Senator Jay Rockefeller asks the FCC to "collect all information necessary to understand the scope and effect" of any SSAs included in pending station sales.
Rockefeller Turns Up Heat On Virtual Duops
U.S. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV on Monday sent a letter to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler which calls on the agency to take a close look at the use of shared services agreements (SSAs) in proposed sales and mergers of television stations. In particular, Rockefeller is asking the agency to collect the information necessary to understand the effect of SSAs on competition and consumers.
SSAs enable broadcasters to operate and profit from more stations in markets than they are allowed to own under local FCC ownership limits. Such combos are known as virtual duopolies or virtual triopolies.
Rockefeller suggests that the FCC consider waiting to approve any pending sales and mergers until a GAO report he requested on the increasing use and impact of SSAs and other broadcaster coordination arrangements is issued.
“Given the current questions about the impact of SSAs on the broadcast landscape,” Rockefeller wrote, “the FCC should approach each of the pending transactions cautiously. While I am not taking a position on any particular transaction, I believe that the FCC should collect all information necessary to understand the scope and effect of the SSAs envisioned by the deals. Such information is also critical to gaining a more thorough understanding of the impact these deals could have on the larger video marketplace and consumers.”
The letter, the senator’s office says, “builds on Rockefeller’s commitment to promoting diversity, localism, and the public interest in broadcast television.”
In May, Rockefeller asked GAO to examine the increasing use and impact of SSAs and other broadcaster coordination arrangements. He requested this report to gain a more thorough understanding of the impact these SSAs could have on the larger video marketplace and consumers.
BRAND CONNECTIONS
In an interview with TVNewsCheck two weeks ago, Wheeler said broadcast ownership issues were not high on his list of priorities. He said he is aware of the proposal by fomer FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski to bar broadcasters from using joint sales agreements and SSAs to circumvent ownership caps.
Genachowski tabled the proposal, apparently because he couldn’t get sufficient support from his fellow commissioners.
“I’ve got to look at it,” Wheeler said. “It’s something that is worthy of me getting further involved in, but I must say that in the first two weeks (on the job at the FCC), I haven’t.”
Comments (9)
Tim Pardis says:
November 26, 2013 at 9:08 am
I applaud Rockefeller’s inquiry. Diversity in ownership AND management of media outlets is important to a thriving democracy.
Drucilla Neeley says:
November 26, 2013 at 9:18 am
THEN WHY ARE GETTING RID OF THE SMALL LPTVS???? SELLING OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH FOR TELEPHONE TAX
Ellen Samrock says:
November 26, 2013 at 12:05 pm
The objectives of the LPTV service was to provide a mass media outlet to minority voices, to promote diversity of opinion as well as provide minorities and women a low cost entry into the broadcasting business which would include creating jobs…essentially the goals I think Rockefeller is trying to accomplish here. Low power TV has done reasonably well in meeting those objectives up to now. But we’re dealing with an administration and Congress that has been well-paid in campaign contributions by the telcos and Silicon Valley companies (the figures are available online) whose goal is to wrest spectrum away from the broadcast industry. Plus there is an election coming up next year, meaning more contributions from these same entities. To make things easier for the incentive auction, the FCC has even chosen to illegally redefine LPTV by inferring that the service is secondary to everything but unlicensed devices (when by law it is defined as secondary only to full power stations and only in regards to interference). There’s no way the tiny LPTV industry can compete against these wealthy giants who clearly have the president, Congress and the Commission in their pockets. The only possible hope is from any lobbying efforts by the NAB. To be clear, the NAB could care less about LPTV but they do care about translators because their full-power members own a boatload of them. Since both services are cut from the same cloth, the NAB can’t defend the one without defending the other. There are also a few senators who are concerned about the future of low power TV and maybe they will draft some kind of legislation protecting the service. Who can say?
Ellen Samrock says:
November 26, 2013 at 12:18 pm
I forgot to add, thanks for the shout out, James.
Celeste Champagne says:
November 26, 2013 at 9:44 am
…and the FCC is going to consider allowing foreign investment. That should about do it!
Maria Black says:
November 26, 2013 at 9:49 am
This should get interesting! Or, at least, I hope it get’s interesting as that means someone will be looking at this, and hopefully dealing with the percentage cap, this issue raised of ownership caps, and hopefully cross-ownership of newspapers. They all seem to touch on some similar turf, and a comprehensive look at those pieces would be awesome.
Brian Bussey says:
November 26, 2013 at 10:47 am
consolidation only occurs to lay off working Americans. we need more jobs all over America.. not less jobs
www.xcodeforwindowsdownload.com says:
July 7, 2018 at 9:30 pm
I’m not that much of a internet reader to be honest but your sites
really nice, keep it up! I’ll go ahead and bookmark your
website to come back later. Many thanks
Happy Birthday Meme says:
July 20, 2018 at 3:58 pm
This should get interesting! Or, at least, I hope it get’s interesting as that means someone will be looking at this, and hopefully dealing with the percentage cap, this issue raised of ownership caps, and hopefully cross-ownership of newspapers.