10 FCC Red No. 14 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1375

BACKGROUND Before the 2. Pursuant to §4 of the Consumer Federal Communications Commission Protection (and Competition Act of 1992 ["1992 Cable Washington, D.C. 20554 Act") 1 and implementing rules adopted by the Commission in its Report and Order in MM Docket No. 92-2S9,2 com mercial television broadcast stations are entitled to assert In re: mandatory carriage rights on cable systems located within the station©s market. A station©s market for this purpose is CSR-4008-A its "area of dominant influence" or ADI as defined by the Orlando, Arbitron audience research organization.3 An ADI is a geographic market designation that defines each television market exclusive of others, based on measured viewing For Modification of Television Broadcast patterns. Essentially, each county in the United States is Station WOFL-TV©s ADI allocated to a market based on which home-market stations receive a preponderance of total viewing hours in the county. For purposes of this calculation, both over-the-air MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER and cable television viewing are included.4 3. Under the Act, however, the Commission is also di Adopted: June 15,1995; Released: June 26,1995 rected to consider changes in ADI areas. Section 614(h) provides that the Commission may: By the Cable Services Bureau: with respect to a particular television broadcast sta INTRODUCTION tion, include additional communities within its tele vision market or exclude communities from such 1. In the captioned proceeding, Meredith Corporation station©s television market to better effectuate the ("Meredith"), licensee of Television Broadcast Station purposes of this section. WOFL (Fox, Channel 35), Orlando, Florida, has requested the Commission to include all of the communities in Polk County and Indian River County, Florida ("the Commu In considering such requests, the Act provides that: nities") within the Orlando-Daytona-Melbourne "area of dominant influence" ("ADI") for purposes of the cable the Commission shall afford particular attention to television broadcast mandatory signal carriage rules. TVT the value of localism by taking into account such License, Inc., licensee of Television Broadcast Station factors as - WTVT (CBS, Channel 13), Tampa, Florida, and Tampa (I) whether the station, or other stations located in Bay Television, licensee of Television Broadcast Station the same area, have been historically carried on the WFTS (Fox, Channel 28), Tampa, Florida filed oppositions cable system or systems within such community; to the petition with respect to the inclusion of the commu nities in Polk County. Four parties filed oppositions to the (II) whether the provides coverage petition with respect to the inclusion of the communities or other local service to such community; in Indian River County: TCI of Northern New Jersey, Inc., (III) whether any other television station that is eli d/b/a TCI Cablevision of the ("TCI"); gible to be carried by a cable system in such commu Krypton Broadcasting of Fort Pierce, Inc., licensee of nity in fulfillment of the requirements of this section WTVX (CBS, Channel 34), Fort Pierce, Florida; Malrite provides news coverage of issues of concern to such Communications Group, Inc., licensee of WFLX (Fox, community or provides carriage or coverage of sport Channel 29), West Palm Beach, Florida; and Photo Elec ing and other events of interest to the community; tronics Corporation, licensee of WPEC (ABC, Channel 12), and West Palm Beach, Florida. WOFL filed a consolidated reply to these oppositions. (IV) evidence of viewing patterns in cable and noncable households within the areas served by the cable system or systems in such community.5

4. The legislative history of this provision indicates that:

1 Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992). 4 Because of the topography involved, certain counties are 2 8 FCC Red 2965, 2976-2977 (1993). divided into more than one sampling unit. Also, in certain 3 Section 6.14(h)(l)(C) of the 1992 Cable Act specifies that a circumstances, a station may have its home county assigned to broadcasting station©s market shall be determined in the man an ADI even though it receives less than a preponderance of the ner provided in §73.3555(d)(3)(i) of the Commission©s Rules, as audience in that county. For a more complete description of in effect on May 1, 1991. This section of the rules, now how counties are allocated, see Arbitron©s Description of Meth redesignated §73.3555(e)(3)(i), refers to Arbitron©s ADI for pur odology. poses of the broadcast multiple ownership rules. Section 5 Communications Act of 1934, as amended, §614 (h)(l)(C)(ii), 76.55(e) of the Commission"s Rules provides that the ADIs to be 47 U.S.C. §534(h)(l)(C)(ii). used for purposes of the initial implementation of the man datory carriage rules are those published in Arbitron©s 1991-1992 Television Market Guide.

