DOCSLIB.ORG

Digital Television Broadcast Stations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Digital Television Broadcast Stations Federal Communications Commission § 73.624 applicable, to the following applica- analog television channel, it must also tions and petitions will be deemed mu- transmit at least one over-the-air video tually exclusive with those applica- program signal on the DTV channel. tions and petitions: The DTV service that is provided pur- (A) Other DTV applications filed the suant to this paragraph must be at same day; least comparable in resolution to the (B) Rulemaking petitions to amend analog television station programming the DTV table of allotments for which transmitted to viewers on the analog a Notice of Proposed Rule Making had channel. been released and the comment dead- (1) DTV broadcast station permittees line specified therein had not passed and licensees required to construct and prior to the filing date of the DTV ap- operate a DTV station by May 1, 2002, plication; and or May 1, 2003, pursuant to paragraph (C) Earlier-filed rulemaking petitions (d) of this section must, at a minimum, to amend the DTV table of allotments beginning on the date on which the for which a Notice of Proposed Rule DTV station is required to be con- Making had not been released. structed, provide a digital video pro- (3) DTV applicants, DTV applicants gram signal, of the quality described in and NTSC applicants, or DTV appli- paragraph (b) of this section, during cants and DTV rulemaking petitioners prime time hours as defined in that are mutually exclusive pursuant § 79.3(a)(6) of this chapter. These licens- to this section will be notified by Pub- ees and permittees must also comply lic Notice and provided with a 90-day with the minimum operating hours re- period of time to resolve their mutual quirements in paragraph (f) of this sec- exclusivity via engineering amendment tion. or settlement. Those applications and (2) DTV licensees or permittees that petitions that remain mutually exclu- choose to commence digital operation sive upon conclusion of the 90-day set- before the construction deadline set tlement period will be dismissed. forth in paragraph (d) of this section [62 FR 26719, May 14, 1997, as amended at 63 are not subject to any minimum sched- FR 13560, Mar. 20, 1998; 64 FR 4327, Jan. 28, ule for operation on the DTV channel. 1999; 65 FR 30002, May 10, 2000; 65 FR 58467, (c) Provided that DTV broadcast sta- Sept. 29, 2000; 66 FR 9984, Feb. 13, 2001; 66 FR tions comply with paragraph (b) of this 65134, Dec. 18, 2001; 69 FR 31906, June 8, 2004; 73 FR 5683, Jan. 30, 2008] section, DTV broadcast stations are permitted to offer services of any na- § 73.624 Digital television broadcast ture, consistent with the public inter- stations. est, convenience, and necessity, on an (a) Digital television (‘‘DTV’’) broad- ancillary or supplementary basis. The cast stations are assigned channels 6 kinds of services that may be provided MHz wide. Initial eligibility for li- include, but are not limited to com- censes for DTV broadcast stations is puter software distribution, data trans- limited to persons that, as of April 3, missions, teletext, interactive mate- 1997, are licensed to operate a full rials, aural messages, paging services, power television broadcast station or audio signals, subscription video, and hold a permit to construct such a sta- any other services that do not derogate tion (or both). DTV broadcast stations’ obligations (b) DTV broadcast station permittees under paragraph (b) of this section. or licensees must transmit at least one Such services may be provided on a over-the-air video program signal at no broadcast, point-to-point or point-to- direct charge to viewers on the DTV multipoint basis, provided, however, channel. Until such time as a DTV sta- that any video broadcast signal pro- tion permittee or licensee ceases ana- vided at no direct charge to viewers log transmissions and returns that shall not be considered ancillary or spectrum to the Commission, and ex- supplementary. cept as provided in paragraph (b)(1) of (1) DTV licensees that provide ancil- this section, at any time that a DTV lary or supplementary services that are broadcast station permittee or licensee analogous to other services subject to transmits a video program signal on its regulation by the Commission must 183 VerDate Mar<15>2010 10:45 Nov 16, 2010 Jkt 220203 PO 00000 Frm 00193 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\SGML\220203.XXX 220203 WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with CFR § 73.624 47 CFR Ch. I (10–1–10 Edition) comply with the Commission regula- DTV Table of Allotments and accom- tions that apply to those services, pro- panying Appendix B, established by the vided, however, that no ancillary or Seventh Report and Order in MB Dock- supplementary service shall have any et No. 87–268 and codified at 47 CFR rights to carriage under §§ 614 or 615 of 73.622(i). the Communications Act of 1934, as (vi) August 18, 2008 in all