VIENNA, Va.—Richard T. Kaplar, president and CEO of The Media Institute since 1981, will step down effective Jan. 31, 2026, the organization said, to be succeeded by former FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly.

Now president of MPORiellyConsulting, O’Rielly served on the FCC as a Republican from 2013 through 2020. During his tenure, O’Rielly supported technologies such as NextGenTV and 5G wireless networks, worked to foster diversity in media ownership and to modernize media regulations that hampered media growth and innovation, the institute said.

Kaplar plans to remain with the Media Institute as a consultant.

“I’ve had the privilege of advancing The Media Institute’s mission for 44 years and especially during these last eight years as its head,” Kaplar said. “It’s been extremely satisfying, but I think it’s time for change. I fully support Mike O’Rielly and I look forward to his energy and ideas for the Institute.”

Kaplar joined The Media Institute in 1981 and served as its vice president from 1984 to 2016. He was named executive director in 2016 and kept that title when he was named as its head in January 2018. He was named president and CEO in December 2018, just the third person to fill that role.

Kaplar has been involved in the creation of every enduring program in the Media Institute’s history, the organization said, including the Communications Forum Luncheon Series that began in 1981; its annual awards banquet that started in 1982 and which he rebranded as the Free Speech America Gala in 2018; and Free Speech Week, which started in 2005.

As the institute’s president, he launched the Digital Media Center in 2020; “The Madison Project: Free Speech and Press in American Democracy” in 2023; and created the Fellows Program that includes O’Rielly, a senior fellow; Distinguished Senior Fellow and Digital Media Laureate Stuart N. Brotman; and James Madison Fellow Patrick Butler.

Kaplar has written, edited or produced more than 40 books and monographs on a variety of communications policy topics. His areas of interest include freedom of speech and the First Amendment; competition and market economics; and government regulation of telecommunications.

In addition to serving as a Media Institute senior fellow, O’Reilly is a member of its First Amendment Advisory Council and serves on the steering committee of its Madison Project.

“I am humbled by the Board’s selection of me to replace Rick Kaplar, who has so ably and honorably served The Media Institute for decades,” O’Reilly said. “The organization’s defense and promotion of the principles within the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment remain critical to our nation and political discourse and will be central to my work at The Media Institute.”

O’Rielly came to the FCC following a long Capitol Hill career, spending 20 years as a staffer in the House and the Senate. He was policy adviser in the Office of the Senate Republican Whip and prior to that was a policy analyst for the Senate Republican Policy Committee.

He began his Capitol Hill career in the House in 1994 as a staffer for Rep. Tom Bliley (R-Va.), then moved to the Senate as an aide to Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.). He then moved to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, where he remained until 2003.

“With a career spanning five decades, Rick Kaplar has been an inspirational leader of the Institute,” said Richard E. Wiley, chairman of The Media Institute’s board of trustees. “We both are pleased to welcome Mike O’Rielly as our new and outstanding President and CEO.”

The Media Institute is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization specializing in communications policy and the First Amendment. For more on the group, visit www.mediainstitute.org.

ARLINGTON, Va.—Michael O’Rielly has joined The Media Institute as a senior fellow, according to an announcement made by Richard T. Kaplar, president of the Institute. O’Rielly has also been appointed a member of the First Amendment Advisory Council, the foundation’s flagship advisory body comprising First Amendment scholars and practitioners.

After more than three decades as a public servant, including service in the U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate and as an FCC Commissioner, O’Rielly was previously a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute’s Center for the Economics of the Internet, and principal at MPORielly Consulting LLC.  He served as a commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission from 2013 through 2020.

 “Michael O’Rielly shares the same values we hold dear: sound communications policy, a competitive media industry and a strong First Amendment,” said Institute President Richard Kaplar.  “We are truly honored and gratified to welcome him as a senior fellow of the institute and as a member of our First Amendment Advisory Council.  With his insightful perspectives on media and telecom policy and his love of the First Amendment, Commissioner Mike O’Rielly is a highly respected voice in the public policy arena.”

“Being invited to join The Media Institute—a legendary institution set on defending and preserving the First Amendment—as senior fellow and member of its First Amendment Advisory Council is an extremely deep honor,” said O’Rielly.  “Hopefully, my record shows that I welcome the opportunity, even when not easy or popular, to push back against anyone seeking to denigrate, malign or infringe upon our cherished rights preserved by the U.S. Constitution.”

The Media Institute is a nonprofit foundation working to advance sound communications policy, freedom of speech, and excellence in journalism.  The Digital Media Center is a program of The Media Institute that brings clarity to key issues at the heart of today’s digital revolution.  For more information, visit the Institute online at www.mediainstitute.org.

WASHINGTON—Michael O’Rielly’s tenure as an FCC commissioner has officially come to an end after a seven-year stint.

Following the Dec. 10 FCC Open Commission Meeting in which O’Rielly took part in, O’Rielly’s FCC twitter account was deactivated Thursday night. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel issued comments on the exiting O’Rielly.

“For over seven years, Mike O’Rielly has served with distinction on the Federal Communications Commission,” said Pai. “And since January 2017, he has been an important partner as the commission has accomplished one of the most ambitious policy agendas in agency history.”

Pai specifically mentioned O’Rielly’s work on the 3.5 GHz spectrum auction, the modernization of rules governing children’s television and more.

“I’m proud to call Mike O’Rielly a colleague and a friend, and I wish him and his family the best in the next adventure,” Pai added.

“Mike O’Rielly has been both a colleague and friend during his tenure at the Federal Communications Commission,” Rosenworcel said. “I am grateful for his public service. I am also grateful for the work we were able to do together to expand the availability of unlicensed spectrum and Wi-Fi and safeguard funding for public safety and 911. I appreciate his consistently principled approach to the issues before the agency and I wish him all the best in the future.”

According to TVT’s sister publication Multichannel News, O’Rielly will move to the private sector.

O’Rielly’s tenure at the FCC was slated to end after President Donald Trump rescinded his nomination for O’Rielly to serve another five-year term. The decision came after O’Rielly made public comments questioning the FCC’s authority to address Sec. 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which deals with protections for social media companies, policy that President Trump has been trying to overturn.

Nathan Simington, who Trump nominated to take O’Rielly’s seat on the FCC, was confirmed by the Senate on Dec. 8. 

WASHINGTON—FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly is making a final push to further “modernize” many broadcast media regulations before his time at the FCC comes to an end.

O’Rielly’s renomination to the commission was withdrawn by President Donald Trump, reportedly after O’Rielly disagreed with the president’s attempt to regulate social media. This will conclude O’Rielly’s time at the FCC. Though his final day has yet to be announced, Trump has nominated his potential replacement.

In a blog post on the FCC website, O’Rielly lays out that while the commission has updated a number of what he believed to be outdated media regulations for broadcasters that “alleviate real burdens,” he finds that there is still work to be done and lays out a path to do so.

The first such effort would be to end the freeze on license modifications. O’Rielly says the freeze put in place a decade ago for technical updates or station modifications to help facilitate the Broadcast Incentive Auction and repack was the right move. But for stations that were not involved in the repack it has prevented them from investing in and upgrading their physical infrastructure. With the repack concluded, O’Rielly believes that lifting the freeze will allow stations to start the process of making critical updates that will help stations better serve their communities.

O’Rielly also says that the criteria for a failing broadcast station needs to be updated. Common ownership of broadcast stations cannot occur within the same market without a waiver, with one way to obtain such a waiver is to prove a station is “failing.” However, O’Rielly believes that the requirements for proving a stations is failing are outdated, specifically when it comes to judging a station on its ratings and revenue. He provides this year as an example, as COVID has often increased TV ratings for stations, but the stations are still losing money because of the loss of ad revenue.

Instead, O’Rielly says the commission should establish new criteria for granting waivers that will allow for mergers that could improve local and/or live programming.

Additional areas that O’Rielly say can be reworked are allowing waivers of LPTV processing rules for in-market station moves, updating the rules to VHF stations seeking to upgrade to UHF channels and the easing of the process for TV stations to change their community of license in certain cases.

“Harmonizing our broadcast regulations with market realities is a commission obligation,” said O’Rielly. “While holistic change is unlikely in the near-term, the changes I’m proposing today could be pursued within the bounds of our current rules while significantly improving the overall regulatory regime.”

O’Rielly’s full blog post is available on the FCC website. 

WASHINGTON—President Trump has announced his intention to nominate Nathan Simington to fill the FCC seat being vacated by Michael O'Rielly, whose renomination was withdrawn by the president apparently because O'Rielly was critical of the his effort to regulate social media.

Simington is currently senior advisor at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which is the president's chief communications advisory arm, where he worked on 5G security/supply chain issues.

He also reportedly worked on NTIA's petition to the FCC to come up with the regime for regulating social media that the president had called for and that O'Rielly had criticized.

Simington is formerly senior counsel to wireless company Brightstar, where the White House points out he "negotiated deals with companies across the spectrum of the telecommunications and internet industry, including most of the world’s leading wireless carriers.

Before that he was at powerhouse law firm Kirkland & Ellis as an associate in its corporate practice.

O'Rielly can continue to serve in his post either until Congress adjourns or Simington has had a nomination hearing in the Senate and is confirmed in that body, whichever comes first.

If O'Rielly left before his mandatory exit, it would leave the FCC at a 2-2 tie, which Republicans clearly don't want. And even if he stayed through the end of December, the FCC could be at a 2-2 tie depending on how long it took to vet and vote a successor given the intervention of a presidential election and a lame-duck Congress with few legislative days.

O'Rielly has already been vetted and voted in the Commerce Committee and had only been awaiting a Senate vote when the president abruptly pulled the nomination, likely over an O'Rielly speech to the Media Institute in which he raised concerns about the negative consequences of regulating social media company content, something the president has pushed.  