7141 DA 95-1375 Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red No. 14

where the presumption in favor of ADI carriage rules further provide, in accordance with the requirements would result in cable subscribers losing access to of the Act, that a station not be deleted from carriage local stations because they are outside the ADI in during the pendency of an ADI change request.9 which a local cable system operates, the FCC may 7. Adding communities to a station©s ADI generally en make an adjustment to include or exclude particular titles that station to insist on cable carriage in those com communities from a television station©s market con munities. However, this right is subject to several sistent with Congress© objective to ensure that televi conditions: 1) a cable system operator is generally required sion stations be carried in the areas which they serve to devote no more than one-third of its activated channel and which form their economic market. capacity to compliance with the mandatory signal carriage obligations, 2) the station is responsible for delivering a good quality * * * * * signal to the principal headend of the system, 3) indemnification may be required for any increase in copyright liability resulting from carriage, and 4) the sys [This subsection] establishes certain criteria which the tem operator is not required to carry the signal of any Commission shall consider in acting on requests to station whose signal substantially duplicates the signal of modify the geographic area in which stations have any other local signal carried or the signals of more than signal carriage rights. These factors are not intended one local station affiliated with a particular broadcast net to be exclusive, but may b.e used to demonstrate that work. If, pursuant to these requirements, a system operator a community is part of a particular station©s market.6 elects to carry the signal of only a single affiliate of a broadcast network, it is obliged to carry the affiliate from 5. The Commission provided guidance in its Report and within the ADI whose is closest to the Order in MM Docket 92-259, supra, to aid decision making principal headend of the cable system. 10 Accordingly, based in these matters, as follows: on the specific circumstances involved, the addition of communities to a station©s ADI may guarantee it cable carriage and specific channel position rights; simply For example, pro the historical carriage of the station vide the system operator with an expanded list of must could be illustrated by the submission of documents carry signals from which to choose, i.e., when it has used listing the cable system©s channel line-up (e.g., rate up its channel capacity mandated for broadcast signals cards) for a period of years. To show that the station carriage, or determined which of duplicating network affili provides coverage or other local service to the cable ated stations are entitled to carriage priority. community (factor 2), parties may demonstrate that the station places at least a Grade B coverage contour over the cable community or is located close to the MARKET FACTS AND ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES community in terms of mileage. Coverage of news or 8. other programming of interest to the The communities at issue in this proceeding are lo community cated in Polk County could be demonstrated by program logs or other and Indian River County, Florida. descriptions of local Polk County is within the Tampa-St. Petersburg ADI, and program offerings. The final fac Indian tor concerns viewing patterns in the cable commu River County is within the West Palm Beach-Ft. nity in cable and noncable Pierce-Vero Beach ADI. WOFL is located in Orlando, homes. Audience data Florida in the Orlando-Daytona-Melbourne clearly provide appropriate evidence about this fac ADI. tor. In this regard, we note that surveys such as those 9. In support of its petition to add Polk County to its used to demonstrate significantly viewed status could ADI, WOFL argues that it has been carried on seven be useful. However, since this factor requires us to different cable systems in Polk County since as early as evaluate viewing on a community basis for cable and 1984, citing to the Television and Cable Factbooks for var noncable homes, and significantly viewed surveys ious years as evidence that WOFL has been continuously typically measure viewing only in noncable house carried and is currently carried on these systems. 11 Regard holds, such surveys may need to be supplemented ing local coverage, WOFL attaches to its petition a copy of with additional data concerning viewing in cable its coverage map which shows that it places a Grade B homes.7 contour over the Northeast portion of Polk County. 12 In addition, WOFL states that it is the closest geographic Fox affiliate 6. In adopting rules to implement this for over half of the residents of Polk County, and provision, the that it provides news Commission indicated that changes requested should be stories, announcements, weather bul considered on a letins and public affairs programs which all feature in community-by-community basis rather formation than on a county-by-county basis and that they should be of interest to Polk County residents. treated as specific to particular Furthermore, Petitioner states that it is a sponsor of the stations rather than ap Kids Club plicable in common to all stations in the market.8 The which provides a news letter to each member in Polk County and that the substantial number of Kids Club members is strong evidence of WOFL©s service to Polk

6 H.R. Rep. No. 628, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. 97 (1992). Communications (formerly Centel Cable TV Co. of Florida) 7 Id. at 2977 (emphasis in original). since at least 1989; American Cablevision Services, Inc. since at 8 8 FCC Red at 2977 n.139. least 1984; Tele-Media Co. of S.E. Florida (formerly Tele-Media 9 47 C.F.R. §76.59. of, Citrus) since at least 1991; Storer Cable TV of Florida since 10 8 FCC Red at 2981. at least 1989; and USA Cablesystems, Inc. (formerly Southeast I 11 These systems include: People©s Cable Inc. since at least Cable Systems, Inc.) since at least 1991. 1990; Paragon Cable since at least 1989; American TV and 12 See Petition, Exhibit A.

