| ALTV chief decries delay (01/26/2000) RUSSELL SHAW Contributing Writer New Orleans -- An angry James Hedlund used his keynote speech to the Association of Local Television Stations on Monday to lash out at those standing in the way of his organization's digital must-carry future. The ALTV president took aim at the cable television industry for standing in the way of digital signal must-carry rules for his largely local-independent station membership, at large networks for not being on the same page when it comes to the issue and at the Federal Communications Commission for not playing fairly. Mr. Hedlund used his remarks to hit back at what he regards as obfuscation and those he regards as foes. He blasted the cable television industry for using the channel capacity argument to oppose digital signal must-carry rules for independent television stations. "If a cable system has a capacity problem, it is self-inflicted," he said. "The hardware and the software exist off the shelf to solve any capacity problems they may have. I think it is interesting to note that we would never tolerate a phone company saying we couldn't meet demand, and so I ask you, why should we accept that from cable?" His comments seemed to indicate feelings that the FCC is wimping out on this issue. "The FCC's reluctance to impose digital must-carry seems to be based, at least in part, on the spurious argument that cable makes that digital must-carry will [consume] so much channel capacity that we as cable operators will not be able to offer local telephone service or broadband access to the Internet," he said. "If there are people in Congress or the FCC who believe that, I've got a couple of messages I'd like to send them on behalf of ALTV. No. 1 is, without a viable transmission standard for digital must-carry, the day will never come when you can reclaim my analog channels unless it is simply out of bankruptcy." Mr. Hedlund also said that if digital must-carry is not enacted, "free television broadcasters will be consigned to a business based on analog in a world that has converted to digital. For this, the White House and the FCC thinks we need to have new and greater public service obligations? I don't think so." From where Mr. Hedlund sits, the three largest broadcast television networks are also hurting his members when it comes to the digital must-carry issue. "Some of the big TV networks -- our allies, we once thought -- are also saying, `We want negotiations, not must-carry,' " he said. "But it is evident that the concerns of some of the big networks are over getting their own programming services carried on cable, and they're not concerned with the interests of their affiliated stations, and they are certainly not interested in the concerns of ALTV's member stations." "My suspicion is that the mindset of at least some of the networks works like this: A decade ago, we really pooh-poohed Fox when they first launched and said, this will never fly. And golly, Fox turned around and bit us on the ass. I'll tell you this: We're sure as hell not going to sit around and let UPN or WB or Pax do the same thing again," Mr. Hedlund said. "So if they want must-carry, we're against it." Mr. Hedlund indicated that government action would be the best way to fix this state of affairs. "In an effort to be reasonable, we've suggested to the FCC that digital must-carry apply only to those cable systems that have gone digital themselves so we are not putting some great burden on them," he said. "We the broadcasters are upholding our end of the bargain by investing hundreds of millions of dollars to go digital. We ask the government, the Congress and the FCC [to] please uphold your end of the bargain . . . ." Speaking from the cable side, Carl Smith, director of advanced products for AT&T Broadband & Internet Services, chided local broadcast stations for being slow to execute local Web site content partnership agreements with broadband AT&T systems. "It's our goal to enter each marketplace where we're delivering high-speed products and services, and when it comes to local content, to partner with in-market media companies. I have to tell you, that's not an easy thing to do. It's harder [partnering] with you than with newspapers. Generally, I have found that you're not ready for that," Mr. Smith said. "A number of your Web sites are more about promoting existing personalities than they are about providing utility or value," he said. |