But there had also been a hold on O'Rielly's nomination placed by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, who was unhappy with an FCC decision to allow Ligado to use spectrum adjacent to GPS for terrestrial broadband. That was a unanimous decision, but O'Rielly's is the only FCC nomination up for renewal and that hold was considered a signal to the whole FCC of Inhofe's unhappiness rather than any desire to derail O'Rielly. 

O'Rielly tweeted his support for his successor, saying: "I extend my sincere congrats to Mr. Simington for selection to join @FCC, and offer best wishes for a smooth confirmation process and successful term at the Commission."

WASHINGTON—Michael O’Rielly’s renomination as an FCC commissioner was rescinded by President Trump Monday, according to published reports.

O’Rielly was originally nominated to the FCC by President Barack Obama and was sworn in November 2013. He was sworn into a second term in 2015. His term expired in June.

O'Rielly is a conservative who generally favors deregulation, including of ISPs and lifting media ownership rules given the rise of competition from cable and broadband and satellite, and was instrumental in loosening KidVid regs on TV stations.   

The renomination of O’Rielly for another term was reportedly put on hold in July by Senator Jim Inhofe because of the FCC’s decision to allow Ligado Networks to deploy a lower-power national mobile broadband network. 

NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith released the following statement in response to the news O'Rielly's nomination had been rescinded:

“Mike O’Rielly has been a sterling public servant for as long as I have had the privilege of knowing him, a span of time covering my years in the Senate and throughout my time leading NAB. He is the consummate professional—smart, diligent, honest, and fair. For these and many other reasons, NAB has been proud to support his continued service at the Commission. But for these reasons also, I have every confidence that he will succeed wherever he casts his lot.”

There has been no comment from the FCC or O'Rielly at the time of publication.

WASHINGTON—FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly is an advocate for modernizing FCC regulations, and according to recent statements that should include shredding the current regulatory model for the broadcast industry.

O’Rielly was a speaker at the Media Institutes’ Luncheon Series, which took place virtually on July 29. Among the topics he spoke on was the need to deregulate legacy media companies so that they can more effectively compete in the ever-changing landscape. When it comes to broadcasting, he said the “level of overregulation is mind boggling.”

He asked why the FCC needed to regulate things like the placement of a broadcast tower as long as it doesn’t cause interference with an adjacent market? Or why the commission tells stations to maximize OTA listeners or viewers, arguing that it is already in their best interest to do so.

He cites how recent steps will help free up what he described as regulatory burdens facing broadcasters, like how the completion of the repack can put an end to license modification freezes. Also, he says that an update is needed for station waiver analysis, saying the current structure is outdated and doesn’t account for certain mergers that would provide increased local and live programming.

“In both instances, these changes to our rules could shift the focus to what truly matters to consumers: more and better locally focused programming,” O’Rielly said.

He also spoke on how removing regulations for the cable industry, like the franchise model, would help companies compete with OTT services that are often lightly regulated and are thriving in the current market. O’Rielly said he hopes that the FCC can close out all open media modernization proceedings before the end of the year so legacy media companies can operate in a “freer market.”

That is the type of setup that O’Rielly says NextGen TV is entering as it continues to roll out across the country. Broadcasters have been the ones making the decisions about their own deployment of ATSC 3.0 without regulatory permission. Because of this, O’Rielly says that how NextGen TV will be utilized will be determined by the market and consumer preferences.

Another free market that is changing the shape of the industry, as O’Rielly detailed, is OTT. With new streaming services popping up from major cable and broadcast networks, they are bypassing “stodgy, outdated FCC regulations,” describing it as a great time for consumers.

However, O’Rielly says that some regulators are slow to recognize the changing market and how things like OTT are impacting legacy providers. O’Rielly gives an example that when TV stations and radio stations in a market want to combine, the Department of Justice fails to acknowledge non-broadcast sales in its analysis when looking at relevant advertising market participants

The need for adaptation of FCC regulations is not just limited to marketplace issues, per O’Rielly, rules regarding diversity must also be looked at.

“No one should be able to say with a straight face that our rules meant to promote diversity have been anything but a complete failure,” O’Rielly said. He argues that removing current FCC limitations would allow for more minority investment and ownership.

The entirety of O’Rielly’s speech is available through the FCC website. 

WASHINGTON—It apparently won't be all smooth sailing to a second term for FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly, as Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe (Okla.) has announced that he has placed a hold on O’Rielly’s nomination until the commissioner publicly commits to overturning the Ligado Order.

The Ligado Order refers to a modification to satellite communications company Ligado’s L-band spectrum license, which Inhofe says will allow them to operate at a power level that testing and studies prove causes significant interference with GPS and satellite communications. The FCC’s proposed mitigation strategies, Inhofe claims, are not practical or adequate.

Inhofe says that he has made several attempts to raise the issue on how the Ligado order would negatively impact the military and other GPS users since the FCC approved the order in April.

“I understand that O’Rielly has stated that he would give ‘due consideration to stay’ ‘based on new data or evidence’—but that isn’t enough,” Inhofe said. “I need his commitment in plain English to vote to overturn the order, not just consider it, before I will allow his nomination to proceed.”

O’Rielly’s nomination has already been approved by the Senate Commerce Committee, and now awaits a vote by the full Senate. As of publication, O’Rielly has made no comment in response to Inhofe.

WASHINGTON—The nomination of Republican FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly for a new, five-year term at the FCC has been favorably reported out of the Senate Commerce Committee and now moves to the full Senate for a vote.  

That came by voice vote Wednesday (July 22), but with ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) voting no, even though, procedural, she was the one to propose that it be reported favorably. Also asked to be recorded as "no" on the O'Rielly nomination were Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Michael Schaatz (D-Hawaii).

In explaining her no vote, Cantwell pointed out that in 2018, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel concluded that O'Rielly had violated the Hatch Act with political comments made at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).*

O'Rielly was issued a warning letter that a repeat of such statements could incur more than a warning. O'Rielly countered that he disagreed that an offhand remark was a violation, but said he took the warning seriously.

Cantwell also said that O'Rielly "had recently injected, I believe, politics into part of the spectrum issue," which she said she found "disturbing." She did not elaborate. 

In contrast, Committee chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said he looked forward to advancing O'Rielly's nomination. He said he appreciated O'Rielly's commitment to the speedy deployment of broadband, particularly given the pandemic and the greater reliance on connectivity, as well as his commitment to insuring it was targeted to areas that need it most.  

Like his fellow Republicans, O'Rielly wants the FCC to focus on the unserved first, rather than overbuilding existing service. 

O'Rielly's term expired at the end of June 2019, but commissioners can continue to serve until the close of the next Congress. The new term would date from July 1, 2019.  

O'Rielly, who has been on the FCC since 2013, is a conservative former Hill staffer who generally favors deregulation, including of ISPs, and lifting media ownership rules given the rise of competition from cable and broadband and satellite, and was instrumental in loosening KidVid regs on TV stations.    

He has also pushed for the FCC to collect better data on broadband availability before handing out billions for 5G buildouts. 

* Asked at a CPAC panel session how to avoid the regulatory issue ping-pong of changing administrations, O'Rielly said: "I think what we can do is make sure as conservatives that we elect good people to both the House, the Senate, and make sure that President Trump gets reelected." O'Rielly told the special counsel he was not advocating for the President's election but meant to relay the point that "the only way to retain that current outcome was to maintain the current leaders in government. In other words, retaining the current Administration is the only sure way to prevent regulatory ping-ponging.”

WASHINGTON (UPDATED 3/19 @ 1:42 p.m.—Michael O’Rielly has been renominated by President Donald Trump to serve another five-year term as an FCC commissioner. The nomination was passed along to the Senate on March 18.

O’Rielly was originally appointed as an FCC commissioner after being nominated by then-President Barack Obama in 2013. If approved, this new five-year term would retroactively begin from July 1, 2019 and end in June 2024.

“I want to congratulate my friend and colleague, Commissioner Mike O’Rielly, on his renomination by the President to serve another term at the FCC,” said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai in a statement, who would go on to praise his work in areas like 3.5 GHz spectrum policy and fighting against misuse of 911 funding. “I look forward to continuing to work with Commissioner O’Rielly to advance the public interest and hope the Senate will act quickly to confirm his nomination.”

NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith also voiced his support for O’Rielly’s renomination, saying that he has served “with class, integrity and distinction.”

NATE President and CEO Todd Schlekeway also praised the news:

"Michael O'Rielly has been an outstanding FCC commissioner and NATE looks forward to continue collaborating with him on important policy issues ranging from workforce development, promoting deregulation to streamline infrastructure deployments, expanding broadband to rural and underserved regions of the country, public safety communications and increasing the industry's access to valuable spectrum."

O'Rielly himself offered comments on his renomination, expressing his appreciation for the president's decision.

"During my tenure at the commission, I have advocated for preserving and advancing American free market principles to develop common sense regulation and eliminate unnecessary rules that hurt consumers," O'Rielly said. "I hope to continue this work should the Senate decide to approve my nomination."

WASHINGTON—ATSC has set the benchmark of launching its NextGen TV standard (aka ATSC 3.0) in 40 U.S. markets by the end of 2020, and as a number of sessions discussed during the APTS Public Media Summit on Feb. 25, public television stations can and will be a key part in that effort.

The theme of the 2020 APTS Public Media Summit, which took place in Washington, D.C., is “The Power of Collaboration.” As John Taylor, LG’s senior vice president, told attendees, “moving from the lab to the marketplace requires a huge amount of collaboration among so many stakeholders; really different teams, different leagues, even different sports. No where is the power of collaboration more evident than bringing NextGen products and services to the American public. Together, we’ll make it happen.”

