The NAB Television Board of Directors promised in a policy statement Wednesday to prioritize local broadcasters' interests in NAB’s advocacy, “including on those issues that may be in tension with other NAB member business interests." This was a veiled reference to the networks and their streaming businesses, numerous attorneys and broadcasters told us. The policy statement is widely seen as a reaction to growing conflict between broadcast affiliates and their network partners over content and issues such as virtual MVPD regulation.
Sinclair Broadcast will sell anything in its portfolio -- at “the right price” -- so it can close the gap between its valuation and share price, CEO Chris Ripley told The Media Institute during a luncheon Tuesday. Ripley also predicted that generative AI eventually will create most media, and said asymmetric regulation and increased competition are broadcasting’s biggest obstacles. “Unfortunately, for our industry, we can't seem to get out from underneath some of these old regulations,” Ripley said. “There really isn't any reason for that to be, besides that's the way it always was.”
All three 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges hearing oral argument Wednesday on Gray Television’s appeal of a $518,000 FCC forfeiture order seemed skeptical of the agency’s rationale for the penalty amount but split on Gray’s arguments against the FCC’s authority over deals for TV station network affiliation.
Adell Broadcasting will bring legal action against Nexstar and Mission Broadcasting if Mission doesn’t accept the FCC’s conditions for approving Mission’s proposed $75 million buy of Adell’s WADL Mount Clemens, Michigan (see 2404240070), Adell CEO Kevin Adell told us in an interview Tuesday.
FCC Commissioner Nathan Simington on Monday condemned the agency’s extension of the top-four prohibition in the 2018 quadrennial review order. Instead of “dusting off” older regulations and “breathing new life into them through interpretive maximalism," the FCC should keep them locked in “a curio cabinet,” Simington said in remarks at NAB Show 2024. The rule change makes existing broadcast assets less marketable and hurts independent operators, he said. The FCC's attack on broadcast assets is particularly egregious at a time when “the literal Chinese Communist Party is pulling more eyeballs then broadcasters are,” said Simington, apparently referring to TikTok. Simington also criticized recent enforcement actions against broadcasters, which he said involved disproportionate penalties for violations that were inadvertent or insignificant. Unlike off-shore robocallers that repeatedly violate FCC rules and rarely pay fines, broadcasters seek to follow the rules and reliably pay their penalties, Simington said. He said he looks forward to the day when the FCC is “less adversarial” to broadcasters and ceases treating them like “problem children.”
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the unopposed motion of the American Television Alliance of low-power stations to intervene as of right in defense of the FCC’s Dec. 26 quadrennial review order against the four consolidated petitions challenging the order for allegedly violating Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act (see 2404080002), said a signed clerk’s order Wednesday. The consolidated petitions pending in the 8th Circuit are from Zimmer Radio (docket 24-1380), Beasley Media Group (docket 24-1480), NAB (docket 24-1493) and Nexstar Media Group (docket 24-1516).
Broadcasters attending the 2024 NAB Show in Las Vegas will focus on exploiting and guarding against the latest advances in artificial intelligence, on making the now 7-year-old transition to ATSC 3.0 finally pay off, and on surviving an unfavorable regulatory landscape, industry officials told us. “We’ve been building out the service; now it’s put up or shut up time,” said Gray Television Senior Vice President Rob Folliard of ATSC 3.0. The show kicks off Saturday at the Las Vegas Convention Center.
