WASHINGTON—In another sign that broadcasters are using the Federal Communication Commission's recently launched inquiry into sports rights and distribution to advance longstanding regulatory concerns, Gray Media used a recent meeting with the agency’s staff to highlight the importance of digital rights management (DRM) being part of NextGen TV deployments and to argue that the agency needs to change rules on how broadcasters negotiate retransmission agreements with vMVPDs like YouTube TV and Hulu + Live TV.

The National Association of Broadcasters has taken a similar response to the FCC’s request for public comments on sports broadcasting practices and market place developments by urging regulators and Congress to abolish ownership caps on station groups.

A letter summarizing a March 5, 2026, meeting between FCC staff and Gray representatives explained that “Gray shares the Commission’s concerns about how difficult it has become for consumers to find their favorite sporting event now that so much is moving to streaming and behind paywalls. During the discussion with Commission staff, Gray described the complex sports rights ecosystem. Gray highlighted the following difficulties: (a) professional sports leagues demand those carrying their games to include digital rights management (`DRM’) into the transmission signal to the extent technically feasible, which is why it is critical that the Commission continue to permit the use of DRM in ATSC 3.0 signals, and (b) network affiliates’ inability to negotiate for carriage of local television signals with virtual multichannel video programming distributors, which significantly handicaps local affiliates' ability to competitively bid for local sports rights because affiliates do not control and cannot appropriately monetize the relationship with a significant distributor of their local signals. Shutting out local affiliates from negotiations for sports rights and distribution not only disenfranchises local affiliates, but it also threatens the revenues used to produce local news, weather, and sports programming that is core to Gray’s mission.”

Station groups have long contended that the current practices of letting the media companies like Disney that own broadcast networks like ABC handle retransmission consent deals with vMVPDs harms them financially by reducing the amount of money that they could get in retrans fees, an argument that the broadcast networks reject.

Including DRM in the NextGen TV standard has been opposed by some consumers while broadcasters have long argued that it puts them at a competitive disadvantage to streaming platforms, who use DRM to encrypt streams, in sports rights negotiations because DRM is not part of the existing ATSC 1.0 standard.

The March 5 meeting at the FCC was attended by Robert Folliard, III, Senior Vice President – Government Relations and Distribution for Gray Media, and I met with Ms. Erin Boone, Chief of the Media Bureau; Evan Morris, Deputy Bureau Chief; and Chad Guo, Attorney Advisor.

The full letter is available here.

WASHINGTON—With a Dec. 15 deadline looming for a new retransmission consent and carriage deal between Cox and Verizon, the two parties have started trading barbs over negotiating tactics and demands for higher retransmission fees.

If a new agreement isn’t reached, Cox stations WFXT (Fox) in Boston and Rhode Island and WPXI (NBC) in Pittsburgh, and PCNC (Pittsburgh Cable News Channel) could be blacked out.

Cox and Verizon issued similar threats in 2022 before a last minute deal was reached on Dec. 16th for the stations to remain on Verizon Fios.

“We are actively working to reach a fair agreement that puts our customers first,” Verizon said in a statement. “Unfortunately, Cox Media Group has yet to agree to reasonable terms. We are fighting to keep costs down for our customers while ensuring they have access to the NFL, college football, and NBA content they love. We will continue to work toward a reasonable agreement on their behalf.”

In a statement posted on its website, Cox’s WPXI-TV complained that while carriage deals are usually “reached without any disruption" to service “Verizon/Fios has so far refused to enter into fair market carriage deal with CMG for the WPXI programming and services that customers value. Verizon/Fios has an unfortunate pattern of forcing channel blackouts of local TV stations. Because WPXI has yet to secure a carriage deal with Verizon/Fios, you will lose live access to the shows, sports and local news on WPXI, which you rely on and are paying for. We are hopeful Verizon/Fios will abandon its well-worn path of blacking out TV stations and come to the negotiating table with CMG and start negotiating in good faith.”

The website also urged customers to call Verizon to complain and it provided contact information for other operators who will continue to carry the station.

