Pai Invites TV Duopolies Into Every Market

In House testimony Wednesday, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai unveiled his dereg plan that would allow  broadcasters to own two TV stations, possibly two network affiliates, in any market regardless of size, and operate still more stations in the same market through JSAs and SSAs. The current restrictions are outdated, he says. They presume that the market is still defined by "pulp and rabbit ears." A full draft of his proposal is due out Thursday.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai today revealed at a House oversight hearing that his proposal for relaxing the local broadcast ownership rules would allow a broadcaster to own two TV stations in any market, regardless of size, and, in some cases, both stations could be Big Four network affiliates.

In his testimony before the House Communications Subcommittee, Pai framed the proposal in First Amendment terms. “If you believe as I do that the federal government has no business intervening in the news, then we must stop the federal government from intervening in the news business.”

Pai said the FCC will release a draft of the entire deregulatory proposal tomorrow in advance of the FCC’s Nov. 16 open meeting, at which the Republican majority is likely to adopt it.

The rules currently prohibit ownership of two stations in markets with fewer than eight independently owned stations — that is, small markets. They also ban ownership of two top-four-rated stations, typically the Big Four affiliates, in all markets, regardless of size.

In his testimony before the House Communications Subcommittee, Pai said the so-called eight-voice test would go and that the FCC would consider allowing combos of top-four-rated stations on a case-by-case basis.

If a broadcaster brings a “compelling case” that owning two top-four-rated stations in a market would be in the public interest, Pai explained, “we will take a look; otherwise, the prohibition applies.”

BRAND CONNECTIONS

Pai also said that the proposal will say that joint sales agreement do not count against the local two-to-a-market cap.

That will have the effect of allowing broadcasters to use joint sales agreements, often in tandem with shared services agreements, to operate — but not own — a third or fourth station in a market.

The proposal would also eliminate the broadcast-newspaper and radio-TV crossownership rules, Pai said.

The current rules are simply outdated, Pai argued in defense of the proposal, reports of which have already drawn criticism from Democrats.

“The marketplace is nothing like it was in 1975,” Pai said. “Newspapers are shutting down. Many radio and TV stations are struggling, especially in smaller and rural markets.

“Online competition for the collection and distribution of news is greater than it ever was, and only two internet companies [Google and Facebook] claim 100% of recent online advertising growth. Indeed, their digital advertising revenue alone this year will be greater than the market cap of the entire broadcasting industry.

“And, yet, the FCC rules still presume that the market is defined entirely by pulp and rabbit ears,” he said. “If this order is adopted, the FCC will belatedly recognize reality and match our rules to the modern marketplace.”


Comments (16)

Leave a Reply

Wagner Pereira says:

October 25, 2017 at 10:43 pm

American Cable Ass. Ted Hearn needing a good stiff drink tonight….or a dozen of them.

    Veronica Serrano Padilla says:

    October 26, 2017 at 12:36 pm

    So will the American public who will be paying more in retransmission fees as “broadcasters” get more and more government provided leverage.

    Wagner Pereira says:

    October 26, 2017 at 12:59 pm

    They can always disconnect. Then again, that put YOU out of business as well. Seems you have more to lose than Broadcasters with your last Century Analog SD Part-TIme CATV Channel.

    Veronica Serrano Padilla says:

    October 27, 2017 at 12:28 pm

    Fairly unlikely in this area, as there is ZERO chance on viewers getting a reliable OTA signal (which begs the question, if “broadcasters” are really interested in OTA viewers, why do none – PBS excepted – have translators in this area??)

kendra campbell says:

October 26, 2017 at 8:50 am

Local TV stations are not in the “news business”. They are in the commercial delivery business.

    Wagner Pereira says:

    October 26, 2017 at 12:54 pm

    We cannot all be PBS

    kendra campbell says:

    October 26, 2017 at 2:15 pm

    Correct. How about news content other than crime, car wrecks, house fires, and endless weather hype? How about 7 minutes of commercials (per half hour) instead of 12? Yes – 12. How about taking the public airwaves license seriously? How about doing some real journalism instead of throwing around inane, insulting, drivel, like “on your side”, “we’re here for you”, etc.?

Shenee Howard says:

October 26, 2017 at 9:29 am

The Fox duopoly here has worked out real well. WWOR has become a shell of itself with limited viewership, no local news product, and repurposed game shows. Basically, they took out a competitor and provided no value. Not sure how duopolies help local TV other than enriching ownership at the expense of community service and information.

Dan Levitt says:

October 26, 2017 at 9:39 am

If it ain’t Broke, don’t Fix it. This is all Pai-in-the-sky.

Julien Devereux says:

October 26, 2017 at 9:56 am

Ok, NOW we know for sure he’s in Sinclair’s pocket.

Kim Bradley says:

October 26, 2017 at 10:04 am

Things are changing for the better. Some folks always resist change. Not I, Thanks Pai.

    alicia farmer says:

    October 26, 2017 at 10:21 am

    Gymbeau – If stations were really in the news business (as Pai laughingly states) then I would strongly disagree with your viewpoint. Since that horse left the barn over ten years ago – who cares?

Brian Bussey says:

October 26, 2017 at 10:38 am

this is what you get when you put a crack head in charge of the drug rehab. this is lunacy

Brian Bussey says:

October 26, 2017 at 10:41 am

F.C.C. licensed broadcast stations are not grocery stores. they are protected local monopolies for a reason. They are what separate us from becoming a communist nation like Russia..

christina sumaya-orozco says:

October 26, 2017 at 10:58 am

The federal government isn’t intervening in the news, it is enforcing expectations of broadcasters using the public airwaves for profit. If you don’t want to regulate them then sell all the spectrum to the highest bidder like you did for cellular service. Allowing Sinclair to own 1000 stations only benefits Sinclair, not the communities they “serve.” Pai making any reference to the public interest is a joke. Let’s see how well those communities are served when the studios in hundreds of markets are shut down and programming is all fed from Baltimore. He’s not saving local broadcasting, he’s ending it.

    Brian Bussey says:

    October 26, 2017 at 11:45 am

    it is enforcing expectations of broadcasters using the public airwaves for profit.
    Not sure I can roll with this statement. I would submit that the F.C.C. wants local stations to figure out how to leverage their legal DMA monopoly by becoming involved in their communities to effectively deliver viewers-customers to their local advertisers. I do not turn to CNN or Bloomberg or MSNBC for local news because they cannot pronounce the street names. Nor do I turn to the weather channel for local weather news because I am not going to sit through reports on snow storms in Kennebunkport until they get to my area of the gulf coast.