LG, as well as other TV manufacturers, revealed some of their efforts for supporting NextGen TV at the 2020 CES show, but other speakers at the Public Media Summit’s Tuesday sessions spoke more directly how public media can provide assistance and reap the benefits.

FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly spoke about many of the new features that NextGen TV will be able to provide local stations, things like enhanced alert capabilities, better picture quality, immersive audio, datacasting and improvement with interactive educational programming.

“The importance of local television stations to their communities stems from the ability of individual stations to know best what programming and services their communities want and need, and the same will hold true for NextGen TV offerings,” said O’Rielly. He also claims that these new features are likely to help public stations compete with OTT providers. 

“Few entities are as nimble and able to experiment with new technologies as public broadcasters, so it will be very interesting to see the future develop,” O’Rielly added.

O’Rielly also was sure to encourage attendees and their stations to file any comments regarding NextGen TV in the FCC’s ATSC 3.0 proceeding, which is expected in the near future. O’Rielly’s work with KidVid rules was also discussed during his speech. Commissioner O’Rielly’s full speech is available online.

Fittingly, APTS had a representative of one of the public stations that is currently experimenting with NextGen TV technology on-hand at the summit—Susi Elkins, director of broadcasting and general manager at WKAR Public Media in East Lansing, Mich., which launched Apollo PublicTV in December 2019.

Apollo PublicTV is offering broadcasters services that include NextGen TV master classes, ATSC 3.0 receiver and transmitter starter kits, access to NextGen TV broadcast chains and the capability to conduct lab and field trials.

“We see NextGen TV and the Apollo platform as one way for public broadcasters to truly become the digital transformation agents of their local communities and the catalyst for a collaborative national footprint enabling innovations around smart cities, precision agriculture, healthcare, public safety, just to name a few,” Elkins said during her presentation, which was part of the “Collaboration with National Partners on Spectrum Opportunities” panel.

“I hope that as public broadcasters, we will embrace our roots as innovators,” Elkins continued.

Other members of the Spectrum panel included John McCoskey, COO at SpectraRep; Molly Phillips, executive director and general manager for Iowa PBS; and Lieutenant General (Retired) Reynold N. Hoover of RNHoover Consulting. They discussed how datacasting and other technology related to ATSC 3.0 can help with public broadcasting needs. “The possibilities are limited to your own imagination,” said Hoover.

In addition to these sessions, APTS Public Media Summit handed out a pair of awards to public broadcasters. The 2020 Pillar of Public Service Award was given to Tom Axtell, general manager of Vegas PBS in Las Vegas, and the 2020 National Advocacy Award was given to Marty Ryall, director of external relations at Arkansas PBS.

For more information, visit www.apts.org.  

WASHINGTON—FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly will address the APTS Public Media Summit breakfast session Feb. 25 and is expected to discuss KidVid, ATSC 3.0 and other television-related issues, America’s Public Television Stations announced today.

The breakfast, 7:30-9 a.m. at the summit’s Ritz-Carlton Hotel venue, will be followed by a panel discussion on collaborating with national partners on spectrum opportunities, the group said.

The panel, moderated by Craig Fugate, former administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), will include: John McCoskey, COO, SpectraRep; Molly Phillips, executive director and general manager, Iowa PBS; retired Lt. Gen. Reynold Hoover, RNHoover Consulting; and Susi Elkins, director of broadcasting and GM, WKAR Public Media, East Lansing, Mich.

Panelists are expected to discuss new business and service opportunities, such as those stemming from precision agriculture, national security and weather alerting. The panel will also present the latest on the spectrum partnerships APTS is creating with national companies and institutions and a platform for making ATSC 3.0 practical, versatile and successful, the group said.

APTS has published additional information about the summit on its website.  

The address of The Ritz-Carlton Hotel is 1150 22nd St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20037.

WASHINGTON—The FCC has its own bit of a zombie outbreak, according to Commissioner Michael O’Rielly. These undead pieces of regulation should be “killed off” as part of the FCC’s efforts to modernize its media regulation rules.

O’Rielly’s description came during a speech that he gave recently to the Massachusetts Broadcasters Association at its Sound Bites 2019 event. The “Zombie Proceedings,” as the commissioner called them, are rulemakings that were started under previous commissions but have not moved forward, simply remaining pending.

One of the specific zombies he spoke about included an outstanding proposal from when Tom Wheeler was commissioner that would classify an OTT platform as an MVPD. The proposal would have defined OTTs as MVPDs for the purpose of program access and carriage rules, providing FCC-enforced access to vertically integrated programming for OTTs to boost their ability to compete with cable and satellite.

With MVPD status, OTTs would secure access to TV stations through must-carry and retrans rules, but they would also be subject to program carriage and access requirements. Broadcasters and the NCTA-The Internet & Television Association voiced concerns about those rules, and ultimately no action was taken by Wheeler.

The FCC did determine that OTTs are competitors to MVPDs after ruling on a petition from Charter Communications over the presence of AT&T TV Now in specific markets.

Other specific examples of these zombie proceedings O’Rielly offered during his speech were a proposed repeal of network nonduplication and syndicated exclusivity programming rules; the set-top box rules proposal; the proposal on sponsorship ID and embedded advertising rules; and remaining pieces of enhanced disclosures proceeding, including Form 355. O’Rielly suggested that all of these proposals, as well as others he did not mention, should be “killed off.”

During O’Rielly’s speech, he also commented on the start of the new KidVid rules that were established over the summer, as well as other media modernization issues like supplementing Issues Programming List and adjusting Class A stations schedule for IPL submissions.

The FCC has released the full transcript of O’Rielly’s speech.

LAS VEGAS—Broadcasters attending the 2019 NAB Show have the chance to hear from four members of the Federal Communications Commission.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai will deliver remarks Tuesday, April 9, at 3 p.m. during the NAB: We Are Broadcasters Celebration. FCC Commissioners Michael O’Rielly, Brendan Carr and Geoffrey Starks will offer their insights Monday, April 8, at the “Raining 3s: A Q&A with FCC Commissioners O’Rielly, Carr and Starks.”

Named chairman by President Donald Trump in January 2017, Pai has set a regulatory course aimed at making sure the agency’s rules reflect the realities of the existing marketplace, NAB said.

Pai, who was appointed an FCC commissioner by former-President Barack Obama in 2012, has worked to update media regulations to match the changing media market, it added.

During their session, Commissioners O’Rielly, Carr and Starks will offer their views on the current regulatory and legislative agenda, NAB added.

More information is available on the NAB Show website.

WASHINGTON—Representatives from One Media met with FCC Commissioner Michael O’Reilly and two staff lawyers Oct. 25 to present how Next-Gen TV can be used to carry more than simply video and audio data and play a vital role in delivering wireless IP data packets as part of a future 5G wireless network.

ONE Media, which recounted details of the meeting in an ex parte notice submitted to the agency Oct. 29, was represented by Mark Aitken, President of ONE Media 3.0 and Jerry Fritz, the company’s executive vice president for Strategic and Legal Affairs.

ATSC 3.0 can be used “as the baseline for terrestrial broadcasters to provide a new, combined broadcast and broadband, cloud-native network system architecture” to deliver TV and non-TV services to new devices, the filing said.

Describing the cloud-native system architecture as “novel,” the ONE Media representatives explained that this broadcast-broadband convergence it will be built upon the physical layer of 3.0 and “a new, virtualized, shared IP Core.” This system can enable several new broadcast applications, such as offloading large data files, including video data files that wireless carriers currently must unicast to subscribers. Delivering data to autonomous vehicles and serving the data requirements of IoT (internet of things) devices and telemedicine are two other uses.

The ONE Media team also explained how 3.0 broadcasting based on tall towers and single frequency networks can be used to overcome the limitations of 5G wireless networks, such as their use of shorter wavelengths and their dependence on “vast networks” of small-cell sites.

The Next-Gen TV standard was designed to be part of the 5G ecosystem, and broadcasters will provide services needed “as part of a robust 5G distribution chain,” ONE Media explained.

Using 3.0 to help converge broadcast and broadband services is already a topic of discussion in South Korean and India, and the Next-Gen broadcast standard should be considered as regulators in this country ponder steps to accelerate deployment of 5G services, ONE Media said.

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

Though their words may be alternately frustrating, verbose or bombastic, the First Amendment rights of speech and the press must be supported — although, remember (wink-wink) even government officials have the right to call out the press in case of inaccuracy or downright lunacy, said Federal Communications Commission commissioner Michael O’Rielly.

O’Rielly said the functioning of these Constitutionally protected rights (in addition to those of religion, freedom of assembly and the right to redress grievances) epitomize what it means to be an American in a speech to the Media Institute on October 24 in Arlington, Va.

“It is worthy of the strongest defenses against any enemy near or far,” he said during the group’s Free Speech America gala.

O’Rielly began by focusing on the freedom of the press, an issue that he said has generated “significant and proper attention” in recent months.

Not only does a fully functioning press provide the general public with information about our government — “an incredibly valuable function that provides a sharp and accurate picture of the government and the activities it carries out on our behalf,” he said — but it serves as a powerful antidote to any abuses of power by government officials, he added.The press serves to scrutinize governmental activities, exposes instances where employees have exceeded their authority and highlighted those who have caused harm to the public by failing to take necessary actions, he said.

“Granted, most federal departments and agencies have inspector generals to examine these abuses, but those entities rarely have the impact of a well-timed expose? by a serious journalist examining corruption or improper behavior, or a live video or picture of a governmental official trying to defend questionable practices,” he said.“The media provides a vital check on the government on behalf of the American citizenry,” he said.