“Despite what you may have heard, this dispute is not about WPXI seeking large fees,” the station insisted. “WPXI is often the highest rated channel on Verizon/Fios. Producing and broadcasting high rated, top-quality programming and being a network affiliate is very expensive. We invest millions of dollars every year in our local news, weather, emergency programming, entertainment content and network affiliations. To keep doing that, we need a fair market deal from Verizon/Fios and all our distributors. We have carriage agreements with every other major cable, telco and satellite company that is carrying WPXI and are seeking to be treated fairly by Verizon/Fios.”

The American Television Alliance (ATVA), which is backed by Verizon and other pay TV providers, has also weighed in.

It issued a statement from spokesman Hunter Wilson saying “Cox Media Group is once again threatening TV blackouts that would remove content from Fox and NBC affiliates in two major markets, demanding excessive retransmission consent fee hikes that leave viewers paying more for the same local programming. This TV blackout would be yet another example of Big Broadcasters leveraging disruption to demand outsized profits at the expense of American consumers.”

The ATVA contends that Broadcasters have levied more than 2,400 TV blackouts and increased retransmission consent fees by an overwhelming 2,000 percent since 2010. Cox Media Group’s TV blackout could impact Verizon customers in Boston, Mass. (WFXT) and Pittsburgh, Pa. (WPXI), jeopardizing their access to regular programs, news and sporting events that they care about, the group said.

While the FCC’s vote in September to consider revising broadcast television ownership rules is long overdue, removing ownership caps will impact other regulations in such a way that requires taking a “holistic” approach to the issue, according to the International Center for Law & Economics.

“The ownership cap is only one piece of a tightly interconnected system of broadcast and carriage regulation,” the conservative think tank wrote in a paper released this week. “Ownership restrictions, Title VI’s retransmission-consent and must-carry rules, and the FCC’s regulatory authority over bargaining standards all interact to shape bargaining power and allocate surplus across the industry. Addressing just one element of this framework risks amplifying distortions in others.

“Indeed, the broadcast-television market is an unusual case in which the prevailing regulatory distortions are directly interrelated, operate on the same products and players, and fall under the same agency’s control," they added. That presents a unique opportunity for the FCC to approach reform holistically, rather than in a piecemeal fashion.”

“Calling current ownership limits of 39% in one market “out-dated”, the group characterized the limit, which was agreed upon in 2004, “a political compromise, rather than an economically grounded metric.”

The paper, "Broadcast Ownership, Retransmission, and the Case for Comprehensive Reform," penned by Eric Fruits, Geoffrey A. Manne, and Kristian Stout, repeats many of the same arguments made by other proponents of changing ownership caps.

Citing competitive pressures from streaming companies, who can reach 100% of U.S. households, they note that “local broadcasters must compete with these services for audiences and advertising revenue, while operating under ownership caps designed for an era in which they were presumed to be dominant media companies. In today’s market, however, broadcasters not only lack market power but face extremely powerful digital competitors whose national scale far exceeds anything broadcasters could legally achieve under the existing limits.”

Such economic pressures have different impacts on local stations depending on their market strength, the authors said, with highly-rated stations cutting back on syndicated content in favor of more local content.

“For market leaders, local news represents 'must-have' content that national competitors cannot replicate, providing leverage in fee negotiations and valuable differentiation for local advertisers,” they wrote.

Meanwhile, lower-rated local stations are having to cut back on local production in favor of national news feeds from their station group, as is the case of WNWO, Sinclair Broadcast Group's NBC affiliate in Toledo, Ohio, which abandoned local news in 2023 in favor of Sinclair’s Washington, D.C.-based “National News Desk” programming, supplemented with network and syndicated content.

The group noted that tepid viewer response to the changes only reinforced the notion that local viewers are looking elsewhere for news.

“Notably, consumer response to WNWO-TV’s changes was minimal, with no significant public outcry reported,” the group wrote. “The station’s small audience simply substituted to competing local newscasts, suggesting consumer indifference to programming changes at underperforming stations. This seems consistent with Nielsen Holdings data showing that growing numbers of Americans prefer online news sources over television news.”

The group concludes that the way broadcast station groups approach maximizing profits can differ across the industry, depending on current economic conditions and that stations need more flexibility to be able to compete against other media.

