Issues
Broadcasting & FCC Licensee Obligations
Overview
Media owners should not only deal fairly with their audiences, but should go the extra mile to serve their communities. FCC licensees bear certain legal obligations in this regard — such as public file obligations, or children's TV requirements, and the other obligations stemming from the public interest standard under Title III of the Communications Act.
Updates
MAP filed comments on behalf of the National Federation of Community Broadcasters in the FCC's proceeding considering how much
to allocate spectrum between commercial and noncommercial broadcasters. (5/15/02)
"The Lion Still Roars:" the Campaign Legal Center explains that the public interest obligations of broadcasters were reaffirmed in the recent Supreme Court opinion upholding campaign finance laws. (12/11/03).
Spectrum Allocation
The electromagnetic spectrum represents one of our greatest public resources. Unlike grazing land or old growth forests, however, use of spectrum can be virtually inexhaustible. More importantly, it can evolve and change with advances in technology and changing social circumstances.
Regulation of the use of the electromagnetic spectrum, or simply "spectrum," has been based on a basic technological limitation. If two people try to broadcast on the same frequency at the same time, they interfere with each other. As a result, the FCC issues exclusive licenses to use spectrum. Until recently, the FCC gave away limited number of licenses for free on condition that the licensee serve their local community. Since 1993, the FCC has sold the right to use spectrum at auction.
Recently, however, a new and exciting possibility has emerged in spectrum management. Technology has advanced to the point where the old rules about interference may no longer apply. New technology allows multiple, competing uses in the same band of spectrum without interfering with other users. Modern "smart" transmitters and "smart" receivers can send to one another without interfering with each other. Examples of this technology include "wi-fi" wireless internet connections and software defined radios.
As this technology continues to grow and mature, it opens new avenues for free expression, civic discourse, and technical innovation. Ideally, this new technology will make licensing obsolete, allowing anyone who wishes to speak through the airwaves to anyone who wishes to hear. The FCC already allows limited "unlicensed" use which has demonstrated the promise of this technology and the feasability of creating a spectrum "commons" wherein everyone can transmit or receive without interfering with others by following established "rules of the road."
But those that have long enjoyed a monopoly on the use of the airwaves, and especially those that paid billions of dollars at auction for the exclusive right to use the airwaves, object to this "commons approach." They argue that they own the spectrum and can use it as they wish without regard to the public.
MAP has worked for most of its existence to ensure that those who have free use of this public resource provide an appropriate level of public service. In the case of television and radio broadcasters, this means providing programming that serves all aspects of their local communities, remaining accountable to their local communities, providing free time for political candidates and coverage of important issues, and a general class of responsibilities usually grouped together as "public interest obligations."
The FCC has established a task force to evaluate how to manage spectrum in the future. Working with New America Foundation, MAP is dedicated to working to maintain three iron principles in spectrum management. First that the spectrum belongs to the public, and the law prevents the FCC from turning it into private property. Second that those with exclusive rights to use spectrum must also serve the public interest. Third that the public is best served by allowing as many people to use the spectrum as technology will permit; the FCC should therefore favor expanding unlicensed uses to the extent technology allows.
top of page
Spectrum Allocation Filings
MAP files comments at the FCC supporting new spectrum for unlicensed, but asks FCC to address privacy
issues and not to adopt costly and unnecessary precautions that would hurt deployment
in noncommercial community mesh networks.(07/29/04)
New America Foundation's summary of the decline of broadcaster public
interest obligations. (03/29/04)
MAP and New America argue for FCC to allocate 90 MHz of spectrum exclusively to unlicensed uses as part of FCC redesign of MDS/ITFS spectrum (10/23/03). MAP and NAF also urge the FCC to maintain the current set aside for non-commercial eductional "ITFS" broadcasters, but insists that grants of new flexibility must be equalled by new public interest requirements. MAP and NAF were joined not only by consumer organizations representing unlicensed users, but by a number of commercial wireless ISPs (WISPs) and non-commercial providers of unlicensed services. Reply Comments available here. Original comments (filed 9/15/03) here.
MAP and New America Foundation file Comments with FCC Spectrum Policy Task Force. Currently, more than 80% of TV channels 52-69 are designated guard band. Commentors request that these be immediately allocated for unlicensed, with the balance allocated after the digital television transition. (04/17/03)
MAP and New America Foundation file Reply Comments with FCC Spectrum Policy Task Force. The reply comments document the consensus supporting MAP's and NAF's initial comments supporting increasing unlicensed spectrum, granting licensees greater flexibility, and ensuring the the public is adequately compensated for use of the public airwaves. (07/22/02)
In collaboration with the
New America Foundation, MAP filed Comments with the FCC's Spectrum Task Force. MAP, NAF, and others supported increasing availability of unlicensed spectrum to create a "Spectrum Commons," restructuring current licenses to enhance flexibility and increase
return to the public, and increasing license spectrum for non-commerical use. (07/08/02)
top of page
DBS Public Interest Obligations
The 1992 Cable Act and the FCC's rules treat DBS operators almost identically to terrestrial television broadcasters. DBS operators must comply with the same political programming rules that apply to terrestrial television broadcasters. In addition, they must set aside spectrum for non-commercial broadcasting, similar to the set asides in cable television and for public broadcasting.
For more, please go to our DBS Public Interest Obligations page.
top of page
Digital Television
Media Access Project has been a leading voice in a policy debate that
will change the face of broadcast television as we have known it.
The FCC has granted television station owners vast quantities of
additional space on the valuable public airwaves,or "spectrum," and it
has not yet required them to make any significant corresponding financial
or public interest contributions in exchange.
Broadcasters want to use this spectrum to switch from their current
"analog" transmission system to digital broadcasting, a technology that
will permit them to provide several free, subscription, and pay-per-view
channels, paging and other non-program services. This "spectrum grab"
would limit diversity in the marketplace of ideas and permit broadcasters
to use 70 billion dollars worth of publicly-owned spectrum for their own
exclusive political and financial gain.
MAP and other public interest advocates would like to see the extra
capacity provided by digital transmission used for free time for political
candidates, increased children's educational programming, and "public
spaces" for independent civic discourse.
MAP challenged in court an FCC decision that will allow public TV
broadcasters to put advertisements on their digital television channels.
Read MAP's brief . (10/21/02)
top of page
More on Digital Television
Privacy Policy • Contact Us
© 2001, 2002 Media Access Project
Site by e.designs
| 