O’Rielly admitted wryly that it can be difficult to always applaud the press’ record in serving this function. “I have been on the receiving end of some of those stories … and it can be emotionally and professionally trying to defend legitimate actions and decisions,” he said. “Certainly, working in the government is not for the faint of heart, especially in the current environment where certain pejorative words are spewed out so carelessly.”

Despite that, he said, “the value of such efforts by the press are immeasurable, and, even if quantifiable, would far exceed any downsides.”

We in America are fortunate, he said: “These … purposes of the press do not exist worldwide. [T]he world’s jails contain many individuals who were trying to perform these exact functions, but were not protected by a similar First Amendment.”

O’Rielly also touched on free speech as it relates to pirate radio. These stations undermine free speech with their very existence, he said, by interfering with a legal stations’ ability to reach their audiences.

[Read: Smith: Founding Fathers Got It Right On Press Freedom]

“While I am a firm supporter of removing illegitimate restrictions on broadcasters’ speech, I also believe that individuals who use the public airwaves must play by the rules, meaning that, at the most basic level, they must have an authorization.” O’Rielly shared the well-reported story of a local Colorado publication that advocated that townspeople tune into a local pirate radio station before the FCC shut it down. O’Rielly wrote a letter to the editor to share his concerns about a publication’s romanticizing illegal broadcasts.

Here’s a situation where the government official has the right to free speech as well, he said. The First Amendment does not make those who enjoy its protections immune from criticism, O’Rielly said.

“Merely criticizing a publication for having little discretion and promoting illegal behavior is not an infringement of the First Amendment, even if I am a government official,” he said. “The Colorado publication has a First Amendment right to state what it did … but such protections don’t preclude me from criticizing what I see as a misguided or wrongheaded story.”

The First Amendment should never be viewed as a shield against challenges of facts, style or substance, he said.

“While it protects the right of everyone, especially press officials, to state what they would like to state, it does not protect these same individuals from being called out for their inaccuracy, inappropriateness, or lunacy — depending on the circumstances — even if done so by government officials,” he said.

WASHINGTON--The Federal Communications Commission today proposed rules to reimburse some low-power TV stations, TV translators and FM stations for costs resulting from the 2017 spectrum incentive auction, following up on a recent Congressional directive known as "The 2018 Reimbursement Expansion Act."

The act “expanded the list of eligible entities to include LPTV, TV translator and FM stations, provided additional funds to be used for this purpose, increased the funds available to reimburse full power and Class A stations and MVPDs and provided funds to be used for consumer education purposes,” the FCC said today. The statute also created a deadline of March 23, 2019, for the commission to adopt a Report and Order.

According to the NPRM (MB Docket No. 18-214; GN Docket No. 12-268), reimbursement will be available for LPTV stations and TV translators, “if (1) they filed an application during the commission’s Special Displacement Window and obtained a construction permit, and (2) were licensed and transmitting for at least nine of the 12 months prior to April 13, 2017.”

[Read: FCC Will Open April Window For Auction-Displaced LPTVs]

Additionally, the order says the Media Bureau should engage a third-party contractor to assist in the administration of the fund and also directs the bureau to determine cost eligibility and the reimbursement process. However, “the Media Bureau will consult with the Office of General Counsel and the Office of the Managing Director,” the order says.

The order also shares plans to use the $50 million provided by the REA for consumer education. According to the order, the commissioners “anticipate, among other initiatives, hosting a dedicated consumer service call center to provide consumers technical support and assistance on such matters as rescanning and other means to resolve potential reception issues. We also intend to perform targeted outreach to specific communities about rescanning, and we may use advertising spots to disseminate rescanning information. Consumer education funding could also be used in developing additional online resources...”

The NPRM also notes that the additional REA funds must be used no later than July 3, 2023.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said, “I’d like to thank Congress for passing legislation which provides additional reimbursement funds for full power and Class A stations, reimbursement funds for newly-eligible LPTV, TV translator, and FM stations, and funds for the commission to use for consumer education purposes.” Pai also thanked the commission staff who worked on the notice.

In his own statement, Commissioner Michael O’Rielly emphasized that he agrees with the reimbursement plans in general but thinks further input is needed before action. Specifically, he said, “While Congress carefully outlined how it intended FY18 monies to be spent, it provided less clarity for FY19. Should these funds be allocated similar to FY18 funds? Should television stations have priority? The answers to these questions will affect how interested parties are reimbursed for relocating during the repacking process...”

Additionally, O’Rielly questioned the validity of the “graduated reimbursement system” based on the idea that time equals money and asked for feedback and alternative proposed system(s) to allocate money.

O’Rielly also cautioned that the educational efforts should not duplicate “efforts undertaken by broadcasters or other stakeholders, or take on initiatives outside of [the commission’s] expertise, such as producing advertising spots.”

Finally, O’Rielly wrote, “I support edits in this item that will mitigate the use of delegated authority, as well as remove the tentative conclusion that third parties who made funding arrangements with LPTVs prior to the passage of REA are ineligible for funding.”

Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel did not release a statement, but the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order (FCC 18-113) indicated her approval and that of Commissioner Brendan Carr, whose statement was still pending as of writing.

[Read: FCC Allocates Additional $742 Million For Repack Expenses]

The NPRM “tentatively concludes that both full power FM stations and FM translators that were licensed and transmitting on April 13, 2017, using the facilities affected by a repacked television station, are eligible for reimbursement.” This includes “FM stations that incur costs to permanently relocate, temporarily or permanently modify their facilities, or purchase or modify auxiliary facilities to provide service during work on a repacked television station’s facilities.” Also, the NPRM recommends that the reimbursement process be “substantially similar to” that already used to reimburse full power and Class A licensees and MVPDs.

NAB Executive Vice President of Communications Dennis Wharton released a statement saying, “Earlier this year, Congress wisely authorized additional funding to ensure that tens of millions of Americans will not lose access to news, entertainment and lifeline information during the broadcast industry ‘spectrum repack.’ NAB is encouraged by the FCC proposal adopted today that closely mirrors the intent of Congress. NAB will be actively engaged during the rulemaking process to preserve live and local broadcasting on hometown radio and television stations, low power TV stations and TV translators."

For more information on the repack, visit TV Technology's repack silo.

COLUMBUS, OHIO—When ATSC president Mark Richer launched the organization’s “Road To ATSC 3.0” campaign earlier this year, he observed that the television industry would be “embarking on the road trip of a lifetime.”

One of the stops on that “road” took place in a big way here June 27-28 with the arrival of the “Midwest Next-Gen TV Summit,” an event designed to bring information about the new DTV transmission standard to broadcasters who might not have had an opportunity to participate in the numerous ATSC 3.0 launch events at the NAB Show and elsewhere.

With the assistance of broadcasting associations from six states—Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Wisconsin—the ATSC brought together some of the top names in a program tailored for both station management and engineering contingents, with an agenda split between the nuts and bolts aspects of ATSC 3.0 and new business models that it could fuel.

The technical side was first, and after welcoming remarks by the executive director of the Indiana Broadcasters Association, Dave Arland, the day-and-a-half conference got down to business with a tag team presentation by the former chair of the ATSC technology group that developed the standard, Richard Chernock, and Skip Pizzi, NAB’s vice president of technology education and outreach. The duo described the genesis of the ATSC 3.0 standard, its inner workings, how it will allow broadcasters to offer a much wider range of services, what it will take to put 3.0 on the air, and even how adoption of the standard can fit in with the ongoing U.S. television spectrum repack.

TIME TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT ATSC 3.0

As well as describing technical aspects of ATSC 3.0, Chernock urged broadcasters to embrace the new standard and commit themselves to adopting it as soon as possible.

“Technology is continuing to accelerate and grow,” he said. “It’s almost an exponential curve and it’s going to keep on going [and] we’re used to television technologies that sit still for a long time.

“How many decades was NTSC pretty much unchanged? And then along came ATSC 1.0, and now, in much less time, 3.0 has come along, and parts of 3.0 are not going to sit still but will keep evolving,” Chernock added. “So, I think we’re entering a phase where we all have to learn that things are not going to be completely stable. They’ll keep on changing. They’ll get better. And if you take advantage of it, there are a lot more opportunities. The key thing is to recognize that it’s going to happen and how to work with it, rather than stick your head in the sand and complain.”

Pizzi observed that while ATSC 3.0 was a “faith-based initiative” and not mandated, broadcasters and consumers alike would benefit from its implementation.

“The main thing is better audio and video,” said Pizzi. “There’s also the ability to do a quantitative increase as well as a qualitative one—to put more in the same channel.”

“There are plenty of more tweaks and adjustments that broadcasters and consumers can add if they want to,” said Pizzi, observing that with the hybrid nature of 3.0, broadcasters would be in a class by themselves.

“They [will be] the only ones who can do both over-the-air and Internet broadcasting,” he said.

Pizzi admitted that implementation of ATSC 3.0 would not exactly be child’s play for a number of reasons, including lack of backwardly compatibility with 1.0, and especially, the absence of a “loaner” channel for phasing in the new service as had been done in the analog-to digital TV transition.

“It will require extensive broadcaster collaboration,” he said. “It’s going to be different in each market.”

Pizzi also noted that the current lack of 3.0-capable television receivers will have to be addressed.

[Read: ATSC 3.0: The Time To Deploy Is Now]

“We assume that new TVs starting to come out [around] 2020 and beyond will be dual system—1.0 and 3.0” he said. “This is just voluntary. There’s no mandate that they will be that way. It’s to the television manufacturers’ advantage to do this. The folks who make the TVs—most of them—have all been involved in developing the standard and they each have, we think, a good bit of intellectual property in the system. So it behooves them [to equip the sets with 3.0 capability].

“We don’t think that lack of a mandate is going to be a problem in terms of having receivers on the market soon,” he said.

