses, which he characterizes as “a non-denial denial that’s probably an affirmation of an underlying issue that is brewing. No one said, ‘it is a non-issue.’ Semantics matter.”

Ducey envisions that there will be changes as broadcast affiliates complete deals with local MVPDs. “At some point the cable industry has to say ‘our ability to pay has been in decline, so we have to re-adjust fees,’” he predicts. “Margins are being compressed; looking ahead [there are] different businesses” taking shape. 

Growing Recognition of Unfolding Problems 
NAB’s meetings with top FCC Media Bureau officials and commissioners’ staff emphasized that “significant developments in the streaming marketplace may impact the Commission’s continued consideration of its pending proposal ‘to modernize [its] interpretation of the term … [vMVPD] by including’ … services that make available for purchase, by subscribers or customers, multiple linear streams of video programming, regardless of the technology used to distribute the programming,” according to the follow-up by Rick Kaplan, NAB’s chief legal officer and executive vice president, Legal and Regulatory Affairs.

Kaplan also pointed out that current streaming advancements may “affect the Commission’s calculus in determining whether virtual MVPDs should be deemed to be MVPDs.” And he emphasized that “must address certain critical implications of its proposal, including how to ensure broadcast signals carried by vMVPDs are protected from piracy, material degradation, and distribution beyond a station’s local market.” 

Bolstering broadcasters’ expectations that they can reach deals with vMVPD operators are recent reports from Park Associates analytics firm that emphasize the continuing appeal of conventional video programming. 

“Adults 55 and older disproportionately favor a linear experience while viewers 18-24 prefer watching content from YouTube, social media, and the like,” Parks Research Vice President Jennifer Kent told TV Tech. “Consumers value live content because it is engaging, sometimes interactive, and personal to their interests.” 

She cited a recent 50:50 joint venture between Comcast and Charter Communications (the two largest cable operators in the U.S.), to develop a nationwide streaming platform. Although the competitive strength of such a unified service may affect broadcast network initiatives, Kent says that the arrangement “may help Comcast and Charter pull ahead in subscriber growth and gain an edge in the crowded OTT market.”

Financial Considerations 
Amid this regulatory rigamarole, Wall St. is also monitoring the impact of the vMVPD relationship with local broadcasting.

Laura Martin, senior entertainment and internet analyst at Needham & Company, doesn’t believe streaming is undermining local affiliates, contending that stations “will get paid if they have viewership,” but is not specific about how those payments will be made.

“The affiliate has value,” Martin said, but adding that direct-to-consumer viewing is all about generating specific data, so “local TV will be forced to compete on the local data.”  It has to be “really good data about what kind of content attracts and keeps a viewer. It must pull its weight.”   

WASHINGTON, D.C.—American  American Television Alliance (ATVA) has issued a statement criticizing retransmission consent negotiating tactics by Apollo Global Management-owned Cox Media Group. 

Citing examples of what it called blackouts and threats of blackouts this holiday season, the ATVA said that those disruptions highlight why Standard General’s proposed $8.6 billion acquisition of Tegna poses a “significant threat to consumers”. 

The pay-TV operator-backed ATVA group noted that the broadcaster had already pulled its local television stations from Dish customers this holiday season even though the deal is under a great deal of scrutiny as the FCC continues to investigate Standard General's proposed acquisition of Tegna. Dish is a member of the ATVA.

“The unreasonable demands by broadcasters like Apollo’s Cox Media could not come at a worse time for families who rely on their local stations for news during the holiday season and gather together to watch holiday programming and their favorite NFL teams ahead of playoffs,” said ATVA spokesperson Jessica Kendust. “Instead of being on its best behavior as Apollo’s Cox Media pushes for FCC approval of its investment, Apollo’s Cox Media has proven it is willing to disenfranchise viewers who have done nothing wrong while the FCC is watching closely. This suggests that worse could be yet to come when the spotlight is removed.” 

 The ATVA acknowledged that Standard General sent a letter to the FCC seeking to assuage those concerns. In a bid to get rid of concerns that Standard General might work with Cox on retransmission consent deal, the letter clearly states that Cox's retransmission agreements won't apply to Tegna stations.  

Last week's letter to the FCC didn't, however, settle the matter for ATVA. 

“There is a bigger problem here,” added Kendust. “The ATVA has warned that this deal poses a more significant threat to consumers because the pending transaction will ‘intertwine’ Apollo’s Cox Media, Standard General, and Tegna in a way that permits the parties to collude—resulting in higher prices all around. Dish, an ATVA member, says that Apollo’s Cox Media has already attempted to negotiate for Tegna’s stations.”  

“We understand that Standard General has offered conditions to the FCC designed to address some of the harms we identified," the statement continued. "But the reality is that the proposed investment increases the parties’ incentive and ability to collude in ways unaddressed by Standard General’s offer. The FCC should look closely at the transaction and do whatever it takes to prevent big broadcast from colluding.” 