“The greatest threat to localism, therefore, may not be rising concentration in mid-sized markets, but the financial collapse of stations that are prevented from adapting to modern competitive realities,” they wrote.

The group questions the relevancy of the broadcast industry’s biggest source of revenue— retransmission fees. Citing broadcasters’ ability to distribute programming through websites, apps and streaming platforms, the authors wrote that the initial justification when the legislation mandating must carry was passed in 1992—that cable served as a “bottleneck” towards program access—no longer exists.

“Without the bottleneck problem, the economic justification for mandatory-carriage rules collapses,” they wrote.

The group also noted the occurrence of frequent network blackouts when broadcast groups fail to reach carriage agreements, as illustrated by the recent nearly two week removal of Disney and ABC programming from Youtube TV.

It concluded that both sides were to blame, adding that "these complex negotiations might be avoided entirely if the mandatory framework were eliminated, allowing standard commercial relationships to govern carriage.”

The group concludes that, in revising ownership caps, the FCC should remove retransmission consent in favor of a more laissez-faire approach.

“The most coherent approach would eliminate the retransmission-consent framework entirely, treating broadcasters like any other content creator and allowing copyright law and voluntary contracts to govern distributor relationships," they wrote. "This would end the regulatory asymmetry between broadcasters and streaming competitors, while removing the advantages broadcasters hold over independent networks.”

WASHINGTON—The National Association of Broadcasters took aim at YouTube TV and its owner Google in a blog post for its “heavy hand in deciding what viewers can and cannot watch.”

Specifically, the Nov. 3 post by Michelle Lehman, NAB’s chief of staff and executive vice president of public affairs, objected to Google’s unwillingness “to fairly compensate ABC stations” for programming and to Big Tech’s market power, which gives it “enormous control” over what viewers can access.

Negotiations for a new carriage deal between YouTube TV and ABC parent Disney proved to be fruitless by the midnight Oct. 30 deadline for renewal. ABC, ESPN and other Disney-owned networks were dropped from the virtual multichannel video programming distributor’s lineup on Oct. 31. Google also is resisting Disney’s demand for price increases on other non-broadcast channels, such as ESPN, because it says increasing what it pays for the right to carry those channels will raise consumer prices.

As a result of the drop, Lehman said, YouTube TV subscribers who rely on local ABC stations for “important news, emergency information, entertainment and live sports” have been “in the lurch” and “at the mercy” of Google, which the blog said annually generates revenue totaling “hundreds of BILLIONs [blog’s all caps].”

The situation, she wrote, is reminiscent of last month’s retrans dispute with NBCUniversal, which nearly left YouTube TV subscribers without access to NBC stations and has shut them off from Univision stations.

The NAB executive vice president urged readers to act “before it’s too late” by reaching out to Washington to modernize broadcast ownership rules.

“[W]hen local broadcasters are sidelined, it is not just sports fans who lose. It is every community” that relies on broadcasters for emergency notifications, “fact-based news,” and a connection with others who reside there, she wrote.

On May 2, FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington and his chief of staff, Gavin M. Wax, published an op-ed in The National Pulse arguing a 30% cap on reverse retransmission fees—the revenue that local TV stations pay back to their affiliated broadcast networks—as a necessary step to protect local journalism and rein in the networks and media monopolies, CBS, ABC, NBC and Fox. This is a much-needed addition to the ways the Federal Communications Commission could actually help local television survive.

When it comes to the FCC and its antiquated regulatory framework that stymies innovation and fair competition, I feel like the proverbial “voice crying in the wilderness.” As one of the very few African-American owners of television stations, I have repeatedly advocated that if the FCC truly wanted to ensure the television industry didn’t go the way of the newspaper industry and end in extinction, it had to do two critical things.

First, remove its Depression-era ownership limits hobbling the television industry by ending the artificial limits on station ownership in a market and the 39% national audience cap. That would finally level the marketplace, allowing television to be able to fairly compete against its Big Tech competitors—Google, X, Facebook, Apple, Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, TikTok, etc.—none of which are subject to the FCC’s ownership and regulatory restrictions.

