Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554
In the Matter of ) ) Standardizing Program Reporting ) MB Docket No. 11-189 Requirements for Broadcast Licensees ) ) )
To: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission Attention: The Commission
JOINT REPLY COMMENTS OF PUBLIC TELEVISION LICENSEES
Alabama Educational Television Commission, Alaska Public
Telecommunications, Inc., Arizona Board of Regents for Benefit of the University of
Arizona, Arkansas Educational Television Commission, Board of Governors of Missouri
State University, Board of Trustees for San Diego State University, Board of Trustees of
Community College District No. 508, County of Cook and State of Illinois, Board of
Trustees of the University of Illinois, Central Michigan University, District Board of
Trustees, Pensacola State College, Eastern New Mexico University, Greater Cincinnati
Television Educational Foundation, Greater Dayton Public Television, Inc., Hawaii
Public Television Foundation, Illinois Valley Public Telecommunications Corporation,
Iowa Public Broadcasting Board, KCTS Television, Kentucky Authority for Educational
Television, KVIE, Inc., Lehigh Valley Public Telecommunications Corporation, Maine
Public Broadcasting Corporation, Michiana Public Broadcasting Corp., Milwaukee Area
Technical College District Board, Mountain Lake Public Telecommunications Council, Nebraska Educational Telecommunications Commission, New Jersey Public
Broadcasting Authority, Northeastern Educational Television of Ohio, Inc., Northern
Minnesota Public Television, Inc., The Ohio State University, Ohio University,
Oklahoma Educational Television Authority, Prairie Public Broadcasting, Inc., Public
Broadcasting Council of Central New York, Public Broadcasting of Northwest
Pennsylvania, Inc., Public Television 19, Inc., Regents of New Mexico State University,
Regents of the University of New Mexico and Board of Education of the City of
Albuquerque, New Mexico, Rural California Broadcasting Corp., Sistema Universitario
Ana G. Mendez, Inc., Smoky Hills Public Television Corp., South Carolina Educational
Television Commission, St. Louis Regional Public Media, Inc., State of Wisconsin –
Educational Communications Board, University of Alaska, University of Houston
System, University of Nebraska, University of Wisconsin System, Washington State
University, West Central Illinois Educational Telecommunications Corporation, Window to the World Communications, Inc., WITF, Inc., WNIN Tri-State Public Media, Inc., and
WSKG Public Telecommunications Council (collectively, “Public TV Licensees”), provide these reply comments in the referenced proceeding1 on replacing the issues/programs lists that television stations currently place in their public inspection files with a standardized disclosure form that would be available online.
1 Standardizing Program Reporting Requirements for Broadcast Licensees, Notice of Inquiry, MB Docket No. 11-189, FCC 11-169 (rel. November 14, 2011) (the “NOI”).
-2 - Introduction
The Public TV Licensees are public and private universities and university systems, state educational communications authorities, boards and commissions, community, state and technical college districts, and non-profit community-based educational entities. Collectively, they are licensees of over 150 full power noncommercial educational television stations, as well as numerous television translator and other associated facilities, over which they provide an incredible array of services to their communities.
In the NOI, the Commission seeks comment on the notion of replacing issues/programs lists that television stations currently place in their public files each quarter with a “streamlined, standardized disclosure form” that would be uploaded to the
Commission as part of a TV station’s public inspection file and made available to the public online. This is not the first time these issues have been considered. The
Commission had adopted a previous proposal for a standardized disclosure form in the
Enhanced Disclosure proceeding,2 but it ultimately abandoned that plan upon the realization that the requirement was overly burdensome. The Commission continues to believe, however, that use of a standardized disclosure form will facilitate access to information on how licensees are serving the public interest and will allow the public to play a more active role in helping stations meet their obligations to provide programming that addresses the community’s needs and interests. However, the Commission proposes changes to the form to “substantially reduce the burden it imposes on broadcasters.”
2 See Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure Requirements for Television Broadcast Licensee Public Interest Obligations, Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 1274 (2007).
