TVfreedom.org Wants to Counter ATVA, Others on Retransmission Consent Matters

The coalition, TVfreedom.org, will work to ensure that broadcasters and others with the same policy perspective “have a voice in the public that’s counter to American TV Alliance (ATVA) and directly pushes back on the misinformation that they are articulating in the public,” said Robert Kenny, TVfreedom public affairs director. Its agenda will focus mainly on issues arising around retrans, he said. That includes making sure the public, regulators and Congress “have a full understanding and grasp for the current state of the marketplace,” he said. “We firmly believe that some pay-TV providers in the ATVA are misrepresenting the reasons for consumers’ cable bills going up each month.” In many cases, subscribers who want to change providers are faced with early termination fees from the pay-TV providers, he said. “We believe those fees should be eliminated."

Having a coalition is important to providing a more balanced debate and a counterbalance to MVPDs, said Scott Flick, a broadcast attorney at Pillsbury Winthrop. “There’s been an immense focus from the MVPD side complaining about the retransmission system and trying to make a major ruckus every time there is a dispute that involves a broadcaster,” he said. “The problem is that if something gets repeated enough, people start to think maybe it’s true.” MVPDs “have been sounding the trumpet non-stop,” he added.

Associations representing the pay-TV industry were skeptical of the coalition and its motivation. Television freedom “is exactly what a company like Aereo is trying to achieve in its case at the Supreme Court,” said Matt Polka, American Cable Association CEO. Aereo is “defending its technology that the broadcasters are fighting tooth and nail to prevent,” he said. The coalition is another attempt “to keep the status quo for broadcasters in an industry and a marketplace with consumers that have so moved on from the old broadcasting technologies of the ‘90s,” Polka said. “Where the work really needs to occur is up on the [Capitol Hill] where there is a pending bill regarding reasonable reform” of retrans, he said. “If the broadcasters want to be constructive, they can definitely engage in trying to work on that bill for the benefit of consumers."

"These are the same tired arguments that NAB has been making for years and it just occurred to them now to dress it up as a consumer issue,” said an ATVA spokesman. “They can attack us all they want but they're still trying to defend really old laws and policies that harm consumers.” For all the new group’s claims, “they're still trying to justify a system that only benefits them,” he said. “They say they're about innovation, but they've sued to stop every new TV consumer technology that’s come around.” The three companies, DirecTV, Dish Network and Time Warner Cable, that broadcasters frequently claim are against the retrans model are three of the biggest pay-TV companies, the ATVA spokesman said. But “it’s the little guys that are members of ACA that can’t afford to fight and they have to pay the higher fees” in retrans negotiations, he said of the American Cable Association. “This is why those little guys are for this."

The impetus of the new group “is probably in response to what has been a lot of terrible behavior by broadcasters,” said Polka. In 2013, there were more broadcaster-initiated blackouts than ever, he said. As a result, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., has developed and introduced a “thoughtful bill in response to broadcaster blackouts to try to prevent them for consumers,” he said. “That’s what TVfreedom is up against because they [broadcasters] have created the problem of more blackouts than ever and they're trying to justify their blackout behavior.” Time Warner Cable, an ATVA member, also was critical of the new coalition. “This appears to be another entity by which the same broadcasters continue to lobby for the status quo of an outdated retransmission consent regime that repeatedly harms consumers,” said a spokesman for the operator.

TVfreedom.org members, Antennas Direct and the Rural Agriculture Council of America backed ensuring the broadcasters receive fair compensation. Broadcast TV and the news and content offered “are more readily accessible to such rural areas and provide the needed access to local weather, news and education programs and as such, should remain a viable resource, regardless of how this news and content is accessed via broadcast-TV,” said RACA President Jack Alexander in a statement. The current system works, he said.

Certain pay-TV providers “are seeking government intervention in the one area that they would like to gain a regulatory advantage in the marketplace over broadcasters,” Kenny said. “Pay-TV providers are seeking government intervention when, in 99 percent of the cases, retransmission negotiations are settled without service disruptions for pay-TV customers."

"NAB is proud to be just one of nearly two dozen members of a coalition that includes rural groups, minority broadcasters and programmers and independent local TV stations,” an NAB spokesman said. “These groups know that distortions and disinformation coming from giant pay TV companies threaten a modest revenue stream that supports robust free and local television for all Americans.”