Second, the FCC has to loosen its regulatory chokehold on the advanced television format ATSC 3.0. The FCC knows how to aid new technology that expands public availability and service. It did so for FM radio and UHF television by ensuring they were available on all new tuners manufactured. To aid the critical analog-to-digital conversion the FCC mandated a conversion requirement and created a reimbursement program to help the television industry cover the cost. It should do likewise for ATSC 3.0.

The proposal by Simington and Wax provides a much-needed third step in the FCC’s work to protect local broadcasting and journalism. By capping reverse retransmission fees the FCC would eliminate the unfair advantage networks have over local journalism and broadcasters. Section 303 of the Communications Act gives the FCC the authority to regulate the network and affiliate relationship, and reigning in the financial overreach of the national networks fully supports the FCC taking this action.

Capping reverse retransmission fees would also be very consumer-friendly. It would allow the affiliates to keep pricing stable for the MVPDs.

Whether through traditional cable/satellite or streaming platforms and MVPDs, the FCC must act decisively to level the playing field for local television—first against Big Tech when it comes to ownership and audience reach, and second against the networks when it comes to distribution control and revenue. Otherwise, local television and the local service it provides will die.

When the network media conglomerates abuse their market power and hoard retransmission revenues, local stations are forced to cut news staff and greatly curtail divergent and diverse content offerings. The loss of that diversity is antithetical to the public interest and feeds a downward spiral for the television industry. Under such circumstances, it is not only appropriate for the FCC to step in and act—it's neccessary.

Capping reverse retransmission fees, eliminating antiquated and unfair broadcast ownership rules and removing the artificial and harmful regulations standing in the way of the universal deployment of ATSC 3.0 are just what the doctor ordered. Without such straightforward solutions being taken by the FCC, broadcast television will, as Simington said last March, continue its “catastrophic decline.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

WASHINGTON—The FCC conducted its monthly open virtual meeting on Wednesday, Sept. 30, during which they voted on new time frames for a couple broadcast regulations and had some technical difficulties with their live stream. TVT’s sister publication Multichannel News covered the meeting's proceedings.

First on the regulatory side, the commission voted unanimously to take steps to “improve” the foreign ownership review process regarding the FCC’s submission of foreign communications outlet ownership proposals to executive branch agencies for national security reviews. The action was in response to an executive order issued by President Donald Trump, with the FCC setting a 120-day timeframe for initial review with a possible 90-day extension.

The commission also voted to eliminate the requirement for cable operators to give at least 30-days notice ahead of possible retrans blackouts, citing that deals are often reached in that 30-day window. With the new order, the FCC tasks cable operators with needing to only provide notice “as soon as possible.” Democratic commissioners Jessica Rosenworcel and Geoffrey Starks approved the order, but warned that consumers need to be kept informed as much as possible.

Beyond the actual content of the meeting, there were a number of technical issues that took place. Rosenworcel had a vote delayed during the virtual meeting because her screen froze as Chairman Ajit Pai called for her vote; her vote was officially recorded when she rejoined the call. She cited the demand for broadband at home as the reason for the freeze.

Later, the entire meeting went dark, as viewers were not able to see the commissioners’ live streams, though audio was still available and presented as online captions. The meeting broke for about half an hour to fix the issue.

One other point of note during the meeting, Commissioner Michael O’Rielly made a statement that he is not seeking any continuation of his tenure at the FCC and will conclude his service either with the appointment of a successor or by January, whichever comes first. 

WASHINGTON—Speaking today during The Media Institute’s Communications Forum luncheon, NAB President and CEO Gordon Smith took aim at AT&T and DISH, suggesting they and other pay-TV providers may be “purposefully withholding” local TV signals from customers to create a crisis and goad Congress into reforming retrans consent.

“Is their goal to manufacture the appearance of a ‘broken system’ to encourage Congress to intervene just as it deliberates the upcoming STELAR [Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act Reauthorization] expiration? If so, that is a dangerous game, and one that hurts viewers—their customers—the most,” said Smith.

Smith framed his argument in the context of the importance of local TV news to democracy, particularly in a time when social media is transforming political discourse. While the number of social media users continues to grow, it is becoming harder for them to sort fact from fiction on platforms like Facebook and Twitter, he said.