As previously reported, opponents of the deal have expressed concerns that the deal would, among other problems, increase retransmission fees and increase the cost of pay TV for consumers. 

More specifically they have worried that the deal has been structured so that Standard General and the private equity group Apollo Global Management would be able to work together to hike retransmission agreements. 

If the deal is approved, Cox Media Group, which is owned by Apollo, will acquire Tegna stations in Austin (KVUE), Dallas (WFAA and KMPX) and Houston (KHOU and KTBU) from Standard General and CMG and funds managed by affiliates of Apollo Global Management would hold non voting securities in the company.

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) has issued a statement about the Tegna, Dish TV carriage dispute, saying “this blackout is another example of broadcast conglomerates prioritizing profit over people.”

The ATVA, whose members include cable, satellite and telco operators as well as Dish, complained that the black out of Tegna stations in 53 U.S. markets impacting nearly 3 million Dish TV customers is part of a larger pattern of broadcasters making unreasonable financial demands on pay TV providers during negotiations for retransmission consent agreements. 

The revenue broadcasters have gained from these fees has grown to more than 12 billion dollars today, ATVA claimed. 

“Tegna’s demand for nearly a billion-dollar fee increase during the height of fall TV viewership is unacceptable yet unsurprising,” said ATVA spokesperson Jessica Kendust. “This weekend, millions of football fans across the country will be disappointed when they settle in to watch the game and realize it’s unavailable. They can blame big broadcast for that.”

In a statement on the black out, Tegna spokesperson Anne Bentley has said “Dish has refused to reach a fair, market-based agreement with us based on the competitive terms we’ve used to reach deals with numerous other providers that reflect the current market. While Dish is one of our smaller distributors, we regret any inconvenience for any of our customers, and hope that Dish will come back to the table to get a deal done to return our valuable programming to their system.” 

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) has issued a statement applauding the FCC for proposing to fine Gray Television more than $500,000 for violating the commission’s local ownership rules.  

“We agree with the FCC that Gray’s manipulation of the local ownership rules was an egregious ‘evasion’ that warrants this fine,” stated ATVA spokesperson, Jessica Kendust. “We hope that today's action is only the beginning of a much closer look at these issues – including consideration of closing all of the other loopholes that broadcasters use to evade the rules.”

The FCC’s local ownership rules prohibit a single entity from owning more than one of the top-four rated stations in a single market, the ATVA said. 

According to the FCC, Gray purchased the assets of the CBS Anchorage affiliate and began carrying CBS programming on its second full power affiliate. The FCC called this an "evasion" of its local ownership rules, and it was right to do so, the ATVA asserted. 

“Gray’s attempt to cure its violation in Anchorage by then moving the CBS programming from its full power station to the low power station and another feed on its NBC station is just another workaround broadcasters employ to exploit the system,” stated Kendust. “We urge the FCC to close these additional loopholes.” 

WASHINGTON—It may be a new, Democratic-led FCC, but broadcasters and cable operators are fighting the same retrans and media ownership battles.

On March 16, representatives of the American Television Alliance met with a top FCC staffer to argue that the current media ownership rules allow broadcasters to skirt limits and create triopolies and even quadropolies, loopholes they argued should be eliminated.

They argued that consolidation leads to higher retrans fees, that are passed on to consumers, as well as reduced diversity of voices.

ATVA also took aim at the larger retransmission consent regime, saying that 20% annual fee increases and record numbers of retrans-related blackouts did not represent a functioning market.

Only a few days later, representatives of the National Association of Broadcasters met with a different FCC staffer to talk about the same issues, but from quite a different perspective.

NAB said broadcasters can't provide local news, weather, sports and emergency info if they are not competitively viable, which means getting fair value for its valuable local content and not being saddled with regulations not placed on its pay-TV or over-the-top video or social media digital platforms not similarly subject to "onerous" restrictions.

NAB called ATVA an "astroturf group" trying to undermine Congress' will in establishing the retransmission consent/must-carry regime. 

As to the FCC's ownership regs, NAB said they were too strict, not too loose, as well as outdated and harmful. As for diversity of voices, it argues that the FCC has made "no progress" on encouraging diversity of ownership under the rules it claims are necessary to do that. 

"The Commission must face the reality that the very rules it has established to encourage diversity in fact make broadcast investment far less attractive for historically underrepresented groups," NAB told the commission. "Given that a potential investor can choose from many other related industries that are free from onerous ownership (and other) restrictions broadcasters face, the Commission’s own actions have made it even less likely its desired outcome will be achieved."

The FCC is required to review its broadcast regs every four years to determine if they are still necessary in the public interest.

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) is putting on an all-out blitz against Cox Media Group and its parent company Apollo Global Management after CMG stations went dark for AT&T/DirecTV customers in 20 markets on Feb. 2, including the CBS affiliates in five markets, Seattle and Dayton, Ohio, among them, just days before Super Bowl LV.