-3 - Comments have been filed in response to the NOI by a number of parties
representing the interests of broadcasters, including public broadcasters. Comments by the Association of Public Television Stations, Corporation for Public Broadcasting and
the Public Broadcasting Service (“APTS/CPB/PBS),3 Joint Comments by another group
of Public Television Licensees (“Other PTV Licensees”),4 and Comments by National
Public Radio (“NPR”)5 each urge that public television stations should be exempt from
standardized disclosure requirements. The APTS/CPB/PBS Comments also suggest that,
if necessary, stations could upload portions of reports that they already prepare and
submit to CPB that would address how they serve their communities.
In these joint reply comments, the Public TV Licensees support the comments of
APTS/CPB/PBS, the Other PTV Licensees and NPR and oppose applying the
standardized disclosure form requirements to public broadcasting stations.
Standardized Disclosure Form
The APTS/CPB/PBS Comments note that public television stations are uniquely
committed to airing programs that address the needs and issues of importance to their
local communities, and thus provide an incredible diversity of high-quality public interest
programming not available in any comparable form in other media. APTS/CPB/PBS cite
public television stations’ children’s programming, news and public affairs programming,
artistic and performing arts programming, history, science and technology programming,
locally produced programming and programming for un-served and underserved
audiences. APTS/CPB/PBS suggest that, because of the unique public interest role that
public television stations serve in their communities, it would not make sense, and could
3 Comments of the Association of Public Television Stations, Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the Public Broadcasting Service, filed January 27, 2012. 4 Joint Comments of Public Television Licensees, filed January 27, 2012. 5 Comments of National Public Radio, Inc., filed January 27, 2012.
-4 - actually do a disservice to the American public, to try to fit the programming and services
of public television licensees into the same template form that is used for commercial
television stations. A single programming disclosure form for both public television and
commercial television could not be both narrow enough to produce reliably standardized
responses and flexible enough to capture in a meaningful way the different services
provided by these two types of stations.
Similarly, the Other PTV Licensees argue that the Commission’s preliminary
conclusion that public broadcasting stations must be treated in the same manner as their
commercial counterparts ignores the fundamental distinction between the two classes of
stations. Commercial and public television each fill vital roles, but public television
stations by their very nature are committed to providing issue-responsive programming.
The Other PTV Licensees go on to argue that the new standardized disclosure
form proposed in the NOI is clearly directed at commercial broadcasting. Among other
things, its reporting categories ignore the reality of the operations of public television
stations, reflect a biased view of what constitutes issue-responsive programming, entail confusing overlapping categories, devalue non-local programming as a measure of a licensee’s responsiveness to its audience, establish the government’s view as to what
constitutes acceptable or at least preferred issue-responsive programming, and ultimately
requires submission of information of limited utility at a substantial cost of licensee
resources.
The Other PTV Licensees urge the Commission to reexamine the basis for the
standardized quarterly reporting requirement proposed in the NOI in light of the
distinctive and substantial public service offered by public television stations and the
ready availability to the public of their programming information. This would result in
-5 - the Commission treating public television differently than commercial stations, as it has with respect to other important service issues such as children’s television.
The NPR Comments echo these same concerns. NPR notes that it is not merely that public broadcasting stations have limited resources and that their programming is more locally responsive (although that is generally true). Rather, NPR argues that a public broadcasting station should be exempt from the standardized reporting obligation where it can demonstrate sufficient ties to the community that the reporting obligation is unnecessary to achieve the Commission’s objectives of accessibility and accountability.
NPR notes that public broadcasting stations are largely funded by contributions from individual viewers and listeners, and therefore have a direct stake in airing programming that their communities will listen to and support. The direct financial relationship that exists between public broadcasting stations and their communities is often the most effective determinant of how well a station is ascertaining and serving the needs of its community.
NPR also notes that public stations now routinely offer a wealth of information about their programming on their websites and other digital platforms, including iPhone, iPad, and Android applications. Stations also actively use Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other social media to engage their audiences.
NPR shows that public broadcasting stations are also subject to an array of social forces which assure local accessibility and accountability. These include community advisory boards, open public meetings, and the presence of public board members. NPR concludes that the Commission should not impose an enhanced disclosure requirement to assure local accountability and accessibility on stations that are already accountable and accessible.