7142 10 FCC Red No. 14 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1375

County. 13 To show viewing patterns in the communities, coverage of news and events of interest to Polk County and Petitioner provides the 1992 Nielsen NSI Florida County that the number of members in WOFL©s Kids© Club is not Coverage Study showing that WOFL earned a three share only inconsequential, but it also appears as if a number of for all day viewing and 34 percent net weekly circulation the members listed by WOFL do not reside in Polk Coun in cable and non-cable households in Polk County. 14 Fi ty. WTVT also asserts that Orlando©s proximity to the nally, as an additional factor in support of its petition, nearest point in Polk County is irrelevant as is the fact that WOFL lists a number of companies "with stores and/or WOFL previously attained significantly viewed status in offices in Polk County" that advertise on WOFL "and Polk County. Finally, WTVT argues that given that WOFL clearly expect that such advertising canbe seen on cable in is licensed to Orlando, we can only assume that the the community of their national headquarters." 15 advertisers on WOFL primarily expect to reach the Or 10. In support of its petition to add Indian River County lando market, and that we can assume nothing about the to its ADI, WOFL states that it has been and is currently Polk county market. carried on Falcon Cable TV©s Sebastian system (formerly 12. WFTS. the Fox affiliate in the Tampa-St. Petersburg Jones Intercable Inc.). WOFL cites the Television and Cable ADI which includes Polk County, opposes WOFL©s peti Factbooks for 1984 and 1989-1993 in support. WOFL also tion on the grounds that Petitioner has failed to provide states that the TCI system in Indian River County has support for many of the factual allegations in the pleading. consistently refused to carry the station. Regarding local Regarding historical carriage, WFTS argues that not only coverage, WOFL admits that it does not place a predicted did Petitioner not include copies of the Television and Grade B contour over Indian River County, but contends Cable Factbook pages which it referenced, but that even that the Sebastian system, which has carried WOFL since this would not have been sufficient because the Commis at least 1984, recently installed a new antenna that receives sion©s Report and Order states that historical carriage can be the station©s off-air signal at a level of -31 dBm. Further illustrated by documents such as rate cards showing the more, WOFL maintains that it provides programming of cable system©s channel line-up. 17 In addition, WFTS argues interest to Indian River County viewers with its local news that Petitioner©s coverage map confirms that the station updates, a public service event bulletin board, Emergency places a Grade B signal contour over only the very north Weather Bulletins, a weekday morning public affairs pro east corner of Polk County. Furthermore, WFTS maintains gram, and its sponsorship of the Kids Club in Indian River that with regard to whether any other station qualified for County. Petitioner admits that two West Palm Beach sta carriage provides local coverage, WOFL fails to provide tions cover Indian River County with a Grade B signal, but information showing the extensive local coverage provided concludes that the lack of any additional stations shows by Tampa-St. Petersburg stations to Polk County. WFTS that the county is underserved by over-the-air television also argues that Nielsen viewership data for 1992 for Polk stations within its own ADI. With respect to local viewing County demonstrates that WFTS is viewed more heavily patterns in Indian River County, WOFL provides evidence than WOFL in both cable and non-cable homes in Polk that in 1992 it earned a one share for all day viewership, County, and that WOFL©s total share dropped in 1993. and a 12 net weekly circulation in combined cable and Finally, WFTS contends that the conclusions drawn by non-cable homes. Finally, in additional support of its ar WOFL with respect to advertisers in Polk County do not guments, WOFL provides a list of Indian River County advance the station©s petition. advertisers which have been consistent sponsors of WOFL©s 13. TCI, WTVX, WFLX, and WPEC all presented similar programming. arguments in opposition to WOFL©s petition with regard to 11. In its opposition to WOFL©s petition with respect to the addition of the Indian River County communities. 18 the addition of the communities in Polk County, WTVT TCI states that it is opposed to the addition of the commu argues that the petition is procedurally deficient because it nities in the southern two-thirds of Indian River County focuses on the entire county instead of providing evidence which it serves. WTVX, WFLX, and WPEC oppose the regarding the individual communities in that county. 16 In addition of all the communities in Indian River County. addition, WTVT maintains that WOFL has failed to meet The parties are opposed to WOFL©s petition on the the four statutory factors for ADI modification. First, grounds that Petitioner failed to meet the four statutory WTVT contends that WOFL has not demonstrated a his criteria for ADI modification. First, all four parties in tory of carriage because of the 14 years it has been on the opposition contend that WOFL©s historical carriage on Fal air, the greatest length of time the station has been carried con Cable is discounted by the fact that TCI, the system on any Polk County cable system is approximately five which has never carried WOFL, serves approximately 80 years. Second, WTVT argues that not only does WOFL©s percent of the residents of Indian River County. TCI con Grade B signal cover only the northeast corner of Polk tends that it has never carried WOFL because it is already County, but more importantly that Petitioner fails to iden carrying WFLX, the Fox affiliate from its own ADI. TCI tify which, if any, Polk County communities are located and WTVX maintain that because there has been no his- within the contour. Third, WTVT maintains that WOFL has failed to provide specific information regarding its