ATVA already highlighted what it says is a pattern for CMG to use the Super Bowl as a bargaining chip in retransmission negotiations, but the organization is continuing to criticize CMG and Apollo, describing the removal of stations as a “brazen assault on consumers and profiteering that defies any reconciliation with broadcast industry promises” to avoid service interruptions during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

It isn’t just the timing ahead of the Super Bowl that has drawn the ire of ATVA, it also is critical of pulling stations in markets like Yuma, Ariz., and Eureka, Calif., where it says Apollo controls multiple Big Four network affiliations, as well as Greenville, Miss., where Apollo controls all four national broadcast network feeds.

“So, with a flick of a switch, Apollo has not only cut off all national network programming to AT&T subscribers in the Greenville market, but also most local TV news in the midst of a public health crisis in one of the 15 states with the most confirmed COVID cases per residents,” said Jessica Kendust, ATVA spokeswoman.

ATVA calls on the FCC to take action to prevent such local consolidation, saying that groups like Apollo will take every advantage they can.

“Apollo’s out-and-out price-gouging shows why these rules must be protected, strengthened and actually enforced to eliminate a stampede of greed at American consumers’ expense,” Kendust added.

In its press release, ATVA points to comments made by NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith in March 2020 at the onset of the pandemic, saying that “broadcasters don’t want to see service interruptions of any kind.”

ATVA counters that statement with the claim that 2020 saw a record number of blackouts (342) despite the impact of the pandemic.

CMG referred to a statement from Paul Curran, its executive vice president of Television, from the press release announcing the stations being dropped when TV Tech asked for a comment. Here is that statement:

“CMG viewers know our trusted local stations are there to deliver the news and information they need to make decisions for their families. Its disappointing that AT&T/DIRECTV has decided to deprive them of that access. We take pride in serving our communities and we will fight to continue to fulfill this responsibility.”

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) is displeased that Cox Media Group has once again gone to what it believes is a staple of their playbook - threatening or withdrawing stations carrying the Super Bowl as part of retransmission negotiations.

Stations in 20 markets went dark on Feb. 2 as CMG and AT&T/DirecTV failed to reach a retransmission deal. Among the stations impacted are a few CBS affiliates, which means that unless a deal is struck before 6:30 p.m. ET on Feb. 7, DirecTV customers in those markets will not be able to watch Super Bowl LV.

ATVA supports AT&T’s claim that CMG is the one causing the blackout. However, for its part, CMG cites AT&T’s reluctance to accept its offers.

Per ATVA, this tactic is a familiar one for CMG, as it is reportedly the fifth time they have threatened or withdrawn stations that are broadcasting the Super Bowl. Past instances involved Charter Spectrum, Dish Network, Verizon Fios and CableOne, ATVA details.

“This latest contrived blackout holding such an important national event like the Super Bowl hostage demonstrates how broadcasters like Cox Media Group intentionally cause maximum disruption and harm for consumers in order to extract exorbitant fees,” said ATVA spokeswoman Jessica Kendust. “The price-gouging behavior of broadcasters like Cox has become increasingly shameless and exploitative and demands action from policymakers in Washington.”

Kendust says that there is a correlation between the rise in the number of broadcast blackouts in the past decade and the “more than seven-fold” increase in station fees. The number of blackouts have risen to new heights in the last couple of years, particularly, with 278 in 2019 and 342 in 2020, according to ATVA.

ATVA wants policymakers to update retransmission consent laws so as to prevent broadcastings from weaponizing stations licenses and government-granted exclusivities.

WASHINGTON—ATVA is not entirely pleased with who the recently approved Congressional Stimulus Package will allow to access small business funds. As it had previously criticized, it believes that the legislation opens up small business aid to benefit large broadcast conglomerates.

Per the new stimulus package, individual TV stations can apply for PPP loans as long as the individual station employs no more than 500 employees per physical location; this includes stations that may be owned by large station groups like Nexstar, Tegna or others. ATVA says that by law these station groups are required to handle personnel, programming and finances for these stations, meaning that their stations should not be able to be classified individually.

“These big broadcasters have reported huge profits this year and now they are positioned to reap millions of dollars each in a handout from taxpayers,” said Jessica Kendust, an ATVA spokesperson. “We hope these large and profitable companies understand the public service obligations expected of those demanding taxpayer support—obligations they should keep in mind when deciding whether to black out the ‘locally focused or emergency information’ that Congress is seeking to protect.”

Kendust points out that despite people’s reliance on local news during the pandemic, major blackouts have occurred throughout the year, including recent issues with Tegna and AT&T (now resolved) and Nexstar and Dish.

“These blackouts should never have happened,” Kendust said. “And now that taxpayers are subsidizing these broadcasters’ already-profitable operations, they must stop using these tactics.”