markets for amended, or be deemed a multichannel completion of construction of post- video programming distributor for pur- transition (DTV) facilities for all com- poses of section 628 of the Communica- mercial and noncommercial television tions Act of 1934, as amended. stations that will use the same channel (2) In all arrangements entered into used for pre-transition operation for with outside parties affecting service post-transition operation but which, as operation, the DTV licensee or per- of December 31, 2007, do not have a con- mittee must retain control over all ma- struction permit for facilities that con- terial transmitted in a broadcast mode form to the facilities defined by the via the station’s facilities, with the new DTV Table of Allotments and ac- right to reject any material in the sole companying Appendix B, established by judgement of the permitte or licensee. the Seventh Report and Order in MB The license or permittee is also respon- Docket No. 87–268 and codified at 47 sible for all aspects of technical oper- CFR 73.622(i). ation involving such telecommuni- (vii) June 12, 2009 in all markets for cations services. completion of construction of post- (3) In any application for renewal of a transition (DTV) facilities for all com- broadcast license for a television sta- mercial and noncommercial television tion that provides ancillary or supple- stations whose post-transition digital mentary services, a licensee shall es- channel is different from their pre- tablish that all of its program services transition digital channel and for those on the analog and the DTV spectrum stations whose post-transition channel are in the public interest. Any viola- is the same as their pre-transition tion of the Commission’s rules applica- channel but that are subject to a ble to ancillary or supplementary serv- unique technical challenge that has ices will reflect on the licensee’s quali- been specifically recognized as such by fications for renewal of its license. the Commission. (d) Digital television broadcast facili- (2) For the purposes of paragraph ties that comply with the FCC DTV (d)(1): Standard (section 73.682(d)), shall be (i) The term, ‘‘network,’’ is defined to constructed in the following markets include the ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox by the following dates: television networks; (1)(i) May 1, 1999: all network-affili- (ii) The term, ‘‘television market,’’ is ated television stations in the top ten defined as the Designated Market Area television markets; or DMA as defined by Nielsen Media (ii) November 1, 1999: all network-af- Research as of April 3, 1997; and filiated television stations not included (iii) The terms, ‘‘network-affiliated’’ in category (1)(i) and in the top 30 tele- or ‘‘network-affiliate,’’ are defined to vision markets; include those television stations affili- (iii) May 1, 2002: all remaining com- ated with at least one of the four net- mercial television stations; works designated in paragraph (d)(2)(i) (iv) May 1, 2003: all noncommercial as of April 3, 1997. In those DMAs in television stations. which a network has more than one (v) May 18, 2008 in all markets for network affiliate, paragraphs (d)(1) (i) completion of construction of post- and (ii) of this section shall apply to its transition (DTV) facilities for all com- network affiliate with the largest audi- mercial and noncommercial television ence share for the 9 a.m. to midnight stations that will use the same channel time period as measured by Nielsen used for pre-transition operation for Media Research in its Nielsen Station post-transition operation and that, as Index, Viewers in Profile, as of Feb- of December 31, 2007, have a construc- ruary, 1997. tion permit for facilities that conform (3) Authority delegated. (i) Authority to the facilities defined by the new is delegated to the Chief, Media Bureau 184 VerDate Mar<15>2010 10:45 Nov 16, 2010 Jkt 220203 PO 00000 Frm 00194 Fmt 8010 Sfmt 8010 Y:\SGML\220203.XXX 220203 WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with CFR Federal Communications Commission § 73.624 to grant an extension of time of up to rect charge to viewers on their DTV six months beyond the relevant con- channel at least 50 percent of the time struction deadline specified in para- they are transmitting a video program graph (d)(1) of this section upon dem- signal on their analog channel. onstration by the DTV licensee or per- (2) Commencing on April 1, 2004, DTV mittee that failure to meet that con- licensees and permittees described in struction deadline is due to cir- paragraph (f)(1) of this section must cumstances that are either unforesee- transmit a video program signal as de- able or beyond the licensee’s control scribed in paragraph (f)(1) of this sec- where the licensee has taken all rea- tion on the DTV channel at least 75 sonable steps to resolve the problem percent of the time they are transmit- expeditiously.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Producer's Handbook
    DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER CHALLENGES A PRODUCER’S HANDBOOK by Kathy Avrich-Johnson Edited by Daphne Park Rehdner Summer 2002 Introduction and Disclaimer This handbook addresses business issues and considerations related to certain aspects of the production process, namely development and the acquisition of rights, producer relationships and low budget production. There is no neat title that encompasses these topics but what ties them together is that they are all areas that present particular challenges to emerging producers. In the course of researching this book, the issues that came up repeatedly are those that arise at the earlier stages of the production process or at the earlier stages of the producer’s career. If not properly addressed these will be certain to bite you in the end. There is more discussion of various considerations than in Canadian Production Finance: A Producer’s Handbook due to the nature of the topics. I have sought not to replicate any of the material covered in that book. What I have sought to provide is practical guidance through some tricky territory. There are often as many different agreements and approaches to many of the topics discussed as there are producers and no two productions are the same. The content of this handbook is designed for informational purposes only. It is by no means a comprehensive statement of available options, information, resources or alternatives related to Canadian development and production. The content does not purport to provide legal or accounting advice and must not be construed as doing so. The information contained in this handbook is not intended to substitute for informed, specific professional advice.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: the Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation
    Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 49 Issue 3 Article 2 4-1997 Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation Ellen P. Goodman Covington & Burling Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Communications Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Goodman, Ellen P. (1997) "Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 49 : Iss. 3 , Article 2. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol49/iss3/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Digital Television and the Allure of Auctions: The Birth and Stillbirth of DTV Legislation Ellen P. Goodman* I. INTRODUCTION ................................... 517 II. ORIGINS OF THE DTV PRovIsIoNs OF THE 1996 ACT .... 519 A. The Regulatory Process ..................... 519 B. The FirstBills ............................ 525 1. The Commerce Committee Bills ............. 526 2. Budget Actions ......................... 533 C. The Passage of the 1996Act .................. 537 Ill. THE AFTERMATH OF THE 1996 ACT ................ 538 A. Setting the Stage .......................... 538 B. The CongressionalHearings .................. 542 IV. CONCLUSION ................................ 546 I. INTRODUCTION President Clinton signed into law the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act or the Act) on February 8, 1996.1 The pen he used to sign the Act was also used by President Eisenhower to create the federal highway system in 1957 and was later given to Senator Albert Gore, Sr., the father of the highway legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • Media Ownership Rules
    05-Sadler.qxd 2/3/2005 12:47 PM Page 101 5 MEDIA OWNERSHIP RULES It is the purpose of this Act, among other things, to maintain control of the United States over all the channels of interstate and foreign radio transmission, and to provide for the use of such channels, but not the ownership thereof, by persons for limited periods of time, under licenses granted by Federal author- ity, and no such license shall be construed to create any right, beyond the terms, conditions, and periods of the license. —Section 301, Communications Act of 1934 he Communications Act of 1934 reestablished the point that the public airwaves were “scarce.” They were considered a limited and precious resource and T therefore would be subject to government rules and regulations. As the Supreme Court would state in 1943,“The radio spectrum simply is not large enough to accommodate everybody. There is a fixed natural limitation upon the number of stations that can operate without interfering with one another.”1 In reality, the airwaves are infinite, but the govern- ment has made a limited number of positions available for use. In the 1930s, the broadcast industry grew steadily, and the FCC had to grapple with the issue of broadcast station ownership. The FCC felt that a diversity of viewpoints on the airwaves served the public interest and was best achieved through diversity in station ownership. Therefore, to prevent individuals or companies from controlling too many broadcast stations in one area or across the country, the FCC eventually instituted ownership rules. These rules limit how many broadcast stations a person can own in a single market or nationwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Competition in Local Broadcast Television Advertising Markets Kevin Caves and Hal Singer August 4, 2014
    Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) 2014 Quadrennial Regulatory Review – Review ) MB Docket No. 14-50 of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership Rules ) and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section ) 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) ) 2010 Quadrennial Regulatory Review – Review ) MB Docket No. 09-182 of the Commission’s Broadcast Ownership Rules ) and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section ) 202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) ) Promoting Diversification of Ownership ) MB Docket No. 07-294 in the Broadcasting Services ) ) Rules and Policies Concerning ) MB Docket No. 04-256 Attribution of Joint Sales Agreements ) in Local Television Markets ) ) Competition in Local Broadcast Television Advertising Markets Kevin Caves and Hal Singer August 4, 2014 -2- Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 I. Background ......................................................................................................................... 4 A. The DOJ Asserts That Local Broadcast Television Advertising Is a Relevant Antitrust Product Market ........................................................................................ 4 B. The DOJ’s Position Lacks Empirical Support ........................................................ 5 II. Empirical Evidence Is Inconsistent with the DOJ’s Definition of the Relevant Product Market ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Clear Picture on Clear Channel Communications, Inc.: a Corporate Profile
    Cornell University ILR School DigitalCommons@ILR Articles and Chapters ILR Collection 1-28-2004 The Clear Picture on Clear Channel Communications, Inc.: A Corporate Profile Maria C. Figueroa Cornell University, [email protected] Damone Richardson Cornell University, [email protected] Pam Whitefield Cornell University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/articles Part of the Advertising and Promotion Management Commons, Arts Management Commons, and the Unions Commons Thank you for downloading an article from DigitalCommons@ILR. Support this valuable resource today! This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the ILR Collection at DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles and Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please contact [email protected]. If you have a disability and are having trouble accessing information on this website or need materials in an alternate format, contact [email protected] for assistance. The Clear Picture on Clear Channel Communications, Inc.: A Corporate Profile Abstract [Excerpt] This research was commissioned by the American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) with the expressed purpose of assisting the organization and its affiliate unions – which represent some 500,000 media and related workers – in understanding, more fully, the changes taking place in the arts and entertainment industry. Specifically, this report examines the impact that Clear Channel Communications, with its dominant positions in radio, live entertainment and outdoor advertising, has had on the industry in general, and workers in particular. Keywords AFL-CIO, media, worker, arts, entertainment industry, advertising, organization, union, marketplace, deregulation, federal regulators Disciplines Advertising and Promotion Management | Arts Management | Unions Comments Suggested Citation Figueroa, M.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Digital Television in Transition Between Japan and the U.S
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Kanayama, Tsutomu Conference Paper Broadcasting Policy and Regulation in transition before dawn of a New Paradigm: Comparing Digital Television in Transition between Japan and the U.S. 14th Asia-Pacific Regional Conference of the International Telecommunications Society (ITS): "Mapping ICT into Transformation for the Next Information Society", Kyoto, Japan, 24th-27th June, 2017 Provided in Cooperation with: International Telecommunications Society (ITS) Suggested Citation: Kanayama, Tsutomu (2017) : Broadcasting Policy and Regulation in transition before dawn of a New Paradigm: Comparing Digital Television in Transition between Japan and the U.S., 14th Asia-Pacific Regional Conference of the International Telecommunications Society (ITS): "Mapping ICT into Transformation for the Next Information Society", Kyoto, Japan, 24th-27th June, 2017, International Telecommunications Society (ITS), Calgary This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/168497 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich
    [Show full text]
  • Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected]
