1 / 11

Public, Educational and Government Channels in the Digital Age

This presentation discusses the challenges and opportunities for public, educational, and government channels in the digital age. It explores the obligations of cable operators to provide these channels and the varying quality, accessibility, and functionality in the digital environment. Key cases related to PEG channels and their impact on consumers are also discussed.

hfay
Télécharger la présentation

Public, Educational and Government Channels in the Digital Age

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Public, Educational and Government Channels in the Digital Age IMLA 2009 Mid-Year Seminar Washington, D.C. Joseph Van Eaton April 20, 2009 Download this presentation at www.millervaneaton.com Miller & Van Eaton P.L.L.C. P Washington, D.C. P San Francisco, CA. P 202-785-0600

  2. The Situation Under Cable Act (Section 611), franchising authorities can require cable ops to designate channel capacity provide facilities and equipment ($ or in-kind) for public, educational and government (PEG) use. Traditionally, ops provided as part of basic service, at same quality as standard definition broadcast channels. Channels used for communication of basic G & E info to public, including emergency messages

  3. The Situation BUT: unclear whether must provide channels as part of basic Is there an obligation to provide PEG channels of the same quality as broadcast channels? Do channels have to be as accessible/functional as broadcast channels? -similar menu system? -channel location? Can operator set the price for PEG channels? Can operator “edit” the PEG signal by: refusing to pass through closed captioning refusing to pass through secondary audio (PEG) use

  4. The Situation In digital environment, quality, accessibility, functionality can vary from channel to channel State laws that limited local franchising authority generally were not well-designed to deal with challenges or opportunities of digital world Many, many operators have significant bandwidth problems

  5. Key Cases • City of Dearborn v. Comcast of Michigan, No. 08-10156, • See esp. Opinion on Motion to Dismiss (E.D. Mich. Oct. 3, 2008) • In the Matter of Petitions for Declaratory Ruling Regarding Public, Educational, and Governmental Programming, MB Docket No. 09-13 CSR-8126, CSR-8127, CSR-8128 • pending at Federal Communications Commission

  6. Dearborn/Meridian Township • Comcast planned to digitize PEG channels while providing bcast in analog • Effect: consumers with analog TVs had to pay extra to receive PEG • Question: was PEG still part of basic? • PEG moved to 900-series channels (not visible at those numbers on digital TV) • Comcast claimed actions lawful because MI franchising law only required provision of channels, and local franchise provisions preempted by state law

  7. Status of Case • Localities contended action violated fed law and existing local franchises • District court granted TRO • Ruled Michigan law was preempted by Section 531(c) of Cable Act, to extent it prevented localities from enforcing PEG requirements in local franchises • Under primary jurisdiction doctrine, referred other fed questions to FCC

  8. AT&T • Channel 99 PEG solution • Not a channel at all – an “application” • Hard to access • Hard to find local programming • Lower quality • Missing basic functionality • secondary audio • closed captioning • ability to surf • ability to record

  9. Petitions filed at FCC • Alliance for Community Media and Lansing claim: • Channel 99 does not satisfy requirements of Section 631 of Cable Act • AT&T engaged in unlawful censorship (631(e)) • Technical standards not satisfied • Petitions do not address state law issues* • Raise issue of whether AT&T is cable system

  10. Status of Petition • AT&T petitions consolidated with Dearborn referral • FCC sought public comment (over 500 submissions) • Now awaiting decisionfrom FCC

  11. Significance • May determine whether AT&T is a cable system – if AT&T loses, may have material adverse effect on company according to SEC filings • May determine what federal standards apply to PEG • Underlines weaknesses of state laws • May set stage for challenges, changes, to state laws • Underlines significance of absence of broadband policy • Underlines significance of infrastructure control

More Related