A VISIT FROM THE COMMISSION

The summit’s program included a special appearance by FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly who noted that the commission was “very positive” about the DTV standard and that it has been trying to speed the deployment as much as possible; however, the successful adoption of ATSC 3.0 also depended on other factors.

“The commission set the stage for deployment of the new standard through a Report and Order and Further Notice in November,” said O’Rielly. “At the time I made clear that the success or failure of a new technology is dependent on two things. First, it requires significant interest by broadcasters willing to make a bet on the future of television and the capabilities this standard may allow. Second, it will require great interest by consumers to adapt and adopt new features and functions that may soon be available.

“Both of these are achievable, but not without tremendous effort,” he said.

O’Rielly acknowledged that while broadcasters had their plates full with the repack and other issues, their rollout of ATSC 3.0 couldn’t be relegated to the “I’ll get around to it someday” category.

“Unfortunately, television broadcasters are under enormous pressures right now,” he said. “The hi-tech companies, who broadcasters compete with daily for advertising and consumer attention are not going to stop and wait for ATSC 3.0 to be fully deployed. They are going to continue to eat market and advertising share.

“So, time is not necessarily a luxury you all have,” O’Rielly continued. “If you are a broadcaster sitting on the fence on whether to implement ATSC 3.0, you should be worried that the fence may no longer exist if you take too long to decide.”

COUNTERING WIRELESS BROADBAND

ATSC 3.0—with its greatly enhanced capabilities over those of present-day ATSC 1.0—is viewed by some as a means for shifting consumers away from streaming of content via wireless broadband to a one-to-many over-the-air delivery paradigm. This surfaced in several presentations, including Jerald Fritz’s “Building New Revenue with Next-Gen TV and SFN Deployment.”

“[With ATSC 3.0], you are no longer in the entertainment video business; you are now in the data business,” said Fritz, explaining that with the feature set provided by the new transmission standard, consumers will have a way to bypass congested and poorly performing cellphone networks when viewing live events, such as a football game, while at the sports venue.

Fritz, executive vice president for strategic and legal affairs for ONE Media, also praised the selection of the OFDM (orthogonal frequency division multiplex) modulation used in 3.0 as an enabler in this respect.

“[Another] major advantage that ATSC 3.0 brings, among many, is the movement to a different modulation scheme—from 8-VSB to OFDM. This means that there’s no multipath distortion, there’s no ghosting, there’s no fading. That means that we finally have the ability after 20 years to have mobile television. All those millennials are watching television on their mobile devices, streaming and paying AT&T and Verizon.

“We abandoned mobile television to the phone company because we didn’t adopt OFDM 20 years ago,” Fritz said.

[Read: ATSC Meeting Explores 3.0 Deployments]

Regarding the availability of a return channel with ATSC 3.0, Fritz remarked “If…there’s a return channel for broadcasters, you have to ask yourself ‘what is it that broadcasters can’t do that the telephone companies can do now that we have a return channel?’”

Other summit presentations included a report by the NAB’s Lynn Claudy on field testing of ATSC 3.0 performed at the Cleveland transmission testing facility, a presentation by AWARN’s Fiona James on the potential of ATSC 3.0 to enhance emergency warning information, a look at the Phoenix test market and the need for cooperation among broadcasters in rolling out 3.0 from Scripps Media’s Ray Thurber, and a panel discussion on considerations and planning in connection with ATSC 3.0 adoption, and another on the monetization opportunities possible with ATSC 3.0’s personalized advertising and viewership data attributes.

Summit activities included a Wednesday evening reception at the Early Television Museum, located in nearby Hilliard, Ohio. There attendees viewed and received demonstrations of numerous television-related artifacts that traced the technical history of the television from its “mechanical” 30-line resolution roots into the electronic and color eras.

Museum founder Steve McVoy was on hand to greet the delegation, and observed that at more than 90 persons, the group was largest ever to tour museum since its inception in 2001.

“It went better than I had expected for a group this large,” said McVoy. “And I’m glad to have hosted a crowd like this with such an appreciation of television’s long history.”

SUMMING IT ALL UP

Asked about how the Midwest Summit came into being, Dave Arland responded that while midwestern television broadcasters were aware of the introduction of the ATSC 3.0 standard, it was felt that it was necessary to provide some in-depth information about 3.0 and the advantages that it offers television station operators.

“While many of our midwestern stations have heard from their corporate engineering teams about the emerging next-gen TV standard, we wanted to offer a detailed overview of what’s in the actual standard and how the first implementations are being put together,” said Arland. “And we knew that our general managers would be interested in the new revenue potential made possible by IP capability. It will be interesting to revisit the landscape in a year or two to see how the new ATSC 3.0 standard is being harnessed to strengthen the business of broadcasting and delivery of digital information.”

For a comprehensive list of TV Technology’s ATSC 3.0 coverage, see ourATSC3 silo.

EAST LANSING, Mich. — The Federal Communications Commission has granted a new experimental license to Michigan State University and public TV station WKAR, who plan to launch a next-generation TV broadcasting station and a new media lab driven by the next-gen ATSC 3.0 standard.

The announcement was made by FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly during a visit to WKAR Public Media studios.

“We have authorized a new broadcast standard and it’s going to open up the doors to what television may be in the future,” O’Rielly said. “WKAR is now authorized to test out ATSC 3.0 in their new lab and work with public broadcasting stations covering 200 million Americans.”

WKAR is the first public broadcasting station in the United States to receive FCC authorization to begin experimental ATSC 3.0 broadcasts, the station said, and expects to begin ATSC 3.0 experimental broadcasting in September. The license is good for six months and then WKAR will be required to petition for an extension to continue the broadcasts.

[Read: ATSC Meeting Explores 3.0 Deployments]

“Next Gen TV has great potential to enhance our media experience by merging the best of broadcasting and broadband,” said Prabu David, dean of the College of Communication Arts and Sciences, which houses WKAR. “The experimental license offers MSU and WKAR a test bed to explore new media innovations in education, information and even autonomous vehicles in depth and in the field.”

WKAR’s experimental ATSC 3.0 station will broadcast in Michigan on digital frequency 35 with a broadcast reach of approximately 40 miles. The technology allows for features such as 4K ultra high-definition video and multichannel immersive audio.

With the ATSC 3.0 station as a test bed, the university also plans to open a new research facility within WKAR and the College of Communication Arts and Sciences called the NextGen Media Innovation Lab. The lab will focus on the creation of education and public media content including early childhood education, telehealth and distance education, connected and autonomous vehicles, agriculture and emergency response.

One of the first projects planned for the NextGen Media Innovation Lab will be how to use ATSC 3.0 to improve early childhood education, said Susi Elkins, director of broadcasting and general manager of WKAR. “We intend to focus on ATSC 3.0 applications that are central to the core values of noncommercial television licensees — education and the betterment of our communities.”

In partnership with the Public Media Venture Group and in collaboration with other noncommercial educational television stations, the NextGen MI Lab will provide an opportunity to test ATSC 3.0 applications and share findings.

The capabilities of ATSC 3.0 continue to be front and center at events like the May Advanced Television Systems Committee Annual Meeting where representatives from the likes of Pearl TV, Sinclair Broadcast Group and Capitol Broadcasting discussed just how far Next Gen TV has come over the past few years. Consumer labs are being set up to gather feedback from viewers while field tests continue to roll out at stations around the country.

It was at that event that Michigan State’s David revealed that the university would be focusing on exploring opportunities for creating interactive content via ATSC 3.0.

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

Note that the FCC announced a 90-day extension to the filing deadline on June 21; stations must now file applications for earth stations currently operating in the 3.7-4.2 GHz band no later than Oct. 17.

For years, radio and television broadcasters, as well as cable providers, have been relying on C Band satellite systems for reliable distribution of programming content. Some estimates place the number of C Band downlink sites in the United States at more than 27,000, and demand for new facilities shows no signs of letting up.

But as Radio World has reported in recent months, the C Band isn’t something that broadcasters should take for granted. The system is in imminent peril of being rendered useless by terrestrial interference, at least according to some observers.

Among them are Mark and Karen Johnson, principals of LinkUp Communications Corp., who recently traveled to Washington to make their case before the commission.

MAKE WAY FOR BROADBAND

The problem is the FCC’s consideration of changing the rules to allow 3.7–4.2 GHz to be shared by other services. The move is being spearheaded by broadband companies, including Google and Verizon, who are asking the commission to turn over some or all of the spectrum to internet providers for future 5G technology.

But syndicators and networks such as Premiere, Westwood One and NPR as well as many radio and television broadcasters stand opposed to the proposed changes, claiming that interference from terrestrial services could render satellite reception all but impossible.

While the issue is being considered, the FCC instituted a 90-day freeze starting April 19 on applications for new receive-only Fixed Satellite Service (FSS) earth stations in the C Band. At the same time, it asked users of existing earth stations to register them by July 18. While not mandatory, this registration is being strongly urged by leading broadcast groups as well as the commission.

These developments precede an expected Notice for Proposed Rule Making on the proposal that would allow 5G to operate within the same frequency ranges as C Band in the United States. The FCC expects to vote on the matter at its July meeting.

Karen Johnson said that she and Mark Johnson were excited to present to the FCC a “real-life” perspective on the impact 5G broadband could have on the heavily used C Band frequencies. They presented to members of the International Bureau and to staff members of three commissioners in individual meetings.

“We had been urged by both Intelsat and SES Global to make the trip to Washington. Representatives from the Society of Broadcast Engineers joined us, and began to discuss how we could make the best use of the 30 minutes we had before the FCC,” she said.

Intelsat, Intel and SES Global support what they call a market proposal that would let wireless operators access mid-band while satellite users would continue to receive services in the remaining portions of the band with certainty of high-quality operation; that initiative is explained at www.intelsat.com/about-us/c-band-spectrum.