13 See .Petition, Exhibit F at 1-2. waiver, and that the petition should therefore be dismissed or 14 See Petition, Exhibit C. denied. 15 Petition at 8. 17 8 FCC Red at 2977. u \VTVT also argues that any deviation from the community 18 In addition to failing on substantive grounds, WFLX argues specific requirement must be accompanied by an appropriate that WOFL©s petition is procedurally defective because WFLX waiver request, that WOFL©s petition failed to request such a has failed to support the petition with specific detailed informa tion and because the petition does not demonstrate a clear public interest as required by the Commission©s rules.

7143 DA 95-1375 Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red No. 14 torical carriage on TGI©s system there is no potential for eral Manager of the station, and numerous exhibits. In subscriber disruption should the Commission deny addition, WOFL argues that the 1992 Cable Act does not WOFL©s petition. require the submission of special community-by-commu 14. Regarding the second statutory requirement that the nity surveys to demonstrate viewership and that the county- petitioning station show local coverage or service to the wide data WOFL submitted in support of its petition is communities at issue, TCI, WTVX, WFLX, and WPEC sufficient to demonstrate viewership levels warranting a agree that WOFL fails to place a grade B signal over any modification of its ADI. portion of Indian River County. In addition, TCI, WFLX, 19. In addition to arguing that its petition is not proce and WPEC maintain that WOFL©s transmitter is approxi durally defective, WOFL also contends that it has met the mately 80 miles from Vero Beach, the major population four-prong test for including the communities in both Polk center of Indian River County. TCI notes that WOFL©s County and Indian River County in its ADI. With respect off-air signal is received by Falcon Cable in northern In to the communities in Polk County, WOFL replies that dian River County only because Falcon installed "very first, not only has it shown historical carriage dating back special equipment" on a 400-foot tower and that this dem to 1984 on the American Cablevision Services system, but onstrates that WOFL cannot be significantly viewed in it also attaches to its Reply additional evidence, as re Indian River County without the special equipment. Fur quested by WTVT, demonstrating that WOFL has met the thermore, all four parties in opposition argue that WOFL historic carriage requirement. Addressing the second and does not provide specific examples of local programming, third statutory requirements simultaneously, WOFL main nor does it show that its programming is responsive to the tains that not only does it provide evidence of local pro needs and/or interest of the residents in the specific com gramming such as the Hurricane Andrew public service munities in Indian River County. The parties also note that announcements and its Kids Club membership, but that the majority of the members listed in the Kids Club do not WFTS does not appear to provide local programming that live in Indian River County and that because the Kids is any more substantial. 19 Finally, WOFL replies that the Club is actually a Fox Network promotion, WFLX provides county-wide viewership data it submitted shows that it the same program in the West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce-Vero warrants carriage on cable systems as a must-carry station Beach ADI. in Polk County. 