“Though the rise of social media can be seen as democratizing, giving a greater number of people the opportunity to express their thoughts and opinions in an open forum, I believe it has also been a destabilizing force that has impacted our society in troubling ways. The paradox of social media—democratizing, yet destabilizing,” said Smith.

The antidote is the coherence local broadcasters give their communities, he explained, pointing to surveys that find local residents trust their stations to provide accurate news without bias.

“Local stations’ investigations protect consumers from scams, and their reporting of local elections help voters make informed decisions,” he said. Smith also gave a hat tip to broadcast network news shows, such as “60 Minutes,” “Meet the Press” and “This Week” as well as presidential debates that inform citizens and keep officeholders accountable.

“It’s unfortunate that at a time when this trusted information is so critical to our communities, some of our pay-TV partners, like AT&T and Dish, seem to be purposefully withholding broadcast signals from viewers—making them pawns in a political game that aims to upend the retransmission consent system,” he said.

Without the compensation broadcasters receive for retrans from AT&T, DISH and others, it would be impossible for stations to pay for “investigative journalism and expensive sports coverage and invest in sophisticated weather operations that save lives and provide in-depth local news coverage,” he said.

Turning to Next-Gen TV, Smith said ATSC 3.0 will converge over-the-air and over-the-top to enhance the viewing experience. Developing Next-Gen TV and other platforms will give broadcasters more outlets “to deliver the stories our communities rely on every day for free,” he said.

To enable new platforms to thrive, broadcasters need the ability to develop new products and services quickly without “unnecessary regulations,” Smith said.

“Lawmakers can enable broadcasters to better compete and to support journalism in this challenging landscape by modernizing outdated broadcast regulations that prevent us from competing on a level playing field with these behemoth tech and pay-TV companies,” said Smith.

While the technology of broadcasting will change over the years, one thing will remain the same: “Our communities will always turn to their local TV and radio stations to follow the inspiring events that have shaped our nation,” said Smith.

“They will always count on us to be their eyes and ears … to guide them to safety during times of crisis … to share life’s greatest moments … and to connect to families, friends and neighbors.

“They will always count on us to be the megaphones for freedom and democracy,” said Smith.

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) Monday (July 23) launched another effort at massive communications deregulation, one he has been pushing for most of a decade, so far without success.

Scalise has reintroduced a discussion draft of his Next Generation Television Marketplace Act, which repeals must-carry and retransmission consent rules and the compulsory license. That is the license that allows broadcasters to include nonlocal programming in their retrans deals without having to secure individual rights from national network and syndication rightsholders.

The bill would also "eliminate the government's role in defining the scope of programming exclusivity" and "codify the repeal of certain limitations imposed on local broadcasters that prevent them from adapting to today’s dynamic communications marketplace."

Like previous incarnations, the bill also includes eliminating the network nonduplication and syndicated exclusivity rules, as well as broadcast ownership limits.

[Read: Retransmission Overhaul Launched]

“Innovation tends to follow the path of least government resistance. For proof, look no further than the growth of online streaming services that are operating in a completely free market, while competing against other platforms that are regulated as if they were still monopolies from the 1990s," said Scalise. "My legislation will level the playing field so consumers can benefit from even more freedom in the video marketplace.”

Broadcasters wouldn't mind getting rid of more ownership restrictions, but getting rid of must-carry and retrans and network nondupe and exclusivity rules are nonstarters. The National Association of Broadcasters will strongly oppose the bill, according to an NAB spokesperson, as it has previous versions.

“Today’s media marketplace has never been more robust, with consumer access to broadcast programming on more platforms than at any time in history," said NAB EVP Dennis Wharton. "Unfortunately, the Next Generation Television Marketplace Act would undermine this great American success story. It would severely damage broadcasters’ ability to serve local communities and hurt tens of millions of viewers who rely every day on broadcast TV for news, entertainment and lifeline weather coverage."

But the bill has plenty of supporters.

"As the former president of an association of local TV stations, former president of network distribution for Fox, former president of the ABC Television Network, former executive VP of The Walt Disney Company and a former law professor, I write to strongly support House Majority Whip Steve Scalise’s Bill, The Next Generation Television Act," blogged Preston Padden, whose resume includes expert witness on the Hill for why the compulsory license should go.

