News directors and “broadcasters on the sidelines” need to get involved now in ATSC 3.0-enhanced emergency alerts to prevent a government mandate, John Lawson, executive director of the Advanced Warning and Response Network Alliance, said on a webinar Tuesday hosted by Sinclair's One Media. That way, “even if someday the federal government steps in, at least it’ll be our idea,” Lawson said, comparing the possible future of advanced emergency information (AEI) to what happened with wireless emergency alerts. WEA rules have been “a long struggle” between industry and the government, and broadcasters need “a voluntary system,” Lawson said. He advocated for agreements between broadcasters and their local emergency managers to discuss the production and use of the more fulsome emergency information and media that could be utilized with 3.0. Recent FCC rulemakings and the Reliable Emergency Alert Distribution Improvement Act “revitalized” state emergency communications committees but not too much of the discussion is focused on older emergency information systems rather than the newer tech, Lawson said. The FCC has open proceedings on making the legacy emergency alert system more accessible and improving it (see 2112140062). Pete Sockett, Capitol Broadcasting director-engineering and operations, said there’s a great deal of misunderstanding about the difference between the EAS and the supplemental, more detailed emergency information that's the focus of discussions about AEI.
Backers of the Martha Wright-Reed Just and Reasonable Communications Act (S-1541) believe changes to the measure the Senate Commerce Committee approved Tuesday greatly strengthened its prospects of passing Congress this year. S-1541 and the similar Martha Wright Prison Phone Justice Act (HR-2489) would bar communications providers from receiving site commissions from prisons and other confinement facilities (see 2104160067). Senate Commerce advanced the amended S-1541 and two other measures -- the Next Generation Telecommunications Act (S-3014) and Low Power Protection Act (S-3405) -- on voice votes.
Cable groups and broadcasters are at odds over how FCC proposals loosening multicast rules for the ATSC 3.0 transition should restrict the number of multicast channels broadcasters can offer, according to reply comments filed in docket 16-142 by Monday’s deadline. The FCC “should rely on its predictive judgment about how reasonable actors motivated by financial gain could act in this undeveloped space,” said the American TV Alliance. ATVA wants the agency to limit broadcasters hosting each other in the transition to the number of multicast streams they have in ATSC 1.0. NAB said broadcasters should be limited to “carry only programming that they could carry on their own facilities as constrained by state-of-the-art technology.” Broadcast consortium BitPath suggested the “cable interests’ concerns can be fully addressed by plainly stating that no station may, through the hosting rules, end up with more capacity than it started with.” Broadcasters wishing to launch new multicast streams above their capacity by hosting them on other stations should be required to simulcast them in ATSC 3.0, said NCTA. The proceeding just codifies and streamlines procedures the FCC has been allowing for two years through grants of special temporary authority, said One Media. “The cable lobby has voiced phantom concerns that are aimed at slowing down or upending ATSC 3.0 deployments they view as a potential competitor to the pay-TV industry,” said NAB. “The routine grant of waivers by the FCC over the past several years to accomplish what the Second FNPRM proposes to codify has not strained cable capacity in any way,” said America’s Public Television Stations and PBS in a joint filing.
Senate Antitrust Subcommittee Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said Monday she hopes to “somehow combine” the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (HR-3816/S-2992), the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act (HR-1735/S-673) and other Big Tech-focused bills “and get a vote on the Senate floor” on the package this year. Klobuchar and other lawmakers who support HR-1735/S-673 encouraged NAB members to press members of Congress to back a combined package, during a Monday event. NAB sees HR-1735/S-673 as one of its top 2022 priorities (see 2202110068), as members plan to meet with lawmakers Tuesday.
High inflation would exacerbate public TV funding woes, but 2022 was also a record year of investment in the service, said America’s Public Television Stations CEO Patrick Butler in his opening address at the 2022 virtual Public Media Summit Monday. Many “consequential elections” in 2022 may “significantly alter the political environment” in which PBS funding is decided, Butler said. “We lost $100 million in purchasing power in a decade of flat funding,” he said.
Broadcasters have evolved to no longer depend on automotive ads for revenue, said several broadcast executives on company quarterly earnings calls last week. The executives also discussed ATSC 3.0 projections, their M&A outlook and the continued rise of sports betting. “Back in the day, when auto sneezed, broadcasters got a cold,” said Gray Television co-CEO Hilton Howell. That’s no longer the case, he said. “We’ve become less reliant on auto,” said Sinclair Chief Operating Officer Rob Weisbord. Auto ads are likely to rebound but will never be as central to broadcaster balance sheets, said Nexstar CEO Perry Sook.
Some 42 markets have access to ATSC 3.0 broadcasts, under 10% of the viewing public in the U.S., and just 3 million 3.0-capable TVs were shipped in the U.S. last year, said Digital Tech Consulting President Myra Moore, moderator on a Streaming Media Connect panel last week.
NAB President Curtis LeGeyt thinks FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel should prioritize paving the way for ATSC 3.0, and is “100% confident” the 2022 NAB Show in late April will be in person as planned, he said at the Media Institute’s virtual Communications Forum luncheon Tuesday. He also targeted tech companies and performance royalties for radio stations, and said the most difficult part of his new job heading NAB is the lack of in-person contact with members due to COVID-19 restrictions. “We don’t have that intimate relationship with our membership,” LeGeyt said. “The way we really succeed is when we can get back to in-person.”
MVPD groups and broadcasters disagree whether proposed rule changes designed to ease the ATSC 3.0 transition should come with additional restrictions on the standard, said comments filed by Friday’s deadline on a November further NPRM in docket 16-142 (see 2111050049).
NAB raised concerns and the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council supported a Land Mobile Communications Council petition asking the FCC to modify its Part 90 rules on sharing of TV channels 14-20 with the T-band to reflect the changes that have occurred due to the DTV transition. Comments were posted Thursday in RM-11915. The T-band is shared with public safety and gets the most use in major cities, including Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, New York, Miami and Washington, D.C. “The changes LMCC proposes could have the practical effect of increasing instances of harmful interference between television stations and land mobile operations in the T-band by allowing television stations and land mobile operations to operate in closer proximity to one another,” NAB said. It noted “occasional complaints concerning interference issues between television stations and T-band land mobile operators under the existing rules, including from LMCC itself.” NPSTC said “time is ripe” to update the rules. “The Commission is fortunate that the LMCC has done so much of the work required to initiate the rulemaking proceeding it has requested,” NPSTC said: “The LMCC petition is comprehensive and includes the background leading to the request, specific recommended changes to the rules, and the rationale for the recommendations provided. The petition even provides a succinct summary on the history of the T-Band spectrum sharing that began in the 1970s. This summary should be helpful as well in crafting the NPRM.” Los Angeles County noted the rules were last updated in the 1990s. “Experience gained from (1) combating interference from DTV operations (new since original rules were adopted), (2) the transition of some [land-mobile radio] systems from analog to digital (which is a continuing process), and (3) the lack of vacant channel options due to channel repacking -- all mandate that the Commission revisit equipment performance assumptions made over two decades ago,” the county said. Issue an NPRM “at the earliest opportunity,” urged the Enterprise Wireless Alliance: T-Band applicants “must comply with a rule that protects television station contours as though they still were operating in NTSC [National Television System Committee] format even though they are required to operate in ATSC [Advanced Television Systems Committee] format. In the interim, television stations are receiving greater than necessary protection while, conversely, affected land mobile systems are not able to derive maximum use of T-Band spectrum.”