“We quickly realized that our list of concerns was too long for this initial meeting. We decided to focus on the FCC filing forms for registering earth stations — the complexity of the form, the need for the ability to ‘batch file’ multiple C Band downlinks and the fee itself.”

Mark Johnson noted that members of the FCC’s International Bureau, responsible for collecting and tabulating the earth station registration forms, seemed sympathetic to some of the concerns they raised — “in particular, the sheer number of C Band downlinks that many in the industry were attempting to register, and the unbudgeted expense of registering multiple downlinks.

“Despite that,” he said in May, “the $435 filing fee is likely to remain. We were told it was necessary to compensate staffing for the additional burden of handling so many complex filings in such a short amount of time. We are hopeful the FCC may provide some financial relief for multiple downlink registrations, I believe they understood the undue burden this hefty expense would have on so many broadcast licensees.” (An earlier requirement for independent frequency coordination, however, was dropped, saving registrants another step that typically cost $1,000 or more.)

Karen Johnson felt that the FCC staff responded best to hard numbers.

“As Mark spoke about how we arrived at a true number of C Band downlink earth stations in the U.S. — approximately 27,000 — the FCC took note. They were also most interested when we shared that our customer base covered 144 markets with a listenership of 14 million. More importantly, our clients use C-band communications for as much as 98 percent of the programming distributed by their stations into local communities.”

A CALL FOR ‘RIGOROUS’ ANALYSIS

The National Association of Broadcasters filed comments with the commission at the end of May, emphasizing the extensive use of the C Band for content distribution by broadcasters, the lack of reasonably practical alternatives such as fiber, the need for rigorous technical analysis of proposals for terrestrial uses and finally the need to preserve full-band, full-arc licensing of earth stations (see sidebar).

Commenting separately, Dennis Wharton, NAB executive vice president of communications, said, “Every day, thousands of commercial and public TV and radio stations use so-called ‘C Band spectrum’ to deliver broadcast programming to tens of millions of listeners and viewers. These airwaves are essential to the successful transmission of the most popular program content on TV and radio, and suggestions that there are sufficient content delivery alternatives have yet to be proven.

“The burden is on wireless carriers to provide the FCC with rigorous, fact-based analysis that demonstrates that any proposal would not threaten interference-free reception of free and local broadcasting,” Wharton said.

Asked by Radio World earlier this year about interference worries, Commissioner Michael O’Rielly said, “Radio broadcasters and broadcasters in general should not be concerned. As someone who’s leading the effort on the 3.7 to 4.2 band, and the 6 GHz bands, which are the C Band up and down links, we’re going to take care of incumbents. I’m not interested in disrupting incumbents.”

O’Rielly said at the time that he was open to other approaches but also urged C Band users to register: “Tell us if you exist. It’s hard to protect people we don’t know about.”

But then in late May, Karen Johnson said that broadcasters — already feeling somewhat discouraged by the proposed reallocation — became even more so when Chairman Ajit Pai announced a plan to vote on the matter July 12, seven days before the deadline for broadcasters to register earth stations.

Pai spoke to the Wireless Infrastructure Association Connectivity Expo in Charlotte, N.C. He addressed the dual connectivity challenges of infrastructure and spectrum associated with 5G, and barriers that he said broadband faces in the global race for 5G dominance.

He spoke of freeing up spectrum, including frequencies identified as C Band for wireless services; he then announced his intent to put up an NPRM. Details regarding that proposal were yet be released at press time. If it passes, opponents would have 60 days to try to influence the commission before a final vote.

ECONOMIC QUESTION

As broadcasters rally to protect the C Band, they face opposition from several forces. Not only is a powerful Washington lobby for broadband interests engaged, there are other political driving forces in play.

One is the significant boost to the economy that broadband is expected to provide. CTIA estimates that 5G will create 3 million jobs, add $275 billion in new investment and spur $500 million in economic growth. But in order to do that, these experts say, they must access multiple spectrums, including the mid-band frequencies populated by C Band.

The newsletter Inside Towers reported that CTIA President Meredith Attwell Baker urged the FCC to finish rules for the 3.5 GHz portion of mid-band spectrum in time for the July meeting; Baker was also reported to be urging the FCC to schedule an auction for the Citizens Broadband Radio Service spectrum in 2019.

Yet another driving force for broadband is the global race for connectivity. The consulting firm Analysys Mason ranked 10 countries across key factors to determine which were in the best position to win the race to 5G. It put the United States in third place, behind China and South Korea.

Karen Johnson said this is the time for the C Band community to come together and take action.

“We encourage everyone to address the FCC directly with your concerns about the encroachment of 5G into C Band satellite frequencies. Registering your C Band earth station with the FCC and filing a letter stating your concerns about 5G encroachment into C Band frequencies are two very tangible ways you can make a difference.”

To register, visit http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs. If you find that page daunting, several of the organizations cited in this article have posted suppport pages; just do an online search for the term C Band and an organization name like NPR PRSS, Intelsat, SBE or SES for example.

WHAT THE NAB SAID ABOUT C-BAND

Excerpts from NAB’s comments:

“First, the C Band is extensively used for content distribution. Virtually every U.S. television and radio household relies on C Band satellite operations for content distribution in some manner. Content providers rely on the C Band to deliver television programming to thousands of MVPD head-ends, over 1,000 broadcast television stations affiliated with national networks and over-the-top service providers. Radio content also relies heavily on dependable access to the C Band. National Public Radio has stated that the public radio system depends on the C Band ‘for reliable distribution of programming to the 475 public radio earth stations that together broadcast public radio programming to 42 million Americans each week.’

“Second, the availability of reasonable, practical alternative means of content delivery, such as fiber, are significantly overstated. In many cases, substitute modes of delivery are unavailable or less reliable. Even in those areas where fiber is available, it may not be economically viable.

“Third, because of the importance of the C Band, and because of the limited alternatives, the commission should insist on rigorous technical analysis of specific and detailed proposals before making decisions that will impact tens of millions of radio and television households. The commission should not assume that technical solutions will appear that will allow incompatible services to share spectrum. NAB reiterates that, as a practical matter, this means the commission should acknowledge that terrestrial users cannot share C Band frequencies based on geographic separation alone. As commenters have explained, earth stations must be designed to reliably capture highly attenuated signals from satellites more than 22,000 miles away. Accordingly, these facilities are extremely sensitive and highly vulnerable to terrestrial interference. Indeed, this is the reason why the FCC has historically required frequency coordination between satellite and point-to-point microwave users in this band. Significant separation distances, ranging from tens or, under extreme circumstances, even hundreds of kilometers, would be required to ensure that fixed and mobile terrestrial signals do not prevent reliable reception of satellite downlinks. Mobile operations in particular cannot be authorized in the same frequency band as existing C Band operations because there is no reliable means of geofencing mobile users or mobile handsets from operation in exclusion zones.

“Finally, in considering options for expanded fixed use of the C Band, the commission should reject any proposal to eliminate or constrain its longstanding and highly successful full-band, full-arc earth station licensing policy, under which FSS earth stations may coordinate across the entire frequency band over the entire geostationary arc. Preserving the longstanding flexibility that full-band, full-arc licensing provides is essential to broadcasters and other users that rely on satellite services. Because satellites are in orbit high above the earth, on-orbit equipment problems or failures cannot be repaired by a ‘truck roll.’ Significant flexibility in both satellite choice and transponder frequency are absolute necessities to assure reliable operation.”

WASHINGTON—FCC Republican Commissioner Michael O’Rielly lashed out at critics who claim that the commission’s actions since the beginning of the Trump administration are designed to help one broadcast company seeking a well-publicized merger: Sinclair.

In a blog post, O’Rielly used the occasion of a trip to Phoenix last week to respond to opponents of Sinclair’s proposal to acquire Tribune Media for $3.9 billion, giving the Baltimore station group control of 210 stations (following its recent proposal to sell off 23 of its stations). The purpose of his trip was to review progress of the 12 TV stations participating in the Phoenix Model Market for ATSC 3.0.

“Seeing this collaboration was impressive in and of itself,” O’Rielly said, “but it also emphasized what I already knew to be the case: that ATSC 3.0 may very well be a game changer for our nation’s broadcasters. Unfortunately there is a false narrative in Washington D.C. that ATSC 3.0 will only benefit one particular company. In fact, this narrative goes even further, suggesting everything the Commission has done in the media space over the last 17 months has been to benefit one company, in this case, Sinclair Broadcast Group.”

O’Rielly called such a narrative a “misguided fantasy” and a “rhetorical tool tool designed to divert attention from opponents’ lack of substantive objections to the underlying policies, combined with what seemingly appears to be an extreme personal dislike for the company itself.”

[Read: Sinclair Broadcast, One Media To Deploy Next Gen TV]

O’Rielly defended Chairman Ajit Pai’s actions, noting they were designed to “reduce the labyrinth of outdated and costly media rules that no longer make sense today,” noting that the marketplace broadcasters are competing against today include the likes of Netflix and Amazon.

He noted that the elimination of the main studio rule was not some “master conspiracy theory” that he likened to “Area 51 territory,” but that in reality, the benefits of doing away with the rule went to small and mid-sized radio stations. “The elimination of the unnecessary rule hasn’t let to great studio consolidation or closures,” he said. “Instead, it was and is about permitting cost efficiencies—without harm to localism—for all broadcasters, which will occur over a longer time frame.”

The commission’s reinstatement of the UHF discount, O’Rielly said, was simply a reversion of the “status quo,” and whether or not the action helps Sinclair is “irrelevant.” He also said that the elimination of the radio/television cross ownership rule provides “little to no benefit” to Sinclair and that while he thinks that the commission’s adoption of a waiver process to allow duopolies in a market, even if both stations are among the top four in terms of audience share is less than ideal due to the potential of abuse, he is willing to delay a larger examination of the rules until the commission’s 2018 Quadrennial review of ownership rules is completed.

