As the FCC moves toward a decision in “GN Docket No.16-142,” which authorizes the permissive use of the much-heralded “Next Generation” broadcast television standard (ATSC 3.0), one big MVPD has asked the Commission to start applying its “light-touch regulation” Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioner Michael O’Rielly have been advocating since January.
That company is Charter Communications, operator of the Spectrum MVPD service.
In an ex parte letter filed with the Commission Friday (10/20), SVP/Regulatory Affairs Elizabeth Andrion urged the agency to “take the necessary steps to ensure a voluntary transition to the ATSC 3.0 broadcast standard that delivers the greatest benefit to consumers, including the tens of millions of MVPD subscribers.”
How, exactly, does Charter suggest this be done? “The Commission can ensure the voluntary nature of the transition by adopting safeguards so that the cost of the transition, and potential disruption it could cause, does not fall on the customers of MVPDs,” it argued. “By taking these steps and ensuring that MVPDs’ adoption of ATSC 3.0 is truly voluntary, the Commission can make certain that consumers continue to receive broadcasts of the same content and quality during and after the transition as they currently enjoy today.”
Citing the American Television Alliance (ATVA), Charter argues that the transition to ATSC 3.0 “could impose real costs on MVPDs and their subscribers, without clearly defined benefits.” First is the fact that MVPDs “would have the option to carry new ATSC 3.0 signals if they negotiate new retransmission consent agreements allowing them to do so.” Until then, MVPDs would be relegated to transmissions of ATSC 1.0 simulcasts for an “indeterminable period.” Then there is the costs associated with system upgrades allowing Charter and MVPDs to carry ATSC 3.0 signals, it claims.
“MVPDs also would have to purchase new equipment (e.g., new receivers, new transcoders, and demulitplexers), much of which does not yet exist, to be able to receive and process ATSC 3.0 signals,” Charter says. “And, if broadcasters have their way, MVPDs would have to pay new, and potentially substantial, per-subscriber royalties in order to do so. Moreover, if broadcasters choose to transmit in higher-resolution formats, MVPDs would be forced to devote additional capacity to carrying ATSC 3.0, which will necessarily limit the bandwidth available for other programming and services, such as broadband.”
To prevent broadcasters from compelling carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals by threatening or conditioning existing ATSC 1.0 service, Charter asks that the Commission require broadcasters to negotiate initial carriage of ATSC 3.0 signals separately from the continued carriage of ATSC 1.0 signals.
Additionally, Charter has asked the Commission to turn down an NAB proposal that would allow a station that obtains a waiver of the ATSC 1.0 simulcasting requirement to instead elect must carry for its ATSC 3.0 feed provided it “arrange[s] for delivery of its signal to any MVPDs required to carry the station’s signal in a format the MVPD is capable of receiving.”
Charter said, “Such [a] proposal blatantly flouts the Commission’s stated intention not to address must carry in this proceeding and it would, if adopted, constitute an unconstitutional expansion of statutory must carry obligations.”
The ex parte letter from Charter came alongside the filing of a related ex parte letter from NCTA: The Internet & Television Association outlining details of an Oct. 18 meeting that saw SVP/Law and Regulatory Policy Rich Cheesen meet with Media Bureau Chief Michelle Carey and 11 staffers; and separately with Matthew Berry and Alison Nemeth from Chairman Pai’s office.
“During our meetings, we discussed the need for the Commission to ensure that the
broadcasters’ voluntary roll-out of ATSC 3.0 does not disrupt consumers or impose costs and burdens on cable operators and their customers,” Cheesen said. “In particular, we reiterated our position that the Commission should require broadcasters to continue to transmit a robust ATSC 1.0 signal during the transition period to ATSC 3.0. Rather than end certain key transition requirements after an arbitrary three-year period, as NAB proposed in an ex parte filing, the Commission must continue to require simulcasting until it determines that conditions warrant allowing a broadcaster to no longer provide an ATSC 1.0 signal.