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance is on the side of AT&T in the dispute with Tegna that led to the blackout of more than 60 local TV stations across the country as of Dec. 1 for DirecTV and U-Verse subscribers.

Tegna-owned stations—including ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox and the CW—went dark for DirecTV and U-Verse subscribers at 7 p.m. ET on Dec. 1 because the two sides could not come to a retransmission agreement. ATVA had harsh criticisms for a situation it believes Tegna is primarily responsible for.

“It is alarming, albeit unsurprising, that Tegna is profiteering off the need for local news at a time as critical as during a national pandemic,” said Jessica Kendust, ATVA spokesperson.

“Following a self-reported revenue of $738 million in 2020’s third quarter, Tegna’s demand for astronomical retransmission fees on the backs of American consumers is baffling,” Kendust continued. “ATVA is disappointed that Tegna is ignoring the public interest  to weaponize blackouts as a negotiation bargaining chip.”

WASHINGTON—Broadcasters should be required to provide a single HD feed of their television service before offering new ancillary or supplementary services, like Broadcast Internet, the American Television Alliance (ATVA) told the FCC.

This stance was raised in ATVA’s comments on the FCC’s “Promoting Broadcast Internet Innovation Through ATSC 3.0,” during which it also brought up the suggestion that the FCC should update its fees for ancillary and supplementary services.

ATVA, which represents cable and satellite operators, states that in 1997 the FCC required broadcasters to transmit in standard definition (it declined to require HD) and that they could devote as much of their spectrum to ancillary and supplementary services as they wished, as long as television remained the primary offering of TV broadcasters—“We expect that the fundamental use of the 6 MHz DTV license will be for the provision of free over-the-air television service.”

As ATSC 3.0 becomes available for broadcasters, it is estimated that a TV station would need as little as 8% to transmit a single SD signal. But if 90% of a broadcaster’s spectrum is used for something other than transmitting a TV signal, it is no longer ancillary, per ATVA.

With customers now expecting higher resolution programming, ATVA believes the FCC should now require broadcasters to offer and simulcast a single HD programming stream, so as not to derogate the primary service with ancillary services.

Another point raised in ATVA’s comments is that the current ancillary and supplementary service fees of 5%—which hasn’t been changed in 18 years—be revisited. The associations suggests the commission analyze what an appropriate fee level would be at this time as not to confer “additional unwanted structural preferences on broadcasters.”

ATVA stresses that it welcomes new ancillary and supplementary broadcast services, but that it thinks the rules need to be updated to maintain TV as broadcasters’ primary service.

ATVA’s full comments are available through the FCC ECFS. 

WASHINGTON—When it comes to issues with the broadcast competition landscape, the American Television Alliance (ATVA) thinks broadcasters should be looking at their own actions.

In comments filed to the FCC for its biennial competition report, ATVA highlighted four key areas that they believe have negatively affected the competition of the marketplace for multichannel video programming distributor carriage of TV broadcast signals:

• Consolidation by broadcasters despite FCC rules they argue prohibit such actions, leading to reduced over-the-air broadcast voices;
• Increased rate of blackouts; 
• Increased retransmission fees of MVPDs; and 
• Smaller MVPDs exiting marketplace as a result 

This is counter to what the NAB is arguing, which focuses on the increased competition from digital and other sources and the need for fewer/modernized regulations.

ATVA says that broadcasters have been exploiting “loopholes” when it comes to local media ownership of stations so they can control multiple network feeds in a single market. This consolidation has in turn led disputes over the increase of retransmission rates and to a record number of blackouts of local programming in 2019. All of these factor into the exit of smaller MVPDs like Google Fiber, BELD Internet, Three Rivers Communications and RTC Communications essentially exiting the cable business, ATVA claims.

“ATVA has suggested a variety of solutions to these problems in various proceedings,” the organization’s comments read. “We have, for example, urged the commission to find that certain broadcaster conduct violates the ‘totality of the circumstances’ test. We have also urged the commission to look at broadcasters’ use of loopholes to evade the FCC’s local ownership rules. Here, we urge the Office of Economics and Analysis—and the commission more broadly—to consider these issues and potential solutions as it drafts this year’s marketplace competition report.”

ATVA members include ACA Connects, AT&T, Charter, Dish, Verizon, Mediacom and USTelecom.

ATVA’s complete comments are available online. 

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) does not believe that broadcast conglomerates should have access to small business aid, but as the tide seems to be going that way, has now asked that Congress hold broadcasters receiving funding responsible for staying on the air.

ATVA wants Congress to include with any small business aid given to broadcasters a condition that requires the station provide their signals without interruption.

“If Congress decides to allocate these critical tax dollars to major broadcasting groups, it should require that they not only provide their signals to all consumers, but also refrain from blacking out their signals to customers of any cable, telco or satellite provider for three years,” said ATVA spokesperson Jessica Kendust.