Repeating comments’ from 2016 to justify his argument, O’Rielly said then, “To say [the duopoly rule] is still needed in an era of literally hundreds of competitive pay TV channels and essentially unlimited competitive Internet content defies belief.”

Turning his attention to Next Gen TV, O’Rielly responded to critics who said the commission’s approval of ATSC 3.0 would give preferential treatment to Sinclair due to its portfolio of patents for the new standard. He reiterated his position “against including any portion of the standards in our rules,” and instead supported the elimination of rules “prohibiting broadcasters from moving to ATSC 3.0.”

[Read: Phoenix Model Market Launches Next Gen TV Broadcasts]

O’Rielly also noted that the standard was developed and vetted by the private sector and that adoption of the standard is voluntary. “The new standard promoted real benefits for consumers—such as ultra high-definition pictures and enhanced emergency alerting,” he said. “But, if consumers are uninterested in these features, they will not be forced to adopt them.”

O’Rielly drove the point home that the FCC’s actions during the past year and a half were designed to enhance the entire broadcast industry’s competitive in today’s media marketplace and not to give one company a leg up on its competition.

“The entire debate misses the bigger picture that I witnessed firsthand in Arizona,” the commissioner said. “That the changing marketplace is causing tremendous challenges to legacy broadcasters forced to abide by outdated and irrelevant ownership limitations and Commission rules.” 

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

The Federal Communications Commission’s Michael O’Rielly dug deep in the weeds of policy discussion in a speech with the American Enterprise Institute, saying some of the most dissimilar policy issues in place at the FCC can actually be tied together with a unifying message: that the FCC is committed to economic freedom, fiscal constraint and simplifying unnecessarily complicated process issues.

O’Rielly said that one of his key priorities since he arrived as a commissioner in 2013 has been advancing FCC process reforms, such as working to ensure more transparency for FCC rulemakings and orders that are coming up for a vote.

Despite concerns from former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, O’Rielly said, there were no doomsday scenarios once now-Chairman Ajit Pai moved to make commission meeting items publically available before a vote was made. This step is now taken before every FCC Open Meeting. “In fact, transparency has resulted in more informative discussions, fewer unnecessary meetings, and, overall, a better work product,” O’Rielly said. “Who would have guessed it?”

At the AEI gathering on April 19, O’Rielly suggested that the commission begin to apply this type of process reform to other areas, including those items that are on the commission’s circulation list. By doing so, the commission avoids creating a secretive, potentially abusive path ripe for considering documents of any length and importance, he said.

[Read: FCC’s O’Rielly: Thank Goodness for Broadcasters]

He also touched on the need to review the commission’s Kid Vid children’s programming rules, which require broadcasters to provide educational and informational programming to children as part of their broadcast license renewal process. Those rules require broadcasters to regularly schedule and air three hours of informational and educational programming for children that is at least 30 minutes in length between the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.

Unfortunately, these well-intentioned rules have not worked to deliver high-quality content for children, O’Rielly said. “As is often the case when government tries to create a market, this endeavor failed spectacularly,” he said. Data suggests a 99% decline in children viewership (ages 2 to 11) on Saturday mornings. “That’s an important segment of children that are simply not watching the commission’s mandated Kid Vid programming,” he said. Instead, some are turning to online sites like YouTube, an unregulated platform “that may deliver high-quality programming to children, or, may label content as children’s programming but instead offer something quite different,” he said. “I have seen this firsthand as a father of a two- year-old.”

While the market the government sought to create with its Kid Vid rules never took off, other markets were killed in the process, O’Rielly said. He pointed to the demise of short-form programming like “School House Rock” and programming that was not regularly scheduled like “Afterschool Specials” that were oftentimes popular with children. “Once the FCC determined that this would not count towards the broadcaster’s ‘core programming’ requirement, interest in producing such shows ceased,” he said.

O’Rielly said the commission plans to set up a rulemaking this summer that will explore ways to “breathe flexibility into the Kid Vid rules.” This rulemaking should eliminate the elements of those rules that have had unintended consequences, would streamline existing reporting requirements, and will consider the needs of those U.S. households who still receive their programing strictly over the air, he said.

“I am hopeful that throughout this process more people will weigh in on the costs and benefits of the commission’s Kid Vid requirements, so we can build a robust record on this topic,” he said.

O’Rielly touted other ongoing changes at the commission, including the creation of the Office of Economics and Analytics (OEA). This office is designed to bring a more effective cost-benefit analysis discussion to items being considered by the commission. Once established, the office will undertake what O’Rielly called a rigorous, economically grounded cost-benefit analysis for any rulemaking that could have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more.

The commission also adopted a rule that requires the OEA to sign off on an item prior to its release to the public. Up next: a rulemaking that will propose that OEA follow the set of guidelines standardized by the Office of Management and Budget when it comes to handling the way benefits and costs are measured and reported across agencies.

All these steps are designed to improve the interworking of the agency, O’Rielly said. “Overall, my ultimate goal remains: to leave the commission in a better procedural place than I found it,” he said.

The commissioner also touched on advancing 5G services and budgeting for the universal service fund.

[Want more information like this? Subscribe to our newsletter and get it delivered right to your inbox.]

LAS VEGAS--FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly says that broadcasters don't need a mandate to serve their local communities, which is why he suggests he is comfortable with trying to get them out from under regulations he sees as outdated and unnecessary.

O'Rielly, speaking to an NAB 2018 audience Tuesday (April 10), said that broadcasters' secret weapon in an increasingly competitive media marketplace was localism.

He told them his push for deregulation was not because he thought it would somehow free them from the unique community service they provide, but because "I’ve simply met enough of you to know that localism is a value you will continue with or without our mandates."

Not only is localism in broadcasters business interest, he said, but it is ingrained in "every broadcaster I have met."

[Read: FCC Eliminates Main Studio Rule]

"During times of emergencies, it is the local broadcaster that always answers the call," he said. "Moreover, there is no one who highlights an issue in a community, or drives fundraising for a local cause, more than the local broadcaster. Thank goodness for you!"

O'Rielly said the FCC needed to start counting edge providers and others as competitors in broadcasters' media markets, and as a result "downward adjust the burdens we impose."

Historically, the FCC has not included the Web when gauging how much media competition there is in a market. "To argue that online streaming services – or over-the-top (OTT) platforms if you prefer — and social media content should not count as media in this day is to ignore what is happening in the marketplace," he said.

This article originally appeared on Multichannel News.

WASHINGTON—At this year’s NAB Show, the Federal Communications Commission will be out in full strength. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioners Michael O’Rielly, Brendan Carr and Jessica Rosenworcel will participate in four separate sessions, April 7 – 12 in Las Vegas. Commissioner Mignon Clyburn is not scheduled to attend.

Chairman Pai will deliver remarks at the “We Are Broadcasters Celebration” Tuesday, April 10, 3–4:15 p.m. The new event celebrates local radio and TV stations’ role in communities and “commitment to innovation that enables broadcasters to better serve listeners and viewers,” according to the announcement.

[Rep. Greg Walden to Speak at 2018 NAB Show Opening]

Designated chairman by President Donald Trump in January 2017, Pai had previously served as commissioner at the FCC, appointed by President Barack Obama and confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate in May 2012.

Remember that Pai notably canceled an appearance at January’s CES, reportedly after threats to his safety over his position on Net Neutrality.

Commissioners O’Rielly, Carr and Rosenworcel will address three sessions within the NAB Show Business of Broadcast Conference, April 8–11, including a Law and Policy Q&A with the FCC and Capitol Hill, which is open to NAB members only.

ORLANDO, FLA.—FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly recently spoke at the 2017 Wireless Infrastructure Show and one area in particular drew the praise of the National Association of Tower Erectors.

O’Rielly devoted some of his time to tower marking; he described the FAA Extension, Safety and Security Act of 2016 as “two steps backward.” NATE subsequently praised the commissioner’s “common sense approach.”

As we've reported, the FAA’s legislation outlined tower obstruction marking provisions for the communications tower industry, mandating improved physical markings and/or lighting on towers ranging from 50 to 200-feet tall. Some of the reasoning behind the provision involved the potential dangers for crop dusters running into towers.

“Carrying out the burden as written will be an extremely expensive undertaking due to the cost of the specialized labor that climb these towers,” O’Rielly told the conference. “It is without question that there have been accidents involving crop dusters. But, it doesn’t appear that communications towers are to blame one iota. According to requisite data, there is a good chance that, had the new provision of law been in effect, it would not have saved any pilot lives or prevented any crashes or incidents.”

Wrote Todd Schlekeway, NATE executive director, in the organization's press release: “Commissioner O’Rielly articulated the impracticalities and unintended consequences of the onerous tower marking provisions the industry is dealing with in the aftermath of the FAA legislation that was passed late last year. NATE thanks Commissioner O’Rielly for utilizing his platform to not only call attention to this issue but also offer common sense improvements that can be made to these requirements.”

NATE said it is working with a coalition of national wireless and broadcast industry organizations to seek practical improvements to section 2110 of the act.

For O’Rielly’s complete comments, click here.

WASHINGTON—FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly thinks thousands of tower owners in the United States were caught up unintentionally in a rule change recently made by Congress. He thinks the change could cause expensive, unnecessary retrofits, so he is recommending tweaks.

In a blog post, O’Rielly said he believes Section 2110 of the FAA Extension, Safety and Security Act of 2016, which requires improved physical markings and/or lighting on small to medium size towers (between 50 and 200 feet), is too broad and could cause unnecessary spending for communication industries.

“Generally, I have avoided critiquing legislation passed by Congress without invitation,” the commissioner wrote. “This is an attempt to highlight a potential unintended consequence, rather than criticism.”

He said that Section 2110 apparently was intended to address dangers to small, low-flying aircraft like crop dusters from structures like temporary meteorological testing towers; but he says language in the provision has far broader consequences.

“If implemented literally, the provision will force expensive retrofits to potentially 50,000 existing towers, such as wireless communications and certain broadcast towers, all new towers that meet the broad definition, and raise tower prices for the next generation of wireless services — all with little gain to air safety,” the commissioner wrote.

O’Rielly estimates that this could cost communications companies thousands of dollars per tower to come into compliance. In addition, the cost could impede development of 5G wireless services, the incentive spectrum auction and implementation of ATSC 3.0, especially in the rural areas where this provision would have the most effect.

He also called it “perplexing” that some technologies are exempted while permanent and non-moving communications towers appear not to be. “In particular, is there any data suggesting wireless or broadcast towers are more susceptible to be air safety hazards than towers used for electric utility transmission or wind turbines? It would seem appropriate that communications towers should be treated similarly to those structures,” he wrote.

While new marking and/or lighting burdens for certain temporary towers is a laudable goal, he concluded, the new provision may have been drafted more broadly than intended and unnecessarily affected communications towers that have little overall impact on agricultural air safety.

“Taken together, it would seem that a small legislative fix to clearly exempt these towers or require the FAA administrator to do so would be appropriate.”

PITTSBURGH—FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly will be one of the speakers at the ACA’s 24th annual policy summit that will take place in Washington D.C. in March.

Michael O'Rielly

Summit24 will have small and mid-sized cable operators connecting with lawmakers and regulators as well as media representatives that handle communications policy in Washington. The ACA will specifically look to discuss the new administration’s plans to pass legislation designed to reduce regulatory burdens on communications providers and other businesses.

“ACA is thrilled Commissioner O’Rielly will join us at Summit24,” said ACA President and CEO Matthew M. Polka. “ACA members are eager to hear from this legal and public policy expert about the FCC’s new agenda and how he plans to translate his ideas into action.”

ACA Summit24 will be held on March 29at the Grand Hyatt in Washington. For more information, visit the ACA Summit website.

WASHINGTON—With the seats at the Federal Communications Commission poised to flip to a Republican majority in 2017, FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly laid clear his suggestions to create a pro-growth, pro-innovation FCC “firmly grounded in free-market principles,” he said.

In a speech before the Free State Foundation earlier this month, O’Rielly said that 2017 will charter in new leadership that will set a new course in communications policy — an opportunity that arrived not a moment too soon, he added.

“The last few years have been marked by a comprehensive effort to exert full control over every detail of anything even arguably within the agency’s grasp, while also expanding our reach into every nook and cranny of the vast internet economy,” O’Rielly said.

Both O’Rielly and fellow Republican Commissioner Ajit Pai have balked at what O’Rielly called the commission’s “disruptive legislation.” Instead, technology and market forces should drive innovation in the marketplace. “There is plenty of work for us all to start next year, with arguably lots of room for improvement at every level,” he said.

His applauded President-elect Trump’s call for the elimination of two regulations for every new one created.

Among the broad changes O’Rielly outlined in his speech included a move to undo certain policies; the clearing away of regulatory underbrush; the move to develop a pro-growth, pro-innovation agenda; and the overhauling the older commission processes.

O’Rielly called for the updating of existing media ownership rules, which he called “relics of the nascent media world of a bygone era,” and he reiterated his call for the elimination for broadcasters to keep paper correspondence files.

He also vowed that the commission would continue to protect legal broadcast licenses. “This was one of the first missions assigned to the commission at its creation, and still ranks among our primary responsibilities,” he said. “While we have generally done a good job of safeguarding spectrum usage rights, for too long the commission has turned a blind eye to the interlopers stealing broadcast spectrum and threatening the viability of legitimate broadcasters in many of the largest American markets.”

The new commission should have ample opportunity to showcase its creativity and foresight by developing and executing a strong pro-growth, pro-innovation agenda firmly grounded in free market principles, he said, and will attempt to make substantial progress toward improving fairness and transparency.

Next year offers long-awaited-for opportunities, O’Rielly said. “Quite frankly, I pushed for [some smaller] reforms, recognizing the limitations of being in the minority, he said. “I suspect there will be greater opportunity to think about bigger reforms and deregulatory efforts — done in a thorough way — in the next commission.”

This story first appeared on TV Technology's sister publication, Radio World.

WASHINGTON—Over the last year, Commissioner Michael O’Rielly has been vocal about his concerns with the Federal Communication Commission leadership and processes—touching via his blog on issues as disparate as reforming the FCC budget process and limiting censure of commissioner viewpoints—and recently turned his thoughts to improving the way the commission handles what are known as circulation items. 

Michael O'Rielly While a dedicated a policy wonk might best enjoy diving deep into the inner workings of the commission—and following the winding path that a circulated item takes on the journey to approval—O’Rielly lays out some changes that he feels would improve the process of resolving these items on circulation. As of June 1, there are more than 40 items on circulation, the oldest from August 2015.

In a blog titled “Improving the FCC Circulation Process,” O’Rielly suggests a series of process improvements for these circulation items, which are those items that have been circulated to the four commissioners and chairman, and are pending action by the full commission. 

As it stands now, the FCC makes final decisions on these items either via electronic votes outside of a meeting or by putting them up for consideration during one of its monthly open meetings. 

But often, these circulation items can linger for many months without receiving formal votes, in part because they tend to be low-profile items that don’t draw as much public attention and tend to be less time sensitive, O’Rielly said. 

There are two existing ways to hasten the resolution of circulation items: adding the item to a commission open meeting, or moving on an item when it has votes in support from at least three commissioners. 

O’Rielly offers two suggestions: one, limit the life of an item on circulation to six months; two, give three weeks’ notice when an item is converted from a circulation item to an open meeting item.

SIX-MONTH LIMIT
By limiting an item on circulation to six months, these possibly stale draft items can be pulled aside and reworked to reflect the current state of the record, he said. In some cases, items sit so long because it does not have the support of a majority. “The chairman’s office should pull the item off circulation and work with staff and the commissioners to find a consensus,” he said. “If or when one is achieved, the item can be revised and recirculated” and will probably be voted in a timely manner. 

That’s how it’s done in the U.S. Senate, where O’Rielly served in pre-commission days as a policy advisor for Republican leaders. O’Rielly suggested the FCC’s circulation process emulate the Senate nomination process—in that case, a pending nomination can be returned to the president at the end of a session of Congress to allow the president to consider withdrawing the nomination or nominating the person again. 

THREE-WEEK NOTICE
O’Rielly also suggested that long-pending circulation items that are converted to open meeting items be announced three weeks before the meeting so interested parties have sufficient time to contact the commission to express their views. 

Sometimes, these additions occur as late as a week before the meeting, a point-of-no-return date known as the Sunshine Period. This is a time in which the public can not lobby FCC staff about matters on the meeting agenda.

Adding items right at the Sunshine Period can hinder discussion time, he said. “[Sometimes] at the very moment that outside parties discover it is finally time to focus on an item, they are no longer able to contact the commission to express their views because it is prohibited by law and FCC regulations.”

To fix this, O’Rielly suggested that those circulation items converted to meeting items should be announced three weeks before the meeting. (This is the typical notification deadline for all other meeting items, known to insiders as the unusually named “white copy date.”) Likewise, those converted items that do not reflect the current views of staff and the chairman—or need significant rewrites—should be revised and recirculated as official meeting items, he said.

“These simple changes would help ensure adequate input and deliberation on all items considered by the commission at its open meetings,” he wrote. 

This story originally appeared on TV Technology's sister site Radio World.

WASHINGTON—Broadcasters, Michael O’Rielly is concerned for your safety and security; and he’s speaking up about it.

“Given past attacks on station employees and the physical risks these individuals can face, it is all the more important that the commission clarify our rules so that if any station makes its public inspection file available online -- either as required by our rules or on its own initiative -- it is no longer required to make its facilities or premises open to the public.” So writes O’Rielly in a new blog post.

He says the recent move to require online public inspection files for most radio and TV stations “brings with it the opportunity to improve the physical security of broadcast stations. Simply put, once the public is able to view these documents online, there should be no need for public access to broadcast station premises.”

The commissioner noted that broadcasters often are real celebrities in their communities. “Unfortunately, the exposure and notoriety from such high-profile professions in today’s media-driven environment can lead to greater safety risk for station personnel. We all know there are some number of unstable individuals interacting in every society, and broadcast station employees can be particularly vulnerable to threats or actual harm, including physical assault or worse.”

O’Rielly, a Republican nominated in 2013 by President Obama, said the FCC’s longtime public file inspection requirement “clearly creates a potential weakness in broadcasters’ security efforts.” He said that during a visit to Alaska, he talked with broadcasters and learned of “repeated attempts by one individual to remove documents from a station’s public file with the hopes of catching the broadcaster out of compliance with FCC rules. Just imagine if that person refused to exit or pulled a knife when the station personnel prevented the malicious act.” He said he was disappointed there wasn’t more comment on this topic when it was raised in the recent notice of proposed rulemaking. 

“It would be helpful to have a more fulsome record about the physical threats and actual harms experienced by broadcast station personnel. Similarly, it would be valuable to hear whether broadcasters believe that their overall security could be improved if the commission addressed this potential vulnerability.” 

He called on the other commissioners to help to improve the safety and security of broadcasters and their employees “by reducing unnecessary access if or when any efforts to expand the online public file go live.” 

The commissioner may raise this topic during his appearance here in Atlanta for the Radio Show later this week. He also has been vocal on the importance of not easing up on pirate radio enforcement.