The American Television Alliance (ATVA) of low-power stations seeks leave to intervene as of right in defense of the FCC’s Dec. 26 quadrennial review order against the four consolidated petitions challenging the order for allegedly violating Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act, said the alliance’s unopposed motion Friday in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The 8th Circuit, in an April 2 order, granted NCTA’s motion to intervene on the FCC’s behalf (see 2404020045). In the order under review, the FCC found that its existing media ownership rules, with some minor modifications, remain necessary in the public interest, said ATVA’s motion. Most important to the group, the FCC retained the local television ownership rule with modest adjustments to reflect changes that have occurred in the television marketplace, it said. That rule limits the number of full-power television stations an entity may own within the same local market to at most two, subject to some limits, it said. The “top-four prohibition” generally bars broadcasters from owning two stations ranked among the top four in a local market, it said. The order “rejected broadcaster efforts” to weaken the top-four prohibition for strong public interest reasons, and the commission also took action to prevent parties from exploiting unintended ambiguities or gaps in the top-four prohibition, it said. ATVA and its members will be “substantially affected” by the 8th Circuit’s review of the order, said the motion. FCC rules require ATVA members to engage in retransmission consent negotiations with television broadcasters throughout the country, and the association argued throughout the agency proceeding that the challenged rules will protect consumers from rising costs due to pass-through of retransmission consent fee increases that result when broadcasters are able to negotiate retransmission consent fees for two top-four stations jointly in a market, it said. ATVA “likewise explained to the FCC the need to close the loophole that was increasingly being exploited” by network affiliation arrangements and acquisitions to circumvent the top-four prohibition, it said. An 8th Circuit decision calling the FCC’s decisions into question in these areas “would increase broadcasters’ already-powerful ability to extract supracompetitive retransmission consent fees from ATVA members and, ultimately, from consumers,” said the motion. The consolidated petitions pending in the 8th Circuit are from Zimmer Radio (docket 24-1380), Beasley Media Group (docket 24-1480), NAB (docket 24-1493) and Nexstar Media Group (docket 24-1516). The 8th Circuit previously granted the unopposed motions of four network affiliates associations (see 2403220041) and six radio group owners (see 2403260001) to intervene in support of the four consolidated petitions.
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals adopted the briefing schedule that the parties proposed in the four consolidated petitions for review challenging the FCC’s Dec. 26 quadrennial review order for allegedly violating Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act (see 2404030004), said the court’s tentative schedule Friday. The opening briefs of the four petitioners and their intervenor supporters are due July 15, it said. Sept. 13 is the deadline for the FCC’s response brief and that of NCTA, which is intervening on the FCC’s behalf to defend the order against the petitioners’ Section 202(h) challenges, said the schedule. Reply briefs are due Oct. 15 and final briefs Nov. 18, it said. The parties said they framed the schedule to allow for the briefing to be complete and the cases ready for submission on the merits before the end of calendar 2024. The dates “may be advanced or extended by court order or a party's early or late filing of a brief,” said the schedule. All briefs and appendices should be filed with the 8th Circuit’s St. Louis office, it said. The consolidated petitions pending in the 8th Circuit are from Zimmer Radio (docket 24-1380), Beasley Media Group (docket 24-1480), NAB (docket 24-1493) and Nexstar Media Group (docket 24-1516).
Opening briefs of the four petitioners and their intervenor supporters challenging the FCC’s Dec. 26 quadrennial review order for allegedly violating Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act (see 2403220041) would be due July 15 under a proposed briefing schedule that has the backing of all parties, NAB told the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a filing Tuesday. Sept. 13 is the proposed deadline for the FCC’s response brief and that of NCTA, which is intervening to defend the order against the petitioners’ Section 202(h) challenges, said the filing. Reply briefs would be due Oct. 15 and final briefs on Nov. 18, it said. The proposed schedule “would allow for the briefing to be complete and the cases ready for submission on the merits” before the end of calendar 2024, it said. The petitioners currently anticipate filing joint opening and reply briefs, it said. The intervenors supporting the Section 202(h) challenge anticipate filing two sets of opening and reply briefs, one from the four network affiliates associations, the other from six radio ownership groups, it said. “The number of briefs, the issues the parties intend to raise, and the number of words needed for full and efficient presentation of the issues could change if additional petitions for review or intervention motions are filed,” it said. April 15 is the deadline to file additional petitions for review of the quadrennial order; further intervention motions would be due 30 days later, said the filing. The parties request leave to file a supplemental joint proposed briefing schedule by April 22, seven days after the deadline to file a petition for review, it said. They further request leave to file a second supplemental joint proposal by May 22, if necessary, seven days after the deadline to intervene, “to ensure all parties are accounted for,” it said. The consolidated petitions pending in the 8th Circuit are from Zimmer Radio (docket 24-1380), Beasley Media Group (docket 24-1480), NAB (docket 24-1493) and Nexstar Media Group (docket 24-1516).