Organizations, including the NAB, the National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters and bipartisan groups of the Senate and House, have been making cases that any future stimulus packages, as well as the benefits available for small businesses (like the Paycheck Protection Program), help local media and broadcast outlets as they help provide critical information on the coronavirus pandemic and have been impacted by the loss of ad revenue during this time.

ATVA’s position, however, is that local TV stations are being reclassified as their own business by the large conglomerates so they can meet the qualifications for small businesses (500 employees or less). ATVA argues that this is not accurate, as when ATVA member stations need to negotiate a contract with a station owned by a large broadcaster, they negotiate with the headquarters, not the individual station.

“Broadcasters are claiming that the service they provide is so important to the public interest that taxpayers must preserve it, even if that means providing ‘small business’ loans to multibillion dollar conglomerates,” said Kendust. “If Congress agrees, it should ensure that such programming remain available to every American, including cable and satellite subscribers who cannot receive it over-the-air. We are not suggesting that broadcasters go uncompensated for providing their signals—but if taxpayer dollars are going to subsidize keeping them on air, then those broadcasters must ensure their signals are actually available to all viewers.”

UPDATE: NAB responded with its own comment from Executive Vice President of Communications Dennis Wharton:

“NAB is disappointed that the American Television Alliance—a front group for AT&T, Charter, Dish and other Big Pay TV companies—is leading a cynical effort to deny local media badly-needed access to SBA loans during the coronavirus crisis.

“Americans from coast-to-coast are flocking to local broadcasters in record numbers for credible, lifesaving information during the COVID-19 crisis, while advertising revenues at local stations have plunged. Meanwhile, as ATVA attempts to exploit this global pandemic for political purposes, its Big Pay TV funders have cut off communication services for out-of-work customers, despite promises to the FCC, as well as ignoring obligations to provide local TV signals in markets underserved by local print journalism.”

The full statement is available on NAB.org.

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) has an objection to the NAB proposal made to Congress about providing coronavirus relief funds to TV stations. ATVA claims that the NAB proposal would allow large TV station conglomerates like Hearst, Tegna, Sinclair and Nexstar gain access to relief funds primarily meant for small businesses.

In its proposal, which was also supported by a group of newspaper associations and the National Association for Black Owned Broadcasters, NAB asked Congress to provide federal advertising funds for local media stations and allow them to qualify for the Paycheck Protection Plan. ATVA says the NAB proposal would classify each TV station as its own business, but says that the majority of TV stations are owned and controlled by large station groups.

“The PPP was designed by Congress to provide relief to small businesses in need, and is already stretched beyond its initial funding limitations,” said Jessica Kendust, ATVA spokesperson. “For NAB to suggest that even its very largest members be eligible for these funds once replenished, is not only misguided, but harmful to those who need it the most.”

“These conglomerates are obviously not ‘small businesses,’ nor are they simply collections of stations operating independently,” Kendust continued. “I urge our leaders in Congress to see through NAB’s misguided proposal and to direct PPP funds to the small businesses they were intended for.”

NAB declined to comment on ATVA’s press release.

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) last week dubbed 2019 the “worst year ever” for TV blackouts related to retransmission consent negotiations between TV broadcasters and MPVDs.

“Consumers have lost billions of dollars and have been used as pawns,” said ATVA spokesman Trent Duffy.

For the first seven months of the year, TV blackouts have totaled 213, which ties the total for 2017.

ATVA, a coalition of consumer groups, cable, satellite and telephone companies and independent programmers, pointed to a couple of ongoing disputes, which have cut off local TV to subscribers, to underscore the scope of the blackouts.

On July 16, Meredith Corp. pulled its stations in 12 markets from DISH Network, leaving millions of satellite TV subscribers out in the cold, ATVA said.

Nexstar Media Group, too, has pulled 125 stations in about 100 cities around the country from DIRECTV, U-Verse and DIRECTV Now, leaving millions of subscribers without access, it said.

“Congress is right to be looking at our outdated video laws, because the blackout crisis is reaching an epic proportion, and we don’t expect it to stop until Congress does something about it,” said Duffy.

Currently, Congress is considering the reauthorization of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act (STELAR), which ATVA supports. Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) has advocated for reforming retransmission consent.

“Congress should not only re-authorize STELAR so rural America can continue receiving all their broadcast channels, but also modernize the retransmission consent rules, which currently favor broadcasters at the expense of consumers and competition,” said Duffy.

ATVA released annual totals for blackouts related since 2010. Together, they total more than 1,000. The yearly totals are:

• 213 blackouts in 2019
• 165 blackouts in 2018
• 213 blackouts in 2017
• 104 blackouts in 2016
• 193 blackouts in 2015
• 94 blackouts in 2014
• 119 blackouts in 2013
• 90 blackouts in 2012
• 42 blackouts in 2011
• 8 blackouts in 2010

WASHINGTON—Though not yet through the halfway point of the year, the American Television Alliance has reported that so far for 2019 there has been 62 station blackouts for the U.S. video marketplace. This has been a consistent trend in recent years, as ATVA says that there have been nearly 550 blackouts in the last three and a half years, with an average of more than 12 a month.

On May 30, seven small station groups owned by Sinclair Broadcasting Group went dark on AT&T’s DirecTV, DirecTV Now and U-Verse in 14 cities. The stations are Deerfield Media, MPS Media, GoCom Media of Illinois, Howard Stirk Holdings, Roberts Media, Second Generation of Iowa and Waitt Broadcasting.

“The video marketplace keeps changing, but the TV blackout crisis and retrans racket that hurts consumers stays the same,” said Trent Duffy, ATVA spokesman. “In this case, one of America’s biggest broadcasters is making a mockery of station ownership restrictions by unduly controlling what ‘independent’ broadcasters are doing.”

Congress is currently considering the reauthorization of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act. ATVA supports the reauthorization of STELAR, saying that up to 870,000 satellite subscribers could lose access to broadcast channels if it is not renewed.

“Congress should not only re-authorize STELAR so rural America can continue receiving all their broadcast channels, but also modernize the retransmission consent rules, which currently favor broadcasters at the expense of consumers and competition,” said Duffy.

WASHINGTON—The American Television Alliance has reiterated its position asking the FCC to reconsider three separate objections it previously raised to the commission’s ATSC 3.0 Order authorizing Next-Gen TV broadcast service in reply comments filed April 23 with the agency.

ATVA is asking the FCC to issue an order on reconsideration that requires separate negotiations for first-time ATSC 3.0 signal carriage by MVPDs, mandates LPTV and translator stations to simulcast ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 signals and makes stations provide viewers and MVPDs with prior notice before being allowed to degrade their signal format or picture quality.

ATVA originally petitioned the FCC March 5 to reconsider its November 2017 ATSC 3.0 order asking the commission to address the same three issues. 

[Read: ATVA Files Petition For Limited Reconsideration of ATSC 3.0 Order]

In this week’s filing, ATVA argued the FCC should not reject its petition for reconsideration, despite its presentation of the same arguments in earlier proceedings, because it “believe[s] that aspects of the ATSC 3.0 Order constitute a ‘material error’….”

The FCC can “grant a petition for reconsideration relying on arguments previously raised, so long as the petitioner demonstrates ‘material error or omission in the original order,’” the filing said. “If the Commission comes to agree with us, no legal barrier prevents it from granting reconsideration.”

In their opposition to the petition for reconsideration, broadcasters have said “marketplace incentives” will prevent them from engaging in the three practices to which ATVA objects. “We have always been highly skeptical of this claim,” the reply comments said.

The reconsideration process gives the FCC the chance “to address these issues despite broadcasters’ promises.” 

For a comprehensive source of TV Technology’s ATSC 3.0 coverage, see our ATSC3 silo.  

WASHINTON—The American Television Alliance (ATVA) has petitioned the Federal Communications Commission to reconsider three aspects or its November 2017 order authorizing broadcasters to begin transmitting ATSC 3.0 signals.

Specifically, the petition, filed March 5, asks the FCC to reconsider its decisions:

• Not to require separate negotiations for first-time MVPD carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals;

• To permit low-power and translator stations to flash-cut to ATSC 3.0; and

• To allow broadcasters to degrade their signals without first warning viewers and MVPDs.

The ATVA petition argues that if the transition to ATSC 3.0 is “to be truly ‘voluntary’ for all parties,” carriage of Next-Gen TV signals should not be obtained “by threatening existing television service.”

[ATSC 3.0 Marches On]

“We believe that the best and most effective way to prevent broadcasters from engaging in such conduct is to require separate negotiations for first-time carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals,” the petition said.

ATVA previously predict this situation based on what it described as “broadcasters’ demonstrated conduct” under different circumstances, such as the forced bundling of unwanted programming. Since then, there have been “a handful of cases” in which broadcasters began doing so even before the ATSC 3.0 authorization order was released, it said.

Some MVPDs already “have been forced to grant ‘ATSC 3.0 MFNs [most favored nation status]’ for a technology that is not yet commercially available,” the petition added.

Regarding low-power and TV translator flash-cutting to ATSC 3.0, the ATVA has “never agreed with the notion of exempting” these stations from the requirement to simulcast ATSC 1.0 and 3.0,” the petition said. Doing so “causes exactly the same harm as does allowing full-power station to flash cut,” according to ATVA.

ATVA argued that narrow waivers are a better way to address low-power concerns with simulcasting “than a broad, class-based exemption” and that “narrow waivers of the simulcasting coverage requirement would address nearly every reason” given to exempt these stations from the simulcast mandate, it said.

One circumstance “appears unamenable to relief” offered by coverage requirement waivers, however, the petition noted. It involves situations in which a low-power station is displaced in the repack and forced to build both ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 facilities, it said.