    University of Miami Law School University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository Articles Faculty and Deans 1996 Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Lili Levi University of Miami School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/fac_articles Part of the Communications Law Commons Recommended Citation Lili Levi, Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 29 Conn. L. Rev. 243 (1996). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty and Deans at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Not With a Bang But a Whimper: Broadcast License Renewal and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 Liu LEvi In 1969, public outrage derailed a bill providing that the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC" or "Commission") could not con- sider competing applications for broadcast licenses unless it first found that renewal of the incumbent's license would not be in the public interest.' Citizen groups claimed that eliminating comparative challenges to incumbent broadcasters was "back-door racism" and reinforced the under-representation of minorities in broadcasting.2 They decried the bill as a "vicious ... attempt to limit the efforts of the black community to challenge the prevailing racist practices of the vast majority of TV stations."3 When the FCC thereupon issued a policy statement adopting a similar reform of the comparative renewal process, it was reversed by * Professor of Law, University of Miami School of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed
    Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed A multimedia report on television newsrooms’ use of material provided by PR firms on behalf of paying clients Diane Farsetta and Daniel Price, Center for Media and Democracy April 6, 2006 Center for Media and Democracy 520 University Ave., Suite 227 Madison, WI 53703 Phone: 608-260-9713 Fax: 608-260-9714 Website: www.prwatch.org Contents News Release - 2 Executive Summary - 4 Introduction - 9 Findings: Video News Releases - 14 Findings: TV Stations - 19 Findings: Corporations - 22 Recommendations - 26 Take Action - 32 Frequently Asked Questions - 33 Appendix A: About This Report - 39 Appendix B: VNRs in Detail - 40 1 News Release Press Advisory: New Report: Fake TV News Widespread and Undisclosed Investigation catches 77 local TV stations presenting corporate PR as real news Groups file complaints urging FCC to take action against deceptive broadcasters WASHINGTON The Center for Media Democracy and Free Press today exposed an epidemic of fake news infiltrating local television broadcasts across country. At a press conference in Washington with FCC Commissioner Jonathan S. Adelstein, the groups called for a crackdown on stations that present corporate-sponsored videos as genuine news to an unsuspecting audience. CMD, which unveiled the results of a 10-month investigation, found scores of local stations slipping commercial “video news releases,” or VNRs, into their regular news programming. The new multimedia report released today includes footage of 36 separate VNRs and their broadcast as “news” by TV stations and networks nationwide, including those in the nation’s biggest markets. The full report -- “Fake TV News: Widespread and Undisclosed” -- is now available complete with VNR and TV station video footage at www.prwatch.org/fakenews/execsummary.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewal Primer for Television Stations for Renewal Cycle Beginning June 2020
    Renewal Primer for Television Stations for Renewal Cycle Beginning June 2020 March 2020 This primer provides detailed guidance on the television station license renewal process.1 Please have those involved in the license renewal process at your station take some time to review these materials. Stations must begin their post-filing announcements on the date that their renewal application is filed. Note that we are happy to set up a call with our clients to walk through this process and answer any questions. We are also glad to handle the mechanics of filing renewal applications through the FCC’s “new” Licensing Management System (“LMS”). SECTION I: THE BASICS The deadline by which a station is required to file its license renewal application is determined by the state in which the station is licensed. Attachment A contains a state-by-state list of license renewal application filing dates and license expiration dates.2 After filing its license renewal application, a station must air post-filing announcements for one month.3 Pre-filing announcements are no longer required.4 Section II of this memorandum provides detailed guidance on the required post-filing announcements, the specific text required, and sample statements for certifying compliance with the public announcement requirements (Attachments B-E). The license renewal application must be filed electronically through the FCC’s Licensing Management System (LMS) platform using FCC Form 2100/Schedule 303-S (“Form 303-S”). A sample copy of the Form 303-S from LMS is available at Attachment F, along with the FCC’s instructions for the form.