15. In an attempt to diminish WOFL©s arguments regard 20. With respect to the communities in Indian River ing the lack of local coverage by other television stations, County, WOFL admits that the evidence regarding historic TCI lists a number of stations which can be received off-air carriage is not as significant as in Polk County, but it also by residents of TCI©s communities, and WTVX, WFLX, and attributes this lack of carriage to TCI©s "steadfast refusal" to WPEC also provide evidence of local coverage to the. In carry WOFL over the years. WOFL maintains that TCI©s dian River County communities. Furthermore, TCI argues refusal to carry the station should not, however, be an that WFLX, the West Palm Beach Fox affiliate, is closer to indication that the signal is not deserving of must-carry TCI©s Vero Beach headend than is WOFL. status. Moreover, WOFL replies, WFLX©s attempt to 16. With regard to local viewing patterns, all four parties downplay WOFL©s carriage on the Falcon system serving in opposition argue that WOFL©s low viewership accurately Sebastian must not be given any weight. Referring to an reflects marketplace conditions in Indian River County. attached memo from Falcon management, WOFL empha The parties note that in contrast, WTVX and WFLX re sizes that 90% of Falcon©s 8000 subscribers are located in ceive much higher ratings than WOFL and that all stations Indian River County. Regarding its local coverage of the in the West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce-Vero Beach ADI enjoy Indian River County communities, WOFL admits that higher viewership ratings in Indian River County than while it does not place a Grade B signal over the county, television stations from the Orlando-Dayton Beach-Mel neither does WFLX.20 In addition, WOFL maintains that its bourne ADI. TCI notes that the 1992 Nielsen NSI coverage of Hurricane Andrew and its educational chil viewership data submitted by WOFL shows that it has no dren©s programming, evidenced by WOFL©s Kids Club non-cable market share in Indian River County, presum members from Indian River County, shows that WOFL ably because it cannot be received off-air. provides programming of interest to Indian River County ar 17. Finally, TCI and WFLX assert that most of the residents. WOFL also attempts to refute the opposing by advertisers listed in WOFL©s petition are statewide or re guments made regarding service to Indian River County notes that TCI carries only gional and not limited to Indian River County. As such, existing local stations. WOFL as opposed to the 11 TCI states TCI and WFLX argue that WOFL©s contentions regarding nine commercial stations, are misleading and probably reflect the that it carries and only five of these are currently must- the advertisers that Indian to advertise in Orlando, WOFL©s city of carry stations demonstrating, WOFL argues, advertisers© intent Finally, license. River County is underserved by local stations. regarding the fourth statutory factor, viewership, WOFL 18. WOFL filed a consolidated reply to the oppositions. defends its evidence stating that "because of the high cable In response to objections by WTVT, WFLX, and WFTS penetration in Indian River County, noncable viewership that its petition is procedurally defective because it lacks figures are unavailable," and that TCI©s refusal to carry sufficient specific evidence to show that its ADI should be WOFL on its system has resulted in WOFL having a low modified, WOFL argues that it has provided sufficient sup overall rating. porting information, including the facts contained in the petition itself, a Declaration of the Vice-President and Gen

19 In addition, WOFL notes that portions of Polk County to WOFL believes it is significant that two stations that do place a the south and east are not covered by WFTS© Grade B signal. Grade B signal over the area are not even carried on the TCI 20 WOFL states that WFLX relies on a translator to deliver its system. signal to noncable homes in Indian River County. Furthermore,

