Tag Archives: FCC

Television

Peoria ‘one of the worst cases of covert media consolidation in the country’

12 Comments

The media reform group FreePress has a campaign called Change the Channels, and it is currently profiling our fair city, saying, “Peoria, Illinois is suffering from one of the worst cases of covert consolidation in the country; all five of its commercial TV stations produce just two distinct newscasts and are controlled by only two companies.” Those two companies, of course, are:

  • Granite Broadcasting, which owns and operates WEEK (channel 25) and, through a local marketing agreement (LMA), operates WHOI (channel 19) and WAOE (channel 59)
  • Nexstar Broadcasting Group, which owns and operates WMBD (channel 31) and, through an LMA, operates WYZZ (channel 43)

They go on to say, “This situation is unacceptable. Two newsrooms simply cannot provide Peoria…with the amount of local news coverage and diversity of perspectives that residents need to stay informed.”

Of course, most of this isn’t news to the residents here in Peoria, but they did have one other claim that I hadn’t heard before: “Three of those stations, WEEK, WHOI and WAOE, are part of an anti-competitive conspiracy that spans two states.” They explain:

Granite’s Shared Services Agreement with Barrington Broadcasters is a particularly outrageous anti-competitive conspiracy between the two companies. Each company owned one station in the Peoria market, as well as one station in the Syracuse, N.Y., market. In order to avoid competing with one another in both markets, they simply “swapped” control of the stations, yielding these comparable markets completely to their former competition. This shady deal cost more than 30 jobs in Peoria (along with 45 in Syracuse), destroyed competition and left viewers in both communities with less local news.

Note that phrase: “to avoid competing with one another.” Barrington Broadcasting owns WHOI in Peoria, and when they were producing their own news program, it was unique in the Peoria area, often including investigative reports and stories that the other stations weren’t covering. Once Barrington and Granite entered into an LMA, the reporters were fired and the anchors moved to a set in the same building as WEEK. Now the WEEK and WHOI news programs are nearly identical.

Granite is now in a dispute with the Peoria chapter of the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) over contract language that would give Granite “jurisdictional flexibility” — something they could use to move the anchor jobs to their central broadcasting hub in Ft. Wayne, Indiana, for example. The local general manager denies the company has any plans to do so, but he won’t explain why the company insists on having the “jurisdictional flexibility” language in the contract. Granite imposed the contract, and AFTRA has filed a grievance.

The Change the Channels campaign is asking those opposed to these kinds of shared services agreements (which they call “covert media consolidation”) to write to the Federal Communications Commission and ask them to put an end to the practice.

The rules are supposed to protect localism, diversity and competition on the public airwaves, but in almost 80 markets across the country, these rules have been circumvented. Media companies have taken advantage of loopholes to covertly consolidate more than 200 stations, colluding rather than competing in order to cut costs.

As a result, communities are getting less local news than ever before. When the exact same news is aired on several stations, fewer stories told, fewer viewpoints are presented, and the public airwaves are wasted on copycat broadcasts.

Continue reading Peoria ‘one of the worst cases of covert media consolidation in the country’ →

Nation/World, Television

Opponents of Comcast-NBCU merger speak out at hearing

1 Comment

The Federal Communications Commission held a public hearing in Chicago Tuesday on the Comcast/NBC Universal merger. Free Speech Radio Network has a good overview of the hearing. I particularly liked this comment from Josh Silver of the Free Press:

He says the merger would be yet another giveaway to industry giants at the public expense:

JOSH SILVER: Policymaking at the behest of the largest companies across industries is threatening our economy, our oceans, our security and the very viability of our democracy. Just look at the ongoing recession or the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico for the most recent examples.

It’s telling that this hearing was attended by only one FCC commissioner, Michael Copps. He spoke in opposition to the merger, but industry experts expect the FCC to ultimately approve it, with conditions. Copps was interviewed by the Philadelphia Inquirer and made a good point:

Copps warned that other media companies would seek government approval for their own mergers if Comcast were allowed to move forward with its proposed acquisition of NBC Universal. And that, he said, could lead the nation down a dangerous path of diminished newsrooms and fewer independent voices on television.

“If you let our competitor get big, you have to let us get big” would be the attitude among Comcast’s competitors, Copps said. Control of the Internet could consolidate into the hands of a few big corporations, in a manner similar to control of radio stations across the country, he said.

Television

Wireless industry trying to grab TV spectrum

9 Comments

There’s another television drama taking place — this one is between over-the-air broadcasters and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

You may recall that TV recently went through a digital conversion. Over-the-air (OTA) broadcasters had to upgrade to digital transmitters at significant cost and switch to new broadcasting frequencies. The portion of the spectrum they abandoned was either used for public safety communication or auctioned off to wireless communication companies. Now there appears to be an effort to take part of television’s new broadcast spectrum away as well. Television Broadcast reported in December:

The focus on spectrum use has intensified since the Obama Administration charged the FCC with developing a nationwide wireless broadband network. The commission must present its plan by February [17]. FCC officials started floating the idea of using TV spectrum for broadband in the fall. Several interested parties have glommed onto the notion, from academics to lobbyists to economists, who say broadband is a more efficient use of the spectrum currently dedicated to delivery TV signals.