    [Show full text]
  • Television and Media Concentration
    •• IRIS Special Edited by the European Audiovisual Observatory TelevisionTelevision andand MediaMedia ConcentrationConcentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level TELEVISION AND MEDIA CONCENTRATION IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration Regulatory Models on the National and the European Level European Audiovisual Observatory, Strasbourg 2001 ISBN 92-871-4595-4 Director of the Publication: Wolfgang Closs, Executive Director of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Editor and Coordinator: Dr. Susanne Nikoltchev (LL.M. EUI and U of M) Legal Expert of the European Audiovisual Observatory E-mail: [email protected] Partner Organisations that contributed to IRIS Special: Television and Media Concentration IViR – Institute of European Media Law EMR – Institute of European Media Law Rokin 84, NL-1012 KX Amsterdam Nell-Breuning-Allee 6, D-66115 Saarbrücken Tel.: +31 (0) 20 525 34 06 Tel.: +49 (0) 681 99275 11 Fax: +31 (0) 20 525 30 33 Fax: +49 (0) 681 99275 12 E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] CMC – Communications Media Center MMLPC – Moscow Media Law and Policy Center New York Law School Mokhovaya 9, 103914 Moscow 57 Worth Street, New York, NY 10013 Russian Federation USA Tel./Fax: +7 (0) 503 737 3371 Tel.: +1 212 431 2160 E-Mail: [email protected] Fax: +1 212 966 2053 [email protected] E-Mail: [email protected] Proofreaders: Florence Pastori, Géraldine Pilard-Murray, Candelaria van Strien-Reney Translators: Brigitte Auel, France Courrèges, Christopher
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission FCC 19-67 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 in the Matter Of
    Federal Communications Commission FCC 19-67 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Children’s Television Programming Rules ) MB Docket No. 18-202 ) Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative ) MB Docket No. 17-105 REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING Adopted: July 10, 2019 Released: July 12, 2019 Comment Date: (30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register) Reply Comment Date: (60 days after date of publication in the Federal Register) By the Commission: Chairman Pai and Commissioners O’Rielly and Carr issuing separate statements; Commissioners Rosenworcel and Starks dissenting and issuing separate statements. TABLE OF CONTENTS Heading Paragraph # I. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................1 II. BACKGROUND.....................................................................................................................................3 III. DISCUSSION........................................................................................................................................10 A. Statutory Authority .........................................................................................................................10 B. The Current State of the Marketplace for Children’s Programming ..............................................11 C. Core Programming..........................................................................................................................21
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-8 Before the Federal
    Federal Communications Commission FCC 03-8 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) ) Second Periodic Review of the ) MB Docket No. 03-15 Commission’s Rules and Policies ) Affecting the Conversion ) RM 9832 To Digital Television ) ) Public Interest Obligations of TV ) MM Docket No. 99-360 Broadcast Licensees ) ) Children’s Television Obligations of ) MM Docket No. 00-167 Digital Television Broadcasters ) ) Standardized and Enhanced Disclosure ) MM Docket No. 00-168 Requirements for Television Broadcast Licensee ) Public Interest Obligations ) NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING Adopted: January 15, 2003 Released: January 27, 2003 Comment date: April 14, 2003 Reply Comment date: May 14, 2003 By the Commission: Commissioners Copps and Adelstein issuing separate statements. TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraph I. INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………………………. 1 II. BACKGROUND …………………………………………………………………………... 2 III. PROGRESS REPORT ……………………………………………………………………... 7 IV. ISSUE ANALYSIS ………………………………………………………………………… 18 A. Transition Progress in Specific Areas …………………………………………………. 18 B. Channel Election ……………………………………………………………………… 24 C. Replication and Maximization for In-Core Channels ………………………………… 29 D. Interference Protection of Analog and Digital Television Service in TV Channels 51-69 39 1. Background ……………………………………………………………………… 41 2. Definition of “Actual” Broadcast Parameters Under Sections 90.545(c)(1)(ii) and 27.60(b)(1)(iii) …………………………………………………………………... 49 3. Replication ………………………………………………………………………. 52 4. Maximization
    [Show full text]