'So Be It,' if ATSC 3.0 Clears FCC Sans Democratic Support, Says Shapiro

Opposition that cropped up recently “sounds like a Democrat versus Republican thing,” said Shapiro. “It’s not technically based at all, that we can figure out,” said Shapiro. “This is an easy one for the FCC. I’ll be surprised if they don’t approve it. If they do so without Democratic support, so be it.” Pai has been a “marvelous” chairman, and has done a “good job depoliticizing” the commission, said Shapiro. “In all the years of working on ATSC 3.0, it took a long time to get here, and we’re not aware of any technical objection or any reason it should not go forward.”

The "objections" to 3.0 by "one FCC commissioner who was away for a while” are based on concerns that 3.0 isn't backward-compatible, Shapiro said, referring to Rosenworcel, who returned in August after her previous term ended in January. “Every one of your existing products will work” with 3.0, said Shapiro. The Oct. 26 draft order set for a Thursday vote requires broadcasters that use 3.0 to partner with another local station to simulcast their programming in ATSC 1.0 so viewers will continue to receive their existing broadcast service. The draft also requires programming aired on the 1.0 simulcast channel to be “substantially similar” to that aired on the 3.0 channel, though that requirement would sunset after five years.

Accessing 3.0's advanced features will require buying a new compatible TV, “but that’s how technology changes,” said Shapiro. He suggested Rosenworcel’s 3.0 opposition on backward-compatibility grounds was based on “a lack of information.” ATSC 3.0 "is not backwards-compatible" with current devices and will add costs, so it’s “a tax on every household with a television," said Rosenworcel last month (see 1710120057). She also told a Thursday panel that the FCC should make the 3.0 migration more closely resemble the DTV transition, with testing rounds, resources to keep consumers from having to buy new equipment and a legal foundation created by Congress (see 1711090064).

Rosenworcel was “the point person on Capitol Hill for the digital television transition during both the Bush and Obama administrations,” her policy adviser, Kate Black, told us Monday. Rosenworcel was senior communications counsel for the Senate Commerce Committee under then-Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, and his successor, then-Sen. John Rockefeller, D-W.Va., says her FCC bio. “She doesn’t lack for information when it comes to technology transitions like with ATSC standards," said Black. "As someone who has worked on this issue for more than a decade, she clearly understands how we can get this done in a way that both fosters innovation and ensures that no consumer is left behind.”

Though at least three commissioners are expected to vote yes Thursday on authorizing 3.0 deployments, Rosenworcel is expected to vote no, as is Clyburn (see 1711090064). "Remember when I asked as part of #NextGenTV NPRM that #payTV providers not be disadvantaged if they choose not to carry an #ATSC3 signal?" Clyburn tweeted Monday. "@FCC tees up final order w/o an answer."

Opponents "dwell on the challenges inherent in any technological transition instead of embracing the benefits that innovation will bring," said Pai in keynote remarks Thursday at the Reason Media Awards ceremony in New York. Foes "want to impose extensive government regulation that could strangle Next Gen TV in its infancy," said Pai. "These opponents inherit a long tradition going all the way back to the late 19th century, when many denounced the development of the automobile. But this tradition is rooted in fear and opportunism, not freedom and opportunity."

The draft 3.0 FNPRM should “better reflect the record” on whether broadcasters need additional spectrum, such as vacant channels in the TV band, to transition to the new standard, Microsoft said in meetings with aides to Pai and Commissioner Clyburn last week, recounted an ex parte filing posted Monday in docket 16-142. NAB said in its petition and subsequently that additional spectrum isn’t needed, the company said. “The draft FNPRM does not reflect these facts, or explain how permitting simulcasts on White Spaces would be consistent with these facts.”

Requiring MVPDs to carry 3.0 signals would be “antithetical to a voluntary and market-driven 3.0 deployment," the American TV Alliance responded to the FCC on broadcaster filings. “Any such expansion of must-carry rights would be unconstitutional -- and, indeed, could call the entire must-carry regime itself into question.” Consolidation of top-four stations under the draft media ownership reconsideration order will cause retransmission consent rates to rise, ATVA also said.

The FCC should clarify that MVPDs and broadcasters can agree to downconvert 3.0 signals, the American Cable Association said in calls last week with aides to Pai, and Commissioners Mike O’Rielly and Brendan Carr. “Downconversion will be necessary in the transition.” If a station’s simulcast signal can’t reach a small cable system, that carrier will have to downconvert 3.0 signals to carry the signal with existing equipment, ACA said. “The law cannot reasonably be read to prevent a small cable system and a broadcaster from agreeing to such an arrangement.” ACA asked the FCC to require more processing time and information submission from broadcasters seeking to transition so the public has ample chance to comment. Stations “must give the public both sufficient information to understand what may happen to them (without having to hire a broadcast engineer) and sufficient time to comment if they wish,” ACA said.