Another publication, TV Technology, gives some additional details:

…The Wireless Association (formerly known as the Cellular Telephone Association) asked the FCC to examine reallocation of broadcast spectrum to prepare for the “looming spectrum crisis.” They cited Congress’s directive that the FCC must conduct an inventory of all available spectrum with recommendations for greater efficiency….

In early December, the commission issued an urgent request for additional data from broadcasters, citing a “concern that the United States will not have spectrum sufficient to meet the demand for wireless broadband services in the near future.”

The wording of the FCC “data request” triggered even greater fears, exacerbated by the FCC’s unusually short three-week turnaround period. In its official notice, the commission explained that its “inquiry takes into account the value that the United States puts on free, over-the-air television, while also exploring market-based mechanisms for television broadcasters to contribute to the broadband effort any spectrum in excess of that which they need to meet their public interest obligations and remain financially viable.”

For many broadcasters, that sounded like a threat to reduce TV bandwidth to standard-definition capacity and eliminate ancillary channel bandwidth.

In other words, broadcasters are concerned that the FCC is considering limiting them to one standard-definition channel and no subchannels to free up as much spectrum as possible for wireless devices. They argue this would effectively kill OTA television’s viability and mean the only way to get high-definition content would be through services like www.aaasatellite.tv that provide good quality with a really good price. It would also be “the largest bait and switch [scheme] on consumers in the history of our country,” according to Perry Sook, chairman/president/CEO of Nexstar Broadcasting Group (the company that owns WMBD-TV, channel 31, locally).

Television Broadcast now says that the FCC is backing off the idea of an enforced reallocation of spectrum, and is considering a “voluntary opportunity” instead. Nevertheless, the wireless industry’s “spectrum grab” ambitions aren’t dampened:

Wireless industry lobby chief Steve Largent has said his sector will need 800 MHz of additional spectrum in six years…. “We continue to believe that all spectrum should be on the table for potential reallocation, including the almost 300 MHz allocated for broadcast television use, which is spectrum most favorable to mobile broadband. We look forward to working with the commission and the broadband team to consider mechanisms to put spectrum to its highest use.”

Broadcasters point out that the government spent $2 billion promoting digital television and subsidizing set-top TV converter boxes. Furthermore, broadcasters were required without subsidy to upgrade their transmitters to HD digital. Reclaiming TV’s spectrum for other uses would be throwing all that public and private money down the drain. Furthermore, television has a “public interest mandate” (they are required to provide educational and informational content in order to broadcast OTA) that wireless companies do not, making TV more entitled to the spectrum in many broadcasters’ minds.

The fight for spectrum isn’t over. As they say on TV, “stay tuned….”

City of Peoria, Peoria Public Schools

District 150 looking to cell towers for supplemental income

26 Comments

cell_tower_ibs91District 150 has found a new way to get revenue: allow private companies to erect cell phone towers on school property.

In November 2008, the City Council approved a request for U.S. Cellular to erect a cell phone tower at Loucks Edison School (now Thomas Jefferson), 2503 N. University St. Sources tell me the the school district will receive $2000 per month from this lease arrangement, and that more cell towers are planned on other properties, including Whittier School. Putting cell towers on school and church property is common — but controversial — all over the country.

The controversy is over safety. The Federal Communications Commission has several documents regarding cell tower (or “cell site”) radiation levels, and they’ve basically determined that they are very safe. “Measurements made near typical cellular and PCS installations, especially those with tower-mounted antennas, have shown that ground-level power densities are well below limits recommended by RF/microwave safety standards,” says OET [Office of Engineering and Technology] Bulletin 56 (p. 21). Well enough below limits that such cell sites “are considered ‘categorically excluded’ from the requirement for routine environmental processing for RF exposure” by the FCC, according to “A Local Government Official’s Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF Emission Safety.”

Not everyone is convinced. People Against Cell Towers at Schools (PACTS) is an organization started by citizens in Tampa, Florida, that believes cell phone towers should not be placed on or near school playgrounds. They cite a litany of research, including a 2004 article from the American Academy of Pediatrics which stated children are more susceptible to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields and recommended “additional research and the development of precautionary policies in the face of scientific uncertainty.” In fact, most of the research cited takes a similar approach. For example, the American Cancer Society is quoted as saying, “we do not have full information on health effects… in particular, not enough time has elapsed to permit epidemiological studies.” In other words, exposure to ELF magnetic fields may or may not be dangerous, and until we know for sure, we should limit exposure to children. Furthermore, in response to appeals to the FCC’s report of cell site safety, they say “government agencies have a bad track record in protecting us against long term threats. Think about some of the major oversights in health threats such as tobacco, lead paint, DDT, PCBs and asbestos.”

So far in Peoria, there appears to be little or no concern. The cell tower at the University St. school building had no public opposition. However, that might be because the request went through after the school was closed and before Thomas Jefferson school was relocated there due to the fire at their Florence Avenue facility. The forthcoming request for a cell tower at Whittier will likely be the bellwether of public reaction to the idea.

One other concern that is expressed about cell towers is that they are not exactly aesthetically pleasing. Some communities try to hide them by making them look like trees — seriously. When I was in California last year, I saw a number of cell towers disguised as palm trees. Pictures on Google show towers camouflaged as pine trees, too. Clever, eh?