STELAR-Mandated DBS Market Modification Rule Broadly Supported
Broadcasters, DBS providers and members of the House of Representatives support an FCC proposal to let designated market areas (DMAs) be modified so satellite subscribers can have access to locally focused programming they might not be able to currently receive, according to comments in docket 15-71 posted Wednesday. The NPRM that inspired the comments from Dish Network, NAB and others is a result of Section 102 of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act Reauthorization, and the rule change is intended to address the issue of “orphan counties” that are in a DMA primarily based in another state. “It is paramount for public safety and fairness reasons that counties have access to in-state broadcast television stations,” said Alabama GOP Reps. Mike Rogers and Robert Aderholt, who together represent three orphan counties in Alabama. The act requires the FCC to approve final rules for DBS market modification by September.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
All commenters in the docket supported the congressionally required rule-change. There are differences on how it should be implemented, in comments filed by Dish, DirecTV, Gray Television, NAB and other broadcasters. The NPRM sought comment on allowing satellite companies to refuse market modifications that aren’t technically feasible. Broadcasters concede that such circumstances could arise and believe DBS companies should have to present evidence of the problem.
The technical feasibility of a market modification is entirely dependent on whether a given satellite’s spot beam reaches the affected location, Dish and DirecTV said. “If the spot beam does not reach that community, DIRECTV cannot deliver the station there, whether or not the Commission grants a proposed modification,” DirecTV said. The FCC should “require satellite carriers claiming infeasibility due to insufficient spot beam coverage to provide spot beam contour diagrams to show whether a particular spot beam can be used to cover a particular community,” said NAB. “The FCC should limit the statutory ‘technical infeasibility’ exception to bona fide, demonstrable instances of the unavailability of spot beam capacity,” Gray said.
Requiring DBS companies to prove technical infeasibility could mean sensitive documents are exposed, Dish and DirecTV said. “The Commission should not require satellite carriers to submit business-sensitive documents or analysis to support determinations of infeasibility,” Dish said. “A satellite carrier should be able to issue a certification that it has analyzed a potential market modification and has determined that it is either technically or economically infeasible to implement it.” The FCC could adopt protective orders for such information to allow it to be shared, NAB said.
"There are situations other than delivery of physically distant in-DMA signals where the local needs of DBS subscribers are not being met," said Virginia Broadcasting Corp. Though located in central Virginia, DBS providers in the area carried a Washington-based NBC affiliate instead of VBC's nearby one, said the broadcaster. “The problem of how to bring the most relevant service to local viewers is broader than delivery of an out-of-state signal to a community that has been assigned by Nielsen to an out-of-state DMA.” Gray suggested a new market modification rule could be used for more than border-crossing DMAs. Several Gray stations are assigned to small DMAs but serve nearby counties assigned to much larger markets, Gray said. ”In such counties, the ‘local’ station in the county’s ‘home’ market is centered on a far-away city -- often in another State,” Gray said. “The local news and sports airing on the nearby Gray stations is more valuable and relevant.”