TVNewsCheck Focus On Washington

NAB Opting Out Of Open Net Fray — For Now

Under the commission’s proposal set for a vote next month, broadcasters, who currently pay nothing to ISPs to make their streaming services available to broadband subscribers, may wind up having to pay ISPs for higher-quality connections. But, at least for now, the NAB thinks it's best to remain on the sidelines of the controversial policy battle.
TVNewsCheck,

Broadcasters could be forced to start paying to get high-quality online programming streams to broadband Internet subscribers under a controversial FCC proposal that the agency is slated to put out for public comment on May 15.

But despite the pleas of watchdog group representatives for support in their efforts to force the agency to reconsider the proposal, the National Association of Broadcasters has remained on the sidelines, both to avoid upsetting NAB member Comcast — one of the nation’s largest broadband Internet service providers — and the broadcast industry’s deregulatory-minded GOP allies on Capitol Hill, broadcast industry sources say.

Story continues after the ad

"NAB has looked at this issue for a number of years and up to this point has decided to remain neutral," says NAB spokesman Dennis Wharton.

The FCC’s so-called open Internet proposal is on the table because a federal appeals court struck down the agency’s previous rules on the subject in January.

The FCC’s open Internet, aka net neutrality, rules were intended to prevent Comcast, Verizon and other giant ISPs from using their control over the nation’s broadband pipelines to discriminate against the content of independent companies.

But the federal appeals court in the case agreed with ISPs that the agency’s former rules exceeded agency authority.

Brand Connections

In response, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has proposed a new set of Internet regulations intended to address the court’s legal concerns.

The new proposed regulations, which are slated to be addressed publicly by the FCC’s commissioners on May 15, would, like the previous regs, bar ISPs from blocking subscriber access to legal Internet content.

But the newly proposed regulations, unlike the former ones, also make clear that ISPs can charge content providers for higher-quality connections, as long as those are “commercially reasonable,” FCC officials have confirmed.

That means that broadcasters, who currently pay nothing to ISPs to make their streaming services available to broadband subscribers, may wind up having to pay ISPs for higher-quality connections.

“Anybody who delivers content over the Internet ought to be concerned about the direction this is going,” says one broadcast industry source, who asked not to be identified.

“You could be in the fast lane or you could be in the slow lane, and you have pay to be in the fast lane,” said another broadcast industry executive. “It would be worthwhile [for the NAB board] to have a discussion about it.”

Representatives of liberal watchdog groups told TVNewsCheck that broadcasters have a major stake in how the newly proposed rules come out because younger people in particular are increasingly getting their information and other programming online.

“Broadcasters should want to reach those users — particularly young users who are the future of the industry — without having to cut online deals with every cable or phone company, or having to pay the kind of fees Netflix and Apple can afford to pay to ensure a good online video experience,” says Marvin Ammori, a fellow with the New America Foundation.

The FCC’s current proposal also threatens to turn the broadcast industry’s current relationship with cable on its head, allowing cable operators who now pay broadcasters retransmission consent fees for broadcast programming to charge broadcasters for decent access to cable’s broadband customers online, according to Matt Wood, policy director of the watchdog Free Press.

“That’s the kind of leverage that any large broadband provider has who controls millions of peoples’ access to the Internet,” Wood says.

Andrew Schwartzman, a long-time attorney for watchdog groups, adds: “As video delivery moves to the Internet, they [broadcasters] have an interest in making sure that ISPs, including the cable companies they have dealt with for so long, cannot use their bottleneck power to extract revenue from speakers such as broadcasters.”

One well-placed broadcast industry attorney tells TVNewsCheck that he believes the FCC’s new net neutrality proposal is particularly “dangerous” for broadcasters and others who post content online, because Comcast will have 40% of the nation’s advanced broadband subscribers, and 30% of cable TV homes, if the giant company’s $45.2-billion pending acquisition of Time Warner Cable is approved.

This essentially means that any video service provider with national ambitions is going to have to cut a deal with Comcast to reach a critical national audience mass.

“They [Comcast] are going to be a gatekeeper you are going to have to go through, and they’re going to hold all the cards,” the broadcast attorney says.

Still, one broadcast attorney tells TVNewsCheck that NAB’s concern that it could alienate critical GOP support it needs for other issues if it weighs in on net neutrality is not a trivial one.

“This might be an issue where other people can carry the water,” the attorney said. “It’s more of a longer-term threat than an immediate threat, and we have a lot of more immediate threats we need to deal with. If I were sitting at the NAB, I would probably do the same thing (remain neutral).”

