Fcc Opens Dtv Public Interest Inquiry Despite Reservations

Television Digest with Consumer Electronics, Dec 20, 1999

Despite reluctance of 2 commissioners, FCC opened inquiry into DTV public interest obligations. Officials indicated inquiry is likely to be first step in relatively long process, since final comments won't be due until late April, and actual rules could only follow subsequent rulemaking process. Comrs. Furchtgott-Roth and Powell, although they concurred in part, also indicated strong reservations about extension of public interest obligations.

Inquiry is necessary to determine what obligations are, given that DTV will allow multicasting, ancillary services and other new capabilities, FCC Chmn. Kennard said: "That gives broadcasters more opportunities to ensure that television serves the needs of an increasingly diverse population, and more capacity to provide programming made to serve the needs of children."

However, Furchtgott-Roth said he would vehemently oppose giving DTV broadcasters public interest obligations beyond those for analog TV, and Powell said DTV capabilities raise strong question whether spectrum scarcity rationale for such obligations still exists. Powell also said he has "grave concerns" whether unelected FCC should act on issues that could "fundamentally affect the electoral process" without specific congressional direction.

One of key issues in inquiry is increasing candidate access to TV, FCC said. It asks what Commission can do to promote broadcasters' voluntary efforts to make time available to candidates, as well as on Gore Commission recommendations that broadcasters provide free time during campaigns and prohibit blanket bans on campaign ads. Furchtgott-Roth said Congress had "deliberately decided not to act" on free time and asked whether FCC should become involved in what he called subsidizing political process. He said obligations amount to special tax on broadcasters, unlike other industries. Candidate access is "a highly political issue," Furchtgott-Roth said, and Administration put FCC in "a very awkward position" by sending letter to Kennard Oct. 20 pushing for action. He said he "knows" inquiry isn't result of that letter, but "free air time is also just bad policy."

Other questions in inquiry include: (1) How to apply obligations to DTV multiplexing and ancillary and supplementary services. (2) Whether DTV could provide better disaster warnings through targeting individual households or neighborhoods. (3) Whether stations should provide enhanced public interest disclosures, including using Internet or e-mail to make public files available. (4) Whether DTV can make programming more accessible to disabled. (5) Whether DTV can increase diversity.

Like Kennard, Comrs. Ness and Tristani appeared supportive of inquiry, with Ness saying new DTV technology should mean not only "static service," but also "dynamic change." Tristani said FCC has no choice on obligations: "It's the law." She said if broadcasters believe they should be treated like any other consumer good, "they should talk to Congress, not the FCC." Fact that many stations already comply with obligations doesn't mean there's no need for rule, Tristani said, comparing specific obligations with "a speed limit on the public airwaves."

Public interest groups immediately backed new obligations for broadcasters. Alliance for Better Campaigns said broadcasters have "turned a deaf ear" on nightly campaign forums. "The longer the industry spurns these recommendations, the stronger the case becomes for mandates," Alliance Exec. Dir. Paul Taylor said. Center for Media Education announced campaign for obligations, calling DTV spectrum "extremely valuable public property" that requires stations to provide "dividend" to public. Media Access Project called inquiry "a good beginning" and repeated its position that additional spectrum requires additional responsibilities.

"The practical reality was that we were not going to get some large quid pro quo in return for the digital spectrum," Gore Commission Co-Chmn. Norman Ornstein said in USA Today op-ed piece Dec. 15: "Broadcasters have too much political power for that." He said Gore Commission recommendations were "pragmatic" solution that "bent over backward to avoid any regulatory straitjacket."