“Even here, however, a broad exemption for all low power stations is not required,” it said, adding that individual waivers of the simulcasting requirement is a better option.

As relates to degrading the broadcast signal without warning, ATVA acknowledges that no current FCC rule prevents a broadcaster from dropping HD service in favor of SD. “Yet, in the normal course, broadcasters have wanted to transmit in high-definition and had no incentive to cease doing so,” the petition said.

[HPA Panel Examines Road to ATSC 3.0 and Repack]

However, as broadcasters transitioning to ATSC 3.0 are required to simulcast, they will have “a new and specific incentive to degrade their signals.” Broadcasters “have insisted throughout this proceeding that they must be able to do so in order for the ATSC3.0 transition to succeed,” the petition said.

ATVA described the ATSC 3.0 transition as a “special case” and called for the FCC to “insist on simple notification rules corresponding to the unique circumstances presented.”

Dennis Wharton, EVP, Communications at NAB, downplayed the ATVA petition. “The cable industry is trotting out the same arguments the FCC already rejected,” said Wharton. “It’s no secret broadcast industry innovation is great for consumers, but bad for cable. So it’s no surprise they continue to oppose a competing industry’s willingness to invest in its product.”

Editor’s note: All emphasis (italicized text) is the ATVA’s.

For a comprehensive list of TV Technology’s ATSC 3.0 coverage, see our ATSC3 silo.

WASHINGTON—Last year TV broadcasters set a record for the number of blackouts recorded in a single year, taking down cable and satellite TV signals 213 times, according to the American TV Alliance. By way of comparison, there were eight TV blackouts nationwide in 2010, the alliance said.

“Broadcaster blackouts roared back in 2017 after the FCC suspended its investigation of abusive broadcast industry tactics,” said ATVA spokesman Trent Duffy in a press release issued today. “Broadcasters have weaponized TV blackouts, deliberately targeting live sports and other must-see TV to inflict maximum pain on innocent consumers.”

Broadcasters often black out channels when retransmission negotiations reach an impasse. The alliance predicts this tactic will continue until Congress and the FCC get involved “to protect consumers,” said Duffy. ATVA has asked the FCC to ban broadcasters from blacking out marquee programming as leverage during retransmission negotiations

The American TV Alliance, which calls itself “a voice for the TV viewer,” counts among its partners the American Cable Association, the NTCA – Rural Broadband Association, DISH Network, Charter Communications and Verizon, according to the group’s website.

Tens of millions of pay-TV viewers were denied access to local news, weather and live sporting events in 2017, the alliance said.

“Broadcasters pocketed $9.3 billion in 2017 from pay TV customers for ‘free’ TV,” the alliance said in its press release, quoting figures from SNL Kagan. Some of the events broadcasters blacked out last year included the Super Bowl, awards shows, college football bowl games, the NFL Playoffs, March Madness and other programming, it said.

The alliance singled out CBS, which it said denied millions of DISH Network customer in 18 markets across 26 states access to the 2017 Thanksgiving Day Parade, holiday specials and NFL football. Further, CBS earned an additional $1 billion from retrans last year and is on track to collet $2.5 billion more by 2020, it said. Overall, TV broadcasters are projected to earn an additional $12.8 billion by 2023.

According to the ATVA, by year the number of blackouts totals: 213 in 2017; 104 in 2016; 193 in 2015; 94 in 2014; 119 in 2013; 90 in 2012; 42 in 2011 and eight in 2010.

In a response to ATVA’s press release, NAB’s Executive Vice President of Communications Dennis Wharton released the following statement:

“ATVA should look in the mirror to determine who's really responsible for retrans disruptions: ATVA's own members—the largest pay-TV companies in the business—cynically force impasses in hopes that Washington will inject itself into free market negotiations. Despite pay TV posturing, 99 percent of all retrans deals are completed successfully, and we look forward to continue partnerships with pay TV operators for our valued, most-watched broadcast programming.”

WASHINGTON—An alliance of pay-TV operators and consumer groups this week claimed that the Next Gen TV standards (aka ATSC 3.0) will “force” consumers to purchase new TV sets, adding that proposed rules that would require broadcasters to simulcast ATSC 1.0 won’t prevent viewers from losing access to free over-the-air TV.

Echoing recent comments from FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, who last week made the same claims, the American Television Alliance, a coalition of cable networks and MVPDs including Mediacom, Dish, Charter, AT&T and Verizon, along with consumer advocacy groups New America Foundation and Taxpayer Protection Alliance, voiced their criticisms in comments filed with the FCC this week. The group claimed that although broadcasters proposed voluntary adoption of the standard, safeguards such as a “lighthouse” station arrangement—in which stations in certain markets would share responsibilities for ensuring the continued broadcasting of the current DTV standard—are not enough.