-6 - The Public TV Licensees agree with and support these arguments. Public
television stations (and public radio stations, should this proposal ever be extended to
them) are closely responsive and accountable to their local communities by virtue of their
local organizational structures, their institutional missions, the open and public processes
under which they operate, their myriad methods of engaging their communities and,
ultimately, their direct dependence on their audience for support. Thus, imposition of a
stilted and largely inapplicable standardized disclosure form on these stations achieves no
useful purpose.
Even with the changes in the streamlined reporting requirements as proposed by
the NOI, including the use of a composite week analysis of station programming, the
requirements are burdensome and the resulting negative impact on public stations’
finances and operations will be out of proportion to any possible value to be achieved.
Existing Alternative Sources of Programming Information
As noted, the Public TV Licensees along with APTS/CPB/PBS, the Other PTV
Licensees and NPR do not believe that additional reporting requirements are useful or
appropriate for public stations, and they urge that public stations be exempt. In the event
that the Commission somehow nevertheless reaches a conclusion that communities do
not have ready access to enough information about the programming and other services
of their public broadcast stations, the Comments of APTS/CPB/PBS offer an alternative –
permitting stations to submit to their online public files certain portions of SABS and
SAS disclosure forms that they already prepare and file with CPB. The Public TV
Licensees also concur with this proposal but, again, view even this submission as unnecessary.
-7 - Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Public TV Licensees support the noted positions of
APTS/CPB/PBS, the Other Public TV Licensees and NPR as set forth in their respective
Comments, and they urge that the standardized disclosure form requirements not be applied to public broadcasting stations.
Respectfully submitted,
ALABAMA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION
ALASKA PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.
ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS FOR BENEFIT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY
BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT NO. 508, COUNTY OF COOK AND STATE OF ILLINOIS
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES, PENSACOLA STATE COLLEGE
EASTERN NEW MEXICO UNIVERSITY
-8 - GREATER CINCINNATI TELEVISION EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
GREATER DAYTON PUBLIC TELEVISION, INC.
HAWAII PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATION
ILLINOIS VALLEY PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
IOWA PUBLIC BROADCASTING BOARD
KCTS TELEVISION
KENTUCKY AUTHORITY FOR EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION
KVIE, INC.
LEHIGH VALLEY PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
MAINE PUBLIC BROADCASTING CORPORATION
MICHIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING CORP.
MILWAUKEE AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE DISTRICT BOARD
MOUNTAIN LAKE PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS COUNCIL
NEBRASKA EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
NEW JERSEY PUBLIC BROADCASTING AUTHORITY
NORTHEASTERN EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION OF OHIO, INC.
NORTHERN MINNESOTA PUBLIC TELEVISION, INC.
THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY
-9 -
OHIO UNIVERSITY
OKLAHOMA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION AUTHORITY
PRAIRIE PUBLIC BROADCASTING, INC.
PUBLIC BROADCASTING COUNCIL OF CENTRAL NEW YORK
PUBLIC BROADCASTING OF NORTHWEST PENNSYLVANIA, INC.
PUBLIC TELEVISION 19, INC.
REGENTS OF NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO AND BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO
RURAL CALIFORNIA BROADCASTING CORP.
SISTEMA UNIVERSITARIO ANA G. MENDEZ, INC.
SMOKY HILLS PUBLIC TELEVISION CORP.
SOUTH CAROLINA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS REGIONAL PUBLIC MEDIA, INC.
STATE OF WISCONSIN – EDUCATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS BOARD
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA
UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON SYSTEM
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY
-10 -
WEST CENTRAL ILLINOIS EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
WINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
WITF, INC.
WNIN TRI-STATE PUBLIC MEDIA, INC.