"His Bill would repeal a steaming pile of outdated, conflicting and unnecessary government interventions into the market for distributing television programming," said Padden.

"The bill would at long last eliminate or substantially curtail legacy video regulations based on perceptions of the market in the early 1990s, or even earlier," said Free State Foundation President Randolph May. "If adopted, the NextGen TV Act would bolster free market competition and free speech in the video services market."

“The American Television Alliance, a voice for the TV viewer, commends Congressman Steve Scalise for his thoughtful leadership to reform and update America’s broken and outdated video laws," said the American Television Alliance, which has been advocating for major retrans reform in the face of what it says are skyrocketing broadcaster fee asks and blackouts. “The Next Generation Television Marketplace Act will jump-start and elevate a long-overdue conversation about modernizing the rules of the road for how Americans access and pay for video content. The legislation is forward-thinking, free-market oriented and pro-consumer."

"ACA applauds Rep. Scalise for introducing legislation designed to overhaul archaic media laws and policies," said ACA President Matt Polka. "The Scalise bill, to its credit, will prompt lawmakers and stakeholders to begin important conversations that should result in legislation next year that will truly serve the public interest."

“The regulations used to govern the video marketplace are out of date and no longer reflect the options and ways consumers obtain and view their content," said Verizon SVP Robert Fisher. "Congress should consider the changing technology enabled by a growing internet ecosystem as they create a new video marketplace framework....This legislation will begin the conversation to modernize our nation’s video policies as the marketplace responds to rapidly changing consumer demands.”

“Dish commends Rep. Scalise for his continued leadership on behalf of consumers," said Dish SVP Jeff Blum. "The broken retransmission consent regime is in dire need of comprehensive reform, and customers have been left paying the price through broadcaster blackouts and skyrocketing retransmission consent rates.”

“NTCA appreciates Congressman Scalise’s willingness to take on the difficult issue of updating video policy by introducing this legislation," said Shirley Bloomfield, CEO of NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association. "As consumer consumption of video continues to evolve, it is essential to examine video marketplace failures and consider updates to existing laws and regulations, especially in rural areas where many residents can’t receive broadcast signals. We look forward to engaging in this important discussion with Congress, and ultimately to the passage of legislation that will address the critical shortcomings in the existing rules governing this marketplace.”

“Charter applauds Majority Whip Steve Scalise for reintroducing the Next Generation Television Marketplace Act," the company said in a statement. "Congressman Scalise is rightly reexamining a broken system that has resulted in retransmission consent fees rising exponentially over the last decade. We look forward to working with him and his colleagues in Congress to reform the outdated rules and better protect consumers.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

WASHINGTON—Broadcasters have asked the FCC to reverse the presumption from “must-carry” to “retransmission consent” in carriage elections given that most stations now seek retrans payments, given the actual and associated costs of making those carriage elections and given the potential cost of not having those elections go through.

Broadcasters have been collecting billions in retrans payments from MVPDs, with the fee tally continuing to increase.

In comments to the FCC on a proposal related to cable notifications, the National Association of Broadcasters focused on broadcasters' required must-carry/retrans notifications.

Currently, if an MVPD does not get an election, the default is must-carry, which means mandatory carriage for no money.

“Today, the clear majority of commercial stations elect retransmission consent and the number is likely to increase in the future.

“These stations cannot afford to lose the ability to negotiate for compensation for MVPDs’ carriage of their valuable signals,” NAB said.

[DPI Discusses Present and Future of Retrans Fees] 

And NAB suggested there are many opportunities for the must-carry default to be triggered for stations instead of wanting to be paid. Those include carriage notices “frequently" returned as undeliverable, “no central repository for the information necessary to (i) identify local cable systems and satellite providers and (ii) identify current, viable mailing addresses for those operators,” as the TV network association also told the FCC.

In addition, NAB said it is a “tremendous burden of time, money and risk” providing the requisite election notice to MVPDs, as state broadcaster associations also told the FCC.

So, NAB wants the FCC to also allow broadcasters to make their elections by placing them in their online public files, which would put the onus on cable operators to check that file. Currently, broadcasters must make their elections to MVPDs by registered mail.

This story first appeared on TVT's sister publication B&C.