Set-Top NPRM Defenders Rally on Capitol Hill

A group of Capitol Hill Democrats defended the FCC set-top box rulemaking Thursday during a news conference featuring multiple officials affiliated with the Consumer Video Choice Coalition. Opponents of the NPRM, including the Future of TV Coalition, have been outspoken in recent weeks, with Democrats and Republicans outlining concerns and calling for pause.

“Opponents have thrown together a mixed salad of criticisms,” said House Communications Subcommittee ranking member Anna Eshoo, D-Calif. “We’re here this morning to set the record straight about the FCC’s proposal to unlock the set-top box and why it is so important to do so.” She disputed what she said are the three main grounds of criticism -- that the proposal will harm minority programmers and viewers; infringe on copyright protections; and harm consumers’ privacy. “Minorities are harmed the most by this monopoly,” Eshoo said. "There is nothing in the proposal that will impact the strong privacy laws.”

“This proposal is smart, it’s fair and a long time coming,” said Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., who wrote Communications Act Section 629 undergirding the NPRM. He slammed “bloated rental fees” and little competition in the set-top market. "When we unlock the box, we unlock competition, we unlock choice, we unlock innovation," he said.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., held up a set-top wrapped in chains and invoked the metaphor of shackles to describe current consumer burdens. He said consumers are paying far too much to rent set-tops, which is why the FCC shouldn't pause its proceeding. A House appropriations policy rider would mandate a pause (see 1606090057). FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler tweeted several times Thursday in favor of his proposal. “Those rental fees add up to $231 per household per yr,” Wheeler tweeted. “It’s time to let innovators create competition in the market as Congress directed.”

“The FCC should act now,” Blumenthal said. “Waiting is a disservice to ordinary Americans who are being billed and being denied the benefits of innovation. … They can do it right away if they have the courage of their convictions.”

“Apps are not good enough,” said Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif. Apps “will not provide unified search” or “fix the notoriously unreliable equipment,” he said. “Apps also won’t let you purchase one of these devices outright.”

“The FCC’s recent proposal would better protect consumers by allowing them to access their pay TV subscriptions how they see fit, whether that’s through a set top box leased from their cable provider, digital apps, or third party alternatives,” said Rep. Bobby Scott, D-Va., who didn’t attend the news conference, in a statement. “The Commission’s efforts will ultimately increase marketplace competition, save consumers money, and afford better access to more diverse programming, including programs from minority and independent broadcasters.”

Robert Johnson, chairman of RLJ Entertainment and Black Entertainment Television founder, attacked Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y., a Commerce Committee member who has led more than 50 House Democrats in opposition to the NPRM. Eshoo’s “credibility and her commitment to this is without question,” Johnson said. “It stands in stark contrast to Congresswoman Yvette Clarke of the Congressional Black Caucus.” He expressed confusion at Clarke’s opposition and that of other NPRM critics such as the National Urban League and Rainbow PUSH Coalition CEO Jesse Jackson. The NPRM amounts to a revolution that says “keep that $231 in your pocket,” said Johnson. “In effect, what Yvette Clarke [could] be doing is saving her constituents in Brooklyn money,” he said, disputing the idea that the NPRM would threaten existing contracts. “Wouldn’t you think they would want it more if they could pay less?”

“Nothing bad happens” when choosing open and interoperable, said Incompas CEO Chip Pickering, holding up his smartphone and comparing the NPRM to the changes inherent in his phone. “There will be no horribles, nothing bad is going to happen.” Other speakers in defense of the NPRM included TiVo Chief Technology Officer Joe Weber, kweliTV CEO DeShuna Spencer, Public Knowledge Vice President-Government Affairs Chris Lewis and Writers Guild of America, West Political Director Corri Freedman. The Writers Guild wouldn't support this proposal “if we thought it was harmful to content,” Freedman said, saying it “won’t create the doomsday scenario some are predicting.”

Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council Chief Operating Officer Maurita Coley attended the news conference and questioned the premise in Q&A. MMTC has sided with Clarke on set-tops. Coley described concerns among some minority programmers over the FCC proposal that “seems to be bypassing traditional kinds of ways that people monetize content. … Why would the FCC usurp this and enable our content to be made available without someone negotiating for us?” She said Google, a member of the Consumer Video Choice Coalition, has come up a lot. “I would still be paying Comcast for that content,” Lewis told Coley, arguing the FCC “will need to work this out in the order" to ensure the "integrity" of the cable fee.

The Future of TV Coalition slammed the premise of the NPRM defenders, issuing a statement before the event. “This isn’t a debate over whether consumers should have more options for video devices and services -- this is a debate about the best approach to achieve this goal,” it said. “An overwhelming majority of the voices that have weighed in during this debate point to apps, not box mandates, as the better path forward.”