7144 10 FCC Red No. 14 Federal Communications Commission Record DA 95-1375

ANALYSIS AND DECISION meager. WOFL provides no programming logs or lists of 21. WOFL has not provided sufficient evidence to justify programs or issues covered other than Hurricane Andrew its market modification request with respect to the commu and other weather emergencies announcements. In addi nities of Polk County and Indian River County, Florida. tion, as stated supra, WOFL fails to provide any evidence Accordingly, its petition will be denied. As a preliminary regarding the specific communities in each of the counties. matter we address the contention that WOFL©s petition is While we accept WOFL©s argument that community spe procedurally defective for its failure to provide evidence cific viewership data is expensive to obtain, such conten regarding the specific communities within Polk and Indian tions do not hold true with respect to evidence of River Counties. The 1992 Cable Act authorizes the Com community specific programming. mission to modify ADI©s to eliminate or include "commu 24. While WOFL presented little evidence regarding nities." We do not read the word "community" as it is used whether any other must carry stations serve the commu in §614(h), in its legislative history,21 or as used in cable nities, the record shows that in addition to other stations, regulation generally to mean "county." To allow stations or WFTS, the Fox affiliate in the Tampa-St Petersburg ADI cable operators to seek to include or exclude entire coun and WFLX, the Fox affiliate in the West Palm Beach-Ft ties from a particular ADI without regard to the individual Pierce-Vero Beach ADI are must carry stations serving circumstances of the communities or franchisee! areas with Polk County and Indian River County, respectively.25 We in such counties would not facilitate an evaluation of the do not believe that Congress intended the third criterion to specific modification criteria provided for in the Act and operate as a bar to a station©s ADI claim whenever other thus an identification of the specific communities within stations could also be shown to serve the communities at the county has generally been required.22 However. WOFL issue. Rather, we believe that this criterion was intended to is correct in arguing that the Commission specifically stat enhance a station©s claim where it could be shown that ed that in marketx modification cases it would not restrict other stations do not serve the communities at issue. How the type of evidence that parties may submit.23 Therefore, ever, the presence of other stations which serve the com rather than reject the petition on procedural grounds, we munities in Polk County and Indian River County does will evaluate the substance of WOFL©s petition and the not permit us to weigh this factor in favor of WOFL©s record before us to determine the propriety of adding the petition. communities in Polk and Indian River Counties to 25. Finally, WOFL©s evidence relating to viewing pat WOFL©s ADI. terns in the communities in question also does not suggest 22. Of the four statutory factors specified in the 1992 a close association of the communities with WOFL or that Cable Act, we find that WOFL has met only one and that the market structure should be revised. The 1993-1994 one only partially -- the historical carriage requirement. Arbitron County Coverage data show that WOFL earned a WOFL demonstrates that the station has been carried by a weekly share of 2 and a net weekly circulation of 28 for number of Polk County cable systems since as early as cable and non-cable homes in Polk County, comparatively, 1984 and on one Indian River County system since at least WFTS earned a 6 share and a 52 net weekly circulation. In 1984. While this factor is entitled to considerable weight, Indian River County, WOFL©s viewership is even lower. especially with regard to Polk County, it does not by itself The 1993-1994 Arbitron data shows that WOFL earned a 1 and in the absence of satisfactory evidence satisfying the share and a 12 net weekly circulation. In addition, other factors, demonstrate that a change in its market Arbitron does not provide a breakdown of WOFL©s viewer boundary is warranted. data for cable and non-cable home, presumably because the 23. With respect to local coverage, the second statutory numbers for non-cable homes are so low because so few factor, we have stated that parties may demonstrate that the residents of Indian River County are able to receive WOFL station places at least a Grade B coverage contour over the off-air. While the Commission has not adopted a minimum cable communities or is located close to the communities level of acceptable share or net weekly circulation for in terms of mileage.24 Although WOFL has shown that it satisfying the fourth statutory factor, WOFL©s numbers, places a Grade B contour over portions of Polk County, it when compared with those of other stations in both Polk does not indicate which communities are included in this and Indian River Counties, do not show that its viewership area. Furthermore, WOFL does not place a Grade B con in cable and non-cable homes in the two counties rises to a tour over any portion of Indian River County. As WOFL level which demonstrates that the communities therein argues, however, failure to place a Grade B contour over form part of WOFL©s economic marketplace, especially the communities does not automatically warrant a denial of given the findings herein that WOFL has failed to show station©s ADI modification petition where the station can that it meets the second and third statutory requirements show geographic proximity and programming which serves for ADI modification. the interests of the communities in question. We find that WOFL has also failed to show that it is any closer to the communities than Tampa or West Palm Beach stations, or that it provides programs of interest to either the Polk County or Indian River Communities. First, the evidence submitted by WOFL©s regarding its local programming is

21 See H.R. Rep. 102-628, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. 97 (1992). poration, 10 FCC Red 134 (1994). 22 We recently denied a cable operator©s plea to exclude a 53 8 FCC Red at 2977. station from particular markets partly because it asked that 24 8 FCC Red at 2977. entire counties be removed from an ADI. See Tele Media Cor 25 WFTS Opposition at 3, Exh. 2; TCI Opposition at 8; WTVX Opposition at 4-5; WFLX Opposition at 13-14; and WPEC Op position at 8-11.

7145 DA 95-1375 Federal Communications Commission Record 10 FCC Red NO. 14

ORDER . 26. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to §614 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. §534), and §76.59 of the Commission©s Rules (47 C.F.R. §76.59), that the petition for special relief filed August 2, 1993 by Meredith Corporation IS DENIED. 27. This action is taken pursuant to authority delegated by §0.321 of the Commission©s Rules.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

William H. Johnson Deputy Chief, Cable Services Bureau

7146