Indie Programmers Back ACA 3.0 Concerns

A group of  cable network producers ask the FCC to ensure that any 3.0 rulemaking will not result in cable nets being dropped by MVPDs because they are required to carry both ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.0 signals “for an indeterminate period of time.”

Eight TV programmers filed support at the FCC for concerns the American Cable Association filed with the FCC on the proposed transition to the ATSC 3.0 TV transmission standard.

The group specifically cited ACA’s concern “that the proposed transition to ATSC 3.0 will force MVPDs to allocate significant amounts of additional capacity to the carriage of broadcast stations. It states that broadcasters are likely to seek to require MVPDs to carry both ATSC 1.0 and ATSC 3.0 signals for an indeterminate period of time.

“ACA also notes that ATSC 3.0 signals will likely consume more capacity than do ATSC 1.0 signals, potentially a great deal more,” the programmers said. “The result, posits ACA, is that capacity-constrained MVPDs are likely to have to drop existing cable networks or forego carrying new ones in order to ‘make room’ for new ATSC 3.0 broadcast signals. Thus, using ACA’s assumptions, ‘a cable operator would have to remove at least six HD cable channels in order to make room for higher-resolution versions of the Big Four. (Since independent channels are still offered in standard definition on some systems, the harm in some cases could be considerably worse.)

“We share ACA’s concerns,” the group’s letter continues. “We believe our respective programming services can compete with any in the market on the merits. Yet we also recognize that, as programmers unaffiliated with the largest conglomerates, our offerings will be at particular risk should the transition to ATSC 3.0 compel MVPDs to eliminate cable channels. As explained by ACA, ‘independent programmers would likely be the first to go’ in systems where capacity is limited. Such an outcome should concern anyone interested in preserving the diversity of media voices available to the viewing public.”

The group said that any commission rulemaking on the 3.0 transition should seek comment on the capacity issues and, in addition, should seek comment on:

  • “The impact of the proposed transition on diverse and independent programmers and their access to MVPDs’ linear platforms.
  • “Protections necessary to prevent broadcasters from using the ATSC 3.0 transition and retransmission consent rights to coerce MVPDs to allocate additional bandwidth that otherwise would be available for the distribution of independent program networks.”

The eight companies are: MAVTV Motorsports Network, Ride Television Network, Herring Networks, KSE Media Ventures, Aspire Channel, UP Entertainment, Cinemoi and INSP. 

BRAND CONNECTIONS


Comments (5)

Leave a Reply

Ellen Samrock says:

February 16, 2017 at 5:48 pm

…”for an indeterminate period of time.” Uh-huh. If the ACA is behind any proposal, assume it’s bad for broadcasters and the public and should be rejected without further consideration.

    Wagner Pereira says:

    February 16, 2017 at 7:24 pm

    If they think ATSC 3.0 will take more bandwidth, perhaps they should 1) remove Analog Channels, such as that which RIDGELINETV IN CAPS remain on and 2) Upgrade their system to .h264 or better yet, .h265.

    Veronica Serrano Padilla says:

    February 17, 2017 at 4:13 pm

    See, the problem @Insider, small MVPDs are in business and want to stay in business, not to serve broadcasters and their new ATSC 3.0 toys. It costs money to upgrade systems (and deploy new set top boxes) and with ridiculous programming rights fees stacking up that’s probably difficult to make happen. Of course, here at RIDGELINE TV (yes, in all all caps, that’s my user name) we’d love for the local cable company to go all digital – and they are working towards that. We applaud them for the effort, yet understand the difficulties which small, rural MVPDs with lower home-per-mile counts have.