WSKG PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS COUNCIL
By: _/s/ Todd D. Gray______Todd D. Gray Margaret L. Miller Barry Persh
Their Attorneys
Dow Lohnes PLLC 1200 New Hampshire Ave., N.W. Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036-6802 (202) 776-2571
February 9, 2012
-11 - ATTACHMENT PUBLIC TV LICENSEES AND THEIR STATIONS
ALABAMA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION WAIQ-DT, Montgomery, AL WBIQ-DT, Birmingham, AL WCIQ-DT, Mt. Cheaha, AL WDIQ-DT, Dozier, AL WEIQ-DT, Mobile, AL WFIQ-DT, Florence, AL WGIQ-DT, Louisville, AL WHIQ-DT, Huntsville, AL WIIQ-DT, Demopolis, AL
ALASKA PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. KAKM-DT, Anchorage, AK
ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS FOR BENEFIT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA KUAS-DT, Tucson, AZ KUAT-DT, Tucson, AZ
ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION KAFT-DT, Eudora, AR KEMV-DT, Mountain View, AR KETG-DT, Arkadelphia, AR KETS-DT, Little Rock, AR KETZ-DT, El Dorado, AR KETJ-DT, Jonesboro, AR
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY KOZJ-DT, Joplin, MO KOZK-DT, Springfield, MO
BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY KPBS-DT, San Diego, CA
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT NO. 508, COUNTY OF COOK AND STATE OF ILLINOIS WYCC-DT, Chicago, IL
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS WILL-DT, Urbana, IL
-12 - CENTRAL MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY WCML-DT, Alpena, MI WCMU-DT, Mt. Pleasant, MI WCMV-DT, Cadillac, MI WCMW-DT, Manistee, MI WCMZ-DT, Flint, MI
DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES, PENSACOLA STATE COLLEGE WSRE-DT, Pensacola, FL
EASTERN NEW MEXICO UNIVERSITY KENW-DT, Portales, NM
GREATER CINCINNATI TELEVISION EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION WCET-DT, Cincinnati, OH
GREATER DAYTON PUBLIC TELEVISION, INC. WPTD-DT, Dayton, OH WPTO-DT, Oxford, OH
HAWAII PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATION KHET-DT, Honolulu, HI KMEB-DT, Wailuku, HI
ILLINOIS VALLEY PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION WTVP-DT, Peoria, IL
IOWA PUBLIC BROADCASTING BOARD KBIN-DT, Council Bluffs, IA KDIN-DT, Des Moines, IA KHIN-DT, Red Oak, IA KIIN-DT, Iowa City, IA KQIN-DT, Davenport, IA KRIN-DT, Waterloo, IA KSIN-DT, Sioux City, IA KTIN-DT, Fort Dodge, IA KYIN-DT, Mason City, IA
KCTS TELEVISION KCTS-DT, Seattle, WA KYVE-DT, Yakima, WA
KENTUCKY AUTHORITY FOR EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION WCVN-DT, Covington, KY WKAS-DT, Ashland, KY WKGB-DT, Bowling Green, KY
-13 - WKHA-DT, Hazard, KY WKLE-DT, Lexington, KY WKMA-DT, Madisonville, KY WKMJ-DT, Louisville, KY WKMR-DT, Morehead, KY WKMU-DT, Murray, KY WKOH-DT, Owensboro, KY WKON-DT, Owenton, KY WKPC-DT, Louisville, KY WKPD-DT, Paducah, KY WKPI-DT, Pikeville, KY WKSO-DT, Somerset, KY WKZT-DT, Elizabethtown, KY
KVIE, INC. KVIE-DT, Sacramento, CA
LEHIGH VALLEY PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION WLVT-DT, Allentown, PA
MAINE PUBLIC BROADCASTING CORPORATION WCBB-DT, Augusta, ME WMEA-DT, Biddeford, ME WMEB-DT, Orono, ME WMED-DT, Calais, ME WMEM-DT, Presque Isle, ME
MICHIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING CORP. WNIT-DT, South Bend, IN
MILWAUKEE AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE DISTRICT BOARD WMVS-DT, Milwaukee, WI WMVT-DT, Milwaukee, WI
