FCC Media Deregulation Effort Likely Will Target 'Underbrush,' Not Controversial Items
The FCC proceeding on media deregulation likely will focus on “underbrush” rather than big ticket, controversial items, attorneys in the pay-TV and broadcast spheres told us. Though lawyers on both sides told us they expect broadcasters to file comments seeking media ownership deregulation and pay-TV entities to target retransmission consent, it won’t be with much expectation of a response. Indications from the commission are that small, outdated rules are the planned focus of this proceeding, and where media entities expect to find success, attorneys told us. Lawyers expect a wide-ranging host of comments.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
“It’s going to be interesting to read,” said Wilkinson Barker broadcast attorney David Oxenford. “This is a way to create an inventory, so the FCC can decide where to act,” American Cable Association Senior Vice President Ross Lieberman told us. Commissioner Mike O’Rielly made similar comments at an ACA event. Comments are due July 5.
The FCC under Chairman Ajit Pai already has rolled back a host of broadcast regulations, so the proceeding represents a chance for media companies to target rules they don’t like, Oxenford blogged. “There has perhaps never been as real an opportunity as now to make your voice heard about the broadcast rules that should be relaxed as part of this proceeding,” he said. “There are lots of old policies that are on the books, often not addressed by statute or rule.” Though attorneys expect a broad response from media companies, a public interest lawyer said public interest groups likely won’t file much for the initial comment date. They likely instead will focus on responding to any objectionable requests for deregulation in the replies, the attorney said. Comments that focus on subjects that have pending proceedings, such as retransmission consent, are to be filed in both the media deregulation docket and the appropriate specific docket, said the public notice. That’s another sign the FCC will likely limit any actual deregulation to very specific, smaller, less controversial rules, one pay-TV attorney said.
Broadcasters are expected to target paperwork and filing requirements, industry lawyers told us. Quarterly issues/program lists and some notice rules that require broadcasters to take out ads in local newspapers are likely to be the focus of calls for deregulation, Fletcher Heald's Francisco Montero told us. The letters that broadcasters must send to pay-TV providers when they opt for retrans consent could be replaced with a simple online solution, a broadcast industry official said. Oxenford pointed to outdated rules that bar the sale of only a station's license, or prevent investors from taking a security in a broadcast license. The latter “scares away certain lenders who might otherwise be interested in providing financing for broadcast deals,” Oxenford said. Many antiquated FCC engineering rules also could be eliminated through the proceeding, Montero said. Under that heading, Oxenford pointed to regulations governing rural radio and “environmental requirements” as possible targets.
Numerous rules require MVPDs to provide information that either isn’t useful or duplicates information that can be found elsewhere, a cable attorney told us. Many regs have outlived their usefulness but persist on the books, the lawyer said. As with broadcasters, record-keeping requirements and old engineering rules are likely to be a focus of pay-TV comments, attorneys told us. Testing requirements may be a target of calls for deregulation, one pay-TV official said. A pay-TV official sees the proceeding as focused more on broadcast rules, though the attorney still planned to file.
Deletion of some mandates, such as accessibility or children’s TV rules, might be limited by statute, taking it out of the FCC’s hands, Oxenford wrote. "Interpretations as to how the statutes are implemented could be addressed by FCC action.” Political broadcasting rules fall in that category, but one attorney suggested the FCC likely would shy from changing those rules anyway, since it would court controversy.