Why are they bitching at DOJ? Because of anti-trust, that is apparently
preventing the merging of some local stations. But limitations being placed on
broadcasters by the DOJ can only exist to the extent that broadcasters see
themselves limited by their OTA coverage. The longer view is not to tackle the
Internet competition by attempting to tweak legacy technologies, such as OTA
broadcast and MVPD dependency. But rather, join the competition, since you
can't beat them. If the Internet competition's ads reach more people, get on
the Internet. The networks already are, so broadcasters have to carve out a
useful role on this Internet. That has more to do with the TV networks, than
with the DOJ, no?
"DOJ has the same view of the broadcast TV marketplace today as it did in the
1970s, 80s and 90s," said Rick Kaplan, NAB executive vice president of Legal
and Regulatory Affairs, in his testimony. "Never mind that cable and satellite
providers now offer hundreds of channels of high-quality content. Never mind
that the internet has thoroughly upended the way consumers access and engage
with video offerings."
That's not fair criticism. Plus, the broadcasters are just as guilty of 1970s
thinking.
Messing with local ownership caps, as THE way to compete against Internet
media, betting on a second retrans consent revenue stream, is SO retro
thinking. It exploits a legacy-thinking "pretend game" that broadcasters
produce and own the high value content they transmit, it makes apologies for
the restrictions of OTA coverage and capacity, and it assumes that this legacy
MVPD model workaround is even viable, long term. Reality is, cord cutting is
still accelerating. This is not the solution.
"Kaplan argues that the DOJ's reasoning for not updating the reach that
broadcasters have is no longer adequate."
The DOJ cannot limit the reach broadcasters have. Maybe the TV networks might
be doing that, by limiting broadcasters' steaming rights. The DOJ is only
concerned about competition in a strictly legacy scenario: when local
broadcasters use the publically-owned OTA spectrum in a given market.
"When it comes specifically to digital, DOJ has made the argument that digital
ads are different from broadcast because they can be skipped, minimized or
blocked."
And here, the DOJ comes across as clueless. It is *not* so trivial to block or
skip online TV ads! It is far more trivially easy to fast-forward the ads of
recorded OTA programs! And some PVRs can even skip ads automatically. In any
event, anyone can do something else while the ad is running. But all of that is
neither here nor there.
With "the rise of digital," and here they really mean "the Internet,"
broadcasters now have a potential for global coverage. No need to ask the DOJ
or FCC for anything.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/broadcasters-seek-expanded-marketplace-definition-with-rise-of-digital
Broadcasters Seek Expanded Marketplace Definition With Rise of Digital
Speakers at DOJ workshop last week laid out how narrow view of broadcast
marketplace is hurting local broadcasters.
Michael Balderston 12 hours ago
WASHINGTON-How people watch TV has dramatically changed in recent years, but in
the view of some broadcasters, their means of utilizing the evolving
marketplace hasn't kept up with the times, specifically when it comes to
advertising. This was a point of topic during the Competition in Television and
Digital Advertising Workshop that was hosted by the Department of Justice on
May 2 and 3.
"DOJ has the same view of the broadcast TV marketplace today as it did in the
1970s, 80s and 90s," said Rick Kaplan, NAB executive vice president of Legal
and Regulatory Affairs, in his testimony. "Never mind that cable and satellite
providers now offer hundreds of channels of high-quality content. Never mind
that the internet has thoroughly upended the way consumers access and engage
with video offerings."
Broadcast company TEGNA's CEO Dave Lougee echoed these thoughts in his own
testimony. Referencing how his 19-year-old son watches most of his content
through his mobile device, he points out that viewing style is gaining in
popularity with not just people of his son's age, but all ages as it becomes
more readily available.
"Advertisers over digital platforms now show ads that look exactly like
traditional TV ads, over platforms that are growing viewership rapidly and
enjoy extremely broad reach, along with the ability to focus on particular
locations or other characteristics," said Lougee. "These ads are powerfully
competitive with over-the-air broadcast ads in the local ad market. And this
competition will only grow."
Kaplan argues that the DOJ's reasoning for not updating the reach that
broadcasters have is no longer adequate. Elements of what gives broadcast
advertising an advantage-a combination of sight, sound and motion; a greater
reach; and the value of brand awareness-are not unique to broadcast anymore.
When it comes specifically to digital, DOJ has made the argument that digital
ads are different from broadcast because they can be skipped, minimized or
blocked.
"I will let you in on a little secret: you can also do those things with
broadcast TV," Kaplan explained. "It's called grabbing a snack from the fridge,
disappearing to the bathroom, or even just hitting 'fast forward' on your DVR
remote. In fact, in most cases, it is harder to do an end-around a digital ad,
because often you can't even get to the highly-desired content without first
playing one or more advertisements."
Ultimately, Kaplan states, broadcasters need to be able to have access to this
wider world of advertising revenues so they "can meet their obligations and
commitments to cities and towns across the nation."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