MOUNTAIN LAKE PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS COUNCIL WCFE-DT, Plattsburgh, NY
NEBRASKA EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION KHNE-DT, Hasting, NE KLNE-DT, Lexington, NE KMNE-DT, Bassett, NE KPNE-DT, North Platte, NE KRNE-DT, Merriman, NE KTNE-DT, Alliance, NE KXNE-DT, Norfolk, NE KYNE-DT, Omaha, NE
-14 - NEW JERSEY PUBLIC BROADCASTING AUTHORITY WNJB-DT, New Brunswick, NJ WNJN-DT, Montclair, NJ WNJS-DT, Camden, NJ WNJT-DT, Trenton, NJ
NORTHEASTERN EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION OF OHIO, INC. WEAO-DT, Akron, OH WNEO-DT, Alliance, OH
NORTHERN MINNESOTA PUBLIC TELEVISION, INC. KAWB-DT, Brainerd, MN KAWE-DT, Bemidji, MN
THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY WOSU-DT, Columbus, OH WPBO-DT, Portsmouth, OH
OHIO UNIVERSITY WOUB-DT, Athens, OH WOUC-DT, Cambridge, OH
OKLAHOMA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION AUTHORITY KETA-DT, Oklahoma City, OK KOED-DT, Tulsa, OK KOET-DT, Eufaula, OK KWET-DT, Cheyenne, OK
PRAIRIE PUBLIC BROADCASTING, INC. KBME-DT, Bismarck, ND KCGE-DT, Crookston, MN KDSE-DT, Dickinson, ND KFME-DT, Fargo, ND KGFE-DT, Grand Forks, ND KJRE-DT, Ellendale, ND KMDE-DT, Devils Lake, ND KSRE-DT, Minot, ND KWSE-DT, Williston, ND
PUBLIC BROADCASTING COUNCIL OF CENTRAL NEW YORK WCNY-DT, Syracuse, NY
PUBLIC BROADCASTING OF NORTHWEST PENNSYLVANIA, INC. WQLN-DT, Erie, PA
PUBLIC TELEVISION 19, INC.
-15 - KCPT-DT, Kansas City, MO
REGENTS OF NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY KRWG-DT, Las Cruces, NM
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO AND BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO KNME-DT, Albuquerque, NM KNMD-DT, Santa Fe, NM
RURAL CALIFORNIA BROADCASTING CORP. KRCB-DT, Cotati, CA
SISTEMA UNIVERSITARIO ANA G. MENDEZ, INC. WMTJ-DT, Fajardo, PR WQTO-DT, Ponce, PR
SMOKY HILLS PUBLIC TELEVISION CORP. KDCK-DT, Dodge City, KS KOOD-DT, Hays, KS KSWK-DT, Lakin, KS KWKS-DT, Colby, KS
SOUTH CAROLINA EDUCATIONAL TELEVISION COMMISSION WEBA-DT, Allendale, SC WHMC-DT, Conway, SC WITV-DT, Charleston, SC WJPM-DT, Florence, SC WJWJ-DT, Beaufort, SC WNEH-DT, Greenwood, SC WNSC-DT, Rock Hill, SC WNTV-DT, Greenville, SC WRET-DT, Spartanburg, SC WRJA-DT, Sumter, SC WRLK-DT, Columbia, SC
ST. LOUIS REGIONAL PUBLIC MEDIA, INC. KETC-DT, St. Louis, MO
STATE OF WISCONSIN – EDUCATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS BOARD WHLA-DT, La Crosse, WI WHRM-DT, Wausau, WI WHWC-DT, Menomonie, WI
-16 - WLEF-DT, Park Falls, WI WPNE-DT, Green Bay, WI
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA KUAC-DT, Fairbanks, AK
UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON SYSTEM KUHT-DT, Houston, TX
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA KUON-DT, Lincoln, NE
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM WHA-DT, Madison, WI
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY KNTW-DT, Richland, WA KWSU-DT, Pullman, WA
WEST CENTRAL ILLINOIS EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION WMEC-DT, Macomb, IL WQEC-DT, Quincy, IL WSEC-DT, Jacksonville, IL
WINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS, INC. WTTW-DT, Chicago, IL
WITF, INC. WITF-DT, Harrisburg, PA
WNIN TRI-STATE PUBLIC MEDIA, INC. WNIN-DT, Evansville, IN
WSKG PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS COUNCIL WSKA-DT, Corning, NY WSKG-DT, Binghamton, NY
-17 -