Related Links

Tags

Comments (1) -

Terry Heaton posted over 2 years ago
The idea of sitting on the fence with this issue is an illusion; you are either for it or against it. There is no neutral. Despite what's said here, the NAB actually benefits from high speed lanes, while the people formerly known as its audience get screwed. The NAB is part of the status quo, and an Internet that functions like cable is much less an enemy than one that gives equal status to anyone who can function as a TV station via an open Net. Sorry, but the NAB keeps its mouth shut for a reason here and reveals its true colors in so doing.
Marketshare Blog Playout Blog

Twitter

TVNewsCheck

Ratings

Overnights, adults 18-49 for September 26, 2016
  • 1.
    4.4/12
  • 2.
    2.8/8
  • 3.
    2.5/7
  • 4.
    1.5/4
  • 5.
    0.8/2
  • 6.
    0.3/1
Source: Nielsen

Reviews

  • Rob Owen

    Easily fall’s best broadcast network comedy pilot, NBC’s The Good Place offers a clever high-concept premise that’s complemented with intelligent, sometimes absurdist humor. Created by Michael Schur, co-creator of NBC’s Parks and Recreation, The Good Place is a highly serialized series that’s essentially set in heaven and stars Kristen Bell and Ted Danson. NBC made five episodes of The Good Place available for review, and the show not only holds up, but also it improves, deepening characters that initially feel one-note and frequently leaving viewers guessing with cliffhanger endings to many of the episodes. The combination of snappy dialogue and winning but flawed characters makes The Good Place a great bet for fans of smart TV comedy.

  • Maureen Ryan

    Pitch has swagger, for good reason. It gets the big things right; the Fox drama about the first female baseball player in the Major Leagues is one of the year’s most assured and exciting debuts. But part of what impresses about the pilot is also the way it confidently strings together so many small but telling details. Ginny (Kylie Bunbury) is the first woman to be called up from the minors to the big leagues, and no show since Friday Night Lights has done a better job of portraying the internal and external pressures that weigh heavily on young athletes asked to do much more than merely succeed on the field. Pitch will likely do a good job of getting viewers to root for it. The hope is that the show won’t be an impressive, short-lived curiosity, but rather a long-term phenomenon.

  • Kevin Fallon

    In a fall TV season that’s already making a splash for championing diverse, distinctive voices in an array of projects that they created, wrote, and starred in, Better Things on FX stands out. The show is created by, written by, and starsPamela Adlon. She plays Sam Fox, the single mother of three daughters modeled after her own reality-show-ready experience raising three girls in Los Angeles following a divorce. Sam is also, like Adlon, a working actress — on shows both raunchy, a la Californication, and animated for children, like her role on Recess. It’s a refreshingly blunt take on single motherhood without sacrificing the warmth of parental love, portraying the dance between selfishness and selflessness that’s at the heart of being a parent — especially one weathering the hormonal fireworks of a household of four women at different ages.

  • David Wiegand

    The fall TV season doesn’t count as much as it used to — we already know that. But no matter how many retreads the broadcast networks throw at viewers in the next few months, this fall will be memorable because of the premiere of Atlanta on Tuesday, Sept. 6, on FX. The half-hour comedy created by and starring Donald Glover (Community), simply and brilliantly recalibrates our expectations of what a TV comedy is and how black lives are portrayed on the medium.

  • Louisa Ada Seltzer

    The second reboot of the 1980s John Candy movie Uncle Buck, bumped by ABC from midseason, has the same tired jokes you'll find on any second-rate sitcom. Too bad, because Mike Epps is appealing and ABC would be wise to keep him around for future shows, but there’s just not enough to this show to suggest it will last past summer. It also airs against NBC’s America’s Got Talent, summer’s No. 1 program on broadcast, which may make it even harder to find an audience.

  • Neil Genzlinger

    Bryan Cranston brings his Tony Award-winning interpretation of President Lyndon B. Johnson to television in an adaptation of the Robert Schenkkan play All the Way, and it’s still quite a sight to behold, just as it was on Broadway in 2014. Nothing beats witnessing this kind of larger-than-life portrayal onstage, of course. But the television version, presented by HBO, offers plenty of rewards, allowing Cranston to work the close-ups and liberating him from the confines of a theater set. Cranston’s performance is a gem — in his hands, this accidental president comes across as an amazing bundle of contradictions, someone who seems at once too vulgar for the job and just right for it.

This advertisement will close automatically in  second(s). You will see this ad no more than once a day. Skip ad