‘DEVIL IS GOING TO BE IN THE DETAILS’

Michael Nilsson, outside counsel for the ATVA, said broadcasters have changed their tune since the FCC took up the proposed standard more than six months ago. “As the proceeding went on, some of the broadcasters, including some of the well-known proponents of it, backed away from that [simulcasting] commitment,” Nilsson said in a phone press conference Thursday. “They said ‘well simulcasting is sort of a nice thing, but we shouldn’t have to do it where simulcasting is impractical or impossible.’ Assuming that there is a simulcast requirement, the devil is going to be in the details to determine how effective that requirement is.”

Nilsson also warned that such simulcasting may not be in HD. “If today a broadcaster is showing a football game in high-def but the simulcast is in standard definition, I think people are going to be unhappy, and they’re going to have a right to be unhappy.”

Retransmission is also a concern, with Nilsson advocating a separate set of negotiations for ATSC 3.0 transmissions to protect viewers from threatened blackouts in which broadcasters pull their signals from pay-TV systems. “We think the right way for the rules to work is for first time carriers of these new signals to be negotiated separately,” Nilsson said. “That way if the signals have market value… pay TV providers are going to want to carry them and they’re going to want to pay for them,” adding that the lack of such protection could lead to pay TV viewers losing access to marquee events such as the Super Bowl or the World Series. “That to us doesn’t sound voluntary and broadcasters have always said that this is supposed to be a voluntary transition for everybody.”

PUBLIC INTEREST

Representing the New America Foundation, Michael Calabrese said that even after last spring’s spectrum auctions, broadcasters are still sitting on billions of dollars worth of spectrum and questioned whether the new standard will fit in with broadcasters’ public interest obligations.

“Less than one-third of the TV band was just auctioned this year and that raised $20 billion dollars, and so they continue to operate on spectrum worth more than $40 billion dollars and unlike the mobile carriers, who they seek to compete with, they did not pay for their spectrum,” he said. “If they want to switch their business model, there should be an auction.” He also added that “we don’t believe the FCC at this time should authorize a permanent transition that gives local stations the option to stop broadcasting the current DTV standard.”

Calabrese also said that the Sinclair Broadcast Group, a strong advocate for ATSC 3.0, will be the biggest beneficiary of the Next Gen TV standard because of its patent royalties and voiced concern that the FCC is considering the proposed adoption while at the same time considering loosening media ownership rules. 

“It's very troubling to us that the FCC is rushing this order through with little debate and few protections for consumers, and that's particularly true because it's being rushed along in parallel with broadcast ownership deregulation,” Calabrese said. “In other words, the elimination of limits on broadcast ownership, which permits Sinclair-Tribune to qualify, and also no action at all on insuring good faith bargaining on retransmission consent fees. And if you add this on top of patent royalties from the entire industry, including from the MVPDs, as well as with Tribune in their stable, [it gives them] far more leverage in retransmission negotiations.”

BACKWARD COMPATIBILITY

The lack of backward compatibility with current TV sets was also raised, as the groups claimed that viewers would need to purchase new sets or equipment in order to receive ATSC 3.0 over the air.

“Broadcasting groups have been talking a great game about this standard, and we've been repeatedly promised that we'll have improvements in viewing quality, over-the-air broadcasting, targeted advertising, and accessibility features for emergency services,” said Ross Marchand with the Tax Payer Protection Alliance. “Now these features may turn out to be as great as they've been trumped up to be but whether it's technology, telecom, or even healthcare, quality improvements never quite happen in response to complicated onerous mandates from Washington, and that's exactly what we're getting with those purposed standards.”

Noting the increase in cord cutting and subsequent rise on viewers accessing free over-the-air television, Marchand noted that many of these households are lower income and that even spending a nominal fee for equipment to access ATSC 3.0 could be onerous.

“Now $50 or so for new equipment may not seem like much to most people, but when you're living from paycheck to paycheck. these out-of-pocket costs get in the way of putting food on the table or paying for gas to go to work and as taxpayers, customers are going have to bear the brunt of even more costs,” Marchand said. “Taxpayers will be forced to fork over millions upon millions of dollars for TV broadcasting they're already paying for in their own household, and in addition, the cost from public broadcasters like PBS could prove to be astronomical.”

Dennis Wharton, spokesman for the NAB responded to ATVA’s warning. “If a consumer buys a dongle/converter box [rather than buying a new Next Gen TV set] that should enable reception of Ultra HD, targeted local ads, and other advancements,” Wharton said. “The only thing you would not receive with a dongle/box would be the emergency alerting feature that ‘wakes up’ a TV when there's a tornado coming through town.

“No consumer will be ‘forced’ to buy a new TV set,” he added, “but we think that over a certain number of years, OTA-reliant consumers will replace existing TV sets with Next Gen sets [just as consumers replace existing cars and cellphones with newer models].” 

For a comprehensive list of TV Technology’s ATSC 3.0 coverage, see our ATSC3 silo.