[opendtv] Time for the FCC to divulge

From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 15:18:18 -0600

http://www.tvnewscheck.com/article/2010/12/03/47495/time-for-fcc-to-divulge-tv-repacking-plan/page/1

Jessell at large

Time For FCC To Divulge TV Repacking PlanWhile the FCC hopes to take back some
of TV's valuable space by tempting broadcasters to voluntarily put it up for
auction, it's also threatening to get some by repacking the band. But what's
most galling is that it still hasn't released its repacking models that spell
out exactly what it wants to do. They've been "forthcoming" since March.

By Harry A. Jessell
TVNewsCheck, December 3, 2010 2:52 PM EST

The FCC took its first steps this week toward its oft-stated goal of snatching
a big hunk of spectrum away from broadcasting so that it can sell it at auction
to others for wireless broadband, which it feels is a superior use in that it
can conquer disease, make American school kids smarter than all their
counterparts in India and China who all sit in the front row and pay attention
and insure a sharply rising Dow Jones Industrial Average for the next 1,000
years. It's hard to compete with all that, even if you have Glee on your
schedule.

The FCC rulemaking didn't actually propose moving any spectrum. Rather, it set
the stage for channel sharing and band repacking, the mechanisms the FCC hopes
to use to snag 40% of the TV spectrum for auctioning.

The FCC is figuring that it can recover most of the 120 MHz it wants through
voluntary channel sharing, if Congress will agree to cut broadcasters in on the
eventual auction proceeds. As an extra incentive, the rulemaking proposes
extending must-carry and retransmission consent to broadcasters who double up
on the channels.

But the FCC also intends to squeeze out some spectrum by what commoners call
repacking the band and what the bureaucrats at the agency are now calling "band
optimization." By whatever name, it means moving stations around in the band
and perhaps trimming their power and coverage.

Repacking particularly worries broadcasters because the FCC could go ahead and
do it without waiting for Congress to act or getting the buy-in of
broadcasters. Twiddling with power levels and interference protections of
licensees is what the FCC does.

Repacking is what NAB President Gordon Smith was talking about in his statement
following the FCC adoption of the rulemaking when he said the trade group would
oppose "government-mandated signal strength degradations or limitations."

The broadcasters' angst about repacking was heightened by that portion of the
rulemaking that seeks improvement in the VHF band. If UHF is beachfront, VHF is
that vacant inner city lot next to the crack house.

Some fear that the FCC wants to fix up the band so that it can move some
stations back into it, sort of like one those misguided 1960s urban renewal
projects.

There's not a TV station in America that wants to operate in the VHF band
anymore, particularly the low-V band. It's lousy for conventional broadcasting,
terrible for mobile DTV.

Those that moved to the UHF band in the transition are happy to be there. Those
who remain in the VHF band through bad luck or judgment are desperate to get
out.

But what exactly is the FCC repacking plan? How might it affect markets?
Individual stations?

Nobody really knows because the FCC has yet to release any of its repacking
models, tentative blueprints for reordering the broadcasting world just as it
did when the industry went from analog to digital.

The FCC first promised the models way back in March, when it released the
voluminous National Broadband Plan, its grand strategy for enhancing wireless
broadband as the be all and end all. Footnote 82 on the spectrum chapter says
they would be "forthcoming."

Eight months later, and the models have not yet forthcome, even though I and
broadcast lobbyists and lawyers have been inquiring about them.

The FCC teased us all again in this week's rulemaking, saying the models would
be "completed and validated" and, I presume, released for public inspection,
"in the near future."

I can understand the FCC reluctance. Once those models get circulated, the
repacking plan suddenly becomes real for broadcasters. They will be able to see
just how they would be affected if the models are implemented. And when I say
affected, I mean negatively affected. Remember, this exercise is meant to
recover spectrum, not improve the broadcast service. Once the models are on the
street, the shooting will begin.

By the way, in the preamble of its rulemaking, the FCC sort of fessed up that
its spectrum recovery plans are not be entirely voluntary. It says the
rulemaking is consistent with its goal of repurposing 120 MHz "through, in
part, voluntary contributions of spectrum to an auction process." It leaves you
wondering what the other "part" is.

In any event, The FCC needs to stop screwing around and release the models so
we can all see what it's talking about.

To the FCC staff, the models must seem like an academic exercise. How can we
tweak the many power and interference variables to yield the greatest possible
spectrum surplus?

But to the broadcasters, the models cut to their real-world ability to deliver
good pictures and sound to homes and to mobile devices, their ability to
compete in the digital age, their very livelihoods.

N.B.: FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's rhetoric concerning broadcasting is
becoming more than a little annoying. A few weeks ago in a speech, he said
broadcasting, because of its grip on primo spectrum, had become an "obstacle"
to the kind of communications infrastructure that our great nation deserves.

This week, at the open FCC meeting, he portrayed broadcasting as a train
pulling a bunch of empty boxcars - that is, allowing some of its digital
capacity to go unused. The metaphor is grossly unfair. He's judging
broadcasting based on what's happening today and purposely ignoring what's
going to happen next.

For the past few years, broadcasters have been working steadily to develop a
mobile DTV service. I expect that by this time next year, NBC and Fox O&Os and
affiliates across the country will be offering a mobile service with network
programming. If the service takes off as I believe it will, and the other
networks will join in, there will be no empty boxcars.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Harry A. Jessell is editor of TVNewsCheck. You may contact him at 973-701-1067
or hajessell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.

[opendtv] Time for the FCC to divulge

Other related posts: