context->filename = 'n:\utility\503800267\5006314434\5006314434.pdf'

 *Pages 1--387 from  n:\utility\503800267\5006314434\5006314434.pdf*
 Before  the 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 In  the  Matter  of 
 Public  Interest  Obligations 
 Of  TV  Broadcast  Licensees 


 >  fJOCM3  Fkfi  COPY  OFNGlN&  1 
 >  MM  Docket  No.  99-  360  1 


 To:  The  Commission 


 COMMENTS 
 of 
 PEOPLE  FOR  BETTER  TV 


 Mark  I.  Lloyd,  Esq. 
 Counsel  for  Petitioner 
 People  for  Better  TV 
 818  18  Street,  NW  #505 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20006 
 (202)  887-  0301 


 Of  Counsel: 
 Randi  M.  Albert,  Esq. 
 Benjamin  N.  Cardozo  School  of  Law 
 Yeshiva  University 
 55  Fifth  Avenue 
 New  York,  NY  10003 
 (2  12)  790-  0402 


 March  27,200O 
1
 SUMMARY 
 People  for  Better  TV  is  a  broad-  based  national  coalition  concerned  that  television  in  the 
 future  become  a  place  not  only  for  entertainment,  but  a  trusted  source  of  education  for  our 
 children  and  civic  discussion  for  our  community.  We  commend  the  Federal  Communications 
 Commission  for  opening  this  Inquiry  into  the  Public  Interest  Obligations  of  Digital  Television 
 Broadcasters,  and  we  repeat  our  call  for  the  Commission  to  begin  a  rulemaking  proceeding  to 
 ensure  that  sensible  guidelines  are  put  in  place  so  that  all  members  of  the  public  benefit  from 
 digital  television. 
 Our  Comments  include  numerous  letters  from  members  of  our  coalition.  These 
 submissions  range  from  the  reports  of  citizens  who  visited  stations  and  reviewed  Quarterly 
 Reports  in  the  public  files,  to  the  extensive  arguments  of  the  Consumer  Federation  of  America 
 and  Children  Now,  to  the  analysis  of  the  Benton  Foundation  and  the  Project  on  Media 
 Ownership.  We  trust  the  Commission  will  respect  and  reflect  upon  this  public  demonstration  of 
 concern  about  the  need  to  preserve  the  public  interest  standard  in  the  digital  age,  and  set  forth 
 clear  rules  so  that  both  broadcasters  and  the  public  can  know  what  it  means  to  operate  in  the 
 public  interest. 
 We  recommend  that  all  digital  television  broadcasters  be  required  to  comply  with  their 
 public  interest  obligations  on  all  channels  they  are  licensed  to  use,  as  well  as  in  their  provision  of 
 ancillary  and  supplementary  services.  We  oppose  any  reliance  by  the  Commission  upon 
 supposedly  voluntary  codes  of  conduct,  however  we  support  the  adoption  of  a  flexible 
 approach  to  enforcing  minimum  requirements.  We  recommend  that  any  deviation  by  a 
 broadcaster  to  the  Commissions  minimum  requirements  be  conditioned  upon  some  sort  of 
 approval  by  the  community  of  license. 
 Along  with  the  Consumer  Federation  of  America,  we  recommend  that  the  Commission 
 adopt  rules  that  protect  consumers.  Specifically,  the  Commission  should  adopt  guidelines  to 
 limit  potential  invasions  for  privacy  by  digital  broadcasters,  and  guidelines  to  limit  potentially 
 abusive  selling  practices.  Furthermore,  the  Commission  should  take  steps  to  ensure  that  digital 
 television  does  not  contribute  to  the  digital  divide,  by  monitoring  equipment  costs  and 
 subscription  charges. 
 People  for  Better  TV  endorses  the  Comment  of  Children  Now,  and  recommends  the 
 immediate  adoption  of  guidelines  so  that  digital  television  broadcasters  are  in  compliance  with 
 the  Childrens  Television  Act.  We  recommend  that  the  Commissions  Three-  Hour  Rule  be 
 applied  proportionately  to  digital  broadcasters  who  multicast.  In  addition,  while  we  oppose 
 censorship,  we  recommend  the  adoption  of  standards  which  give  parents  tools  to  screen 
 programs  they  do  not  want  their  children  to  watch,  such  as  a  more  advanced  V-  Chip,  and  an 
 opportunity  to  click-  through  to  ratings  created  by  independent  groups. 
 Academic  research  and  anecdotal  evidence  strongly  suggests  that  local  broadcasters  are 
 not  providing  adequate  discussion  of  local  issues;  thus  People  for  Better  TV  recommends  that 
 digital  broadcasters  be  required  to  provide  one  hour  a  day  of  local  public  affairs  programs,  and 
 one  public  service  announcement  for  every  four  commercials.  In  addition,  we  recommend  that 
 broadcasters  be  required  to  discover  and  serve  the  needs  and  interests  of  all  segments  of  the 
 community  of  license.  New  Internet  technologies  can  assist  in  both  discovering  local  needs  and 
 making  it  easier  for  the  public  to  review  the  broadcasters  claims  of  service  in  their  public  files. 
 Finally,  digital  broadcasters  should  be  in  compliance  with  the  Commissions  EEO  rules, 
 and  they  should  be  required  to  use  new  technologies  to  make  their  programs  more  accessible  to 
 the  disabled,  and  to  those  who  speak  languages  other  than  English. 
2
 TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 
 I.  Introduction  and  Background  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  1 
 II.  Challenges  Unique  to  the  Digital  Era  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .3 
 A.  The  Commission  Should  Require  DTV  Broadcasters  to  Comply  with  Public 
 Interest  Obligations  on  All  Channels  that  They  Use.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  3 
 1.  Rather  Than  Rely  on  Broadcasters  to  Abide  by  a  Voluntary  Code  of 
 Conduct,  the  Commission  Should  Adopt  a  Flexible  Approach 
 to  Enforcing  Minimum  Requirements.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .4 
 2.  Digital  Broadcasters  Public  Interest  Requirements  Should  Apply  to  All 
 Channels  Including  Ancillary  and  Supplementary  Services.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  6 


 B.  The  Commissions  Rules  for  Digital  Television  Should  Include  Protections 
 forconsumers.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ...  7 
 1.  The  Commission  Should  Adopt  Rules  to  Protect  Consumer  Privacy 
 and  Limit  Abusive  Selling  Practices.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  8 
 2.  The  Commission  Should  Develop  Steps  to  Ensure  DTV  Does  Not 
 Contribute  to  the  Digital  Divide.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  8 


 C.  Digital  Broadcasters  Should  Fulfill  Their  Obligations  to  Children  by 
 Offering  Educational  Programming  and  Services  as  well  as  Additional 
 Rating  Information  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  11 
 1.  The  Three-  Hour  Rule  Should  be  Transferred  Proportionately 
 toDTV.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ..  ll 
 2.  The  Commission  Should  Adopt  Standards  to  Make 
 Independent  Ratings  Available  .  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  13 


 III.  Responding  to  the  Community  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  14 
 A.  Digital  Television  Broadcasters  Should  Be  Required  to  Provide 
 One  Hour  a  Day  of  Local  Public  Affairs  Programming.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 
 1.  Local  Broadcasters  are  Failing  to  Address 
 LocalNeeds  .,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 
 2.  Regulatory  Certainty  is  Needed  to  Ensure  Local  Needs 
 are  Addressed.  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 
 3.  Local  Public  Affairs  Programs  Should  Address  the  Needs  of 
 All  Segments  of  the  Community  of  License.  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 
 4.  Local  Television  News  Should  Not  Be  Considered  a  Substitute 
 for  Local  Public  Affairs  Programming.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 


 .  .  .  .  16 
 .  .  .  .  16 
 .  .  .  .  19 
 .  ...  20 
 .  .  .  .  22 
 B.  Digital  Broadcasters  Should  Provide  One  Public  Service  Announcement  for 
 Every  Four  Commercials,  With  at  Least  Equal  Emphasis  Placed  on  Independent 
 and  Locally  Produced  PSAs  Addressing  a  Communitys  Local  Needs.  .  .  .  .  .  .  23 


 _-  -  --  _-.__.  _  -_,.-.  ,...  -._  __--.  l.._-.  ..__  I  __  I_  _-_--  -  _.._.  --  l__  l-_  ,.......  Ic----  - 
 -- 
3
 C.  The  Commission  Should  Require  Broadcasters  to  Seek  Out  the 
 Needs  and  Interests  of  All  Segments  of  the  Community  of  License.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .24 
 1.  The  Market  Does  Not  Guarantee  that  All  Segments 
 of  the  Community  Will  Be  Served.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .24 
 2.  New  Technologies  Can  Relieve  the  Administrative  Burden  of 
 Discovering  Community  Needs.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .26 


 D.  Digital  Broadcasters  Should  Be  Required  to  Disclose  their  Public  Interest 
 Programming  and  Activities  Quarterly.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .27 


 IV.  Enhancing  Access  to  the  Media  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .3  1 
 A.  The  Commission  Should  Ensure  that  Digital  Broadcasting  is  Accessible  to  All 
 Americans.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ...  31 


 B.  Diversity........................................................  34 
 1.  DTV  Broadcasters  Should  Be  Required  to  Comply  with  the 
 FCCs  EEO  Rules.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .34 
 2.  Under  the  People  for  Better  TV  Flexibility  Approach 
 Multicasting  Broadcasters  Could  Devote  Channel  Space 
 to  Underserved  Audiences  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .34 
 3.  Disaster  Relief  Information  Should  be  Available  in 
 Multiple  Languages.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .35 


 V.  Conclusion  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ...  36 
4
 Before  the 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 In  the  Matter  of 
 Public  Interest  Obligations 
 Of  TV  Broadcast  Licensees 


 ) 
 ) 
 )  MM  Docket  No.  99-  360 
 ) 


 COMMENTS 
 of 
 PEOPLE  FOR  BETTER  TV 


 People  for  Better  TV  hereby  submits  comments  in  response  to  the  Federal 
 Communications  Commissions  (  Commission  or  FCC)  Notice  of  Inquiry,  In  the  Matter  of 
 Public  Interest  Obligations  of  TV  Broadcast  Licensees,  MM  Docket  No.  99-  360  (  rel.  Dec.  20, 
 1999)  (  NOI).  People  for  Better  TV  is  a  national  broad-  based  coalition  established  to  ensure 
 that  television  broadcasters  are  responsive  to  local  community  needs.  A  current  list  of  member 
 organizations  is  at  Appendix  A.  The  steering  committee  of  People  for  Better  TV  includes  the 
 following  organizations:  Children  NOW,  Civil  Rights  Forum  on  Communications  Policy, 
 Communications  Workers  of  America,  Consumer  Federation  of  America,  League  of  United 
 Latin  American  Citizens,  National  Association  of  the  Deaf,  National  Organization  for  Women, 
 National  Urban  League,  Project  on  Media  Ownership  and  U.  S.  Catholic  Conference.  These 
 groups  recognize  the  tremendous  influence  of  television,  and  have  joined  together  to  encourage 
 the  Commission  to  adopt  policies  that  serve  the  public. 


 I.  Introduction  and  Background 
 On  June  3,  1999,  People  for  Better  TV  filed  a  Petition  for  Rulemaking  and  Petition  for 
 Notice  of  Inquiry  at  the  Commission,  explaining  that  the  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996 
5
 (  1996  Act)  requires  that  the  FCC  determine  the  public  interest  obligations  of  digital 
 broadcasters.  People  for  Better  TV  noted  that  digital  television  broadcasting  is  a  new  service, 
 requiring  a  new  look  at  the  public  interest,  convenience,  and  necessity  standard  so  firmly 
 imbedded  in  broadcast  policy.  Furthermore,  People  for  Better  TV  argued  that  the  Commission 
 could  not  maintain  that  digital  broadcasters  are  operating  in  the  public  interest,  as  Congress 
 intended,  without  asking  the  public  what  is  in  their  interest.  Thus,  People  for  Better  TV 
 commends  the  Commission  for  initiating  this  inquiry.  Through  its  comments,  People  for  Better 
 TV  intends  to  provide  the  Commission  with  the  perspectives  of  the  viewing  audience  and  local 
 grassroots  organizations  from  areas  throughout  the  nation. 
 Broadcasters  obligation  to  serve  the  local  community  is  the  core  of  the  public  interest 
 standard  and  the  underlying  rationale  for  their  free  license  to  exclusive  use  of  public  airwaves.   
 Since  the  passage  of  the  Communications  Act  of  1934,  broadcasters  have  been  entrusted  to  serve 
 their  local  community  needs.  This  responsibility  is  expressed  in  both  the  statute  and  in  court 
 rulings.  Under  Section  307(  b)  of  the  Communications  Act  of  1934,  applicants  for  broadcast 
 licenses  must  agree  to  provide  programming  service  to  their  particular  community  of  license.   
 The  D.  C.  Circuit  has  affirmed  this  obligation,  noting  that  [  i]  n  requiring  a  fair,  efficient  and 
 equitable  distribution  of  service,  the  Communications  Act  encompasses  not  only  the  reception 


 I  The  local  basis  of  its  service  distinguishes  broadcasting  from  cable  and  satellite  services  which 
 consist  almost  entirely  of  national  programming  and  retransmission  of  local  TV  stations.  News,  public  affairs 
 programming  and  other  opportunities  for  local  self-  expression  are  important  elements  usually  necessary  to  meet 
 the...  needs  and  desires  of  the  community  in  which  the  station  is  located...,    as  enumerated  in  the  FCCs  classic 
 formulation  of  public  interest  programming  obligations.  Renort  re  En  Bane  Proerammine  Inauirv,  44  FCC  2203, 
 23  14  (1960). 


 2  47  U.  S.  C.  5  307(  b). 


 -2- 
6
 of  an  adequate  signal  but  also  community  needs  for  programs  of  local  interest  and  importance 
 and  for  organs  of  local  self-  expression.  3  Thus,  only  by  considering  the  views  of  the  local 
 audience  can  the  Commission  develop  a  framework  of  regulation  for  digital  broadcasters  that 
 truly  serves  the  public  interest. 
 We  note  however  that  the  Commissions  inquiry  alone  does  not  satisfy  the  legislative 
 mandate  to  set  forth  clear  regulations  so  that  both  broadcasters  and  the  public  know  exactly  what 
 is  meant  by  the  public  interest  obligations  of  digital  broadcasters.  Therefore,  we  request  that 
 following  this  Inquiry,  the  Commission  initiate  a  rulemaking  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of 
 digital  broadcasters. 
 II.  Challenges  Unique  to  the  Digital  Era 
 A.  The  Commission  Should  Require  DTV  Broadcasters  to  Comply  with  Public 
 Interest  Obligations  on  All  Channels  that  They  Use. 


 Congress  intended  digital  broadcasters  to  comply  with  public  interest  obligations  on  all  of 
 their  channels.  As  the  Commission  notes  in  paragraph  11  of  the  NOI,  when  Congress  authorized 
 the  Commission  to  issue  additional  licenses  for  advanced  television  services.  47  U.  S.  C  0 
 336(  a),  it  made  clear  that: 
 Nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  construed  as  relieving  a  television  broadcasting  station 
 from  its  obligation  to  serve  the  public  interest,  convenience,  and  necessity.  In  the 
 Commissions  review  of  any  application  for  renewal  of  a  broadcast  license  for  a  television 
 station  that  provides  ancillary  or  supplementary  services,  the  television  licensee  shall 
 establish  that  all  of  its  m-  ozz-  am  services  on  the  existing  or  advanced  television  spectrum 
 are  in  the  public  interest.  4 


 3  Pinellas  Broadcastine  Co.  v.  FCC,  230  F.  2d  204,206  sert.  denied,  350  U.  S.  1007  (D.  C.  Cir. 
 1956). 


 4  47  U.  S.  C  $  336(  d)  (emphasis  added). 


 -3- 
7
 Moreover,  Congress  decision  to  treat  the  spectrum  set  aside  for  advanced  television  service 
 differently  from  other  new  services  by  exempting  it  from  auction  procedures,  47  U.  S.  C  5 


 3Wi)  MW  P  rovides  further  evidence  that  Congress  intended  broadcasters  to  pay  for  the 
 valuable  gift  of  public  property  by  performing  public  service. 


 1.  Rather  Than  Rely  on  Broadcasters  to  Abide  by  a  Voluntary  Code  of 
 Conduct,  the  Commission  Should  Adopt  a  Flexible  Approach  to 
 Enforcing  Minimum  Requirements. 


 To  implement  the  legislative  directive  to  impose  obligations  on  digital  broadcasters,  the 
 Commission  should  adopt  minimum  public  interest  requirements.  By  setting  forth  minimum 
 measurable  requirements,  the  Commission  would  ensure  that  the  public  interest  is  served.  In 
 contrast,  self-  regulatory  voluntary  codes  of  conduct  have  historically  not  been  successful  in 
 ensuring  that  participants  adhere  to  the  prescribed  conduct.  See  Angela  J.  Campbell,  Self- 
 Regulation  and  the  Media,  5  1  Fed.  Comm.  L.  J.  712  (  1999).  5  Establishing  a  standard  facilitates 
 the  evaluation  of  licensees  at  renewal  time  by  both  the  Commission  and  the  public. 
 While  People  for  Better  TV  rejects  the  idea  of  voluntary  obligations,  we  believe  that 
 the  Commission  could  incorporate  flexibility  into  its  enforcement  of  the  minimum  requirements, 
 thereby  providing  broadcasters  with  some  leeway  in  deciding  how  to  meet  their  obligations. 
 Such  a  policy  could  resemble  the  three-  hour  processing  guideline  for  childrens  television 
 programming.  Under  that  guideline,  broadcasters  have  several  means  of  demonstrating  their 


 5  Professor  Campbells  article  specifically  addresses  the  viability  of  voluntary  code  for  digital 
 broadcasters  and  finds  that  such  an  approach  is  unlikely  to  be  successful.  According  to  Campbell,  There  are  three 
 reasons  to  be  skeptical  about  the  Advisory  Committees  recommendation  for  a  voluntary  code.  First,  it  is  unclear 
 whether  the  NAB  will  follow  it.  Second,  even  if  the  NAB  does  adopt  a  voluntary  code...  it  is  doubtful  that  the  code 
 will  be  effective  in  achieving  the  stated  goals.  Finally,  the  Model  Voluntary  Code  raises  similar  questions  regarding 
 voluntariness  that  could  cause  it  to  be  subject  to  constitutional  challenge.  u  at  764. 


 -4- 


 _  ,.  i  __.....  ._  --_-.- 
8
 commitment  to  providing  educational  and  informational  programming  for  children.  6 
 To  ensure  that  broadcasters  are  meeting  their  obligations  to  their  community  and  to 
 facilitate  review  of  their  practices,  People  for  Better  TV  suggests  that  broadcasters  who  wish  to 
 fulfill  their  obligations  in  a  manner  that  deviates  from  the  Commissions  standards  should  enter 
 into  agreements  with  the  local  community  which  outline  how  they  intend  to  serve  the  public 
 interest.  These  community  contracts  could  be  crafted  through  a  negotiating  process  similar  to  the 
 one  currently  employed  by  cable  operators  and  local  franchising  authorities.  Alternatively, 
 broadcasters  could  adopt  other  means  of  ensuring  that  the  community  agrees  to  its  public  interest 
 plan.  For  example,  a  broadcaster  could  invite  community  involvement  by  drafting  a  public 
 interest  plan  and  allowing  citizens  to  vote  on  it  either  in  person  or  on  the  Internet.  Under  such  an 
 arrangement  the  broadcaster  should  be  required  to  televise  announcements  and  provide 
 information  on  the  Internet  describing  its  proposal  and  explaining  how  viewers  could  express 
 their  opinion.  Regardless  of  how  the  broadcaster  and  the  community  reach  agreement,  these 


 6  Under  the  Commissions  rules  implementing  the  Childrens  Television  Act,  a  broadcaster  can 
 demonstrate  that  it  has  met  its  childrens  programming  obligation  in  several  ways: 


 (  A)  By  checking  a  box  on  its  renewal  application  and  providing  supporting  information  indicating  that  it  has  aired 
 three  hours  per  week  of  regularly  scheduled,  weekly  shows  that  are  30  minutes  or  longer  and  that  otherwise  meet 
 the  definition  of  core  programming  .  .  or 


 (B)  By  showing  that  it  has  aired  a  package  of  different  types  of  educational  and  informational  programming  that, 
 while  containing  somewhat  less  than  three  hours  per  week  of  core  programming,  demonstrates  a  level  of 
 commitment  to  educating  and  informing  children  that  is  at  least  equivalent  to  airing  three  hours  per  week  of  core 
 programming.  Policies  and  Rules  Concernine  Childrens  Television  Programming.  Revision  of  Programming 
 Policies  for  Television  Broadcast  Stations,  11  FCC  Red  10660,  107  1  S-  71  9  (  1996). 


 Moreover,  the  Commission  provides  that  renewal  applications  that  do  not  meet  this  guideline  will  be  referred  to  the 
 Commission,  where  the  applicant  will  have  a  full  opportunity  to  demonstrate  compliance  with  the  CTA  by,  for 
 example,  relying  in  part  on  sponsorship  of  core  educational  and  informational  programs  on  other  stations  in  the 
 market  that  increases  the  amount  of  core  educational  or  informational  programming  on  the  station  airing  the 
 sponsored  program  an&  or  on  special  nonbroadcast  efforts  which  enhance  the  value  of  childrens  educational  and 
 informational  television  programming.    u 


 -5- 


 .-  -  .-.-  I._  --.~-  _  ._-_^-_--  ll_--.__.-  .-..  ~-  -_- 
9
 public  interest  plans  should  be  kept  in  the  broadcasters  public  files,  so  that  the  FCC  and  the 
 public  could  view  them  and  assess  whether  the  broadcaster  was  adhering  to  them.  Only  by 
 adopting  such  a  framework  would  the  FCC  ensure  that  the  agency  and  the  public  would  be  able 
 to  evaluate  a  broadcasters  compliance  with  its  public  interest  obligations. 
 2.  Digital  Broadcasters  Public  Interest  Requirements  Should  Apply  to 
 All  Channels  Including  Ancillary  and  Supplementary  Services. 


 The  broadcasters  public  interest  obligations  should  apply  to  every  channel  that  they  use. 
 Thus,  in  a  multicasting  environment  with  program  streams  of  varying  definition,  the  Commission 
 should  review  the  broadcasters  use  of  each  channel.  Such  an  approach  would  prevent 
 broadcasters  from  segregating  certain  programming  streams,  e.  g.,  local  affairs,  programming  for 
 minorities,  political  discourse,  or  childrens  programming,  from  other  more  economically 
 profitable  ones,  and  placing  these  types  of  programs  on  channels  with  less  desirable  features. 
 Similarly,  broadcasters  responsibilities  to  ensure  access  to  disabled  viewers  through  closed 
 captioning  and  video  description  should  apply  to  each  of  their  channels.  Without  such  a  policy, 
 certain  individuals  might  be  relegated  to  receiving  lower  quality  services.  By  making  the  public 
 interest  obligations  apply  to  all  channels,  the  Commission  will  ensure  that  needs  of  the  entire 
 community,  including  disabled  people,  children  and  ethnic  and  racial  minorities  are  met. 
 In  addition,  the  Commission  must  apply  public  interest  obligations  to  the  broadcasters 


 provision  of  ancillary  and  supplementary  services.  Congress  clearly  stated  that  the  offering  of 
 such  services  must  be  consistent  with  the  public  interest,  convenience  and  necessity.   
 Moreover,  in  Section  336(  b),  Congress  stated  that,  in  prescribing  the  regulations  required  by 


 7  47  U.  S.  C.  $336(  a)(  2). 
 -6- 
10
 subsection  (a),  the  Commission  shall  (3)  apply  to  any  other  ancillary  or  supplementary  service 
 such  of  the  Commissions  regulations  as  are  applicable  to  the  offering  of  analogous  services  by 
 any  other  person.  Thus,  DTV  licensees  should  have  the  same  responsibility  to  meet  their 
 communities  needs  through  these  pay  services  as  they  do  through  free  broadcasting. 
 People  for  Better  TV  supports  the  Advisory  Committees  recommendation  that 
 broadcasters  who  choose  to  take  advantage  of  their  datacasting  capabilities  also  use  this  spectrum 
 to  transmit  information  on  behalf  of  civic  institutions.  *  Moreover,  the  broadcasters  should  make 
 all  datacasting  accessible  to  individuals  with  disabilities.  Within  these  parameters,  People  for 
 Better  TV  favors  a  flexible  approach  that  allows  broadcasters  some  leeway  in  deciding  how  they 
 will  meet  their  obligations. 
 B.  The  Commissions  Rules  for  Digital  Television  Should  Include  Protections 
 for  Consumers. 


 The  Commissions  proposals  for  regulating  digital  television  must  take  into  account  the 
 new  technologys  potentially  adverse  impact  on  consumers.  In  the  attached  comments,    the 
 Consumer  Federation  of  America  (  CFA),  a  member  of  People  for  Better  TVs  steering 
 committee,  sets  forth  the  unique  consumer  concerns  raised  by  the  development  of  digital 
 television.  These  concerns  involve  the  broadcasters  potential  use  of  interactive  technology  to 
 invade  consumers  privacy  and  promote  unfair  sales,  and  the  broadcasters  potential  pursuit  of 
 profits  in  a  manner  that  widens  the  digital  divide  and  threatens  the  diverse  expression  of  ideas. 


 8  13.  SeeNOIatB 
 9  See  Appendix  at  C-  2 


 -7- 


 __  .*,  .-.-_--  _  ..-.  -  ^- 
11
 1.  The  Commission  Should  Adopt  Rules  to  Protect  Consumer  Privacy 
 and  Limit  Abusive  Selling  Practices. 


 By  converging  Internet  capabilities  with  broadcasting,  digital  television  permits 
 interactivity  between  broadcasters,  advertisers  and  viewers.  This  technological  development  will 
 allow  for  the  sale  of  goods  and  services  over  the  television  as  well  as  the  collection  of 
 information  from  viewers  about  their  programming  and  product  choices.  To  address  potential 
 invasions  of  privacy  and  prevent  targeted  overselling,    CFA  and  People  for  Better  TV 
 recommend  that  the  Commission  require  broadcasters  to  comply  with  privacy  guidelines  that 
 require  information  collectors  to  take  the  following  steps:  provide  notice  to  consumers  of  their 
 practices;  obtain  consent  before  sharing  information  with  either  corporate  affiliates  or  third 
 parties;  and  allow  consumers  access  to  all  information  that  has  been  collected  about  them.  O  In 
 addition,  to  limit  abusive  selling  practices,  CFA  and  People  for  Better  TV  ask  the  Commission  to 
 adopt  rules  allowing  post-  purchase  remedies,  as  well  as  regulations  restricting  interactive 
 advertising  directed  at  children.  The  Commission  should  also  work  with  the  Federal  Trade 
 Commission  and  consumer  groups  to  set  appropriate  standards  regarding  the  Childrens  Online 
 Privacy  Protection  Act  as  it  applies  to  digital  television. 
 2.  The  Commission  Should  Develop  Steps  to  Ensure  DTV  Does  Not 
 Contribute  to  the  Digital  Divide. 


 The  Commission  should  monitor  both  equipment  costs  and  broadcaster  subscription 
 charges,  These  steps  would  help  ensure  that  digital  television  broadcasters  are  not  allowed  to 


 IO  See  Appendix  at  C-  2,  CFA,  p.  23.  See  also  Appendix  at  B-  3,  Lake  Snell  Perry,  May  1999:  80 
 percent  of  voters  favor  FCC  guidelines  to  protect  consumer  privacy,  83  percent  think  establishing  privacy  protection 
 guidelines  is  important. 


 -8- 
12
 maximize  their  economic  benefits  to  the  detriment  of  lower  income  viewers.  In  its  comments, 
 CFA  notes  two  ways  in  which  the  development  of  digital  television  may  have  an  adverse  impact 
 on  some  members  of  the  public.  First,  CFA  questions  whether  the  adoption  of  digital  televison 
 will  widen  the  digital  divide.  As  CFA  states  in  its  comments,  [  tlhe  expense  of  equipment,  the 
 cost  of  services,  and  the  targeting  of  marketing  points  to  a  commercial  model  in  which  high- 
 value,  high  income  consumers  participate  and  are  targeted.  CFA  further  states, 
 Companies  introducing  technologies  can  identify  the  likely  adopters  and  orient  their 
 product  distribution  to  maximize  the  penetration  within  that  market  segment.  The 
 competitive  energies  of  the  industry  are  focused  on  the  premier  segment,  with 
 innovative  offerings  and  consumer-  friendly  pricing,  while  the  remainder  of  the 
 population  is  ignored  or  suffers  price  increases.  The  merging  of  informational, 
 educational  and  employment  opportunities  over  the  Internet  with  the  commercial 
 activities  of  interactive  TV  raises  concerns  that  the  commercial  model  might  further 
 isolate  those  who  have  been  disadvantaged  by  the  digital  divide.  i2 


 CFA  and  People  for  Better  TV  urge  the  Commission  to  monitor  the  market  to  determine 
 whether  equipment  costs,  such  as  set  top  boxes  and  digital  television  sets  are  affordable.  In 
 addition,  the  Commission  should  monitor  the  costs  of  equipment  which  makes  television 
 available  to  the  disabled.  In  general,  in  adopting  digital  television  policies,  the  Commission 
 should  consider  those  segments  of  the  population  that  may  be  left  out  of  the  transition  to  digital. 
 Second,  CFA  and  People  for  Better  TV  are  concerned  that  economic  pressures  may  lead 
 digital  broadcasters  to  limit  the  diversity  of  their  offerings,  especially  educational,  cultural  and 
 informational  programming,  or  cause  broadcasters  to  provide  such  programming  only  on  a 
 subscription  basis.  The  Commission  cannot  permit  digital  broadcasters  to  make  public 


 II  See  Appendix  at  C-  2,  p.  6. 
 12  Id. 


 -9- 
13
 information  available  only  to  viewers  who  can  afford  to  access  it  through  pay-  per-  view  or 
 subscription  services.  In  some  markets  today,  public,  educational,  and  governmental  offerings 
 appear  only  on  designated  PEG  cable  channels,  and  thus  are  not  accessible  to  viewers  who 
 cannot  afford  to  subscribe  to  cable  television.  The  Commission  should  not  permit  digital 
 broadcasters  to  adopt  a  similar  model.  Segregating  such  informational  fare  to  subscription 
 channels  would  adversely  impact  all  viewers,  and  would  have  a  disproportionately  detrimental 
 effect  on  lower  income  viewers.  To  foster  public  discourse,  the  Commission  should  require  that 
 all  Americans  have  access  to  civic  programming.  Indeed,  as  CFA  notes,  the  Commission  should 
 have  policies  in  place  that  obligate  broadcasters  to  provide  programming  beyond  what  is  simply 
 protitable,  3 
 We  recommend  that  the  Commission  monitor  pay-  per-  view  and  subscription  charges,  and 
 reserve  the  right  to  adopt  regulations  to  ensure  that  broadcasters  charge  reasonable  rates  for  any 
 non-  free  television  services  they  offer.  l4  While  People  for  Better  TVs  comments  focus  mainly 
 on  the  provision  of  public  affairs  and  informational  programming  to  all  members  of  the  public, 
 we  are  also  concerned  that  digital  broadcasters  not  place  entertainment  programming  out  of  reach 
 of  many  viewers.  In  the  digital  model,  broadcasters  may  find  it  economically  beneficial  to 
 charge  viewers  to  watch  certain  programming  including  the  Super  Bowl  or  popular  sitcoms.  The 
 Commission  must  adopt  a  regulatory  framework  to  ensure  that  popular  television  does  not 
 become  a  luxury  item. 


 13  See  Appendix  at  C-  2,  p.  8. 
 14  &  Appendix  at  B-  3,  Lake  Snell  Perry,  May  1999.  73  percent  of  voters  favor  FCC  rate  regulation 
 of  pay-  per-  view  programming,  75  percent  think  this  is  important. 


 -lO- 


 .  --..  __  .II,.  -...-  --_  l  __^.  ,-.  -_-  -._--- 
14
 C.  Digital  Broadcasters  Should  Fulfill  their  Obligations  to  Children  by  Offering 
 Educational  Programming  and  Services  as  well  as  Additional  Rating 
 Information. 


 The  Commission  must  ensure  that  broadcasters  continue  to  meet  their  obligations  to 
 children  in  the  digital  age  by  providing  educational  and  informational  programming.  The 
 Commission  should  adopt  standards  for  making  additional  program  rating  information  available 
 so  that  parents  can  more  easily  determine  which  shows  they  want  their  children  to  watch. 
 1.  The  Three-  Hour  Rule  Should  be  Transferred  Proportionately  to 
 DTV. 


 The  Commission  should  adopt  Children  Nows  proposal  for  applying  the  current 
 Childrens  Television  Act  to  digital  television.  In  its  extensive  comments  attached,  15  Children 
 Now,  a  member  of  the  People  for  Better  TV  steering  committee,  has  proposed  a  means  of 
 implementing  the  3-  hour  childrens  programming  guideline  in  a  manner  that  takes  into  account 
 both  the  increased  number  of  programming  hours  offered  by  digital  broadcasters  as  well  as 
 variations  in  the  viewers  experience  which  depend  on  the  whether  the  broadcaster  airs  the 
 programming  in  standard  or  high  definition.  Moreover,  Children  Now  maintains  that  the 
 Commissions  rules  concerning  childrens  advertising  limits,  host-  selling  and  program-  length 
 commercials  must  be  met  on  all  program  services  including  ancillary  and  supplemental  services. 
 The  Commission  should  adopt  Children  Nows  proposals  to  ensure  that  digital  broadcasters 
 fulfill  their  obligation  to  children. 
 The  publics  consistent  interest  in  the  provision  of  quality  educational  programming  for 
 children  is  reflected  in  the  letters  People  for  Better  TV  has  collected  from  across  the  country. 


 15  &  Appendix  at  C-  1. 
 -ll- 
15
 Viewers  have  expressed  concerns  that  the  current  amount  of  programming  is  insufficient,  that  the 
 quality  is  poor,  and  that  the  stations  air  too  many  commercials  during  childrens  shows.  For 
 example,  Natalie  Gallant  from  NOW  in  Boston,  writes  that  the  local  NBC  affiliate  offers  no 
 programming  for  children  under  6  years  old  and  only  one  program  for  children  under  11  years 
 and  she  questions  the  educational  value  of  the  stations  programs.  Likewise,  Dr.  W.  Curtiss 
 Priest,  director  of  the  Center  for  Information,  Technology  and  Society  in  Boston,  expressed 
 concern  that  the  amount  of  childrens  programming  at  local  Boston  station  WBZ  had  declined 
 50%  from  1997  to  1999  after  the  station  was  acquired  by  CBS.  I6  Letters  from  other  cities  voice 
 similar  concerns.  In  Detroit,  Peggy  Goodwin  found  that  her  local  stations  provide  quality 
 programming  for  children  5-  10  years  old,  but  fail  to  provide  quality,  educational  programs  for 
 older  youth.  Concerns  about  the  lack  of  quality  programming  have  also  been  expressed  by 
 young  people  themselves,  as  can  be  seen  in  the  attached  letter  from  17  year-  old  Elizabeth  Cohen 
 in  New  York.  Finally,  several  viewers,  including  Doshia  Harris,  Susie  Green,  and  Pam  Parks 
 from  Georgia,  have  written  to  the  Commission  complaining  about  the  commercialization  of 
 childrens  programming.  I9  The  Commission  should  consider  these  letters  from  individual 
 viewers  throughout  the  country  as  a  call  to  action  to  ensure  that  digital  broadcasters  meet  their 
 obligations  to  children. 


 16  See  Appendix  at  D-  la,  for  both  Gallant  and  Priest  letters. 
 17  See  Appendix  at  D-  3b. 
 18  See  Appendix  at  D-  1  a. 


 19  See  Appendix  at  D-  2a. 


 -12- 
16
 2.  The  Commission  Should  Adopt  Standards  to  Make  Independent 
 Ratings  Available. 


 While  People  for  Better  TV  is  opposed  to  censorship,  we  believe  the  Commission  must 
 respond  to  parents  demands  for  more  information  about  the  content  of  programs.  Thus,  the 
 Commission  should  modify  the  V-  Chip  regulations  in  the  digital  environment  to  provide  more 
 information  to  viewers.  Congress  anticipated  that  new  technology  would  allow  for  changes 
 in  the  blocking  system.  It  stated,  [  a]  s  new  video  technology  is  developed,  the  Commission  shall 
 take  such  action  as  the  Commission  determines  appropriate  to  ensure  that  blocking  service 
 continues  to  be  available  to  consumers.  20  In  addition,  the  Commission  has  indicated  its 
 preference  for  an  open,  flexible  approach  to  the  development  of  industry  standards  and 
 regulations  that  would  accommodate  the  possible  development  of  multiple  rating  systems. 
 People  for  Better  TV  recommends  that  digital  broadcasters  be  required  to  provide  viewers 
 a  means  of  discovering  what  other  groups  think  about  the  content  of  programs.  Through  the 
 increased  information  capability  of  digital  technology  the  present  ratings  system  can  be 
 substantially  improved.  Broadcasters  should  provide  access  to  much  more  information,  from  a 
 variety  of  independent  sources,  about  the  nature  (such  as  violent  or  sexual  content)  of  the 
 programs  being  broadcast,  as  they  are  being  broadcast.  This  information  would  enable  parents  to 
 screen  out  programs  they  do  not  want  in  their  homes. 
 We  encourage  the  FCC  to  conduct  meetings  on  the  next  stage  of  the  V-  Chip  and  the 


 ratings  system.  The  FCC,  working  with  software  developers,  should  consider  the  following 


 20  47  9  U.  S.  C.  330(  c)(  4). 
 21  Technical  Reauirements  to  Enable  Blockine.  of  Video  Proeramming  based  on  ProPram  Ratings, 
 13  FCC  Red  11248,  11251  (1998). 


 -13- 
17
 questions:  Can  filtering  software  that  reads  and  screens  predetermined  codes  be  downloaded  to 
 the  next  generation  of  television  sets  to  adapt  to  a  more  complex  digital  environment?  Just  as 
 television  stations  are  working  with  advertisers  to  develop  click  through  technologies  for 
 viewers  to  buy  products  they  see  during  commercial  or  programming,  can  technologies  allow 
 viewers  to  click  through  to  independent  ratings  by  local  groups,  or  national  groups  such  as  the 
 National  Institute  for  Media  and  the  Family?  22 
 Viewers  clearly  want  more  information  on  program  content.  Survey  results  indicate  that 
 84  percent  of  voters  favor  an  independent  ratings  system,  while  87  percent  think  developing  such 
 a  system  is  important.  23  These  findings  are  echoed  by  citizens  letters  such  as  the  one  from 
 Rebecca  Rogers  of  Carolina  Peace  Resource  Center  in  Columbia,  South  Carolina.  Ms.  Rogers 
 writes,  digital  broadcasters  should  be  required  to  provide  an  easy  to  understand  independent 
 ratings  system  about  the  violent  and  sexual  content  of  programs.  24  Digital  technology  will 
 allow  for  the  provision  of  multiple  rating  systems  both  by  using  the  additional  spectrum  available 
 and  by  providing  links  to  the  Internet  where  such  information  can  be  accessed. 


 III.  Responding  to  the  Community 
 Local  television  stations,  not  networks,  not  corporate  collections  of  broadcast  operations, 
 but  local  television  stations  are  licensed  by  the  FCC.  If  the  public  interest  standard  is  to  mean 


 22  See  Television  Ratings  (visited  Mar.  20,  2000) 
 <http/  lwww.  mediaandthefamily.  org/  rate.  ctm?  s=  tv>. 
 23 


 24 
 See  Appendix  at  B-  3,  Lake  Snell  Perry,  May  1999. 


 &e  Appendix  at  D-  2b. 


 -14- 
18
 anything  in  the  digital  age,  People  for  Better  TV  asserts  it  must  mean  program  service  to  the 
 local  community,  and  nil  segments  of  the  local  community,  men  and  women,  minority  and 
 majority,  urban  and  rural.  Furthermore,  while  the  FCC  may  not  be  able  to  ensure  that 
 broadcasters  are  serving  the  entire  community,  it  can  put  in  place  mechanisms  to  encourage  a 
 dialogue  and  some  level  of  accountability  between  stations  and  those  they  are  licensed  to  serve. 
 These  principles  should  guide  the  Commissions  determination  of  the  minimum  public  interest 
 obligations  of  broadcasters. 
 While  local  service  has  long  been  a  bedrock  goal  of  the  public  interest  standard,  it  has  for 
 most  of  the  history  of  broadcast  regulation  been  more  promise  than  practice.  Two  of  the  four 
 programming  requirements  in  the  1946  Blue  Book  focused  on  local  programs  and  the  discussion 
 of  local  issues,  25  and  in  1960  the  top  two  FCC  programming  priorities  were  opportunity  for 
 local  self-  expression  and  use  of  local  talent.  26  Still,  as  Ofice  of  Communications,  United 
 Church  of  Christ  v.  Federal  Communications  Commission  (hereinafter  UCC  v  FCCJ2  and  the 
 subsequent  Kerner  Commission  Report  on  the  neglect  of  minority  audiences  by  television 
 stations  made  clear,  an  emphasis  on  local  programs  did  not  necessarily  mean  all  segments  of  the 
 local  community  were  served.  With  the  Ascertainment  Primer  in  1971,  the  FCC  finally  put  forth 


 25  See  Public  Service  Responsibilities  of  Broadcast  Licensees,  12,36-  40  (1946)(  Blue  Book). 
 26  Commission  Policv  on  Programming,  20  Rad.  Reg.  (P&  F)  190  1,  at  19  13  (1960). 
 21  Office  of  Communications.  United  Church  of  Christ  v.  Federal  Communications  Commission, 
 359  F.  2d  994  (D.  C.  Cir.  1966). 
 28  Renort  of  the  National  Advisorv  Commission  on  Civil  Disorder,  Otto  Kemer,  Chairman,  2  10 


 (Bantam,  1968). 


 -15 
19
 guidelines  to  aid  broadcasters  in  being  more  responsive  to  the  problems  of  their  communities.  29 
 Thus,  stations  were  not  only  informed  about  a  wider  range  of  local  issues,  and  thus  able  to 
 respond,  they  actually  became  more  accountable  to  all  segments  of  the  community. 
 For  thirteen  years  the  Commission  struggled  to  improve  on  the  sad  history  of  the  prior 
 forty.  But  in  1984  the  Commission  (and  the  political  tide)  reversed  course  and  ruled  that  local 
 service  to  all  segments  of  the  local  community  would  be  best  promoted  not  by  clear  guidelines, 
 but  by  the  laissez-  faire  practices  of  the  Roaring  20s  when  broadcasters  were  first  being 
 regulated.  3o  Despite  the  bold  declaration  of  the  National  Association  of  Broadcasters  of  billions 
 of  dollars  of  local  service,  31  what  we  have  found  is  a  retreat  from  the  discussion  of  local  issues 
 by  too  many  broadcasters,  and  a  destruction  of  community  affairs  departments  justified  by  de- 
 regulation.  This  state  of  affairs  should  not  be  carried  into  the  digital  age. 


 A.  Digital  Television  Broadcasters  Should  Be  Required  to  Provide  One  Hour  a 
 Day  of  Local  Public  Affairs  Programming. 


 1.  Local  Broadcasters  are  Failing  to  Address  Local  Needs. 
 There  are  not  enough  local  programs  dealing  with  important  local  issues.  Local 
 elections  had  very  little  public  programming  on  local  transportation  or  initiative  issues  or 


 29 
 (1971). 
 Primer  on  Ascertainment  of  Communitv  Problems  bv  Broadcast  Atmlicants,  27  FCC  2d  650,65  1 


 30  Revision  of  Proerammine  and  Commercialization  Policies.  Ascertainment  Requirements.  and 
 Program  Lee.  Reouirements  for  Commercial  Television  Stations,  98  FCC  2d  1076,  1116  (1984). 
 31  A  National  Renort  on  the  Broadcast  Industrvs  Communitv  Service,  National  Association  of 


 Broadcasters  (April  1998)  claimed  $6.8  billion  dollars  of  service  to  community.  However,  as  demonstrated  by  A 
 Methodoloeical  Evaluation  of  the  NAB  ReDort,  Project  on  Media  Ownership,  (January  2000),  the  NABs  report 
 cannot  be  taken  seriously.  &g  Appendix  at  B-  2. 


 -16 


 ,-  _. 
20
 information  about  what  is  happening  in  our  state  legislature,  writes  Phyllis  Rowe,  President  of 
 the  Arizona  Consumers  Council.  32  We  have  heard  this  complaint  hundreds  of  times  over  the  past 
 year  from  citizens  from  all  walks  of  life  from  across  the  country.  People  for  Better  TV 
 recommends  that  all  digital  television  broadcasters  be  required  to  devote  at  least  one  hour  a  day 
 to  discussion  of  local  issues  important  to  the  community  of  license.  33  While  recognizing  that  a 
 wide  range  of  issues  important  to  the  community  will  be  national  and  international  in  scope,  we 
 suggest  that  the  unique  qualities  of  local  television  service  are  best  suited  to  addressing  local 
 concerns.  As  noted  above,  this  requirement  should  not  be  relegated  to  only  one  channel  or 
 program  service  provided  by  the  licensed  broadcaster,  but  should  apply  across  all  channels.  3 
 In  cities  across  the  country  members  of  People  for  Better  TV  reviewed  quarterly  reports 
 which  demonstrated  little  or  no  attention  to  the  needs  and  interests  of  the  diverse  members  of 
 their  communities.  One  shocking  example  was  the  quarterly  report  from  KPIX-  TV  San 
 Francisco.  Close  inspection  of  their  program  report  on  activity  in  the  last  three  months  of  1999 
 would  not  reveal  one  program  squarely  devoted  to  any  of  the  several  ballot  initiatives  during  the 
 November  1999  election.  35  Other  examples:  Helen  Grieco,  President  of  California  NOW  writes, 
 [elarlier  this  month  I  visited  two  stations,  KTVU-  TV  and  KRON-  TV.  While 


 32  &  Appendix  at  D-  4b. 
 33  &e  Appendix  at  B-  3,  Lake  Snell  Perry,  May  1999.  80  percent  of  voting  Americans  both  favor 
 think  important  People  for  Better  TVs  proposal  to  require  local  television  stations  to  produce  programs  to  address 
 local  concerns. 


 34  One  means  of  satisfying  this  might  be  to  use  one  of  the  multicast  channels  to  air  the  meetings  of 


 state  legislators,  or  city  councils,  or  boards  of  education,  or  public  utility  commissions.  This  might  be  done  in 
 cooperation  with  cable  providers  who  air  these  important  civic  fora  on  their  Public,  Education,  and  Government 
 channels.  By  providing  this  service  all  Americans  could  have  free  access  to  the  workings  of  their  important  local 


 institutions,  not  just  those  who  can  afford  cable. 


 35  See  Appendix  at  D-  5b. 


 -17- 


 -  .._  ll_-  l.  _---.  l-.._-  --_-.-_  _. 
21
 these  stations  provide  a  standard  list  of  community  issues,  it  is  clear  from  the 
 program  reports  to  the  FCC  that  this  list  isnt  worth  the  paper  its  printed  on.  Not 
 only  are  their  lists  so  generic  as  to  be  unhelpful,  its  clear  that  they  dont  change 
 from  quarter  to  quarter  (quite  unlike  the  challenges  in  our  very  diverse 
 community).  Both  of  these  channels  also  rely  heavily  on  the  local  news  as  a 
 means  of  satisfying  their  obligation  to  provide  for  discussion  of  important  issues. 
 One  look  at  the  news  makes  it  clear  that  as  good  as  it  may  be  in  providing 
 headlines,  soundbites  from  mainly  white  males  are  not  a  valid  substitute  for 
 discussion  from  a  range  of  perspectives.  j6 


 Paul  Schlaver  of  the  Massachusetts  Consumer  Coalition,  writes:  I  simply  cannot  recall 
 one  decent  local  network  offering  some  in-  depth  coverage  of  these  complex  issues.  Such  stories 
 (state  privacy  legislation  and  broadband  access)  cry  out  for  more  time  and  attention  .  ..  And 
 Professor  Ceasar  McDowell  of  Newton,  Massachusetts  writes:  In  reviewing  the  public  file  from 
 two  stations  it  is  clear  that  stations  fulfill  their  public  interest  obligations  by  piecing  together 
 unrelated  and  often  non-  local  programming.  37 
 These  comments  reinforce  research  commissioned  by  the  Benton  Foundation.  Professor 
 Philip  Napoli,  of  the  Graduate  School  of  Business  at  Fordham  University,  studied  142 
 commercial  broadcast  stations  over  a  two  week  period  in  January  2000.  He  found  that  of  the 
 47,712  broadcast  hours  only  156.5,  or  0.3  percent  were  devoted  to  local  public  affairs 
 programming.  Local  plus  national  public  affairs  programs  reached  1.09  percent  of  total 
 broadcast  hours  studied.  38  To  say  that  there  has  been  a  decline  in  public  affairs  programming 
 would  be  an  understatement.  Between  1973  and  1979,  the  average  percent  of  public  interest 


 36  See  Appendix  at  D-  5b. 
 37  See  Appendix  at  D-  1  a,  for  both  McDowell  and  Schlaver  letters. 
 38  Philip  Napoli,  Market  Conditions  and  Public  Affairs  Proerammine:  Imnlications  for  Dieital 
 Television  Policv,  Benton  Foundation,  March  2000.  It  is  important  to  note  that  Professor  Napoli  used  the  same 
 definition  of  public  affairs  as  the  Commission  in  its  1984  Revision  of  Programming  rules.  See  Appendix  at  B-  l) 


 -1% 
22
 programming  was  4.6  percent.  39  Perhaps,  of  greater  importance  than  data  demonstrating  a  clear 
 decline  in  public  affairs  service,  is  Professor  Napolis  suggestion  that 
 although  larger  markets  provide  a  greater  aggregate  amount  of  local  public  affairs 
 programming,  individual  stations  do  not  respond  to  increasingly  competitive 
 market  conditions  by  producing  more  public  affairs  programming.  Nor,  for  that 
 matter,  do  they  respond  by  reducing  the  amount  of  local  public  affairs 
 programming  .  .  .  the  provision  of  local  public  affairs  programming  appears 
 highly  resistant  to  economic  influences.  40 


 This  suggestion  undermines  the  core  rationale  of  the  1984  Revision  of  Programming  decision 
 that  licensees  will  continue  to  supply  informational,  local  and  non-  entertainment  programming 
 in  response  to  existing  as  well  as  future  marketplace  incentives.  4 
 2.  Regulatory  Certainty  is  Needed  to  Ensure  Local  Needs  are  Addressed. 
 In  various  cities,  People  for  Better  TV  members  found  cutbacks  in  community  affairs 
 departments  justified  not  by  the  market,  but  by  the  perception  of  recent  de-  regulation.  Jason 
 McInnes  and  Gordon  Quinn  of  Kartemquin  Films  write  that  one  Chicago  station  executive 
 explained  the  cutback  in  public  affairs  programs  as  follows:  With  the  FCC  de-  regulation  things 
 have  changed.  2  Cher  McIntyre  of  Consumer  Action  in  Los  Angeles  writes:  .  .  .  local  Los 
 Angeles  stations  (ex.  CBS-  KNXT-  LA)  have  elected  to  eliminate  Community  Relations 
 Departments  altogether.  3  People  for  Better  TV  asserts  that  the  assumption  that  market 
 mechanisms  can  replace  clear  guidelines  is  unfounded.  The  Fowler  Commissions  free  market 


 39 
 40 


 41 
 42 


 Revision  of  Propramming  at  98  FCC  2d  at  1080. 
 Napoli  at  13. 
 Revision  of  Propramming,  98  2d  at  FCC  1080. 
 See  Appendix  at  D-  3a. 
 43  See  Appendix  at  D-  5a. 


 -19- 
23
 experiment  with  local  programming  has  failed  citizens  and  consumers  hungry  for  the  discussion 
 of  important  local  issues. 
 When  Congress  stepped  in  with  the  Childrens  Television  Act  to  correct  the  Fowler 
 Commissions  radical  elimination  of  childrens  program  requirements,  44  the  Hundt  FCC  bravely 
 stepped  up  to  create  clear  and  certain  guidelines.  As  Children  Now  has  set  forth,  this  regulatory 
 certainty  has  improved  programming  for  children.  45  Regulatory  certainty  needs  to  be  established 
 regarding  local  public  affairs  programs.  If  localism  remains  the  bedrock  of  the  public  interest 
 standard,  setting  a  clear  goal  as  to  the  amount  of  time  a  station  will  devote  to  address  local  issues 
 is  obviously  needed  to  achieve  that  standard.  46 
 3.  Local  Public  Affairs  Programs  Should  Address  the  Needs  of  All 
 Segments  of  the  Community  of  License. 


 While  UCC  v.  FCC,  stands,  in  part,  for  the  proposition  that  a  federal  licensee  is  obligated 
 to  operate  in  the  interest  of  the  entire  community,  we  understand  that  serving  all  segments  of  the 
 community  is  a  large  task.  Digital  television  service  provides  local  broadcasters  unique 
 opportunities  to  expand  their  programming  service.  A  much  wider  variety  of  local  needs  can 
 now  be  met.  And  as  we  suggested  in  our  initial  Petition  for  Inquiry,  the  local  needs  of  diverse 
 communities  are  not  well  served  by  national  programs.  Network  programming  has  a  difficult 
 enough  time  depicting  the  true  diversity  of  New  York  City  or  Los  Angeles,  47  how  could  it 


 44 
 45 
 See  Newton  Minow,  Abandoned  in  the  Wasteland,  pp.  5  l-  57  (Hill  and  Wang)  (1995). 


 &Appendix  at  C-  l,  pp.  21-  29. 
 46  In  addition  to  providing  local  programming,  it  is  important  for  the  station  to  provide  that  program 
 during  the  regular  broadcast  day,  rather  than  at  4:  OOam.  If  television  is  to  contribute  to  community  discourse  the 
 community  should  be  awake  during  the  contribution. 


 47  See  Comments  of  LULAC,  Appendix  at  C-  3. 


 -2o- 
24
 possibly  be  expected  to  address  the  diverse  local  interests  in  Houston,  Texas  or  Columbia,  South 
 Carolina? 
 Therefore,  in  addition  to  requiring  a  clear  numerical  standard  for  public  affairs  programs, 
 the  Commission  should  require  that  these  programs  address  the  needs  and  interests  of  all 
 segments  of  the  community  served  by  the  broadcast  licensee,  regardless  of  the  ethnicity  or 
 wealth  of  those  segments.  Sandy  Close  and  Emil  Guillermo  of  New  California  Media  note: 
 There  are  numerous  examples  of  how  local  broadcasters  give  short  shrift  to  the 
 concerns  of  the  multi-  racial,  multi-  ethnic  communities  that  now  comprise  the  San 
 Francisco  Bay  Area.  .  .  Candidates  debates  broadcast  over  the  network  local 
 affiliates  are  routinely  conducted  by  representatives  from  mainstream  TV  and 
 print  media  --  invariably  people  who  are  out  of  touch  with  the  concerns  of  major 
 communities  of  color.  Yet  the  nightly  news  anchors  of  Spanish,  Mandarin, 
 Cantonese  and  Korean  language  television  stations  in  the  Bay  Area  command 
 large  audiences  and  are  exactly  the  people  who  should  be  fielding  questions  to 
 candidates.   


 Again,  these  comments  are  echoed  across  the  country,  even  in  areas  thought  not  to  be  as 
 diverse  as  the  San  Francisco  Bay  Area.  49 
 Second,  all  of  the  broadcast  area  deserves  service.  Florence  Rice  of  the  Harlem 
 Consumer  Education  Council,  writes:  It  is  my  personal  opinion  that  Harlem  has  been  extremely 
 neglected  by  local  television  broadcasters.  Linda  Cookingham,  also  notes:  My  husband  and  I 
 tune  in  the  NYC  TV  stations  for  the  daily  news  and  are  distressed  that  our  local  news  is  rarely 
 broadcast.  In  fact,  the  stations  are  hard  pressed  to  include  the  Hudson  Valley  in  their  weather 
 reports.  5o  Surely  the  public  interest  does  not  mean  that  stations  need  only  serve  those  parts  of 


 48 
 49 
 50 


 See  Appendix  at  D-  5b. 
 See  Appendix  at  D-  1  and  D-  2  especially. 
 See  Appendix  at  D-  1  b  for  both  Cookingham  and  Rice  letters. 


 -21- 
25
 the  community  advertisers  are  especially  interested  in. 
 4.  Local  Television  News  Should  Not  Be  Considered  a  Substitute  for 
 Local  Public  Affairs  Programming. 


 The  apparent  low  level  of  attention  to  important  local  issues  through  public  affairs 
 programming  is  not  increased  by  the  local  news  programs.  While  current  news  programming 
 may  be  more  entertaining  than  ever,  it  clearly  does  not  satisfy  the  goal  of  local  discussion  about 
 important  local  issues.  A  Kaiser  Family  Foundation/  Center  for  Media  and  Public  Affairs  Report 
 shows  that  crime  and  accidents  make  up  roughly  30  percent  of  local  newscasts,  while  reporting 
 on  local  city  or  state  government  was  only  two  (2)  percent  combined.  Sports  and  entertainment 
 combined  for  ten  percent.  5  These  findings  are  in  line  with  the  comments  of  Professor  Xandra 
 Kayden,  Chapter  President  of  the  League  of  Women  Voters  in  Los  Angeles;  If  70  percent  of 
 Americans  get  their  news  from  televison  -  and  local  television  is  devoted  to  personal  tragedies, 
 natural  disasters  and  consumer  news  -  it  is  not  difficult  to  explain  the  decline  in  affiliation  with 
 our  political  system.    Professor  Kayden  cites  as  evidence  the  LWV  study  of  local  news,  Media 
 Watch.  Alicia  Maldonado  of  the  Mexican  American  Legal  Defense  and  Education  Fund  writes: 
 coverage  of  local  primary  races,  controversy  over  the  building  and  construction  of 
 schools  in  Los  Angeles,  and  meetings  of  local  government  were  missing,  yet  these 
 issues  directly  affect  the  daily  lives  of  television  viewers.  I  was  frankly  surprised 
 that  not  one  story  covered  the  activities  of  the  city  council  or  board  of 
 supervisors.  52 


 These  reactions  reflect  local  news  coverage  in  every  region  of  the  country.  Digital  broadcasters 
 should  not  be  allowed  to  skirt  their  obligation  to  provide  information  and  discussion  of  local 


 51  Assessing  Local  Television  News  CoveraPe  of  Health  Issues,  Kaiser  Family  Foundation/  Center 
 for  Media  and  Public  Affairs  Report,  1998. 
 52  &g  Appendix  at  D-  5a  for  both  the  Kayden  and  Maldonado  letters. 


 -22- 
26
 issues  by  pointing  to  their  news/  entertainment  programs. 
 B.  Digital  Broadcasters  Should  Provide  One  Public  Service  Announcement  for 
 Every  Four  Commercials,  With  at  Least  Equal  Emphasis  Placed  on 
 Independent  and  Locally  Produced  PSAs  Addressing  a  Communitys  Local 
 Needs. 


 Public  service  announcements  are  an  important  means  of  providing  reminders  about  local 
 public  events  and  simple  messages  about  non-  commercial  activity  in  the  community.  These 
 announcements  can  improve,  and  make  civil  our  local  discussions.  Unfortunately,  there  seems  to 
 have  been  a  decline  in  local  and  non-  promotional  public  service  announcements.  Gail  Parson,  a 
 Consumer  Associate  with  Illinois  Public  Interest  Research  Group,  writes:  Public  service 
 announcements  are  a  way  for  stations  to  give  back  to  the  community  in  which  they  broadcast.  If 
 public  service  announcements  are  aired  at  all,  they  are  aired  when  most  viewers  are  asleep.  53 
 According  to  Susan  Grover  of  the  Prevention  Coalition  of  Southeast,  Michigan  (PREWCO) 
 Over  the  past  years  we  have  seen  a  dramatic  decrease  in  the  actual  amount  of 
 airtime  that  is  devoted  to  PSAs.  In  the  past,  we  were  able  to  consecutively  air 
 :60  spots.  Currently,  we  are  confined  to  :30  or  :  15  spots.  The  seriousness  of  these 
 community  health  issues  has  not  decreased.  Unfortunately,  the  available  airtime 
 has  decreased  by  up  to  50%.  54 


 Therefore,  we  recommend  that  digital  broadcasters  be  required  to  provide  one  public  service 
 announcement  for  every  four  commercials,  with  at  least  equal  emphasis  placed  on  independent 
 and  locally  produced  PSAs  addressing  a  communitys  local  needs.  PSAs  should  run  in  all  day 
 parts  including  in  primetime  and  at  other  times  of  peak  viewing. 
 As  the  Commission  understands  all  too  well,  the  U.  S.  regulation  of  broadcasting  is  based 


 53  See  Appendix  at  D-  3a. 
 54  See  Appendix  at  D-  3b. 


 -23- 
27
 upon  offering  private  citizens  free  and  exclusive  license  to  use  a  locally  defined  portion  of  the 
 electromagnetic  spectrum,  in  exchange  for  their  using  this  public  property  on  behalf  of  the  local 
 public.  This  obligation  does  not  mean  donations  to  local  charities,  it  means  local  television 
 programs  serving  the  needs  of  the  entire  community.  This  deal,  a  free  license  for  local  public 
 service,  is  a  fiction  and  a  fraud,  just  one  more  example  of  corporate  welfare,  if  the  Commission 
 shrinks  from  the  obligation  to  set  certain  and  enforceable  guidelines  for  public  discussion. 


 C.  The  Commission  Should  Require  Broadcasters  to  Seek  Out  the  Needs  and 
 Interests  of  All  Segments  of  the  Community  of  License. 


 As  stated  above,  the  FCC  determined  in  the  mid-  1980s  that  the  obligations  of  a  public 
 licensee  to  serve  the  public  good  could  be  easily  substituted  by  the  dictates  of  the  commercial 
 marketplace.  According  to  that  FCC,  requiring  broadcasters  to  determine  the  issues  of 
 importance  to  all  segments  of  its  community  of  license  proved  to  be  burdensome,  inconvenient  to 
 both  business  and  government,  and  unnecessary  given  marketplace  pressures  to  discover 
 consumer  needs.  We  will  address  the  last  platitude  first,  and  argue  second  that  new  technologies 
 make  ascertainment  duties  no  longer  (putting  aside  the  question  of  whether  they  ever  really  were) 
 unduly  burdensome  or  inconvenient. 
 1.  The  Market  Does  Not  Guarantee  that  All  Segments  of  the  Community 
 Will  Be  Served. 


 In  arguing  against  the  ascertainment  requirement,  Commissioner  Furchtgott-  Roth  writes: 
 Broadcasters  have  every  reason  to  serve  their  local  communities  and,  if  they  do  not  meet  that 


 -24- 
28
 challenge,  they  will  go  out  of  business.  55  This  old  reasoning  is  not  only  bad  logic  it  ignores 
 reality.  Ascertainment  requirements  were  put  in  place  in  the  late  1960s  and  early  1970s  because 
 it  was  demonstrated  that  certain  broadcasters  ignored  the  needs  of  certain  segments  of  their 
 community,  particularly  ethnic  and  racial  minorities.  To  paraphrase  the  Kerner  Commission 
 Report,  for  four  decades  the  market  failed  to  ensure  that  all  broadcast  licensees  communicated  to 
 white  America  what  it  meant  to  be  other  than  white.  The  broadcast  market  did  not,  does  not,  and 
 will  not  dictate  that  all  segments  of  the  community  of  license  be  served.  The  broadcast  market 
 dictates  meeting  the  short-  term  desires  of  its  potential  paying  customers.  Those  customers,  of 
 course,  are  advertisers.  Advertisers,  and  the  broadcasters  who  serve  them,  may  determine,  as 
 they  have  in  the  past  (rightly  or  wrongly),  that  ignoring  certain  minority  groups,  or  women,  or 
 the  elderly,  or  the  disabled,  may  be  the  most  efficient  market  action.  56  Thus,  broadcasters 
 certainly  need  not  go  out  of  business  if  they  ignore  the  needs  of  certain  groups.  Indeed, 
 broadcasters  may  see  ignoring  those  needs  as  protecting  their  ability  to  best  serve  both  their  core 
 customers  and  the  audience  that  those  advertisers  seek.  However  efficient  it  may  be  to  ignore 
 the  needs  of  certain  groups,  it  is  certainly  not  in  the  best  interests  of  either  the  community 
 segment  or  the  community  at  large.  Community  needs  and  interests  cannot  intelligently  be 
 confused  with  short  term  market  dictates.  57 
 The  Commissioners  logic  fails  to  understand  the  broadcast  market,  and  it  fails  to  observe 


 55  See  NOI,  Separate  Statement  of  Commissioner  Harold  Furchtgott-  Roth. 
 56  See  generallv,  Kofi  Ofori,  When  Being  One  Is  Not  Enoueh,  Civil  Rights  Forum  on 
 Communications  Policy,  1999. 
 57  Andrew  Graham,  Broadcastinp  Policy  in  the  Digital  Ape.  Evidence  to  the  Advisorv  Committee  on 


 Public  Interest  Obligations  of  Digital  Television  Broadcasters  (Submitted  to  the  Public  Interest  Advisory 
 Committee),  July  1998,  at  10-  15. 


 -25- 


 .-  _  .  -...-.-.  ..^    --_  _____.___  .--.  ~-_  I 
29
 the  facts.  Not  only  do  the  national  networks  regularly  decide  that  it  is  in  their  market  interest  to 
 ignore  certain  communities,  broadcasters  across  the  country  ignore  a  variety  of  groups  in  their 
 community  of  license.  Allen  Perez,  of  Cambridge,  Massachusetts  writes:  Most  of  the  major 
 local  stations  do  not  even  have  a  community  liaison  .  .  .  An  evening  of  watching  my  local 
 broadcast  station  reveals  .  .  .  Not  a  single  mention  of  Latin0  issues.  58  Minority  groups  are  not 
 the  only  ones  ill-  served  by  market  dictates.  New  York  NOW  member  Sonia  Ossorio  writes, 
 NOW/  NYC  won  a  court  case  against  the  New  York  State  division  of  human  rights  to  force  them 
 to  set  up  policies  to  improve  response  time  and  lower  the  backlog  of  employment  discrimination 
 suits  filed  with  the  state.  [Not]  CBS,  nor  Fox,  nor  any  other  television  station  responded  to  press 
 announcements  of  this  legal  victory  won  by  NOW.  59  The  public  good  and  the  results  of 
 unregulated  markets  (so-  called)  are  not  one  and  the  same. 
 2.  New  Technologies  Can  Relieve  the  Administrative  Burden  of 
 Discovering  Community  Needs. 


 We  are  left  with  the  rather  weak  argument  that  broadcasters  consider  community 
 consultations  too  much  of  a  burden.  Now,  new  technologies  have  been  developed  which  might 
 help  relieve  the  supposedly  burdensome  nature  of  determining  the  public  interest. 
 On-  line  discussions,  perhaps  once  a  quarter,  with  a  diverse  selection  of  community 
 leaders  can  be  conducted  by  the  station,  These  discussions  can  be  stored  automatically  and  kept 
 available  on-  line  for  the  general  public  to  read.  Programs  are  already  available  which  facilitate 
 these  sort  of  discussions.  These  programs  can  rank  ideas  listed  by  participants  and  calculate 


 58  See  Appendix  at  D-  1  a. 
 59  See  Appendix  at  D-  1  b. 


 -26- 
30
 percentages.  A  good  example  on  how  local  television  stations  might  consult  with  community 
 leaders  on  issues  important  to  a  variety  of  segments  of  the  community  is  the  Benton 
 Foundations  Debate  America  project.  This  project  maps  community  issues,  provides  context, 
 and  facilitates  discussion,  through  an  Internet  Web-  based  program.  Discussion  leaders  can 
 select  participants  or  allow  for  a  wide  field  of  discussants,  and  allow  for  a  wide  range  of 
 discussion  styles.  Imagine  a  community  relations  director  at  a  local  television  station  with  this 
 tool  to  consult  with  a  wide  range  of  community  leaders  from  time  to  time  on  important  local 
 issues.  No  more  messy  paperwork,  or  burdensome  aggregation  of  comments.  We  propose 
 requiring  the  broadcasters  to  conduct  community  consultation  via  Internet  technologies.  61 


 D.  Digital  Broadcasters  Should  Be  Required  to  Disclose  their  Public  Interest 
 Programming  and  Activities  Quarterly. 


 The  best  guarantor  that  broadcasters  attend  to  community  needs  is  community  oversight. 
 People  for  Better  TV  applauds  the  Commissions  insistence  up01  75  the  requirement  that 
 broadcasters  make  their  quarterly  reports  and  other  important  dot  lmity  service 
 open  to  the  public.  These  requirements  should  be  extended  to  dig 
 We  must  report,  however,  a  decidedly  mixed  reception  fro 
 our  coalition  who  attempted  to  review  public  files.  Rick  Loza  oft  b 
 2 
 W  \5 


 60  See  Debate  America  (visited  Mar.  20,  2000)  <  http://  www.  det 


 Lotus  has  developed  a  wide  range  of  software  programs  which  allow  for  informs 
 Mar.  20,  2000)  ~http://  www.  lotus.  com/  home.  nsf7welcome/  uroducts~. 


 61  We  recognize  that  the  Internet  is  not  accessible  to  everyone.  However,  we  think  that  an 


 Internet-  based  solution  is  a  reasonable  compromise  that  minimizes  broadcasters  burdens  while  providing  a  means 
 for  community  interaction. 


 -27- 
31
 International  Union,  Local  46,  writes  that  he  and  a  colleague  went  to  inspect  the  public  files  at  a 
 Chicago  station,  and  were  told  that  they  could  not  see  anyone  without  an  appointment.  After 
 asking  to  call  someone  to  set  up  an  appointment,  he  was  refused  both  a  telephone  and  a  telephone 
 number.  62  Dorothy  Garrick  of  Columbia,  South  Carolina  writes: 
 On  March  7,  2000  I  visited  one  of  my  local  broadcasting  station,  SCETV  in 
 Columbia,  South  Carolina  to  inspect  the  public  files  and  was  not  allowed  to  see 
 the  files.  These  are  some  of  the  reasons  I  was  given  by  Ms.  Kathy  Gardner-  Jones, 
 Vice  President-  SCETV  as  to  why  I  could  not  inspect  the  public  files:  I  needed  to 
 file  a  Freedom  of  Information  request,  unless  I  explained  exactly  what  I  was 
 looking  for  in  the  public  files.  (She  assumed  I  did  not  know  what  Freedom  of 
 Information  meant,  so  she  proceeded  to  explain  it  to  me  and  how  to  file).  I 
 needed  to  tell  her  exactly  what  I  was  looking  for  in  the  public  tiles.  I  could  not 
 see  the  employees  personnel  files.  Public  files  are  not  in  one  (1)  location.  I 
 needed  to  go  to  different  areas  in  the  building  to  inspect  the  public  files.  Staff  is 
 very  busy  and  dont  have  a  lot  of  time.  Staff  needed  to  know  exactly  how  much 
 time  I  would  need  to  inspect  the  public  files.  A  staff  member  had  death  in  his 
 family.  I  needed  to  make  an  appointment  to  see  the  public  files.  j3 


 Catherine  Bell  of  the  Boston  Chapter  of  NOW  writes,  we  were  told  we  would  not  be 
 able  to  view  the  public  files  that  day.  64  Shirley  Middleton  of  New  York  writes,  I  went  to  NBC 
 and  ABC  with  my  daughter  to  gain  entry  to  the  public  records  and  I  cannot  believe  the  run 
 around  they  tried  to  give  me.  65 
 While  we  continue  to  think  it  important  for  stations  to  keep  files  for  public  review  on  site, 
 we  propose  that  digital  broadcasters  also  be  required  to  disclose  information  on  their  web  sites. 
 This  policy  would  be  a  minor  burden  on  the  stations  compared  to  the  incredible  burden  on  those 


 See  Appendix  at  D-  3a. 
 See  Appendix  at  D-  2b. 
 See  Appendix  at  D-  1  a. 
 See  Appendix  at  D-  lb. 


 -28- 
32
 members  of  the  public  who  travel  several  miles  only  to  be  turned  away  or  made  to  feel 
 uncomfortable.  As  Mary  Ellen  Guest,  of  Working  In  The  Schools  from  Chicago  says, 
 It  is  time-  consuming  and  expensive  (downtown  parking  is  $14  per  hour)  to  visit 
 local  broadcast  affiliates  and  review  their  public  files.  We  encourage  the  FCC  to 
 require  stations  to  post  reports  about  their  childrens  programming,  public  service 
 announcements,  and  public  affairs  programming  on  the  Intemet.  66 


 This  recommendation  is  a  small  step  and  it  should  be  implemented  immediately.  Research  by 
 the  National  Association  of  Broadcasters  in  1998  revealed  that  approximately  two-  thirds  of 
 television  stations  in  the  top  100  markets  had  web  sites.  67 
 The  Commission  asks  what  information  should  be  included  in  the  public  files  of  digital 
 broadcasters?  68  In  addition  to  the  current  requirements,  broadcasters  should  put  in  their  files  and 
 their  web  sites  all  records  of  community  consultations,  and  the  means  by  which  the  station  makes 
 its  programs  available  to  the  disabled.  One  persistent  complaint  from  People  for  Better  TV 
 members  is  that  it  was  difficult  to  gauge  what  public  service  announcements  were  broadcast.  We 
 concur  with  the  recommendation  of  Benjamin  Jones,  of  the  National  Council  on  Alcoholism  and 
 Drug  Dependence  in  Detroit,  who  suggests  that  digital  broadcasters  list  in  their  public  file  the 
 date,  time  and  type  of  public  service  announcements  they  air.  69 
 To  facilitate  broadcaster  compliance  and  public  review,  the  Commission  should  create  a 
 public  service  form  that  is  both  easy  to  complete  and  easy  to  read.  Standard,  computerized  forms 


 66  See  Appendix  at  D-  3a. 
 61  &g  Brian  Savoie,  Summary  of  Web  Activity  of  Television  Stations  (visited  Jan.  26,  2000) 
 4ttp:  llwww.  nab.  o  rgiResearcblwebbriefs/  WebActiv.  html> 
 68  NO1  at  y16. 


 69  See  Appendix  D-  3b. 


 -29- 
33
 listing  employment,  public  service  programs,  etc,  should  be  administratively  simple,  much 
 simpler  than  the  standard  commercial  logs  station  administrative  support  complete  every  day. 
 As  indicated  above,  several  members  of  People  for  Better  TV  reviewed  public  files  at  stations 
 across  the  country  and  the  most  consistent  finding  is  the  lack  of  consistency  and  uniformity  about 
 what  is  in  the  files,  even  within  the  same  community.  Chicago  Commissioner  Shiela  Lyne 
 attached  a  summary  of  visits  to  television  stations  which  notes: 
 At  three  out  of  five  stations,  all  mail  was  placed  together,  no  matter  what  the  topic 
 was.  At  two  stations,  there  were  specific  violence  files  and  one  station,  WBN 
 which  was  visited  first,  kept  violence  files  separate,  stating  they  were  mandated  to 
 do  so  by  the  FCC.  No  other  station  had  known  about  that  mandate. 


 Professor  Rose  Economou  of  Columbia  College  in  Chicago  assigned  her  class  to  monitor 
 local  stations,  write  a  letter  to  each  station  about  what  they  saw,  and  visit  the  station  to  inspect 
 the  public  file  to  see,  among  other  things,  if  the  letters  they  wrote  were  placed  in  the  file.  Only 
 one  letter  was  found  at  one  Chicago  station  -  WPWR-  TV,  none  of  the  other  stations  had  the 
 student  letters  on  file.  Several  letters  from  her  class  are  attached.  As  Professor  Economou 
 reports:  the  state  of  the  public  file  is  in  jeopardy. 
 People  for  Better  TV  recommends  that  public  files  be  kept  current;  letters  and  e-  mail 
 received  should  be  placed  in  the  file  no  later  than  five  (5)  days  after  receipt.  Members  of  the 
 public  may  be  interested  to  know  whether  there  is  a  shared  sentiment  regarding  a  recent 
 community  issue  or  action  by  the  station.  Allowing  a  station  to  wait  until  an  issue  or  station 
 action  has  perhaps  become  moot  (or  until  after  an  FCC  inspection)  before  a  letter  is  placed  in  the 


 70  See  Appendix  at  D-  3a  for  both  Commissioner  Lynes  letter  and  the  letters  from  Professor 
 Economou  and  her  class. 


 -3o- 
34
 file  does  not  further  the  core  goal  of  the  public  file  obligation. 
 Digital  television  broadcasters  should  be  required  to  respond  to  community  needs  with 
 local  programming  services.  In  order  to  provide  responsive  programs,  broadcasters  should  be 
 required  to  consult  with  all  the  segments  of  the  community  they  are  licensed  to  serve.  And,  at  a 
 minimum,  the  public  files  should  be  current  and  the  public  should  have  much  easier  access  to  the 
 information  the  broadcasters  are  required  to  keep.  If  ascertainments  and  public  reporting  were 
 burdensome  fifteen  years  ago,  new  information  sharing  technologies  have  made  these 
 requirements  far  less  burdensome.  Unless  this  Commission  is  prepared  to  declare  the  public 
 interest  standard  a  promise  which  cannot  be  kept,  People  for  Better  TV  asserts  that  the  basic 
 triangle  of  this  standard  be  preserved  in  the  digital  age:  ascertaining  community  needs,  providing 
 programs  which  address  those  needs,  and  reporting  to  the  community  what  service  is  being 
 provided  should  be  considered  minimum  public  interest  requirements. 


 IV.  Enhancing  Access  to  the  Media 
 A.  The  Commission  Should  Ensure  that  Digital  Broadcasting  is  Accessible  to  All 
 Americans. 


 The  Commission  should  adopt  regulations  for  closed  captioning  and  video  description 
 that  ensure  that  all  disabled  individuals  have  access  to  digital  television.  People  for  Better  TV 
 has  attached  a  letter  signed  by  23  groups  representing  deaf  and  hard  of  hearing  people  which  sets 
 forth  our  position  that,  broadcasters  who  are  now  entering  the  digital  age  should  be  required  to 
 take  advantage  of  increased  bandwidth  as  well  as  other  emerging  features  of  digital  technologies 


 -31- 
35
 that  can  serve  to  enhance  access  to  digital  TV  for  all  Americans.  * 
 On  behalf  of  these  23  groups  and  other  viewers  with  disabilities,  People  for  Better  TV 
 offers  several  specific  proposals.  We  maintain  that  the  Commission  should  adopt  captioning 
 rules  that:  1)  enable  viewers  to  control  caption  styles  and  permit  decoding  and  processing  of 
 different  captioning  services;  2)  require  captioning  of  PSAs,  public  affairs  programming  and 
 political  discourse;  and  3)  require  real-  time  captioning  of  newscasts,  and  televised  information 
 about  disasters.  These  requirements  could  be  phased  in  over  the  first  four  years  of  a  stations 
 digital  broadcast,  but  should  be  completed  by  2006.  In  addition,  the  Commission  should  adopt 
 rules  governing  video  description  that:  1)  require  broadcasters  to  allocate  sufficient  audio 
 bandwidth  for  the  transmission  and  delivery  of  video  description;  2)  require  that  all  digital 
 television  receivers  support  simultaneous  multi-  channel  audio-  decoding  capability  so  that 
 descriptions  can  be  delivered  separately  from  a  programs  main  audio;  3)  establish  a  schedule  for 
 digital  broadcasters  to  begin  providing  video  description  for  their  programming. 
 Implementing  these  provisions  would  fulfill  Congressional  mandates,  and  would  not 
 unduly  burden  broadcasters.  In  Section  305  of  the  1996  Act,  Congress  stated  that  television  and 
 cable  programming  should  be  accessible  through  closed  captioning.  47  U.  S.  C.  9  613.  Similarly, 
 the  Television  Decoder  Circuitry  Act  requires  that  new  television  technologies  be  capable  of 
 transmitting  closed  captions.  72  The  expense  for  digital  broadcasters  of  complying  with  these 
 provisions  should  be  minimal.  Captioning  costs  are  expected  to  drop  as  demand  increases  and 
 captioning  technology  improves.  Furthermore,  digital  technology  offers  multiple  audio  channels 


 71 
 72 
 See  Appendix  at  C-  4. 


 See  Pub.  L.  101-  431,  104  Stat.  960  (1990)  (codified  at  47  U.  S.  C.  5303). 


 -32- 


   _  -  x  ,.  l_^.  _  .  ._-*^^_  I...  .  ,.  .-.  l----  ..-.-..  --.  ..-.---  I  1.-.  .__ 
36
 with  significantly  greater  bandwidth  that  can  easily  and  inexpensively  accommodate  video 
 descriptions.  Thus,  the  Commission  must  adopt  each  of  these  recommendations  to  ensure  that 
 the  benefits  of  digital  television  are  available  to  all. 
 The  Commission  should  also  ensure  that  disabled  individuals  have  access  to  ancillary 
 and  supplementary  services.  Such  a  policy  would  be  consistent  with  Section  255  of  the 
 Telecommunications  Act  of  1996  which  requires  providers  of  telecommunication  services  to 
 make  these  services  accessible  to  and  usable  by  individuals  with  disabilities,  if  readily 
 achievable.  73  The  FCC  should  work  with  other  regulatory  agencies  and  set  manufacturers  so 
 that  modifications  in  audio  channels,  decoders,  and  other  technical  areas  [are]  built  to  ensure  the 
 most  efficient,  inexpensive  and  innovative  capabilities  for  disability  access.  74  Moreover,  the 
 Commission  should  not  allow  broadcasters  to  implement  ancillary  and  supplementary  services  in 
 a  way  that  would  impinge  on  bandwidth  set  aside  for  captioning  or  video  descriptions. 
 Individuals  with  disabilities  should  have  every  opportunity  to  enjoy  the  benefits  of  the 
 development  of  digital  television. 
 People  for  Better  TV  has  found  that  individual  viewers  with  disabilities  are  concerned 
 about  their  ability  to  access  digital  television  services.  As  Julia  Zozaya,  a  blind  and  hearing 
 impaired  woman  from  Phoenix,  writes  in  her  attached  letter,  only  the  public  broadcasting  station 
 in  her  area  offers  video  description.  She  writes,  [  tlhis  means  that  I  cannot  enjoy  the  local  news, 
 weather,  or  any  of  the  community  or  public  affairs  programming  which  are  offered  by  the  other 
 stations.  Ms.  Zozaya  also  writes  that  she  wants  to  be  sure  that  the  [digital  television] 


 73 
 74 
 47  U.  S.  C.  9  255(  c). 


 See  Appendix  C-  4,  NAD  Letter  at  p.  6. 


 -33- 
37
 technology,  including  both  software  and  hardware  will  be  standardized  and  accessible  to  a11.  75 
 Only  by  requiring  digital  broadcasters  to  provide  equal  access  to  digital  television,  including 
 public  affairs,  political  programming  and  PSAs,  will  the  Commission  be  certain  that  all 
 Americans  can  participate  equally  in  the  democratic  process. 
 B.  Diversity 
 1.  DTV  Broadcasters  Should  Be  Required  to  Comply  with  the  FCCs 
 EEO  Rules. 


 People  for  Better  TV  urges  the  Commission,  largely  through  its  aforementioned 
 recommendations!  to  make  certain  that  digital  broadcasters  use  this  new  medium  to  serve  all 
 members  of  their  communities  of  license.  Moreover,  we  applaud  the  Commission  for  moving 
 forward  with  the  establishment  of  sensible  Equal  Employment  Opportunity  rules,  and  are  certain 
 that  these  new  rules  will  fully  apply  to  digital  broadcasters.  In  addition,  we  encourage  the 
 Commission  to  require  broadcasters  to  announce  all  the  stations  job  opportunities,  and  report  all 
 diversity  efforts,  whether  programming  or  employment,  in  the  stations  public  files  and  on  its 
 web  site. 
 2.  Under  the  People  for  Better  TV  Flexibility  Approach  Multicasting 
 Broadcasters  Could  Devote  Channel  Space  to  Underserved  Audiences. 


 The  Commission  seeks  comment  on  innovative  ways  unique  to  DTV  that  the 
 Commission  could  use  to  encourage  diversity  in  the  digital  era.  76  People  for  Better  TV 
 recommends  that,  in  consultation  with  their  local  communities,  digital  broadcasters  who 
 multiplex  could  be  provided  incentives,  such  as  an  abeyance  of  other  public  interest  obligations, 


 7s  See  Appendix  at  D-  4b. 
 76  NO1  at  133. 


 -34- 
38
 to  devote  channel  space  to  women,  minorities,  and  other  under  served  groups.  These  groups 
 could  use  this  channel  space  for  datacasting,  or  commercial  or  non-  commercial  programming. 
 As  the  League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens  suggests:  Digital  television  broadcasters  have 
 the  ability  to  send  much  more  information,  and  more  channels  than  standard  analog  broadcasts. 
 Why  not  use  that  ability  to  provide  more  service  to  a  more  diverse  audience?  Why  not  use  that 
 ability  to  put  on  programs  about  the  local  needs  and  interests  of  minority  communities  at  a  time 
 when  those  programs  can  be  seen?   
 3.  Disaster  Relief  Information  Should  be  Available  in  Multiple 
 Languages. 


 People  for  Better  TV  also  supports  LULACs  suggestion  that  all  broadcasters  be  required 
 to: 
 make  emergency  and  disaster  related  information  available  in  a  variety  of 
 languages  appropriate  to  the  communities  they  are  licensed  to  serve.  While 
 English  may  not  be  the  dominant  language,  for  many  immigrants,  English- 
 language  television  is  the  only  source  of  news,  weather,  and  emergency 
 information.  We  believe  that  broadcasters  could  reasonably  be  required  to  scroll 
 emergency  information  across  the  bottom  of  television  screens  which  would  help 
 to  alert  non-  English  speakers  of  life-  saving  instructions. 


 These  efforts  would  go  a  long  way  toward  ensuring  that  all  Americans  benefit  from  the 
 new  digital  television  service. 


 77 
 78 
 See  Appendix  at  C-  3. 


 Id. 


 -35- 
39
 V.  Conclusion 
 Most  Americans  do  not  know  that  their  local  broadcasters  are  given  free  licenses  by  the 
 federal  government  to  operate  in  the  public  interest  of  the  local  communities.  The  letters 
 attached  to  this  Comment  attest  to  the  general  anger  expressed  by  millions  of  Americans  about 
 the  lack  or  quality  of  coverage  of  important  local  issues,  or  programs  for  children,  or  service  to 
 the  disabled.  People  for  Better  TV  has  encouraged  citizens  across  the  country  to  read  the 
 Commissions  documents  on  the  relationship  between  broadcasters  and  the  public.  Citizens  have 
 visited  stations  and  monitored  local  programming.  And  they  have  submitted  comments  about 
 what  they  think  it  means  for  local  broadcasters  to  operate  in  the  public  interest.  We  trust  that  this 
 Commission  will  not  be  blind  to  the  concerns  expressed  in  those  petitions,  and  will  work  to 
 restore  the  public  interest  standard  so  the  public  might  recognize  that  it  is  in  operation. 
 There  are  many  important  philosophical  arguments  about  the  scarcity  rationale,  or  the 
 role  of  regulation  in  a  period  of  technological  transition,  or  the  degree  to  which  regulators  should 
 rely  upon  the  marketplace.  However,  Congress  tied  the  free  licensing  of  spectrum  to 
 broadcasters  on  the  condition  that  they  operate  in  the  public  interest.  This  Commission  is 
 obligated  to  say  what  that  means,  and  set  clear  public  interest  guidelines  for  digital  broadcasters. 
 We  commend  the  Commission  for  opening  this  Inquiry,  and  hope  that  it  will  stay  open  to 
 resolve  those  remaining  difficult  technical  issues  surrounding  this  evolving  technology.  We  also 
 repeat  the  request  we  set  out  in  June  1999:  the  time  for  a  rule  making  proceeding  on  the  public 
 interest  obligations  of  digital  broadcasters  is  overdue.  Federal  licensees  obligated  to  operate  in 
 the  public  interest  should  understand  their  obligations,  so  should  the  public. 


 -36- 
40
 Respectfully  Submitted, 
 People  for  Better  TV 
 8  18  1  Sth  Street,  NW 
 Suite  505 
 Washington,  DC  20006 


 Of  Counsel: 
 Randi  M.  Albert 
 Howard  M.  Squadron  Program  in  Law,  Media  &  Society 
 Benjamin  N.  Cardozo  School  of  Law 
 Yeshiva  University 
 55  Fifth  Avenue 
 New  York,  NY  10003 
 (2  12)  790-  0402 


 March  27,  2000 


 -37- 
41
 APPENDIX 
 List  of  People  for  Better  TV  Members  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  Tab  A 
 Supporting  Analysis  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ..  TabB 
 Market  Conditions  and  Public  Affairs  Programming: 
 Implications  for  Digital  Television  Policy,  Philip  Napoli,  Ph.  D., 
 Benton  Foundation,  March  2000  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  B-  l 


 A  Methodological  Evaluation  of  the  NAB  report  entitled 
 A  National  Report  on  the  Broadcast  Industrys  Community  Service 
 (April  1998),  Project  on  Media  Ownership,  January  2000  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  B-  2 


 Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates,  Findings  from  a  National  Survey, 
 People  for  Better  TV/  Project  on  Media  Ownership,  May  1999  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  B-  3 


 MajorComments  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ..  Tab  C 
 Children  Now,  Comments,  March  27,200O  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  C-  l 
 Consumer  Federation  of  America,  Comments,  March  27,200O  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  C-  2 
 League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens,  Comments,  March  27,200O  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  C-  3 
 National  Association  of  the  Deaf,  October  1999  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  C-  4 
 Additional  Comments  and  Letters  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  Tab  D 
 Northeast 
 Massachusetts  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  D-  la 
 Newyork...................................................  D-  lb 


 Southeast 
 Georgia.....................................................  D-  2a 
 South  Carolina  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  D-  2b 


 Midwest 
 Illinois  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  D-  3a 
 Michigan  ,..........,.......................................  D-  3b 


 Southwest 
 Texas  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  D-  4a 
 Arizona.....................................................  D-  4b 


 California 
 LosAngeles  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  D-  5a 
 SanFrancisco................................................  D-  5b 


 ..__  ,.  _-~  -._.-  --_._  I_  .--  __. 
42

43
 People  for  Better  TV 
 Members 
 3/  30/  2000 


 Steering  Grout, 
 Children  Now 
 Civil  Rights  Forum  on  Communications  Policy 
 Communications  Workers  of  America 
 Consumer  Federation  of  America 
 League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens 
 National  Association  of  the  Deaf 
 National  Organization  for  Women 
 National  Urban  League 
 Project  on  Media  Ownership 
 U.  S.  Catholic  Conference 


 Other  Coalition  Members 
 American  Academy  of  Child  and  Adolescent  Psychiatry 
 American  Academy  of  Pediatrics 
 American  Documentary 
 American  Foundation  for  the  Blind 
 American  Society  for  Deaf  Children 
 A.  Philip  Randolph  Institute 
 Appalshop 
 Arizona  Consumers  Council 
 Association  of  Independent  Video  and  Filmmakers 
 Benton  Foundation 
 Branch  County  -NOW 
 Bridge  the  Gap  -  Family  Day  Care  Network 
 Carolina  Peace  Resource  Center 
 Center  for  Information,  Technology,  and  Society 
 Chicago  Access  Corporation 
 Chicago  Media  Watch 
 Childserv 
 Christian  Communication  Council  of  Metropolitan  Detroit  Churches 
 Chinese  for  Affirmative  Action 
 Citizens  for  Independent  Public  Broadcasting 
 Citizens  Media  Corps 
 Cobb  County  -NOW 
 Columbia  Consumer  Education  Council 
44
 Community  Technology  Centers  Network 
 Conference  of  Educational  Administrators  of  Schools  and  Programs  for  the  Deaf 
 Consumer  Action 
 Cultural  Environment  Movement 
 Deaf  Entertainment  Foundation 
 Fairness  and  Accuracy  in  Reporting 
 Globalvision 
 Global  Ministries  United  Methodist  Church 
 Green  Party  of  Metro  Detroit 
 Interfaith  Broadcasting  Commission 
 Harlem  Consumer  Education  Council,  Inc. 
 Houston-  Media  Source 
 Illinois  Campaign  for  Political  Reform 
 Illinois  Public  Interest  Research  Group 
 Intemews 
 Intemews  Interactive 
 Kartemquin  Films  Ltd. 
 Labor  Council  for  Latin  American  Advancement 
 Latin0  Public  Broadcasting 
 League  of  Women  Voters  -  Los  Angeles 
 Libraries  for  the  Future 
 Loka  Institute 
 LULAC-  Houston  District 
 MADD-  Wayne  County  Michigan  Chapter 
 Massachusetts  Consumers  Coalition 
 Media  Education  Foundation 
 Mediascope 
 Metropolitan  Christian  Council:  Detroit-  Windsor 
 Mexican  American  Legal  Defense  and  Educational  Fund  (MALDEF) 
 Michigan  Association  of  Retired  School  Personnel 
 Michigan  Consumer  Federation 
 Michigan  Institute  for  Nonviolence  Education 
 Multicultural  Collaborative 
 NAACP 
 National  Institute  on  Media  and  the  Family 
 National  Association  of  the  Deaf 
 National  Association  of  Latin0  Elected  Officials  (NALEO) 
 National  Capital  Area  Trade  Union  Retirees 
 National  Council  of  Churches 
 National  Council  on  Alcoholism  and  Drug  Dependence,  Greater  Detroit  Area 
 National  Hook-  Up  of  Black  Women,  Inc 
 National  Indian  Telecommunications  Institute 
 National  Puerto  Rican  Coalition 
 NOW-  Boston 
 NOW-  California  Action  Center 


 ._  _  .  __,  _  l,-.  -.    .---.  _...  __._.  I.  -1-_--  1.  .  ..- 
45
 NOW  -  Montgomery  County 
 NOW-  New  York  City 
 NOW-  Western  Wayne  County  Chapter 
 NOW-  University  of  Michigan  Campus  Group 
 New  California  Media 
 Nuestra  Palabra:  Latin0  Writers  Having  Their  Say 
 OMB  Watch 
 Pacific  News  Service 
 Pontiac  Area  Urban  League 
 Prevention  Coalition  of  Southeast  Michigan  (PREVCO) 
 Rocky  Mountain  Media  Watch 
 Self  Help  for  Hard  of  Hearing  People 
 Service  Employees  International  Union  -  Local  46 
 Southern  Rural  Development  Initiative 
 Talenton  Bilingue  de  Houston 
 Telecommunications  for  the  Deaf,  Inc. 
 Womens  Institute  for  Freedom  of  the  Press 
 Working  In  The  Schools 
 WWNews 
 Youth  Connection 


 .  ,_  .D  _  ^  -.___.  -_-  I__  IIIx_.  . 
46

47
 Market  Conditions  and 
 Public  Affairs  Programming: 
 Implications  for  Digital  Television  Policy, 
 Philip  Napoli,  Ph.  D., 
 Benton  Foundation,  March  2000 


 A  Methodological  Evaluation  of 
 the  NAB  report  entitled: 
 A  National  Report  on  the  Broadcast 
 Industrys  Community  Service, 
 Project  on  Media  Ownership,  January  2000 


 Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates, 
 Findings  from  a  National  Survey, 
 People  for  Better  TV  & 
 Project  on  Media  Ownership, 
 May  1999 
48

49
 Market  Conditions  and  Public  Affairs  Programming:  Implications  for  Digital  Television  Policy 
 A  report  prepared  for 
 FOUNDATION 
 BY  Philip  M.  Napoli,  Ph.  D. 
 Graduate  School  of  Business  Administration 
 Fordham  University 
 113  W.  60*  St. 
 New  York,  NY  10023 
 212-  636-  6196 


 pnaDoli6%  ordham,  edu 
50
 2 
 Executive  Summary 


 In  its  December  20*,  1999  Notice  of  Inauirv  in  the  Matter  of  Public  Interest  Oblirrations 
 of  Broadcast  Licensees,  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  asked,  Are  there  sufficient 
 marketplace  incentives  to  ensure  the  provision  of  programming  responsive  to  community  needs, 
 obviating  the  need  for  additional  requirements?  (Federal  Communications  Commission,  1999,  p. 
 29).  The  Commission  asked  this  question  within  the  context  of  inquiring  whether  specific  public 
 interest  programming  oblig  s  should  be  imposed  upon  digital  television  broadcasters. 
 on,  this  study  investigated  whether  marketplace  conditions  affect 
 the  provision  of  public  gramming  by  analog  television  broadcasters.  This  examination 
 of  the  relationship  bet  conditions  and  public  affairs  programming  in  the  analog 
 television  environment  can  pr  ide  insights  into  broadcasters  programming  practices  that  can 
 then  be  applied  to  the  issue  public  interest  programming  obligations  in  the  digital  realm.  The 
 central  research  question  is:  oes  competition  encourage  the  airing  of  public  affairs 
 programming? 
 vels  of  public  affairs  programming  across  a  random  sample  of 
 24  markets.  Next,  this  study  amined  a  random  sample  of  112  commercial  broadcast  stations  in 
 order  to  determine  whether,  en  accounting  for  station  characteristics  and  market  size  and 
 demographics,  competitive  ditions  affect  the  quantity  of  public  affairs  programming  provided. 
 In  order  to  conduct  these  an  ses,  the  broadcast  schedules  for  each  station  included  in  the  station 
 and/  or  market  samples  were  alyzed  for  the  two-  week  period  beginning  on  January  17    and 
 concluding  on  January  30*,  0.  This  study  analyzed  local  public  affairs  programming  alone,  as 
 rs  programming  combined. 
51
 3 
 The  primary  results  of  these  analyses  were  as  follows: 


 l  Within  the  24  markets  studied,  there  was  an  average  of  6.52  hours  of  local  public  affairs 
 programming  per  market  during  the  two-  week  time  period,  and  an  average  of  1.1  hours 
 per  commercial  station. 


 l  0.3  percent  of  the  total  commercial  broadcast  time  within  these  markets  was  devoted  to 
 local  public  affairs  programming. 


 l  When  local  and  non-  local  public  affairs  programming  were  analyzed  together,  the 
 average  hours  of  public  affairs  programming  per  market  increased  to  21.2  (3.59  hours 
 per  station)  during  the  two-  week  time  period. 


 l  1.06  percent  of  the  total  commercial  broadcast  time  within  the  studied  markets  was 
 devoted  to  local  and  non-  local  public  affairs  programming. 


 l  Competitive  conditions,  market  demographics,  and  station  characteristics  had  no 
 significant  effect  on  the  quantity  of  local  public  affairs  programming  provided  by 
 individual  broadcast  stations. 


 l  Competitive  conditions  were  significantly  related  to  the  provision  of  local  and  non-  local 
 public  affairs  programming  combined.  Specifically,  there  was  a  significant  positive 
 relationship  between  the  number  of  commercial  broadcast  stations  in  a  market  and  the 
 amount  of  public  affairs  programming  that  a  station  provides.  The  moderate  level  of 
 explained  variation  (less  than  25  percent),  however,  suggests  that  public  affairs 
 programming  decisions  are  quite  resistant  to  market  conditions. 


 Overall,  the  results  of  this  study  suggest  that  broadcasters  generally  devote  a  very  small 
 fraction  of  their  broadcast  time  to  public  affairs  programming,  and  that  marketplace  incentives  do 
 not  effectively  motivate  the  provision  of  such  programming,  particularly  in  terms  of  locally 
 produced  public  affairs  programming. 
52
 4 
 Introduction 


 In  its  December  20tih,  1999  Notice  of  Inauirv  in  the  Matter  of  Public  Interest  Obligations 
 of  Broadcast  Licensees,  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  asked,  Are  there  sufficient 
 marketplace  incentives  to  ensure  the  provision  of  programming  responsive  to  community  needs, 
 obviating  the  need  for  additional  requirements?  (Federal  Communications  Commission,  1999,  p. 
 29).  The  Commission  asked  this  question  within  the  context  of  inquiring  whether  specific  public 
 interest  programming  obligations  should  be  imposed  upon  digital  television  broadcasters. 
 One  traditionally  prominent  aspect  of  broadcasters  public  interest  obligations  has  been  the 
 provision  of  public  affairs  programming,  particularly  public  affairs  programming  produced  locally 
 and/  or  addressing  local  interests  and  concerns  (Federal  Communications  Commission,  1999).  The 
 Federal  Communications  Commission  has  defined  public  affairs  programming  as  programs 
 dealing  with  local,  state,  regional,  national  or  international  issues  or  problems,  documentaries, 
 mini-  documentaries,  panels,  roundtables  and  vignettes,  and  extended  coverage  (whether  live  or 
 recorded)  of  public  events  or  proceedings,  such  as  local  council  meetings,  congressional  hearings 
 and  the  like  (Federal  Communications  Commission,  1984,  p.  172).  The  Commission 
 traditionally  has  differentiated  public  affairs  programs  from  news  programs,  which  the 
 Commission  has  defined  as  reports  dealing  with  current  local,  national  and  international  events, 
 including  weather  and  stock  market  reports,  and  commentary,  analysis,  or  sports  news  when  they 


 are  an  integral  part  of  a  news  program  (Federal  Communications  Commission,  1984,  pp.  171- 
 172). 
 This  study  investigates  whether  marketplace  conditions  affect  the  provision  of  public 
 affairs  programming  by  analog  television  broadcasters.  This  examination  of  the  relationship 


 ___..,  .-___-._-  -.  _  ____  ll--__  -^  I..-~~..  ..---  -- 
53
 5 
 between  market  conditions  and  public  affairs  programming  in  the  analog  television  environment 


 can  provide  insights  into  television  broadcasters  programming  practices  that  can  then  be  applied 
 to  the  issue  of  public  interest  programming  obligations  in  the  digital  realm.  The  central  research 
 question  is:  Does  competition  encourage  the  airing  of  public  affairs  programming?  If  the 
 provision  of  public  affairs  programming  is  responsive  to  market  conditions,  then  government 
 efforts  to  encourage  its  production  may  be  unnecessary.  If,  however,  the  provision  of  public 
 affairs  programming  is  not  responsive  to  market  conditions,  then  government  action  may  be 
 necessary  to  ensure  the  availability  of  such  programming. 
 Methodology 
 This  study  is  divided  into  two  sections.  The  first  section  presents  a  descriptive  analysis  of 
 public  affairs  programming  provided  by  commercial  television  stations  in  24  randomly  selected 
 Nielsen  television  markets.  These  24  markets  represent  approximately  ten  percent  of  the  211 
 television  markets  in  the  United  States.  These  markets  are  analyzed  in  terms  of  the  overall  levels 
 of  public  affairs  programming  available  across  markets  of  various  sizes.  The  second  section 
 examines  the  programming  patterns  of  individual  broadcast  stations.  This  section  involves  a 
 quantitative  analysis  of  the  determinants  of  the  quantity  of  public  affairs  programming  provided  by 
 a  random  sample  of  112  commercial  television  stations.    These  112  stations  represent 
 approximately  ten  percent  of  the  roughly  1,200  commercial  television  stations  licensed  in  the 
 United  States.  This  analysis  examines  whether  individual  station  characteristics,  market 


 demographic  factors,  and  competitive  conditions  affect  the  quantity  of  public  affairs  programming 
 provided. 
 In  order  to  conduct  these  analyses,  the  broadcast  schedules  for  each  station  included  in  the 
54
 6 
 station  and/  or  market  samples  were  analyzed  for  the  two-  week  period  beginning  on  January  17 


 and  concluding  on  January  30,  2000.  This  two-  week  period  appears  reasonably  representative 
 of  a  typical  two-  week  broadcast  period.  This  period  represents  the  heart  of  network  broadcasting 
 season  (which  runs  roughly  from  September  through  May).  In  addition,  none  of  the  14  days 
 studied  falls  into  any  of  the  four  one-  month  sweeps  periods,  in  which  programming  strategies 
 and  practices  typically  deviate  from  the  norm  in  an  effort  to  boost  ratings.  During  sweeps 
 periods,  it  is  more  likely  that  public  affairs  programming  will  be  preempted  (Moonves,  1998). 
 Given  that  sweeps  periods  comprise  a  till  third  of  the  broadcast  year  and  that  no  sweeps  days  are 
 included  in  the  time  period  studied,  however,  it  is  possible  that  this  data  set  overestimates  the 
 amount  of  public  affairs  programming  that  would  be  found  if  14  days  were  randomly  sampled 
 throughout  the  year.  2 
 A  second  possible  bias  to  this  data  set  is  the  selected  time  periods  proximity  to 
 presidential  primaries.  This  factor  also  may  artificially  inflate  the  quantity  of  public  affairs 
 programming  presented.  An  examination  of  the  data  gathered,  however,  revealed  very  few 
 programs  devoted  specifically  to  the  presidential  campaign.  Moreover,  only  one  sampled  market 
 (Boston)  was  in  close  proximity  to  either  of  the  states  (Iowa  and  New  Hampshire)  that  held  a 
 caucus  or  primary  election  close  to  the  studied  time  period.  In  sum,  the  time  period  studied  is 
 likely  to  be  very  representative  of  typical  commercial  broadcaster  behavior. 
 For  the  24-  market  analysis,  a  list  of  all  commercial  television  stations  located  in  each  of 


 the  24  randomly  sampled  markets  was  compiled  using  the  third  edition  of  the  1999  Investiw  in 
 Television  Market  Reuort.,  published  four  times  a  year  by  BIA  Research.  The  Investing  in 
 Television  Market  Renort  (1999)  provides  the  city/  town  of  license  for  each  station  designated  as 
55
 7 
 falling  within  the  Nielsen  Designated  Market  Area.  The  appropriate  zip  codes  were  then  obtained 


 through  the  U.  S.  Postal  Services  web  site  (BWW.  US~  S~). 
 The  next  step  required  obtaining  program  schedules  for  each  of  the  commercial  broadcast 
 stations.  This  was  accomplished  using  ClickTV  (  .ckktv.  c@  a  national  television 
 schedule  database  provided  by  TV  Data,  one  of  the  nations  leading  providers  of  television 
 program  schedule  information  (see  m.  tvdata.  com).  ClickTV  provides  zip  code-  based 
 searching  of  broadcast,  cable,  and  satellite  television  schedules.  The  ClickTV  database  covers  24 
 hours  per  day  and  encompasses  programs  as  short  as  15  minutes  in  length.  The  relevant  station 
 zip  codes  were  entered  in  order  to  produce  the  corresponding  program  schedules  for  the  two- 
 week  time  period.  3 
 These  program  schedules  were  then  keyword-  searched,  using  the  term  public  affairs. 
 Public  affairs  is  one  of  the  program  type  designations  used  by  ClickTV  to  identify  programs.  It 
 is  important  to  note  that  the  public  affairs  program  type  designation  is  not  only  used 
 independently,  but  also  in  conjunction  with  other  program  type  designations  (e.  g.,  public 
 affairs/  legal  or  public  affairs/  community).  Thus,  it  is  unlikely  that  a  keyword  search  using  the 
 public  affairs  terminology  failed  to  produce  scheduled  public  affairs  programs.  Indeed, 
 preliminary  exploration  of  the  ClickTV  database  produced  no  instances  in  which  related  program 
 categories,  such  as  community  or  legal  were  used  without  being  linked  with  the  public 
 affairs  category.  In  addition,  exploration  of  the  database  produced  no  instances  in  which 
 programs  clearly  representative  of  the  public  affairs  category  were  classified  under  a  different 
 program  type.  There  were,  however,  instances  in  which  programs  that  did  not  meet  the  FCCs 
 criteria  for  public  affairs  programming  (described  above)  were  classified  as  such  (primarily 
56
 8 
 religious  and  agricultural  programs).  These  programs  were  excluded  from  the  data  set. 
 The  ClickTV  listings  contained  the  following  information  about  the  programs:  (a)  time  of 
 broadcast;  (b)  station  call  letters/  channel;  (c)  program  length  (in  minutes);  and  (d)  brief 
 descriptive  information.  In  those  instances  in  which  a  program  could  not  easily  be  confirmed  by 
 its  title  and/  or  description  as  a  public  affairs  program,  the  station  was  contacted  via  telephone  or 
 e-  mail,  or  the  stations  web  site  was  consulted,  in  order  to  make  a  final  determination  as  to 


 whether  the  program  was  appropriately  classified  as  a  public  affairs  program.  In  each  of  these 
 cases,  deference  was  given  to  the  programmers  own  interpretations  of  whether  or  not  the 
 program  was  appropriately  categorized  as  a  public  affairs  program. 
 Although  locally  produced  public  affairs  programs  have  often  been  the  focus  of 
 communications  policymakers,  this  study  also  approached  public  affairs  programs  more  broadly, 
 given  that,  in  many  instances,  local  programmers  import  public  affairs  programming  from  outside 
 their  market  in  an  effort  to  appeal  to  particular  audience  segments  within  their  community  (e.  g., 
 importing  foreign-  language  public  affairs  programs,  or  senior  citizen-  focused  public  affairs 
 programs).  As  policymakers  have  noted  on  occasion,  localism  need  not  be  expressed  purely  in 
 terms  of  geography.  Localism  can  also  be  expressed  in  terms  of  shared  cultural  values  or  interests 
 (see  Napoli,  in  press,  Chapter  Nine).  Moreover,  many  public  affairs  programs  are  national 
 network  programs  (e.  g.,  Meet  the  Press,    Nightline)  or  are  nationally  syndicated  programs 
 (e.  g.,  Americas  Black  Forum).  Consequently,  the  analyses  that  follow  examine  both  locally 
 produced  public  affairs  programming  and  public  affairs  programming  in  its  entirety  (local  and  non- 
 local  public  affairs  programming  combined).  The  television  stations  or  their  web  sites  were 
 consulted  when  necessary  to  clarity  any  instances  in  which  it  was  unclear  from  a  programs 
57
 9 
 description  as  to  whether  or  not  the  program  was  a  bl  public  affairs  program  (i.  e.,  produced 


 within  the  market  area). 
 Market  Analvsis 
 The  sampled  markets  ranged  in  their  rankings  from  number  two  (Los  Angeles)  to  number 
 200  (Bend,  Oregon).  They  ranged  in  size  from  40,000  television  households  to  over  five  million 
 television  households.  These  markets  contained  a  total  of  142  commercial  television  stations. 
 The  individual  markets  contained  from  one  to  19  commercial  television  stations.  These  markets 
 had  an  average  household  income  of  over  42  thousand  dollars  and  an  average  cable  penetration  of 
 approximately  68  percent,  Both  of  these  averages  correspond  very  closely  to  national  average 
 figures,  which  provides  a  strong  indication  of  the  representativeness  of  the  sample. 
 Descriptive  information  for  the  sampled  markets  is  provided  in  Table  One.  As  the  table 
 indicates,  a  total  of  156.49  hours  of  local  public  affairs  programming  was  presented  during  the 
 two-  week  period.  This  averaged  out  to  6.52  hours  per  market  and  1.1  hours  per  commercial 
 station  (156.5  hours/  l42  stations).  These  156.5  hours  represent  0.3  percent  of  the  total  broadcast 
 hours  studied  (14  days  x  24  hours  x  142  stations).  This  percentage  corresponds  closely  to 
 previous  research  that  focused  on  local  public  affairs  programming  (Benton  Foundation,  1998). 
 The  amount  of  all  forms  of  public  affairs  programming  (local  and  non-  local)  totaled  509  hours,  for 
 an  average  of  2  1.2  hours  per  market  and  3.59  hours  per  station.  These  509  hours  represent  1.06 
 percent  of  the  total  broadcast  hours  studied. 


 Table  Two  provides  a  market-  by-  market  breakdown  of  public  affairs  programming  hours. 
 This  table  lists  the  hours  of  local  and  total  (local  +  non-  local)  public  affairs  programming  in  each 
 of  the  markets  studied  (columns  2  and  5).  As  the  table  indicates,  Los  Angeles  contained  the 


 --  ll___  ll_--.--  l.  -. 
58
 10 
 greatest  amount  of  public  affairs  programming  (in  terms  of  both  local  and  total  public  affairs 


 programming).  A  number  of  the  smaller  markets  (e.  g.,  Topeka,  KS,  Watertown,  NY,  Marquette, 
 MI)  contained  no  local  public  affairs  programming,  Columns  3  and  6  represent  the  percentage  of 
 the  total  available  broadcast  hours  (expressed  as  24  hrs.  x  14  days  x  N  stations  in  the  market) 
 accounted  for  by  each  of  these  program  categories.  These  numbers  provide  an  indication  of  the 
 overall  amount  of  broadcast  time  devoted  to  public  affairs  programming.  As  the  table  indicates, 
 the  Joplin,  MO/  Pittsburg,  KS  market  contained  the  highest  percentage  of  total  broadcast  time 
 (1.69  percent)  devoted  to  local  public  affairs.  The  JoplinPittsburg  measure  is  significantly  higher 
 than  the  norm  because  the  JoplinBittsburg  market  contains  a  relatively  small  number  of 
 commercial  television  stations  (three),  but  one  or  more  of  these  stations  devotes  a  larger  than 
 average  amount  of  time  to  local  public  affairs  programming. 
 Finally,  in  columns  4  and  7  the  hours  of  local  and  total  public  affairs  programming 
 presented  in  each  market  are  divided  by  the  number  of  commercial  television  stations  in  the 
 market  in  order  illustrate  the  average  hours  of  public  affairs  programming  ger  station  in  each 
 market.  Markets  with  the  highest  per  station  averages  for  local  public  affairs  programming  are 
 JoplinPittsburg  (5.67  hrs./  station),  Los  Angeles,  (2.48  h&  station),  and  Flint,  MI  (2.00 
 hrs./  station).  The  lowest-  ranking  markets  in  this  category  include  Topeka,  KS,  Watertown  NY, 
 and  Marquette,  MI  (all  with  zero  hours/  station),  as  well  as  Savannah,  GA  and  Lansing,  MI  (.  20 
 hrs./  station).  In  terms  of  total  public  affairs  programming  (local  +  non-  local),  the  best  performing 
 markets  were  JoplinPittsburg  (8.67  h&  station),  Tampa,  FL  (5.54  hrs./  station)  and  Salisbury, 
 MD  (5.00  hrs./  station).  Low  ranking  markets  included  Mankato,  MN,  (1.00  his/  station), 
 Houston,  TX  (2.03  h&  station),  and  Reno,  NV  (2.28  h&  station). 
59
 11 
 The  central  research  question  of  this  study  was  whether  the  quantity  of  public  affairs 


 programming  varies  according  to  market  conditions.  Figure  One  is  a  graph  of  the  total  hours  of 
 local  public  affairs  programming  available  in  each  market  during  the  two-  week  period  studied.  As 
 the  graph  indicates,  there  is  a  general  pattern  of  greater  availability  of  local  public  affairs 
 programming  in  larger  markets  (JoplinPittsburg  being  the  visibly  notable  exception).  When  total 
 hours  of  combined  local  and  non-  local  public  affairs  programming  are  graphed  across  markets 
 (see  Figure  Two),  a  similar  pattern  emerges,  with  larger  markets  generally  offering  more  total 
 hours  of  public  affairs  programming. 
 Table  Three  presents  a  means  comparison  between  top  100  markets  in  the  sample  and 
 markets  outside  the  top  100.  As  the  table  indicates,  in  terms  of  local  public  affairs  programming, 
 and  in  terms  of  total  public  affairs  programming  (local  +  non-  local),  there  are  significant 
 differences  in  the  mean  hours  of  programming  between  markets  within  and  outside  the  top  100 
 (local:  F  =  3.53;  Q  <  .lO;  total:  F  =  7.53;  p  <  .05).  These  results  are  not  surprising  given  that 
 larger  markets  generally  have  more  commercial  television  stations.  Thus,  viewers  in  larger 
 markets  will  generally  experience  a  greater  availability  of  public  affairs  programming. 
 These  analyses  do  not,  however,  provide  a  direct  indication  of  the  behavior  of  individual 
 stations  within  these  markets.  That  is,  how  do  market  conditions  affect  the  amount  of  public 
 affairs  programming  provided  by  individual  stations?  A  key  question  raised  by  the  FCCs  Notice 
 of  Inauirv  is  whether  market  conditions  are  sufficient  to  promote  the  airing  of  public  affairs 
 programming  (Federal  Communications  Commission,  1999).  Certainly  larger  markets  will  likely 
 have  more  aggregate  hours  of  public  affairs  programming  than  smaller  markets,  due  to  the 
 increased  number  of  broadcast  stations,  However,  such  a  pattern  tells  us  little  about  how  market 


 -.  I.  _  l__  l..  .  ...----_.-  .  .  ..--  l_______  l____.  l___-  _--_^__  C.-- 
60
 12 
 conditions  affect  the  programming  decisions  of  individual  broadcast  stations. 


 In  a  first  step  toward  investigating  this  issue,  Figure  Three  provides  a  graph  of  the  mean 
 hours  of  local  public  affairs  programming  ger  station,  according  to  market  size.  As  the  figure 
 indicates,  there  does  not  appear  to  be  a  very  strong  relationship  between  market  size  and  the 
 hours  of  local  public  affairs  programming  (although  there  does  appear  to  be  a  slight  tendency 
 toward  more  local  public  affairs  hours  per  station  in  larger  markets).  There  is  less  indication  of 
 any  pattern  when  local  and  non-  local  public  affairs  hours  are  combined  and  graphed  against 
 market  size  (see  Figure  Four).  These  results  suggest  that  market  size  and,  by  association,  the 
 level  of  market  competitioq4  may  not  be  significant  factors  affecting  the  public  affairs 
 programming  decisions  of  commercial  broadcast  stations. 


 In  order  to  investigate  this  issue  more  thoroughly  it  is  necessary  to  look  beyond  markets 
 as  the  unit  of  analysis  and  examine  the  behavior  of  individual  stations.  In  order  to  do  so,  a 
 random  sample  of  112  commercial  broadcast  television  stations  was  generated  and  analyzed.  5 
 The  same  procedure  that  was  used  to  gather  program  and  market  information  in  the  market 
 sample  was  used  to  gather  information  for  the  station  sample;  however,  additional  market  and 
 station  data  were  incorporated  from  BIAs  (1999)  Investing;  in  Television  Market  Renort.  This 
 data  set  includes  information  on  the  size  (in  terms  of  television  households),  average  annual 
 household  income,  and  minority  population6  of  each  stations  market.  This  information  was 
 gathered  in  order  to  account  for  the  possibility  that  the  size  and  wealth  of  a  stations  market  affect 
 the  amount  of  public  affairs  programming  a  station  provides  (see  Federal  Communications 
 Commission,  1984,  Appendix  C),  as  well  as  for  the  possibility  that  minority  populations  factor 


 I_  .  ._-.^-_    .^  I  .._  .._.  _  __--  ^1.-..  1_________  _.  __,.---- 
61
 13 
 into  public  affairs  programming  decisions.  Larger  audience  bases  may  translate  into  a  greater 


 diversity  of  viewer  interests,  and  hence,  more  public  affairs  programming.  Wealthier  markets  may 
 also  be  markets  with  higher  average  education  levels,  which  may  translate  into  greater  viewer 
 demand  for  public  affairs  programming.  Finally,  larger  minority  populations  may  translate  into 
 more  public  affairs  programming  given  that  many  programs  labeled  as  public  affairs  programs 
 are  specifically  oriented  toward  minority  audiences  and  concerns  (e.  g.,  Americas  Black 
 Forum). 
 Information  was  also  gathered  on  the  competitive  conditions  in  each  stations  market 
 (e.  g.,  cable  penetration,  number  of  public  television  stations,  number  of  commercial  television 
 stations).  These  measures  were  obtained  in  order  to  test  whether  the  intensity  of  competition  for 
 television  audiences  affects  the  levels  of  public  affairs  programming  that  commercial  broadcasters 
 provide.  For  instance,  greater  presence  of  cable  or  public  television  may  discourage  commercial 
 broadcasters  from  airing  public  affairs  programming  due  to  its  availability  via  these  alternative 
 outlets,  or  it  may  encourage  public  affairs  programming  if  broadcasters  elect  to  compete  with 
 cable  and  public  television  for  public  affairs  viewers.  Greater  numbers  of  commercial 
 broadcasters  in  the  market  may  have  similar  affects  on  the  programming  decisions  of  individual 
 broadcasters. 
 Finally,  information  on  individual  station  characteristics  (e.  g.,  estimated  annual  revenues7 
 VHF  or  UHF,  network  affiliation),  was  gathered  in  an  effort  to  account  for  additional  potential 
 explanatory  factors  for  variation  in  the  quantity  of  public  affairs  programming.  For  instance, 
 network  affiliates  may  be  less  inclined  to  air  local  public  affairs  programming  due  to  the  quantity 
 of  broadcast  time  they  defer  to  the  networks.  On  the  other  hand,  network  affiliates  may  air  more 
62
 14 
 non-  local  public  affairs  programming  due  to  their  commitment  to  airing  network-  produced  public 


 affairs  programming  such  as  Nightline  and  Meet  the  Press.  Similarly,  revenues  may  factor 
 into  a  stations  decision  to  produce  public  affairs  programming,  with  wealthier  stations  perhaps 
 more  likely  to  incur  the  expense  of  producing  local  public  affairs  programming  (Federal 
 Communications  Commission,  1994,  Appendix  C).  It  is  important  to  emphasize,  however,  that 
 given  the  lack  of  previous  research  on  this  subject,  8  no  specific  hypotheses  have  been  formulated 
 regarding  the  relationships  between  the  independent  and  dependent  variables. 
 Overall,  this  sample  of  112  stations  included  stations  from  83  of  the  211  television 
 markets.  As  Table  Four  indicates,  eighty-  four  of  these  stations  (75  percent  of  the  sample)  are 
 affiliates  of  one  of  the  Big  Four  broadcast  networks  (ABC,  NBC,  CBS,  FOX).  Twenty-  four 
 stations  (2  1.4  percent  of  the  sample)  are  affiliated  with  one  of  the  three  smaller  networks  (WB, 
 UPN,  PAX).  The  remaining  four  stations  (3.5  percent  of  the  sample)  are  not  affiliated  with  any  of 
 these  networks.  The  VHF-  UHF  split  is  50.9  percent  UHF  and  49.1  percent  VHF. 
 These  112  stations  aired  a  total  of  118.8  hours  of  local  public  affairs  programming  during 
 the  time  period  studied.  These  118.8  hours  represent  0.3  percent  of  the  total  broadcast  hours 
 studied  (14  days  x  24  hrs.  x  112  stations)  and  an  average  of  1.06  hours  per  station.  The  sampled 
 stations  aired  a  total  of  409.46  hours  of  all  forms  of  public  affairs  programming  (local  +  non- 
 local).  These  409.46  hours  represent  1.09  percent  of  the  total  broadcast  hours  studied  and  an 
 average  of  3.66  hours  per  station.  These  percentages  and  averages  correspond  very  closely  with 
 those  obtained  for  the  market  analysis  (see  above). 
 Local  Public  Affairs  Proaramminq 
 Table  Five  presents  the  results  of  a  regression  analysis  with  local  public  affairs  hours  as  the 
63
 15 
 dependent  variable.  As  the  table  indicates,  the  adjusted  R2  for  this  model  is  .03  (p  >  .05).  9 


 Among  the  independent  variables,  only  the  total  number  of  commercial  television  stations  in  the 
 market  was  significant  at  the  .05  level  (beta  =  .3  7;  g  <  .05),  lo  though  of  course  the  low  R2 
 indicates  that  this  relationship  is  so  weak  as  to  be  of  no  practical  significance.  The  remaining 
 competitive  conditions  indicators  (cable  penetration  and  the  number  of  public  television  stations  in 
 the  market)  exhibited  very  weak  relationships  with  the  dependent  variable.  Neither  of  these 
 variables  was  significant  at  the  .05  level, 
 Overall,  these  results  conform  with  the  observations  made  in  the  market-  level  analysis  -- 
 that  although  larger  markets  provide  a  greater  aggregate  amount  of  local  public  affairs 
 programming,  individual  stations  do  not  respond  to  increasingly  competitive  market  conditions  by 
 producing  more  local  public  affairs  programming.  Nor,  for  that  matter,  do  they  respond  by 
 reducing  the  amount  of  local  public  affairs  programming  they  provide.  Instead,  public  affairs 
 programming  appears  to  be  unaffected  by  competitive  conditions.  The  results  also  suggest  that 
 local  public  affairs  programming  is  not  a  function  of  the  size  or  demographic  characteristics  of  the 
 potential  audience,  nor  is  it  a  function  of  the  basic  attributes  of  the  broadcast  station.  Thus,  the 
 provision  of  local  public  affairs  programming  appears  highly  resistant  to  economic  influences. 
 Total  Public  Affairs  Programming  (Local  +  Non-  Local) 
 A  slightly  different  picture  emerges,  however,  when  public  affairs  programming  is  defined 
 more  broadly  --  specifically,  in  terms  of  both  local  and  non-  local  public  affairs  programming. 


 Table  Six  presents  the  results  of  a  regression  analysis  with  total  (local  +  non-  local)  public  affairs 
 program  hours  as  the  dependent  variable.  As  the  table  indicates,  the  adjusted  R2  for  this  model  is 
 .23,  which  is  significant  at  the  .05  level  (p  =  .OO).  The  total  number  of  commercial  television 
64
 16 
 stations  is  significant  at  the  .05  level  (beta  =  .46;  g.  <  .05).  No  other  independent  variables  are 


 significant  at  the  .05  level,  although  the  Big  Four  affiliate  variable  is  significant  at  the  .  10  level 
 (beta  =  .29;  g  =  .07).  12  The  significant  positive  coefficient  for  the  number  of  commercial 
 television  stations  in  the  market  (beta  =  .46;  g  <  .05)  suggests  that  higher  numbers  of  competing 
 commercial  television  stations  will  compel  commercial  television  broadcasters  to  increase  the 
 amount  of  public  affairs  programming  they  provide.  Thus,  when  public  affairs  programming  is 
 defined  more  broadly  (to  include  local  and  non-  local  public  affairs  programs),  increased 
 competition  from  other  commercial  television  stations  does  have  a  modest  positive  effect  on  the 
 amount  of  public  affairs  programming  that  commercial  broadcasters  choose  to  air.  However,  the 
 fact  that  over  75  percent  of  the  variation  in  public  affairs  programming  remained  unexplained  by 
 the  model  suggests  that  public  affairs  programming  decisions  are  quite  resistant  to  marketplace 
 influences. 
 Conclusion 
 Overall,  these  results  provide  support  for  the  notion  that  market  incentives  may  not  be 
 sufficient  to  promote  the  provision  of  public  affairs  programming,  particularly  local  public  affairs 
 programming.  The  availability  of  local  public  affairs  programming  was  not  significantly  related  to 
 any  of  a  variety  of  market  and  station  characteristics.  Only  a  modest  relationship  was  found 
 between  competitive  conditions  (specifically,  the  number  of  commercial  television  stations)  and  all 
 forms  (local  +  non-  local)  of  public  affairs  programming.  It  is  possible  that  the  relationship 
 between  competitive  conditions  and  public  affairs  programming  is  stronger  within  the  context  of 
 all  forms  of  public  affairs  programming  than  within  the  context  of  local  public  affairs 
 programming  because  stations  are  more  likely  to  respond  to  competitive  pressures  (weak  as  they 
65
 17 
 may  be)  to  provide  public  affairs  programming  by  airing  cheaper  syndicated  fare,  rather  than 


 incurring  the  time  and  expense  of  producing  their  own  programming. 
 Previous  research,  which  studied,  in  the  aggregate,  a  broader  range  of  program  types 
 (news,  local  programming,  and  all  forms  of  public  affairs),  found  much  stronger  relationships 
 between  market  and  station  characteristics  and  the  amount  of  programming  provided  (Federal 
 Communication  Commission,  1984,  Appendix  C)  than  were  found  in  this  study,  in  which  only 
 public  affairs  programming  was  studied.  These  contrasting  results  suggest  that  public  affairs 
 programming,  in  particular,  may  be  resistant  to  variation  in  station  and  market  conditions. 
 As  policymakers  consider  whether  to  impose  specific  public  interest  programming 
 requirements  upon  digital  broadcasters,  the  results  presented  here  suggest  that,  at  least  in  terms  of 
 public  affairs  programming,  it  is  unlikely  that  market  incentives  will  promote  the  production  of 
 such  programming.  If  policymakers  desire  a  level  of  public  affairs  programming  in  digital 
 broadcasting  that  exceeds  the  levels  currently  available  in  the  analog  environment,  then  the 
 institution  of  specific  public  affairs  programming  obligations  may  be  necessary. 
 Of  course,  public  affairs  programming  represents  just  one  of  many  types  of  programming 
 that  have  traditionally  been  associated  with  serving  the  public  interest.  Other  types  of 
 programming,  such  as  news,  educational  childrens  programming,  and  public  service 
 announcements,  also  contribute  to  the  public  service  dimension  of  commercial  broadcasting.  The 
 results  presented  here  should  not  be  generalized  to  these  other  forms  of  public  interest 
 programming. 
66
 18 
 1.  Both  the  market  and  station  samples  were  generated  from  listings  in  the  third  edition  of  BIA 


 Researchs  (1999)  Investing  in  Television  Market  Reuort. 
 2.  Given  the  narrow  time  frame  between  the  release  of  the  Commissions  Notice  of  Inquiry  and 


 the  due  date  for  comments,  and  the  limited  availability  of  searchable  program  schedules  (see 
 endnote  three),  it  was  not  possible  to  study  a  sample  of  days  throughout  the  broadcast  year. 
 3.  A  maximum  time  period  of  two  weeks  is  available  on  the  ClickTV  database  at  any  given  time. 
 4.  In  the  sample  of  112  commercial  television  stations,  there  is  a  very  strong  positive  correlation 


 (I=  .77;  p  =  .OO)  between  the  number  of  television  households  in  a  market  and  the  number  of 
 commercial  television  stations  in  a  market.  There  is  also  a  strong  positive  correlation  (F  .62;  p  = 
 .OO)  between  the  number  of  television  households  in  a  market  and  the  number  of  public  television 
 stations  in  a  market.  These  correlations  suggest  that  larger  markets  generally  contain  more 
 competitors  for  television  audiences. 
 5.  This  additional  sample  was  generated  and  analyzed  due  to  the  fact  that  analyzing  the  individual 


 stations  contained  within  the  market  sample  would  not  produce  a  sample  of  stations  that  was 
 sufficiently  generalizable  to  the  population  of  television  stations. 
 6.  Minority  population  was  measured  by  adding  the  percent  Black,  percent  Asian,  and  percent 
 Spanish-  speaking  statistics  provided  in  the  Investing  in  Television  Market  Report  (BIA  Research, 
 1999). 
 7.  In  incorporating  station  revenues  as  an  independent  variable,  it  was  necessary  to  exclude  from 


 the  sample  those  stations  that  did  not  report  revenues  in  the  Investing  in  Television  Market 
 Report  (BIA  Research,  1999).  Only  stations  that  reported  revenues  were  included  in  the  study 
 due  to  the  fact  that  previous  research  suggests  that  station  revenues  may  be  an  important  factor  in 
67
 19 
 determining  programming  decisions  (Federal  Communications  Commission,  1984,  Appendix  C). 


 According  to  BIA  Research  (1999)  almost  80  percent  of  stations  surveyed  reported  their 
 revenues  (p.  6).  This  is  a  high  level  of  participation  that  alleviates  some  of  the  concerns  about 
 potential  non-  response  error  affecting  the  results. 
 8.  One  notable  exception  is  a  study  titled  An  Empirical  Study  of  the  Determinants  of  News  and 


 Public  Affairs  and  Local  Programming  Choices  of  Commercial  Broadcasters,  conducted  in 
 conjunction  with  the  FCCs  1984  decision  to  eliminate  specific  requirements  for  public  interest 
 programming  and  included  in  Appendix  C  of  that  decision  (Federal  Communications  Commission, 
 1984).  As  the  title  suggests,  this  study  examined  a  much  broader  range  of  program  types  than  the 
 analysis  presented  here. 
 9.  The  Durbin-  Watson  statistic  of  1.95  for  this  regression  indicates  no  serial  correlation  problem. 
 10.  Tolerance  statistics  and  correlation  coefficients  indicated  no  significant  multicollinearity 


 problems  among  the  independent  variables  nor  were  there  any  significant  indications  of  non-  linear 
 relationships  between  any  of  the  independent  and  dependent  variables.  Consequently,  no  variables 
 have  been  combined  or  omitted,  nor  have  any  linear  transformations  been  imposed  on  the  data  set. 
 11.  The  Durbin-  Watson  statistic  for  this  regression  is  1.85,  indicating  no  significant  serial 


 correlation  problem. 
 12.  Although  not  significant  at  the  .05  level,  the  positive  relationship  between  hours  of  public 


 affairs  programming  and  Big  Four  network  affiliation  is  worth  discussing  briefly.  This 
 relationship  is  due  to  the  fact  that  Big  Four  network  affiliates  typically  carry  at  least  one  weekly 
 public  affairs  program  (  Meet  the  Press  on  NBC;  This  Week,  on  ABC;  Face  the  Nation,  on 
 CBS;  and  FOX  News  Sunday,  on  FOX).  These  weekly  programs  generally  air  in  a  Sunday 
68
 20 
 morning  time  slot.  In  many  markets  these  programs  receive  an  additional  late-  night  airing  (e.  g., 


 Monday  at  2:  30  AM),  which  tirther  boosts  the  cumulative  public  affairs  programming  hours  for 
 Big  Four  network  affiliates.  In  addition,  ABC  affiliates  generally  carry  Nightline  five  nights  per 
 week. 
69
 21 
 Table  One 


 Public  AE  ir  Pr  rammin  n  Mark  a= 


 24) 
 Min/  Max  Sum  Mean 


 Local  public  affairs 
 programming  hours 
 0147.2  156.49  6.52 


 Total  public  affairs 
 programming  hours 
 1174.36  509.15  21.22 


 Average  household 
 income  (000) 
 3  1.17/  49.36  NA  42.3  I 


 Television 
 households  (000) 
 40/  5  135  NA  13473 


 Cable  penetration  (%)  55182  NA  68.29 
 Number  of  commercial 
 TV  stations  in  market 
 l/  19  142  5.92 


 _._^_,  .._  _-_  x.  I_.  c-----.------  --..  _  I.  --,  I 
70
 22 
 Table  Two 


 Market-  h-  Market  Breakdowns  of  Local  and  Total  (Local  +  Non-  Local)  Public  mairs  Programming 
 Local  Public  Affairs  Total  Public  Affairs 
 Market  (Rank)  Total  Hours  %  Broadcast  Time  Hours/  Station  Total  Hours  %  Broadcast  Time 


 Los  Angeles,  CA  (2)  47.20  .74  2.48  74.36  1.16 
 Houston,  TX  (11)  12.50  .25  .83  30.50  .61 
 Tampa,  FL  (14)  14.00  .35  1  17  66.50  1.65 
 San  Antonio,  TX  (37)  18.50  .55  1.85  34.00  1.01 
 Wilkes-  Barre,  PA  (5  1)  3.00  .13  .43  20.00  .85 
 Flint,  MI  (64)  10.00  .60  2.00  23.00  1.37 
 Green  Bay,  WI  (69)  2.00  .lO  .33  16.00  .79 
 Syracuse,  NY  (54)  4.00  .20  .67  20.00  .99 
 Columbia,  SC  (86)  4.50  .27  .90  18.00  1.07 
 Burlington,  VT  (91)  4.30  .18  .61  18.30  .78 
 Colorado  Springs,  CO  (94)  2.00  .12  .40  20.00  1.19 
 Savannah,  GA  (100)  1  .oo  .06  .20  15.00  .89 
 Springfield,  MA  (104)  1.00  .15  .50  9.00  1.34 
 Lansing,  MI  (106)  1  .oo  .06  .20  16.00  .95 


 Hours/  Station 
 3.91 
 2.03 
 5.54 
 3.40 
 2.86 
 4.60 
 2.67 
 3.33 
 3.60 
 2.61 
 4.00 
 3.00 
 4.50 
 3.20 
71
 23 
 Table  Two  Continued 


 Market-  bv-  Market  Breakdowns  of  Local  and  Total  (Local  +  Non-  Local)  Public  Affairs  Programming 


 Market  (Rank)  Total  Hours 
 Local  Public  Affairs 
 %  Broadcast  Time  Hours/  Station  Total  Hours 
 Total  Public  mairs 
 %  Broadcast  Time  Hours/  Station 


 Reno,  NV  (108) 
 Topeka,  KS  (140) 
 Medford,  OR  (  143) 
 Joplin,  MO  (  146) 
 Salisbury,  MD  (163) 
 Elmira,  NY  (171) 
 Watertown,  NY  (175) 
 Marquette,  MI  (  177) 
 Mankato,  MN  (187) 
 Bend,  OR  (200) 


 4.99  .21  .71  15.99 
 .oo  .oo  .oo  12.00 
 3.00  .I5  .50  26.00 
 17.00 
 1.00 
 2.50 
 .oo 
 .oo 
 1.00 
 2.00 


 1 
 .68 
 .89 
 1.29 
 .69  5.67  26.00  2.58 
 .15  .50  10.00  1.49 
 .25  .83  13.50  1.34 
 .oo  .oo  8.00  1.19 
 .oo  .oo  10.00  .99 
 .30  1  .oo  1  .oo  .30 
 .30  1  .oo  6.00  .89 


 2.28 
 3.00 
 4.33 
 8.67 
 5.00 
 4.50 
 4.00 
 3.33 
 1.00 
 3.00 
72
 24 
 Figure  One 


 0  c 
 v)  .- 
 ii 
 % 


 40  l 
 30  . 
 20. 


 IOm 
 0 


 Market 
73
 25 
 Figure  Two 
 Total  Public  AflGrs  (Local  +  Non-  Local)  Hours  by  Market 


 80  1 


 Market 
74
 Table  Three 
 26 


 Comuarison  of  Mean  Levels  of  Public  mairs  Programming;  Between  Top  100  and  Non-  Top  100 
 Markets  (N  =  24) 


 Local  Public  AfGirs 
 Within  Top  100  Markets 
 Outside  Top  100  Markets 
 F  =  3.53  (g  <  .lO). 


 Mean  Cases  Std.  Dev. 
 10.25  12.91  12 


 2.79  4.71  12 


 Total  Public  Affairs 
 Within  Top  100  Markets 
 Outside  Top  100  Markets 
 F  =  7.53  (p  <  .05). 


 Mean  Std.  Dev.  Cases 
 29.64  19.92  12 


 12.79  7.44  12 
75
 27 
 Figure  Three 


 Local  Public  Afftirs  Hours  Per  Station  bv  Market 


 - 
 . 
 . 


 I 
 . 
 . 
 m- 


 Market 


 .  -  .-  ..-  _  _  ..  _  ._.  __._  __.  _.  .__.  -I  .-  -..,_  __  _..^_-_-_-.--.  ..-_  I  --  ~---  ____._..-.  ___.-  ..-  m.- 
76
 Total  public  affairs  hours/  station 
77
 29 
 Table  Four 


 Public  Affairs  Procrramminrr  and  Station  Characteristic  Data  for  Station  Sample  (N  =  112) 


 Network  Affiliation 
 Big  Four  Affiliate 
 Other  Network  ARiliate 
 Independent 
 Total 


 Total 
 Public  Affairs  Prorrramminq 
 Local  Public  AfIairs  Hours 
 Total  Public  Affairs  Hours 


 Number 
 84 
 24 
 4 
 112 


 Number  Percent 
 55  49.1 
 57  50.9 
 112  100.0 


 Percent 
 75.0 
 21.0 
 4.0 
 100.0 


 MinIMax  Sum 
 O/  16  118.80 
 O/  23  409.46 


 Mean 
 1.06 
 3.66 


 -- 
 _.  _.  -  -...  ___.  --._  I  -,  _--.____  -.-_  l.-_--  l---. 
78
 Table  Five 
 30 


 Summary  of  Simultaneous  Regression  Analysis  for  Variables  Predicting  Hours  of  Local  Public 
 Affairs  Proaramming 


 Variable 
 Station  revenues  (000) 
 UHForVHF  (O=  uHF;  l=  VHF) 
 Big  4  affiliate  (0  =  No;  1  =  Yes) 
 Other  network  affiliate  (0  =  No;  1  =  Yes) 
 Television  households  (000) 
 Average  household  income  (000) 
 Minority  population  (%) 
 Public  TV  stations 
 Cable  penetration  (%) 
 Commercial  TV  stations 
 Constant 


 Note.  Adjusted  R2  =  .03  (p  >  .05). 


 B  SE 
 .00001  .oo 


 .30  .55 
 -.  32  .96 
 -.  53  .82 
 -.  OOl  .oo 
 -.  00002  .oo 
 .OOl  .02 
 -.  Ol  .22 
 .Ol  .03 
 .24  .ll 
 .12  2.95 


 Beta 
 .19  . 
 .06 
 -.  06 
 -.  09 
 -.  33 
 -.  06 
 .Ol 
 -.  04 
 .03 
 .37* 
79
 31 
 Table  Six 


 c  Summa  f  Sim  It  n 
 Affairs  Proerammincr  (N  =  112), 


 Variable  B 
 Station  revenues  (000)  .00002 
 UHForVHF(  O=  UHF;  1=  VT-  TF)  .59 
 Big  4  affiliate  (0  =  No;  1  =  Yes)  2.53 
 Other  network  affiliate  (0  =  No;  1  =  Yes)  -.  66 
 Television  households  (000)  -.  OOl 
 Average  household  income  (000)  -.  00003 
 Minority  population  (%)  .Ol 
 Public  TV  stations  -.  13 
 Cable  penetration  (%)  .02 
 Commercial  TV  stations  .47 
 Constant  -1.76 


 SE 
 .oo 
 .79 
 1.38 
 1.17 
 .OOl 
 .oo 
 .02 
 .31 
 .04 
 .15 
 4.23 


 m 
 .17 


 .08 
 .29 
 -.  07 
 -.  24 
 -.  04 
 .03 
 -.  05 
 .04 
 .46** 


 Note.  Adjusted  R2  =  .23  (p  <  .05). 
 **  p  <  .Ol. 
80
 32 
 References 


 Benton  Foundation  (1998).  Whats  local  about  local  broadcasting.  Available: 
 www.  benton.  org/  Television/  whatslocal.  html. 
 BIA  Research  (1999).  Investing  in  television  market  report  (3d  ed.).  Chantilly,  VA: 
 Author. 
 Federal  Communications  Commission  (1984).  Revision  of  programming  and 
 commercialization  policies,  ascertainment  requirements,  and  program  log  requirements  for 
 commercial  television  stations,  1984  FCC  LEXIS  2105. 
 Federal  Communications  Commission  (1999).  Public  interest  obligations  of  TV  broadcast 
 licensees,  1999  FCC  LEXIS  6487. 
 Moonves,  Les  (1998,  April  14).  Statement  before  the  open  meeting  of  the  advisory 
 committee  on  public  interest  obligations  of  digital  broadcasters,  Washington,  DC.  Available: 
 http://  www.  ntia.  doc.  gov/  pubintadvcom/  aprmtg/  transcript-  am.  htm. 
 Napoli,  P.  M.  (in  press).  Foundations  of  communications  policy:  Principles  and  process  in 
 the  regulation  of  electronic  media.  Cresskill,  NJ:  Hampton  Press. 
81

82
 A  Methodological  Evaluation  of  the  NAB  Report 
 entitled 
 A  National  Report  on  the  Broadcast  Industrys  Community  Service 
 (April  1998) 


 Presented  to: 
 People  for  Better  TV 


 Prepared  by: 
 Project  on  Media  Ownership 
 New  York  University 


 January  24,200O 
83
 A  Methodological  Evaluation  of  the  NAB  report  entitled  A  National  Report  on  the  Broadcast  Industrys  Community  Service 
 April  1998 


 Executive  Summary 
 This  NAB  report  entitled  A  National  Report  on  the  Broadcast  Industrys  Community 
 Service-  April  1998  concludes  that  radio  and  television  stations  donated  at  least  $6.85 
 billion  dollars  to  improve  community  life.  The  timespan  for  this  estimate  is  over  the  12 
 months  from  August  1,  1996  to  July  3  1,  1997. 


 The  breakdown  of  the  $6.85  billion  is  categorized  into  three  categories  as  follows: 
 Projected  value  of  PSA  airtime  donated 
 Projected  amount  raised  for  charities/  causes 
 Projected  value  of  free  airtime  for  Debates, 
 Candidate  Forums  and  Convention  Coverage 


 $  4.6  billion 
 $  2.1  billion 
 $148.4  million 


 Both  from  a  thousand  foot  perspective  and  a  more  detailed  examination  into  the 
 quantification  of  the  above  categories,  the  methodology  the  researchers  used  to  arrive  at 
 the  $6.85  billion  dollar  figure  is  subject  to  debate.  In  some  cases,  there  are  methological 
 flaws  in  deriving  these  estimates.  In  other  cases,  methodology,  and  associated 
 assumptions  used  might  have  been  reasonable,  but  these  were  not  detailed  or  defended. 
 As  a  result,  the  validity  of  the  conclusions  in  this  report  is  in  question. 


 On  an  overall  basis,  the  survey  itself  and  the  results  that  were  extrapolated  had  the 
 following  methodological  flaws: 
 l  The  survey  was  self-  reported,  which  could  skew  it  toward  broadcasters  that  are 


 more  supportive  of  community  service  than  the  norm. 
 l  Answers  in  the  survey  were  not  verified  by  an  independent  party  against  the 


 broadcasters  internal  records.  Thus,  survey  results  are  highly  subjective. 
 l  There  was  no  analysis  deriving  the  appropriate  sample  size  needed  to  give  the 


 results  a  high  degree  of  validity. 
 l  There  is  a  comparison  problem  in  that  both  broadcasters  and  networks  were 
 included  in  the  survey,  both  of  which  are  different  types  of  corporate  entities  in 
 size  and  goals.  l 
 There  was  not  a  breakdown  of  non-  networked  owned  broadcasters  and  network- 


 owned.  This  breakdown  would  have  assisted  in  seeing  the  community  service  activities  of  different  types  of  broadcasters. 


 l  In  the  first  two  categories  above  (PSAs  and  Charities/  Causes),  the  report  says  that 
 the  estimates  are  estimates  of  all  broadcasters  that  received  the  survey 
 extrapolated  from  those  that  completed  the  survey;  in  the  third  category  (Debates, 
 Candidates  and  Convention  Coverage)  the  estimate  is  for  &l  broadcasters  and  not 
 those  that  received  the  survey.  The  NAB  offers  no  explanation  as  to  this 
84
 difference  in  extrapolating  to  different  populations  or  in  the  first  case,  the 
 relevance  of  extrapolating  to  those  that  received  the  survey. 


 Drilling  down  to  the  more  specific  level,  there  are  the  following  methodological  flaws  in 
 the  three  community  service  categories  that  are  quantified: 


 Projected  Value  of  PSA  Airtime  Donated 
 To  project  the  value  of  PSA  airtime  donated,  the  NAB  multiplies  the  run-  of-  station  rate 
 by  the  average  (or  median)  number  of  PSAs  that  broadcasters  air.  The  usage  of  both 
 multiples  have  methodological  flaws: 
 l  I&  NAB  uses  the  run-  of-  station  price  to  estimate  the  value  of  donated  air-  time 
 and  not  the  price  of  the  ad  time  when  the  PSAs  actually  ran.  The  run-  of-  station 
 rate  is  the  price  an  advertiser  pays  per  ad  to  run  many  ads  throughout  all 
 broadcasting  times--  both  prime  time  hours  and  non-  prime  time  hours.  Thus,  the 
 run-  of-  station  rate  is  an  average  of  prime  time  and  non-  prime  time  rates.  Most 
 PSAs  are  run  in  non-  prime-  time  hours  where  the  rate  is  lower.  Since  the  NAB  is 
 using  the  blended  run-  of-  station  rate,  this  figure  is  higher  than  the  actually  rate 
 charged  when  the  PSAs  air.  Even  if  the  NAB  were  to  claim  that  many  of  the 
 PSAs  are  aired  in  prime  time,  it  would  have  been  more  accurate  to  have  the 
 broadcasters  report  the  time  of  day  the  PSAs  actually  ran  and  what  the 
 corresponding  rates  were  at  that  time. 
 l  Number  of  PSAs  There  is  an  inconsistency  in  measurement  for  the  networks  vs. 


 the  broadcasters  because  the  report  uses  the  average  number  of  PSAs  for  the 
 broadcasters  but  the  median  number  of  PSAs  for  the  networks.  There  are  4 
 networks  that  report  and  the  median  can  really  disguise  the  range  in  such  a  small 
 data  set. 
 l  A  logical  justification  is  never  offered  as  to  why  the  report  extrapolated  the  $4.6 
 billion  in  this  category  to  all  broadcasters  that  received  the  survey  from  the  data  of 
 broadcasters  that  actually  completed  the  survey. 


 Proiected  Amount  Raised  for  Charities/  Causes 
 l  A  logical  justification  is  never  offered  as  to  why  the  report  extrapolated  the  $2.1 


 billion  in  this  category  to  all  broadcasters  that  received  the  survey  from  the  data  of 
 broadcasters  that  actually  completed  the  survey. 
 l  The  NAB  concludes  that  the  amount  raised  annually  from  broadcasters  increases 
 with  the  population  it  serves  but  the  NAB  does  not  conclude  that  the  larger  the 
 broadcasters  population,  the  less  that  broadcaster  spends  per  member  of  the 
 population  on  charity  fUndraising.  If  the  NAB  had  taken  their  analysis  one  more 
 step,  they  would  have  have  come  to  this  latter  correct  conclusion. 
85
 Proiected  Value  of  Free  Airtime  for  Debates.  Candidate  Forums  and  Convention 
 Coverage 
 l  In  quantif$  ng  this  category,  the  NAB  does  not  state  how  it  calculated  the  value  of 
 the  air-  time  devoted  to  these  political  causes  so  we  do  not  know  if  the 
 quantification  is  valid. 
 l  The  NAB  offers  no  justification  as  to  how  or  why  it  extrapolates  the  $148.4 


 million  estimate  in  this  category  to  all  broadcasters  from  the  data  of  broadcasters 
 that  actually  completed  the  survey.  In  the  other  parts  of  the  survey,  they  did  not 
 extrapolate  to  all  broadcasters  but  rather  just  to  those  that  received  the  survey. 


 Local  Issues  Guide  Broadcasters  section 
 Statistics  Regarding  Participation  Rates  in  On-  Air  Communitv  Service  Campaigns  and 
 Off-  Air  Station  Involvement 


 In  addition  to  the  quantification  exercise  above,  in  a  section  entitled  Zocal  Issues  Guide 
 Broadcasters  the  NAB  reports  non-  monetary  statistics  regarding  broadcasters  on-  air 
 community  service  campaigns  and  off-  air  station  involvement.  The  NAB  defined  on-  air 
 support  community  service  as  local  news  broadcasts,  PSAs  or  public  affairs 
 programming.  Some  of  this  on-  air  community  service  included  on-  air  disaster  reporting, 
 involvement  with  local  businesses  in  community  service  campaigns  and  consultation  with 
 local  community  leaders.  Off-  air  station  involvement  was  defined  in  a  highly-  inclusive 
 way  in  that  it  included  involvement  in  aiding  the  victims  of  disasters,  donation  drives, 
 local  community  events,  county  fairs,  and  service  organizations  and  their  activities. 


 For  on-  air  community  service  and  off-  air  station  involvement,  the  NAB  reports  a 
 percentage  of  TV  and  radio  stations  that  are  involved  in  the  above  activities  and  does  not 
 make  an  attempt  to  quantify  these  activities  either  in  airtime  minutes  or  dollar  terms. 
 Thus,  through  the  percentages,  we  get  a  sense  of  how  many  stations  engaged  in  this  type 
 of  community  service-  even  if  only  one  time--  but  not  an  indication  as  to  the  real  scale  of 
 these  efforts.  The  average  number  of  minutes  or  average  value  of  on-  air  community 
 service  was  not  reported  nor  was  the  value  of  off-  air  involvement  pinpointed  in  dollar 
 terms  or  time  spent.  Rather,  the  NAB  reported  only  whether  or  not  broadcasters  ever  did 
 these  activities,  so  broadcasters  that  engaged  in  these  activities  only  once  were  included 
 in  the  percentages  of  broadcasters  that  said  they  performed  these  activities.  There  is  no 
 reporting  that  gives  a  sense  of  scale  or  broadcasters  commitment  to  on-  air  community 
 service  campaigns  and  off-  air  station  involvement. 


 Last,  in  this  section,  the  NAB  considers  activities  like  donation  drives  and  county  fairs  as 
 part  of  broadcasterscommunity  service.  Activities  such  as  these  are  part  of  any 
 corporations  obligation  to  be  a  good  corporate  citizen  and  are  not  specific  to 
 broadcasters.  Instead,  the  broadcasters  real  contribution  to  what  we  deem  as  broadcaster 
 community  service  should  only  be  tabulated  in  terms  of  donated  airtime,  both  in  the  value 
 of  the  air-  time  and  the  community  benefits  the  air-  time  produces. 
86
 Overall  Perspective  of  The  Report 
 Serious  Study  or  Public  Relations  Brochure? 
 The  aim  of  the  report  seems  to  be  to  positively  portray  the  community  service  efforts  of 
 the  broadcasters  rather  than  attempt  a  serious  analysis  of  the  data  the  broadcasters  are 
 reporting.  The  study  appears  to  be  more  of  a  public  relations  brochure  than  an  objective 
 study.  The  report  is  filled  with  over  17  pages  of  anecdotal  examples  as  opposed  to  only 
 one  page  describing  the  research  methodology. 


 Self-  Renorting 
 The  data  was  self-  reported  by  broadcasters  and  it  is  unaudited  in  that  there  was  not  an 
 independent  certified  public  accounting  firm  or  other  appropriate  independent  party 
 reviewing  the  data  for  accuracy  and  consistency.  Thus,  we  do  not  know  if  the 
 broadcasters  interpreted  the  questions  in  a  similar  way  or  checked  their  records  to  verify 
 their  actual  participation  in  community  service  during  the  year  surveyed.  The 
 recollections  of  the  party  filling  out  the  survey  at  the  TV  or  radio  station  could  have  been 
 inaccurate  but  there  was  no  auditing  entity  to  verify  the  survey  answers. 


 When  studies  are  based  on  self-  reported  data,  the  results  tend  to  be  skewed  because  self- 
 reporting  usually  attracts  parties  that  are  reporting  in  the  atlirmative.  Broadcasters  that 
 are  assisting  the  community  would  have  an  interest  in  reporting  and  probably  due  to  their 
 commitment,  they  would  be  more  likely  to  have  staff  involved  in  the  community  service 
 efforts  that  could  spend  time  filling  out  the  survey.  Stations  that  did  not  return  the 
 survey  might  not  have  done  so  because  they  do  not  have  staEinvolved  in  community 
 service  efforts  or  a  commitment  to  community  service.  In  the  same  vein,  individual  state 
 broadcaster  associations  distributed  the  survey,  which  also  skews  the  results  in 
 that  industry  insiders  were  managing  the  distribution.  It  stands  to  reason  that  the 
 associations  that  are  more  committed  to  community  service  would  manage  the  process  so 
 that  the  surveys  of  their  constituents  were  completed  thereby  again  skewing  the  results  in 
 the  affirmative. 


 Sample  Size 
 There  is  no  calculation,  using  common  statistical  tools,  of  the  appropriate  sample  size 
 that  would  make  this  report  valid.  The  overall  response  rate  for  the  project  was  42%  with 


 the  completion  rate  among  television  stations  at  63%,  100%  among  the  networks  and 
 39%  for  radio.  (The  report  did  not  give  a  breakdown  between  non-  network  owned  TV 
 stations  and  network  .)-  The  NAB  report  claims  this  response  rate  is  unusually  high;  even 
 among  association  members  most  mail  surveys  tend  to  fall  in  the  20%  to  30%  response 
 range.  However,  a  high  response  rate  does  not  indicate  validity  of  a  sample  size. 
 However,  the  NAB  did  send  the  completed  surveys  to  Public  Opinion  Strategies,  an 
 Alexandria-  based  research  firm,  to  be  tabulated  and  analyzed.  Was  this  research  firm  an 
 independent  party?  The  report  gives  no  evidence  on  this  matter 
87
 Extrapolation 
 The  NAB  includes  both  the  four  major  networks  and  typical  television  stations  in  their 
 quantifications.  The  inclusion  of  data  derived  from  both  networks  and  typical  TV 
 stations  probably  corrupts  the  conclusions  and  the  extrapolations  because  networks  are 
 different  operationally  from  typical  television  stations  and  so  including  the  data  of  both  in 
 the  same  conclusion  is  flawed.  It  is  like  collecting  data  on  both  apples  and  oranges  and 
 making  conclusions. 


 An  indication  of  the  differences  in  the  survey  results  of  the  networks  and  the  typical 
 television  stations  is  in  the  reported  weekly  PSAs.  The  report  says  that  the  typical 
 television  station  runs  an  average  of  137  PSAs  a  week  and  the  four  networks  run  a 
 median  of  41  PSAs  per  week.  These  numbers  are  very  far  apart  and  would  affect  the 
 margin  of  error  in  prediction  and  extrapolation.  Thus,  the  inclusion  of  both  network  data 
 and  the  broadcaster  data  in  the  data  set  probably  is  the  reason  for  95%  confidence  level  vs 
 a  higher  98%  confidence  level  (confidence  within  two  standard  deviations)  or  99.7% 
 confidence  level  (confidence  within  three  standard  deviations.  In  other  words,  the  95% 
 confidence  level  is  high  but  the  extrapolation  would  be  more  valid  at  the  higher 
 confidence  level.  However,  the  95%  might  be  an  appropriate  confidence  level  for  this 
 type  of  survey  but  no  evidence  is  offered  and  the  report  does  not  pinpoint  the  reason  for 
 this  confidence  level.  Is  it  due  to  the  fact  that  networks  had  higher  community  service 
 activities  or  it  is  because  the  overall  data  reported  has  this  variance? 


 Methodologies  Used  in  the  Three  Community  Service  Categories 
 The  methodologies  and  assumptions  the  NAB  uses  in  quantifying  the  three  separate 
 categories  of  community  service  can  be  contested  as  follows: 


 Public  Service  Announcement  (PSA)  Air  Time  Donated-  estimated  $4.6  billion 
 In  quantifying  the  value  of  PSAs,  the  NAB  report  uses  the  average  run-  of-  station  charged 
 for  a  30  second  spot  multiplied  by  the  total  number  of  spots.  Usage  of  the  run-  of-  station 
 rate  can  be  contested  because  this  is  an  average  of  all  ad  time  slots  available  in  a  24-  hour 
 period.  The  stations  do  not  normally  air  PSAs  during  prime  time,  when  audiences  and 
 rates  are  at  their  highest,  because  these  spots  are  usually  filled  to  capacity  with  paid 
 advertising  at  the  highest  rates.  PSAs  are  usually  made  during  non-  primetime  and  are  filler  spots  that  are  used  in  lieu  of  unsold  paid  advertising  spots.  For  this  reason,  PSAs 


 are  most  often  seen  on  late  night  TV  or  on  weekend  mornings.  This  analysis  is  similar 
 for  the  total  value  of  radio  PSAs  which  is  quantified  using  an  average  rate  and  not  the  lower  rate  in  effect  when  the  PSAs  are  usually  aired. 
88
 In  addition,  the  report  extrapolates  out  a  figure  of  the  value  of  donated  PSA  air-  time  to  all 
 stations  that  received  the  survey.  Why  extrapolate  out  to  those  that  merely  received  the 
 survey--  why  not  extrapolate  out  to  all  stations  if  the  NAB  feels  their  95%  confidence 
 level  makes  extrapolation  accurate? 


 There  is  a  mix  of  metrics  report  with  respect  to  television  stations.  The  four  networks 
 reported  a  median  number  of  41  PSAs  while  the  typical  TV  station  ran  an  average  of  137 
 per  week.  There  is  an  inconsistency  in  using  the  median  number  for  the  networks 
 reporting  of  PSAs.  The  median  is  either  the  middle  number  or  the  average  of  the  two 
 middle  numbers  in  a  data  set.  In  a  data  set  of  four  networks,  41  is  the  average  of  the  two 
 middle  numbers  but  41  does  not  tell  us  much  because  mathematically  the  lower  numbers 
 in  the  data  set  could  be  0  and  0  and  there  could  still  be  a  median  of  41  if  the  third  data 
 point  is  82  [(  82  +  0)/  2  =  411.  Is  there  something  in  the  network  reporting  that  needed  to 
 be  disguised  by  using  the  median  number?  There  could  be  a  reasonable  case  for  using 
 the  median,  but  the  NAB  doesnt  make  a  case  in  the  text. 


 Amount  Raised  for  Charities/  Causes-  estimated  at  $2.1  billion 
 Similar  to  the  analysis  of  the  value  of  PSA  air-  time  donated,  the  report  uses  extrapolation 
 to  calculate  a  total  figure  for  the  12  month  period  surveyed  of  $2.1  billion,  this  total  being 
 attributable  to  stations  who  were  mailed  a  survey  and  not  all  stations. 


 The  NAB  cites  that  As  one  might  reasonably  expect,  the  amount  raised  for  charitable 
 causes  also  increases  with  the  population  it  serves.  This  comment  is  written  in  relation 
 to  a  chart  on  page  7  which  is  represented  below: 


 Residents  Under 
 25,000 
 25,000- 
 75,000 
 75,000- 
 1  mil 
 Over 
 1  mil 


 Average  Raised  $25,600  $90,200  $165,000  !w4,200 


 The  NABs  claim  of  reasonable  expectation  is  not  reasonable  because  this  chart  shows 
 that  the  average  dollars  raised  per  person  in  the  population  served  actually  declines  if  we 
 do  this  calculation  using  the  mean  number  of  residents  in  the  population  categories: 


 Average  Residents  12,500  50,000  87,500  Cannot  calculate 
 Average  Raised  $25,600  $90,200  $165,000  $404,200 


 Amt  Raised/  Person  $2.05 
 in  Population  Served 
 $1.80  $0.31  ? 


 In  the  far  right  column,  we  can  calculate  an  amount  raised  per  person  in  the  population 
 served  if  we  assume  that  some  broadcaster  serve  a  population  as  high  as  5  million.  We 
 can  then  take  average  of  1  million  and  5  million,  which  is  3  million  and  divide  it  by  the 
89
 average  raised  of  $404,200,  which  would  bring  the  amount  raised/  per  person  in  the 
 highest  population  served  to  13  cents. 


 One  might  reasonably  expect  that  the  since  broadcasters  with  larger  populations  can 
 charge  higher  rates  for  advertising  spots  and  have  the  ability  to  be  more  profitable,  they 
 would  at  least  spend  the  same  per  person  on  charitable  causes  as  the  broadcasters  with  the 
 lower  coverage  area.  It  appears  that  the  NAB  has  presented  these  numbers  for  charity 
 money  raised  without  the  true  analysis  as  it  relates  to  the  broadcasters  with  the  larger 
 populations. 


 Proiected  Value  of  Free  Airtime  for  Debates.  Candidate  Forums  and  Convention 
 Coverage-  estimated  at  $148.4  million 


 In  making  the  $148.4  million  estimate,  the  NAB  does  not  give  any  clue  as  to  how  they 
 calculated  the  value  of  the  air-  time.  Did  the  broadcasters  make  their  own  estimate  or  did 
 the  NAB  assign  a  value  itself  to  the  airtime?  One  is  left  to  guess. 


 The  NAB  also  reports  percentages  of  broadcasters  that  ran  specific  segments  in  the 
 political  arena.  For  example  they  report  that  54%  of  all  broadcasters  aired  a  segment 
 profiling  candidates  or  their  issue/  stands.  Reporting  a  percentage  in  this  way  does  not 
 give  an  indication  as  to  the  scale  of  this  type  of  coverage.  Broadcasters  that  aired  only 
 one  candidate  protile  lasting  only  30  seconds  would  be  included  in  the  54%.  In  the  same 
 vein,  many  of  the  broadcasters  included  in  the  54%  may  have  only  aired  a  few  short 
 segments;  it  is  impossible  to  determine  the  scale  and  impact  from  this  type  of  percentage 
 data. 


 The  NAB  offers  no  justification  as  to  how  or  why  they  extrapolate  the  $148.4  million 
 estimate  in  this  category  to  aN  broadcasters  from  the  data  of  broadcasters  that  actually 
 completed  the  survey.  In  the  other  parts  of  the  survey,  they  did  not  extrapolate  to  all 
 broadcasters  but  rather  just  to  those  that  received  the  survey. 


 Local  Issues  Section  of  Report  (entitled  Local  Issues  Guide  Broudksters) 
 In  addition  to  quantifying  community  service,  the  NAB  report  surveyed  broadcasters 
 about  their  on-  air  community  service  campaigns  whether  through  local  news  broadcasts. 
 PSAs  or  public  a.  Eairs  programming  or  off-  air  activities  to  aid  the  victims  of  disasters. 
 The  NAB  reported  the  percentage  of  broadcasters  that  undertook  these  activities  as  66% 
 of  TV  stations  and  68%  of  radio  stations.  It  was  not  stated  whether  these  percentage 
 resulted  from  broadcasters  that  completed  the  survey,  those  that  received  the  survey  or  all 
 broadcasters.  In  addition,  the  PSAs  were  already  quantified  in  the  report  in  the  $6.85  total  community  service  estimate  so  it  seems  odd  to  include  them  in  this  category  as  well. 


 Methodologically,  the  NAJ3  reported  the  percentage  of  stations  that  did  this  on-  air 
 community  service  within  the  12  months  surveyed  but  they  did  not  report  what 
 percentage  of  total  airtime  on  average  was  devoted  to  this  type  of  programming.  One 
 would  be  especially  interested  in  the  amount  of  programming,  reported  in  a  metric  such 
90
 as  minutes,  that  is  done  during  prime  time  which  has  the  greatest  audience  and  would 
 therefore  give  community  service  programs  the  greatest  reach. 


 The  NAB  also  reports  the  percentage  of  stations  which  covered  specific  issues  such  as 
 aids  or  alcohol  abuse  in  a  PSA,  locally-  produced  public  affairs  program  or  news 
 segment.  For  the  nine  issues  surveyed,  the  percentages  of  stations  that  covered  an  issue 
 was  over  70%  in  every  case  and  as  high  as  94%  in  the  highest  case.  Again,  what  was  the 
 time  devoted  in  minutes?  The  way  this  is  reported  a  broadcaster  could  have  aired  one 
 PSA  or  one  public  affairs  program  on  one  issue  and  the  broadcaster  would  be  accounted 
 for  in  these  percentages. 


 Toward  the  end  of  this  Local  Issues  section,  the  NAB  reports  that  more  than  eight  in  ten 
 broadcast  stations  involve  local  businesses  in  their  community  service  campaigns.  The 
 report  does  not  denote  whether  these  stations  are  those  that  completed  the  survey  or  an 
 extrapolation  of  those  that  received  the  survey  or  all  stations.  This  is  a  bit  vague--  how  is 
 involvement  defined?  Are  the  businesses  involved  in  such  a  way  that  it  truly  benefits 
 the  community?  It  would  be  interesting  to  have  an  estimate  of  monetary  value  that  the 
 broadcasters  are  soliciting  from  local  businesses  for  the  community  or  conversely,  an 
 estimate  of  the  value  of  the  benefit  to  the  local  business  of  the  broadcasters  efforts. 


 In  the  last  paragraph  of  the  Local  Issues  section,  the  NAB  cites  that  more  than  75%  of 
 stations  say  they  consult  with  local  community  leaders  in  deciding  which  issues  and 
 causes  to  address.  Again  the  report  does  not  denote  whether  these  stations  are  those 
 that  completed  the  survey  or  an  extrapolation  of  those  that  received  the  survey  or  all 
 stations.  As  important,  who  are  these  so-  called  community  leaders  that  have  been 
 consulted?  The  report  does  not  define  the  term  community  leader  and  are  these 
 community  leaders  the  people  that  can  really  add  the  appropriate  input  into  a  stations 
 community  service  program?  These  community  leaders  might  be  self-  interested-- 
 vested  in  certain  political  factions  or  specific  charities--  and  therefore  their  advice  might 
 not  objective  and  usetkl. 
91

92
 The  Project  on  Media 
 Ownership 


 Findings-  from  a  National  Survey 
 Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates 
 May  1999 
93
 Methodology 
 This  report  is  based  on  a  national  survey  conducted  by  Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates  for 
 the  Project  on  Media  Ownership. 


 Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates  designed  and  administered  this  survey  which  was 
 conducted  by  telephone  using  professional  interviewers.  The  survey  reached  a  total  of  1400 
 adults  nationwide  age  18  years  or  older,  who  indicated  they  are  registered  to  vote  and  likely  to 
 vote  in  the  2000  general  election,  including  oversamples  of  200  African  American  respondents 
 and  200  Hispanic  respondents.  The  survey  was  conducted  between  April  6-  11,1999. 


 Telephone  numbers  for  the  survey  were  drawn  from  a  random  digit  dial  sample  (RDD). 
 The  sample  was  stratified  geographically  by  state  based  on  the  population  in  each  region. 
 The  oversamples  were  weighted  into  the  base  sample  so  that  the  oversampled  group  reflects 
 its  actual  contribution  to  the  total  population.  The  sample  size  with  these  weights  applied  is 
 1000  cases.  The  data  were  weighted  by  race,  age,  gender,  and  education  to  ensure  the 
 sample  is  an  accurate  reflection  of  the  population.  The  margin  of  error  for  this  survey  is 
 +/-  3.1%.  The  sampling  error  for  subgroups  is  greater. 


 The  Project  on  Media  Ownership  LaKe  me/  r  rerry  ui  Assoclares  May  1999 
94
 Two-  thirds  of  voters  are  unaware  that 
 broadcasters  use  the  airwaves  for  free. 
 Half  mistakenly  believe  they  pay  for  this 
 access. 


 As  you  may  know,  television  broadcasters  need  access  to  the  airwaves  in  order  to  broadcast  their  programs.  They  get  that  access  from  the  Federal  Communication  Commission,  or  FCC.  Do  you 
 think  that  broadcasters  pay  to  use  these  airwaves  or  do  you  think  they  get  to  use  them  for  free? 


 PAY  TO  USE  50% 


 GETFREE  32%  - 
 The  Project  on  Media  ownersnrp  Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates  May  1999 
95
 Other  important  proposals  include  broadcasters 
 paying  into  a  trust  fund  and  various  proposals  to 
 increase  local,  educational,  and  public  affairs 
 programming,  and  put  limits  on  commercials.  As  you  may  know,  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  recently  GAVE  broadcasters  access  to  FREE  additional  public  airwaves  in 


 order  to  a  develop  new  technology  called  digital  television.  The  public  now  has  an  qoportunity  to  say  what  broadcasters  should  aive  back  to  the  public  in  return  for  free  use  of  the  airwaves. 
 I  am  going  to  read  you  a  nunrber  of  public  service  prqoosals  on  the  part  of  broadcasters  in  for  the  free  use  of  public  airwaves.  Please  tell  me  how  IMPOFtTiWT  each  one  is  to  you  personaNy 


 NOT  /MPORTANT  IMPORTANT 
 PUBLIC  BROADCASTING  TRUST  FUND 
 PRODUCE  PROGRAMS  TO  ADDRESS  LOCAL  CONCERNS 


 SHOW  AT  LEAST  7  HOURS  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PROGRAMMING  EACH  WEEK. 
 PROVIDE  MORE  ADULT  EDUCATION/  COMMUNITY  COLLEGE  COURSES  ON 
 TV 


 PROVIDE  ONE  HOUR  OF  PUBLIC  AFFAIRS  PROGRAMMING  TO  COVER  LOCAL  /SSUES 


 MAKE  ALL  CHILDRENS  SHOWS  COMMERCIAL  FREE 


 -60%  -40%  -20%  0%  20%  40%  60%  80%  100% 


 The  Project  on  Media  Ownership 
 48 


 Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates 
 May  1999 
96
 Every  proposal  tested  about  broadcasters  debt  to  the  public 
 gains  at  least  majority  support.  The  proposals  voters  find  most 
 important  include  providing  a  ratings  system,  close-  captioning, 
 protecting  consumers  privacy,  regulating  pay-  per-  view,  and 
 more  local  programming. 


 As  you  may  know,  the  Federal  Communications  Commssion  recently  GAVE  broadcasters  access  to  FREE  additional  public  airwaves  in  order  to  a  develq  new  technology  called  digital  television. 
 to  the  public  in  return  for  free  use  of  the  airwaves. 
 The  public  now  has  an  ~rtunity  to  say  what  broadcasters  should  give  back 


 broadcasters  in  for  the  free  use  of  public  airwaves. 
 I  am  going  to  read  you  a  number  of  public  service  proposals  on  the  part  of  Please  tell  me  how  IMPORTANT  each  one  is  to  you  personally. 


 NOT  IMPORTANT  IMPORTANT 


 PROVIDE  RATINGS  SYSTEM  FOR  VIOLENCE,  SEXUAL  CONTENT  AND  INAPPROPRIATE  LANGUAGE 
 PROVIDE  CLOSECAPTlONllW  VIDEO  DESCRIPTION  FOR  HANDICAPPED  PEOPLE 
 PROTECT  CONSUMERS  PRIVACY 
 FCC  SHOULD  BE  REGULATE  PAY-  PER-  VIEW  PROGRAMMING 


 LIMIT  COMMERCIALS  TO  SIX  MINUTES  PER  HOUR  DURING  CHILDRENS  PROGRAMMING 


 The  Project  on  Media  Ownership  .  -.--  A  -..  m  a  m  LaKe  meli  perry  &  Assoclat~~  May  1999 
97
 Additionally,  voters  are  intensely  favorable  toward  these 
 proposals,  specifically  close-  captioning,  a  ratings  system,  protecting  consumers  privacy,  requiring  more 


 educational  programming,  and  limiting  commercials. 
 As  you  may  know,  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  recent/  y  GAVE  broadcasters  access  to  FREE  additional  public  airwaves  in  order  to  a  develop  new  technology  called  digital  television.  The  pubic  now  has  an  opportunity  to  say  what 
 broadcasters  should  give  back  to  the  public  in  return  for  free  use  of  the  airwaves.  After  I  read  each  one,  please  tell  me  whether  you  would  strongly  favor,  somewhat  favor,  somewhat  oppose  or  strongly  oppose  each  of  the  following  proposak 


 OPPOSE  FAVOR 
 PROVlDE  CLOSECAPTIONING/  VlDEO  DESCRIPTION 
 FOR  HANDICAPPED  PEOPLE 


 PROVIDE  RATlNGS  SYSTEM  FOR  VIOLENCE,  SEXUAL 
 CONTENT  AND  INAPPROPRIATE  LANGUAGE 


 PROTECT  CONSUMERS  PRIVACY 
 LIMIT  COMMERCIALS  TO  SIX  MINUTES  PER  HOUR 
 DURING  CHlLDRENS  PROGRAMUING 


 SHOW  AT  LEAST  7  HOURS  OF  EDUCATIONAL 
 PROGRAiUMlNG  EACH  WEEK. 


 The  Project  on  Media  Ownership  Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates  May  1999 
98
 Producing  programming  which  addresses  local 
 concerns,  making  childrens  shows  commercial  free,  and  providing  more  adult  educational  and  local 
 public 


 As  you  may  know,  the  Federal  Communications  CommLssion  recent/  y  GAVE  broadcasters  access  to  FREE  additionalpublic  airwaves  in  order  to  a  develop  new  technology  called  digital  television. 
 The  public  now  has  an  opportunity  to  say  what  broadcasters  shouM  give  back  to  the  public  in  return  for  free  use  of  the  airwaves.  After  I  read  each  one,  please  tell  me  whether 


 you  would  strongly  favor,  somewhat  favor,  somewhat  oppose  or  strongly  oppose  each  of  the  following  proposal. 


 PRODUCE  PROGRAMS  TO  ADDRESS  LOCAL  CONCERNS 
 PUBLIC  BROADCASTING  TRUST  FUND 
 MAKE  ALL  CHILDRENS  SHOWS  COMMERCIAL  FREE 
 PROVIDE  ONE  HOUR  OF  PUBLIC  AFFAIRS 
 PROGRAMMING  TO  COVER  LOCAL  ISSUES 


 FCC  SHOULD  BE  REGULATE  PAY-  PER-  VIEW 
 PROGRAMMING 


 PROVIDE  MORE  ADULT  EDUCATION/  COMMUNITY 
 COLLEGE  COURSES  ON  TV 


 -40%  -20%  0%  20%  40%  60%  80%  100% 


 The  Project  on  Media  Ownership  Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associa  tes  May  1999 
99
 Proposals  to  provide  more  public  service 
 announcements  and  more  non-  English 
 language  programming  are  less  popular  with 


 PROVIDE  ONE  PSA  FOR  EVERY  FOUR 
 COMMERCIALS 


 PROVIDE  MORE  NON-  ENGLISH  LANGUAGE 
 PROGRAMMING 


 OPPOSE  FAVOR 


 60%  -40%  -20%  0%  20%  40%  60%  8090 
 NOT  IMPORTANT  IMPORTANT 


 PROVIDE  ONE  PSA  FOR  EVERY  FOUR 
 COMMERCIALS 


 PROVIDE  MORE  NON-  ENGLISH  LANGUAGE 
 PROGRAMMING 


 60%  -40%  -20%  0%  20%  40%  60%  8090 


 The  Projecf  on  Media  Ownership  Lake  Snell  Perry  &  Associates  May  1999 
100

101
 . 
 r 
 READY  INDEX  !NDEXlNG  SYSTEM 
102
 ? 
103
 Before  the 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 In  the  Matter  of 
 Public  Interest  Obligations 
 Of  TV  Broadcast  Licensees 


 Comments  of 


 MM  Docket  No.  99-  360 


 CHILDREN  NOW 
 1212  Broadway,  Fifth  Floor 
 Oakland,  CA  94612 
 (5  10)  763-  2444 
 www.  childrennow.  org 


 March  24,  2000 
104
 Children  Now 
 TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 
 I.  INTRODUCTION  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .......  1 


 A.  THE  STATE  OF  THE  NATIONS  Cmmm..  .........................................................................................  2 
 B.  CHILDREN  &  THE  ADVISORY  COMMITTEE  ON  THE  PUBLIC  INTEREST  OBLIGATIONS  OF  DIGITAL 
 TELEVISION  BROADCASTER.  S  ............................................................................................................  .4 
 C.  THE  FEDERAL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMISSIONS  NOTICE  OF  INQUIRY  ...........................................  .5 


 II.  DTVS  TECHNOLOGICAL  ADVANCES  &  CHILDREN  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  6 
 A.  ENHANCED  AUDIO-  VISUAL  QUALITY..  .............................................................................................  .8 
 B.  MULTICASTING..  .............................................................................................................................  11 
 C.  MULTIPLEXING  -  ANCILLARY  &  SUPPLEMENTARY  SERVICES  .........................................................  14 
 D.  DIGITAL  VIEWER  EXPERIENCE  QUALITY  (DVEQ)  &  BANDWIDTH  MANAGEMENT..  ......................  .19 


 III.  THE  CHILDRENS  TELEVISION  ACT  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  20 
 A.  BACKGROUND  .................................................................................................................................  20 
 B.  THE  CHILDRENS  TELEVISION  ACT  OF  1990  ....................................................................................  23 
 C.  THE  CHILDRENS  TELEVISION  ACT-  MORE  STRINGENT  RULES  ......................................................  25 
 D.  THE  THREE-  HOUR  RULE:  Is  IT  LIVING  UP  To  ITS  EXPECTATIONS?  ..................................................  25 
 E.  THE  THREE-  HOUR  RULE:  INSIDERS  REACTIONS  ............................................................................  27 
 F.  LOCAL  OBSERVATIONS  RELEVANT  TO  THE  CHILDRENS  TELEVISION  ACT..  ...................................  .28 
 G.  MANDATING  RULES  IN  A  NEW  DIGITAL  ERA  ...................................................................................  31 


 IV.  ANALYSES  &  RECOMMENDATIONS  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  32 
 A.  MINIMUM  PUBLIC  INTEREST  OBLIGATIONS  SHOULD  BE  SPECIFIC..  .................................................  32 
 B.  SERVING  THE  NATIONS  CHILDREN..  ..............................................................................................  .33 
 I.  The  Childrens  Television  Act  in  Digital  ....................................................................................  33 
 a.  The  Digital  Three-  Hour  Rule  for  E/  I  Programming:  Proportional  Hours  Requirement.............  3  4 
 b.  The  Digital  DVEQ  Rule  for  E/  I  Programming:  Proportional  DVEQ  Requirement..  ................  .35 
 c.  Pay  or  Play  Model  ......................................................................................................................  36 
 d.  Diversity  of  Programming  ..........................................................................................................  39 
 e.  Ratings  and  the  V-  Chip..  ............................................................................................................  42 
 f.  Commercials  ...........................................................................................................................  44  ... 


 2.  Additional  Opportunities  and  Obligations..  ...............................................................................  46 
 3.  Children  s  Privacy  &  Protection  on  DTV..  ................................................................................  47 
 C.  DISCLOSURE  REQUIREMENTS  .........................................................................................................  .48 
 D.  DIVERSITY  .......................................................................................................................................  50 


 APPENDICES  (A-  J) 
105
 Children  Now 
 I.  INTRODUCTION 
 Children  Now,  in  association  with  the  national  coalition  People  for  Better  TV, 
 hereby  submit  the  following  comments  in  response  to  the  Notice  ofInnquiv  (hereinafter, 
 Notice)  in  the  above-  captioned  proceeding  that  was  released  on  December  20,  1999. 


 Children  Now  commends  the  Commission  for  opening  this  inquiry  into  the  public  interest 
 obligations  of  television  broadcast  licensees  as  the  revolutionary  transition  from  analog  to 
 digital  television  (  DTV)  technology  begins.  The  implications  of  this  transition  and  its 
 effects  on  the  American  public,  particularly  Americas  children,  are  unprecedented. 
 These  comments  will  begin  by  exploring  the  particular  importance  of  childrens 
 issues  for  this  FCC  inquiry,  the  Advisory  Committees  recommendations  regarding 
 childrens  programming  in  the  digital  era,  and  the  specific  FCC  requests  that  we  will 
 address.  The  second  section  will  examine  the  DTV  technological  advances  that  will 
 impact  children  most  significantly  during  the  transitional  period.  The  third  section  will 
 assess  the  Childrens  Television  Act  of  1990  and  its  impact  on  current  programming. 
 Finally,  we  present  a  set  of  recommendations  regarding  areas  of  DTV  broadcasting  that 
 will  affect  children.  These  recommendations  are  starting  points  for  further  research  and 
 analysis,  and  should  be  considered  for  future  rule-  making.  Children  Now  joins  People 
 for  Better  TV  in  their  request  for  a  rule-  making  proceeding  and  hearings  to  determine 
 specifically  the  public  interest  obligations  of  digital  broadcasters.   
 These  comments  benefit  from  a  series  of  discussions  that  Children  Now  has 
 undertaken  since  the  beginning  of  2000.  This  series  includes  conversations  with  leading 


 academics,  advocates,  and  industry  professionals,  regarding  their  general  opinions  of 
106
 Children  Now 
 DTV  public  interest  obligations  and  children.*  We  will  continue  this  important  process 
 with  a  formalized  schedule  of  interviews  and  meetings  throughout  the  rule-  making 
 process  to  obtain  the  highest  level  of  relevant  expertise. 
 A.  The  State  of  the  Nations  Children 
 Officials  recognize  that  the  meaning  of  the  public  interest  will  change  -  indeed,  must 
 change  -  in  a  new  communications  environment  in  which  viewers  rather  than 
 programmers  choose  what  to  watch  and  when,  and  in  which  viewers  may  one  day  even 
 produce  and  distribute  programs  themselves.  There  are  few  firm  points  of  agreement  on 
 how  this  new  communications  environment  should  be  structured  or  whom  it  should  serve 
 .  .  .  But  everyone  everywhere  can  agree  on  one  precept:  the  public  interest  requires  us  to 


 put  our  children  fust.  3 


 The  FCCs  Notice  presents  several  important  areas  of  inquiry  with  sub-  headings 
 such  as  Disclosure  Obligations,  Disaster  Warnings,  Disabilities,  Diversity,  and 
 Enhancing  Political  Discourse.  4  While  the  obligations  regarding  childrens 
 programming  do  not  have  their  own  category,  the  FCC  does  request  comments  on  how 
 digital  broadcasters  may  serve  the  nations  children.  5 
 Considering  that  Americas  children  currently  consume  the  equivalent  of  a  full- 
 time  work  week  using  media  that  digital  television  will  provide,  they  may  be  one  of  the 
 most  vulnerable  and  needy  populations  with  respect  to  the  digital  transition.  6  First, 


   See  People  for  Better  TV,  Petition  for  Rulemaking  and  Petition  for  Notice  of  Inquiry  (filed  June  3,  1999) 
 (PBTV  Petition);  Letter  from  People  for  Better  TV  to  William  E.  Kennard,  Chairman,  FCC,  Nov.  16,  1999 
 (PBTV  Letter). 
 r  Children  Now  has  conducted  informal  and  exploratory  conversations  with  experts  such  as:  Ms.  Peggy 
 Charren  (Founder,  Action  for  Childrens  Television),  Professor  Katharine  Heintz-  Knowles  (childrens 
 media  consultant),  Professor  Amy  Jordan  (Annenberg  School  for  Communications,  University  of 
 Pennsylvania),  Professor  Dale  Kunkel  (University  of  California,  Santa  Barbara),  Professor  Donald  Roberts 
 (Stanford  University),  Ms.  Marjorie  Tharp  (American  Academy  of  Pediatrics),  and  Dean  Ellen  Wartella 


 (University  of  Texas).  The  comments  of  these  participants  have  been  incorporated  into  this  statement 
 where  appropriate. 
 3  Minow,  Newton  and  Craig  LaMay,  Abandoned  in  the  Wasteland:  Children,  Television,  and  the  First 
 Amendment  14  (1995). 
   See  Notice  at  7115,  18,  24,  29,  and  34. 
   Id.  at  112. 
 6  Henry  J.  Kaiser  Family  Foundation,  Kids  and  Media  at  the  New  Millennium  (Executive  Summary)  at  6 
 (Nov.  1999)  (  The  average  child  spends  about  five  and  a  half  hours  a  day  using  media  (5:  29)  -  more  than 
 38  hours  a  week.). 


 ..-.  -._.-  _  _  _  ,..  ._.._.  I._  _  -  ._  --..--_  ll.  .._,  I  .  .._.-.  -._.,-  ._..  ---.--  Y__  l__ 
107
 Children  Now 
 broadcast  content  designed  for  children  is  scarce  and  often  of  low  quality.  7  Parents 
 continually  search  for  and  request  more  quantities  of  higher  quality  programming  for 
 their  children.    As  recently  as  1999,  the  Journal  of  Broadcasting  &  Electronic  Media 
 published  a  survey  of  parents  regarding  the  Childrens  Television  Act  of  1996  and  the 
 Educational/  Informational  (  E/  I)  programming  requirements.  Although  63%  of  parents 
 had  not  heard  of  the  E/  I  requirements,  82%  of  parents  either  somewhat  favored  or 
 strongly  favored  them,  and  79%  thought  that  the  E/  I  programming  would  do  some  or 
 a  lot  of  good  for  children.    Parents  and  caretakers  of  Americas  young  people  are 
 asking  for  better  content  for  kids,  and  more  of  it. 
 Further,  the  ancillary  and  supplementary  services  that  DTV  broadcasters  can 
 provide,  such  as  datacasting,  paging,  or  interactivity,  raise  the  specter  of  privacy  and 
 protection  concerns  that  have  haunted  childrens  policy  in  the  Internet  arena  for  the  past 
 several  years.  Once  again,  the  enhanced  capabilities  to  inquire,  target,  and  collect  data 
 from  consumers  present  unparalleled  financial  opportunities  for  businesses  and 
 unparalleled  risks  for  the  public,  especially  children.  These  concerns  will  be  both 
 magnified  and  immediate  if  the  DTV  convergence  reaches  a  critical  mass. 
 Finally,  the  next  decade  will  host  a  DTV  dialogue  between  government, 
 broadcasters,  federal  agencies,  business,  and  the  public  that  is  filled  with  technical 


   Center  for  Media  Education,  Digital  TV  in  the  Public  Interest  (op-  ed),  (last  visited  Nov.  2,  1999) 
 <hm,:!  iwww~.  cme.  orrr/  dtv  in.  htm>.  See  also,  Part  III.  F,  infra  (recent  observations  regarding  local 
 broadcasting  from  People  for  Better  TV  members).  [Please  note  that  these  comments  refer  to  several 
 leading  Internet  sites  that  contain  the  most  current  research  regarding  digital  television.]. 
   See,  e.  g.,  Walsh,  Ann,  et  al.,  Mothers    Preferences  for  Regulating  Children  s  Television,  J.  of 
 Advertising  23  passim  (No.  3,  Vo1.27,  Sept.  22,  1998). 
 9  J.  of  Broadcasting  &  Electronic  Media,  September  22,  1999. 
 lo  See  Federal  Trade  Commission,  New  Rule  Will  Protect  Privacy  of  Children  Online,  (released  Oct.  20, 
 1999);  Childrens  Advertising  Review  Unit,  Statements  Re:  Workshop  on  Proposed  Regulations 
 Implementing  the  Children  Online  Privacy  Protection  Act  (July  20,  1999),  July  30,  1999;  Ian  Auston,  But 


 -..  ._  -..  .  .  .  __.  -- 
108
 Children  Now 
 questions,  transition  timelines,  price  points,  market  penetration,  and  extraordinary 
 advances.  Perhaps  the  greatest  vulnerability  for  Americas  children  is  the  risk  of  being 
 eclipsed  amidst  the  unprecedented  technology  and  endless  commercial  opportunities, 
 Thus,  it  is  everybodys  duty  to  realize  the  unprecedented  and  endless  opportunities  that 
 we  have  to  make  the  digital  world  a  better  place  for  children. 
 B.  Children  &  the  Advisory  Committee  on  the  Public  Interest  Obligations  of 
 Digital  Television  Broadcasters 


 In  1997,  Vice  President  Gore  and  the  Office  of  the  President  convened  an 
 Advisory  Committee  to  explore  the  public  obligations  of  digital  television  broadcasters, 
 which  resulted  in  a  comprehensive  final  report  with  broad  recommendations  for  the 
 FCC.  The  Committee  addressed  the  concerns  of  children  and  childrens  programming 
 at  several  points  throughout  its  report,  including  a  history  of  the  Childrens  Television 
 Act  and  the  public  mandate  for  broadcasters  to  serve  the  nations  children.  12  The 
 Advisory  Committee  made  the  following  specific  recommendations:  data  about 
 childrens  and  educational  programming  should  be  included  in  broadcasters  quarterly 
 disclosures  of  public  interest  activities;  digital  stations  must  determine  or  ascertain  a 
 communitys  needs  and  interests  regarding  childrens  programming  as  part  of  their 
 minimum  public  interest  requirements;  the  FCC  should  reserve  the  equivalent  of  one  6 
 MHz  channel  in  each  viewing  area  from  recovered  analog  spectrum  for  noncommercial 


 First,  Another  Wordfrom  our  Sponsor,  N.  Y.  Times,  Feb.  18,  1999,  at  Dl;  Jamie  Beckett,  Kids  Tell  All  Online,  S.  F.  Chron.,  Sept.  22,  1998,  at  Cl. 
   See  Executive  Order  No.  13038,  2,62  Fed.  Reg.  12.065  (1997). 
 I2  Advisory  Committee  on  Public  Interest  Obligations  of  Digital  Television  Broadcasters,  Charting  the 
 Digital  Broadcasting  Future:  Final  Report  of  the  Advisory  Committee  on  the  Public  Interest  Obligations  of 
 Digital  Television  Broadcasters  at  $11,  The  Public  Interest  in  Children  s  Educational  Programming  (1998) 
 [hereinafter  Advisory  Committee  Report]  (discussing  the  Children  s  Television  Report  and  Policy 
 Statement,  50  FCC  2d  1,5  (1974)  and  Action  for  Childrens  Television  v.  FCC,  564  F.  2d  458,465  (D.  C. 
 Cir.  1977),  It  seems  to  us  that  the  use  of  television  to  further  the  educational  and  cultural  development  of 


 -.  -..  I  ...  _  _  _.  .  __.  ._  .-  .-  .l-__  l~  .--- 
109
 Children  Now 
 educational  programming,  including  childrens  education;  fee  collection  from 
 multiplexing  should  be  used  to  produce  and  air  educational  programming  that  would 
 otherwise  not  be  commercially  feasible;  broadcasters  should  datacast  educational 
 programming  from  preschool  through  higher  education  and  public  school  information; 
 and  broadcasters  should  have  the  option  of  a  pay-  or-  play  model  of  public  interest 
 obligations  where  collected  monies  would  be  applied  to  childrens  programming.  3 
 Children  Now  is  encouraged  by  the  Advisory  Committees  thoughtfulness 
 regarding  how  to  serve  the  nations  children  in  the  digital  era,  and  we  have  analyzed  and 
 incorporated  some  of  its  recommendations  and  principles  into  these  comments. 
 C.  The  Federal  Communications  Commissions  Notice  of  Inquiry 
 The  FCC  Notice  invites  discussion  and  proposals  addressing  whether  and  how 
 existing  public  interest  obligations  should  translate  to  the  digital  medium.  4 
 Specifically,  the  FCC  is  requesting  comments  on  how  both  analog  and  digital 
 broadcasters  must  operate  consistently  in  the  public  interest  during  this  lengthy  transition 
 period  from  analog  to  digital.  15  Children  Nows  comments  will  address  the  following 
 requests,  with  a  focus  on  children  and  childrens  programming: 
 l  How  can  broadcasters  serve  the  nations  children  in  the  digital  environment? 


 (Notice  at  712); 
 l  Do  a  licensees  public  interest  obligations  apply  to  its  ancillary  and 


 supplementary  services?  Should  broadcaster  activities  on  ancillary  and 


 Americas  children  bears  a  direct  relationship  to  the  licensees  obligations  under  the  Communications  Act 
 to  operate  in  the  public  interest.). 
 3Advisory  Committee  Report  at    III.  l,  111.3,111.4(  b)  (  The  opportunity  for  digital  television  to  improve 
 student  achievement  has  extraordinarily  high  stakes  for  our  Nation.  .  .  We  put  our  children  at  a  competitive 
 disadvantage  in  the  global  economy  if  we  do  not  invest  wisely  in  educational  resources.),  111.4.  c  111.5, 
 I4  Notice  at  110. 
 I5  Id.  at  78. 
110
 Children  Now 
 supplementary  services  count  toward  the  public  interest  obligations?  (Notice  at 
 lP3); 
 l  What  information  should  be  included  in  the  public  files  of  digital  broadcasters? 


 Do  the  FCCs  reasons  for  eliminating  the  previous  ascertainment  requirements 
 apply  to  the  proposals  for  rule-  making  for  the  digital  era?  (Notice  at  116); 
 l  How  can  broadcasters  use  the  Internet  and  similar  capabilities  through  DTV  to 
 ensure  that  they  are  responsive  to  the  needs  of  the  public?  (Notice  at  117); 
 l  Should  the  Commission  establish  more  specific  minimum  requirements  or 


 guidelines  regarding  television  broadcasters  public  interest  obligations?  If  so, 
 how  should  these  requirements  be  defined  and  communicated  to  licensees? 
 (Notice  at  722); 
 l  How  can  broadcasters  use  multicasting  and  other  new  technologies  associated 
 with  DTV  to  enhance  access  to  the  media  by  all  people,  particularly  people  from 
 diverse  and  underrepresented  backgrounds?  What  other  ways  could  and  should 
 the  Commission  encourage  diversity  in  broadcasting,  consistent  with  relevant 
 constitutional  standards?  (Notice  at  yT23,  33). 


 II.  DTVS  TECHNOLOGICAL  ADVANCES  &  CHILDREN 
 In  1997,  the  federal  government  allocated  an  additional  6  MHz  bandwidth  to 
 every  existing  broadcaster  as  part  of  a  giveaway  valued  at  approximately  $70  billion.  6 
 This  authorization  was  the  first  step  in  a  comprehensive  digital  conversion  plan,  targeted 


 for  completion  by  2006.  Toward  that  goal,  the  FCC  issued  a  timetable  for  digital 


 l6  Federal  Communications  Commission,  Digital  Television  Tower  Siting  Fact  Sheet  and  Frequently  Asked 
 Questions  (last  modified  June  18,  1998)  <ht~://  www.  fcc.~  ov/  mmb/  mdldtv/>  at  introduction,  Question  25 
111
 Children  Now  7 
 broadcasting,  requiring  all  stations  affiliated  with  ABC,  CBS,  NBC,  and  Fox  in  the  top  10 
 markets  to  begin  at  least  one  digital  broadcast  by  May  1,  1999.  A  second  deadline  Was 
 set  for  markets  1  l-  30  by  November  1,  1999.  I7  Thus  currently,  broadcasters  have  two  sets 
 of  bandwidth  to  use:  (i)  their  original  analog  bandwidth,  and  (ii)  the  additional  6  MHz 
 designated  for  digital  conversion.  As  the  transition  progresses,  the  FCC  has  determined 
 that  broadcasters  must  return  the  bandwidth  currently  used  for  analog  broadcasting  when 
 the  conversion  reaches  its  completion  point  (i.  e.,  spectrum  recovery).  Correspondingly, 
 the  FCC  and  Congress  have  asserted  that  portions  of  these  returned  bandwidths  will  be 
 designated  for  public  uses  such  as  public  safety  and  police  and  fire  department  needs.* 
 Although  2006  is  the  hard  deadline  originally  established  by  the  FCC,  the  completion 
 point  for  digital  conversion  has  been  debated  by  broadcasters  who  have  cited  numerous 
 time-  sensitive  obstacles  such  as  tower  construction  and  local  zoning.  Through  a  series  of 
 FCC  inquiries  and  hearings,  a  compromise  has  been  reached,  setting  a  modified  deadline 
 of  2006  unless  one  or  more  of  the  largest  television  stations  in  a  market  do  not  begin 
 DTV  transmission  through  no  fault  of  their  own  or  there  is  less  than  85%  market 
 penetration.  In  any  case,  complete  conversion  is  scheduled  to  arrive,  shepherded  by 
 both  government  and  industry. 


 [hereinafter  FCC,  Digital  Television  Tower];  People  for  Better  TV,  Here  Comes  Digital  TV  (last  visited 
 March  13,  2000)  =+  tm:/  iwww.  bettertv.  orrr/  diaital.  html~. 
   FCC,  Digital  Television  Tower,  supra,  at  introduction. 
 I8  FCC,  Digital  Television  Tower,  supra,  at  introduction,  Questions  4-  5;  Andy  Carvin,  Corporation  for 
 Public  Broadcasting,  Digital  Television:  A  New  Toolfor  Education?  (Oct.  30,  1998)  (last  visited  February 
 22,  2000)  <http://  edweb.  esn.  ore/  teled98/  sneech.  html>  [hereinafter  Carvin  &  CPB].  _ 
 I9  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  How  Digital  Television  Will  Evolve:  The  Plan.  See  also  FCC,  Digital 
 Television  Tower,  supra,  at  introduction,  Questions  12-  13;  Carvin  &  CPB,  supra;  Robert  X.  Cringely, 
 Public  Broadcasting  Service,  Digital  TV:  A  Cringely  Crash  Course  (last  visited  Mar.  2,  2000) 
 ~l~  ttv:  llwww.  vbs.  or~  lo~  blcrashcourse/  hdtvlt~  eline.  html~  at  9  Digital  Broadcast  Timeline  [hereinafter 
 Cringely  &  PBS];  Digital  Television:  The  Site,  at  0  What  is  Digital  Television?  Consumer  Information 
 Page  (last  visited  Mar.  2,  2000)  <httn://  www.  diaitaltelevision.  com/  what.  shtml>;  National  Association  of 
 Broadcasters  and  PricewaterhouseCoopers  LLP,  Digital  Television  99:  Navigating  the  Transition  in  the 
 US  (last  visited  Mar.  13,  2000)  <htm://  www.  nab.  ora/  Research/  Renorts/  DIGITALTV.  htm>  (  The  DTV 
112
 Children  Now 
 Over  the  past  few  years,  the  media  attention  garnered  by  digital  television  has 
 focused  on  DTVs  enhanced  audio-  visual  qualities  and  the  high  price  points  of  viewer 
 reception  equipment.  20  While  both  issues  have  significant  effects  on  the  public,  there  are 
 several  other  technological  advances  that  have  not  reached  mainstream  consciousness  but 
 will  impact  the  public  in  important  ways. 
 For  this  comment,  Children  Now  has  identified  three  specific  advances  that  will 
 affect  children  and  childrens  programming:  (1)  Enhanced  Audio-  Visual  Quality;  (2) 
 Multicasting;  (3)  Multiplexing  -  Ancillary  &  Supplementary  Services.  Further,  these 
 three  advances  combine  to  provide  an  overall  digital  viewer  experience;  the  variability  of 
 this  experience  due  to  individualized  bandwidth  management  is  a  separate  and  specific 
 area  of  concern.  In  this  section,  Children  Now  presents  each  advance  along  with  its 
 opportunities  to  improve  our  public  obligations  to  children  and  its  risks  that  children  will 
 be  overlooked  for  technology  and  business. 
 A.  Enhanced  Audio-  Visual  Quality 
 Most  of  the  attention  surrounding  DTV  has  concerned  the  leap  in  audio-  visual 
 (  A/  V)  effects,  presenting  a  television  experience  unlike  any  before.  Digital 
 broadcasting  will  provide  the  clearest  pictures  with  realistic  sound,  and  will  eliminate  the 
 reception  problems  commonly  associated  with  anaIog  television.  2  Whereas  previously, 
 analog  broadcasts  offered  a  standard  NTSC  (National  Television  Systems  Committee) 


 transition  will  take  longer  than  most  people  in  the  industry  will  publicly  admit  .  .  .  at  least  10  to  12  years  - 
 or  even  longer.  This  period  is  much  lengthier  than  the  original  timetable  established  by  the  US  Congress.) 
 [hereinafter  NAB  &  PricewaterhouseCoopers  LLP]. 
 a  See,  e.  g.,  Federal  Communications  Commission,  Digital  Television  (description)  (last  modified  Nov.  2, 
 1999)  <  httu:!/  www.  fcc.  eov/  mmblvsdlfilesldescri~.  htn~>;  Wendy  Tanaka,  The  DTV  Industry  is  Growing 
 Slowly,  Philadelphia  Inquirer,  Feb.  10,  2000  (page  unavailable);  A  Technophobes  Guide  to  HDTV,  Daily 
 Variety,  April  6,  1998,  at  A2. 


 .  .  .-...^  -._.  _.  l  _  ..--.  I~  x--_  l  .-.  --x  I  - 
113
 Children  Now  9 
 screen  with  4-  to-  3  aspect  ratio  and  525  lines  of  720  pixels  that  totaled  378,000  pixels  per 
 frame,  the  newer  digital  technology  can  present  a  standard  ATSC  (Advanced  Television 
 Systems  Committee)  screen  with  19-  to-  9  ratio  and  up  to  1080  lines  of  1920  pixels  for 
 2,073,600  pixels  per  frame.  22  This  picture  is  commonly  referred  to  as  high-  definition 
 television  (  HDTV).  23  Correspondingly,  the  sound  quality  of  television  will  also 
 improve  dramatically  from  mono  and  stereo  to  5.1  Dolby  Digital  surround  sound  and  the 
 digital  quality  currently  found  in  compact  discs.  24  Thus,  there  is  a  hierarchy  of  A/  V 
 quality,  ranging  from  the  existing  low-  quality  analog  transmission  (NCTE)  to  middle- 
 quality  SDTV  digital  transmissions  to  high-  end  HDTV.  While  not  every  broadcast  in  the 
 digital  era  will  be  of  the  highest  possible  quality,  all  broadcasts  will  be  of  higher  quality 
 than  analog  transmission.  25  The  FCC  mandate  requires  some  amount  of  broadcasting  in 
 a  higher  quality  format  beginning  in  1998  and  increasing  in  quantity  until  complete 
 conversion. 
 Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  be  cognizant  of  the  opportunities  and  risks  for 
 children  that  enhanced  A/  V  capabilities  present.  First,  the  higher  A/  V  quality  can 
 provide  children  with  greater  educational  experiences  through  television.  For  example, 


 2  See  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  A  Brief  History  of  Digital  Television  Technology  (discussing 
 progressive  scanning,  square  pixels,  increased  frame  rates  additional  lines  per  frame,  different  aspect  ratios, 
 and  sound);  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  Q  Ghosts  in  the  Machine. 
 22  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  A  Brief  History  of  Digital  Television  Technology;  Cringely  &  PBS, 
 supra,  at  Q  Bandwidth  Squeeze;  Pat  Denato,  Future  of  TVS  is  Here  -  Digital  and  High-  Definition  TVs  Will 
 Put  Viewers  in  Control  and  Provide  Better  Sound  and  Quality,  Des  Moines  Register,  May  17,  1999,  at  16. 
 23  See  Allison  Ballard,  The  Defining  Moment  of  Television:  The  Conversion  to  Digital  TV  Will  Cost 
 Networks  and  Consumers  Big  Bucks,  Morning  Star,  Feb.  17,2000,  at  lD,  3D  (  One  common  confusion 
 with  the  new  technology  is  the  terminology.  Digital  television  is  a  way  to  transmit  television.  HDTV,  or 
 high-  definition  television,  is  one  application  of  digital  television.). 
 24  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  $  Digital  Sound;  Digital  Television:  The  Site,  supra,  at  Q  What  is  Digital 
 Television?  Consumer  Information  Page. 
 z5  FCC,  Digital  Television  Tower,  supra.  at  Questions  l-  2  (  Standard  definition  digital  TV  pictures  would 
 be  similar  in  clarity  and  detail  to  the  best  TV  pictures  being  received  and  displayed  today  using  the  current 
 (analog  NTSC)  broadcast  system  and  TV  receivers.);  A  Technophobes  Guide  to  HDTV,  Daily  Variety, 
 April  6,  1998,  at  A2. 
114
 Children  Now  10 
 science  programs  or  travelling  shows  will  be  able  to  present  people,  places,  and  things 
 through  more  realistic  pictures  and  sounds  than  ever  before.  While  it  is  not  yet  certain 
 how  DTV  will  ultimately  impact  education,  it  is  evident  that  the  technology  will  have  a 
 significant  and  tangible  effect  with  regard  to  engaging  young  viewers  and  encouraging 
 further  leaming.  26  These  effects  and  other  enhancements  are  discussed  further  at  Part  II 
 (C-  D),  infya. 
 Second,  broadcasters  will  have  the  ability  to  vary  the  amount  and  quality  of  their 
 programming  menu  throughout  the  day  -  e.  g.,  airing  lower  A/  V  quality  SDTV 
 multicasting  during  early  morning  hours  and  higher  A/  V  quality  HDTV  during  prime- 
 time.*    The  Advisory  Committee  on  Public  Interest  Obligations  of  Digital  Television 
 Broadcasters  (hereinafter,  Advisory  Committee)  noted  that  there  are  18  possible 
 formats  in  HDTV  and  SDTV.  28  While  this  flexibility  may  provide  more  overall 
 quantities  of  programming,  it  also  risks  having  a  segregation  effect  -  i.  e.,  certain 
 programming  receiving  priority  for  high  A/  V  quality  (e.  g.,  sports  games,  prime-  time 
 shows)  while  other  programming  is  relegated  to  low  A/  V  quality.  Higher  definition 
 programming  will  necessarily  require  higher  production  costs,  and  broadcasters  will  often 
 face  the  usual  business  efficiency  decisions  that  rely  heavily  on  viewership  ratings  and 


 26  See,  e.  g.,  Andy  Carvin,  ED  WEB:  Exploring  Technology  and  School  Reform,  (latest  revision  Jan.  11, 
 2000)  <htto:  i/  edweb.  esn.  org>,  at  9  DTV:  Enhanced  Television 
 <htt~://  edweb.~  si~.  ore!  teled98/  ellhancedtv.  html>  (actual  demonstrations  of  educational  programs  enhanced 
 by  DTV). 
 *  See  Part  II.  B,  infra. 
 *  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  01,  A  Brief  History  of  Digital  Television  Technology  (citing  FCC 
 discussion  that  broadcasters  have  a  variety  of  options  and  that  the  market  will  determine  the  ultimate 
 decisions,  in  In  the  Matter  of  Advanced  Television  Systems  and  Their  Impact  upon  the  Existing  Television 
 Broadcast  Service,  MM  Docket  No.  87-  268,  Fifth  Report  and  Order,  supra,  at  12826-  27  [hereinafter  Fifth 
 Report  and  Order]). 


 ,,  .  I  __-,..  ,-_.  _  ~  _-  _------.--  I~ 
115
 Children  Now  11 
 advertising  dollars.  29  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  consider  the  risks  and  possibilities 
 of  excluding  childrens  programming  from  the  highest  A/  V  quality  broadcasting. 
 Third,  the  enhanced  picture  and  sound  will  also  mean  a  more  realistic  viewer 
 experience  with  regard  to  images  of  sex  and  violence  that  may  be  inappropriate  for  young 
 children.  30  Given  the  long-  existing  concerns  in  this  area,  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC 
 to  research  and  analyze  the  impact  of  enhanced  A/  V  capabilities  on  childrens 
 consumption  of  such  images. 
 Finally,  more  research  and  analysis  is  needed  regarding  the  psychological  and 
 physical  effects  of  enhanced  A/  V  on  viewers,  especially  children.  In  December,  1997,  an 
 episode  of  Pokemon  that  aired  in  Japan  induced  several  hundred  cases  of  photosensitive 
 epileptic  seizures.  31  Most  of  these  cases  involved  children.  More  recently,  experts  have 
 been  exploring  the  effects  of  new  technologies  such  as  virtual  reality  for  their  capacity  to 
 induce  physical  illness  in  consumers.  32  As  the  digital  conversion  introduces 
 technological  advances  that  make  home-  viewing  a  more  virtual  experience,  the  FCC 
 should  conduct  due  diligence  regarding  its  public  health  impact. 
 B.  Multicasting 
 Unlike  traditional  analog  broadcasting,  digital  broadcasting  uses  a  binary  system 
 of  ls  and  Os  to  transmit  high  quantities  of  data  in  an  extraordinarily  compact  form.  This 
 technology  is  currently  used  in  platforms  such  as  personal  computers,  compact  disc 


 29  See  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  4111.4.  a  (  The  startup  costs  of  converting  to  digital  signals  are  high, 
 and  just  as  significantly,  the  costs  of  producing  digital  programming  are  10  to  20  percent  higher  than  those 
 of  comparable  analog  programming.). 
 3o  People  for  Better  TV,  The  Dangers  of  DTV,  (last  visited  Mar.  13,  2000) 
 <htto://  www.  bettertv.  org/  dangers.  html>. 
 3  See  Pokemon  and  Epilepsy,  Washington  Post,  Mar.  6,  2000,  at  A9;  Kevin  Sullivan,  Japan  s  Cartoon 
 Violence;  TV  Networks  Criticized  After  Children  S  Seizures,  Washington  Post,  Dec.  19,  1997,  at  Dl;  Sheryl 
 Wu  Dunn,  TV  Cartoon  3  Flashes  Send  700  Japanese  Into  Seizures,  N.  Y.  Times,  Dec.  18,  1997,  at  A3. 
 32  Katie  Hafner,  Real  Queasiness  in  Virtual  Reality,  N.  Y.  Times,  Nov.  19,  1998,  at  Gl. 
116
 Children  Now  12 
 players,  and  the  Internet.  The  benefits  of  such  transmission  through  the  television  are 
 manifold,  such  as  picture  perfect  quality  and  Internet  capabilities.  33 
 Given  the  compression  power  of  digital  transmission,  the  additional  6  MHz  of 
 bandwidth  granted  to  broadcasters  represents  more  than  a  simple  100%  increase  in  a 
 stations  programming  capacity.  While  the  additional  bandwidth  can  provide  one 
 channel  at  the  highest  A/  V  quality  (i.  e.,  HDTV),  it  can  also  sustain  several  simultaneous 
 channels  at  lower  qualities  (e.  g.,  SDTV).  This  ability  to  broadcast  multiple  channels  is 
 called  multicasting.  Multicasting  essentially  allows  each  current  broadcaster  to 
 become  its  own  mini-  network,  with  an  inverse  relationship  between  the  quantity  of 
 channels  and  the  A/  V  quality  on  those  channels.  34  At  present,  the  common  perception  is 
 that  the  additional  6  MHz  can  sustain  up  to  4-  6  channels  of  SDTV  transmission,  thereby 
 increasing  the  amount  of  available  programming  exponentially.  35  As  the  technology 
 develops,  the  number  of  possible  channels  may  increase  even  more. 
 The  power  of  multicasting  requires  broadcasters  to  engage  in  what  the  National 
 Association  of  Broadcasters  terms  bandwidth  management.  36  As  previously  discussed, 
 broadcasters  will  have  the  flexibility  to  vary  the  amount  and  A/  V  quality  of  programming 
 throughout  the  day.  For  example,  local  broadcaster  WXYZ  could  design  a  Monday  menu 


 33  See  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  $9  MPEG-  2  (discussing  the  MPEG-  2  compression  scheme  for  digital 
 transmission),  Ghosts  in  the  Machine.  See  also,  Carvin  &  CPB,  supra  (explaining  binary  compression  and 
 associated  benefits).  34  See  FCC,  Digital  Television  Tower,  supra,  at  Questions  2-  3  (  There  is  a  trade-  off  between  using  digital 


 transmission  capacity  for  improved  pictures  and  sound  and  using  it  to  transmit  additional  programs.); 
 Center  for  Media  Education,  supra  (  Initially,  at  least,  the  latter  option  [of  SDTV  multicasting]  will  be  far 
 more  practical  (given  the  scarcity  of  sets  capable  of  displaying  HDTV),  which  means  that  every  local  TV 
 station  will  be  able  to  control  a  mini-  network  of  its  own.);  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  0  Multi-  Casting; 
 Digital  Television:  The  Site,  supra,  at  Q  SDTVMulticasting. 
 35  See,  e.  g.,  FCC,  Digital  Television  Tower,  supra,  at  Question  3;  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  5  Multi- 
 Casting;  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  What  is  Digital  Television? 
 j6  NAB  &  PricewaterhouseCoopers  LLP,  supra  (  As  managers  of  bandwidth,  they  may  adjust  their 
 broadcast  product  from  multiple  standard  definition  channels  during  the  day  and  late  night  dayparts  to  high 
 definition  programming  designed  to  reach  a  broad,  mass  audience  during  prime  time.). 


 .  -  _  .-..  -  I.-  .  .  .  ..__-  .._..  ._  _.--__-  I_-,  I.~..~--.-~ 
117
 Children  Now  13 
 that  airs  four  SDTV  channels  from  8  a.  m.  to  3  p.  m.,  switches  to  two  higher  definition 
 channels  from  3  p.  m.  to  8  p.  m.,  and  finishes  with  one  HDTV  channel  for  prime-  time  and 
 late-  night  programming.  Then,  WXYZ  could  change  its  amounts  and  quality  for  the 
 Tuesday.  37  Further,  WXYZ  may  choose  to  hold  a  special  pay-  per-  view  HDTV  broadcast 
 for  a  sporting  event,  in  lieu  of  its  scheduled  multicast  segment.  In  any  case,  digital 
 technology  and  the  bandwidth  giveaway  have  granted  broadcasters  an  enormous  amount 
 of  power  and  flexibility,  and  they  must  manage  the  station  schedule  for  optimal 
 performance. 
 This  model  of  variability  raises  several  serious  concerns  for  childrens  E/  I 
 programming.  In  addition  to  the  A/  V  quality  concerns  raised  in  Part  II.  A,  supru,  the 
 overall  amount  and  weekly  proportion  of  childrens  programming  may  be  threatened. 
 Multicasting  capability  de-  standardizes  the  amount  of  programming  across  broadcasters. 
 Whereas  previously  there  was  a  relatively  constant  set  of  programmable  hours  for  each 
 broadcaster,  the  new  digital  regime  will  host  myriad  combinations  and  permutations  of 
 hours  and  A/  V  quality.  Every  broadcaster  in  America  can  and  probably  will  provide  a 
 different  combination  with  different  overall  hours  and  quality.  38  Thus  the  previous  hard- 
 fought  rule  for  three  hours  of  Educational/  Informational  childrens  programming  per 
 week  may  suffer  drastically  -  what  was  previously  three  hours  of  E/  I  programming  per 
 105  hours  of  effective  weekly  broadcasting39  may  become  three  hours  per  1000  hours. 


 37  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  What  is  Digital  Television?  (  Within  a  single  programming  day,  a 
 broadcaster  will  have  the  flexibility  to  shift  back  and  forth  between  different  DTV  modes  in  different  day 
 parts.). 
 38  See  NAB  &  PricewaterhouseCoopers  LLP,  supra  (  One  new  benefit  of  the  digital  format  is  the  ability  to 
 apply  compression  and  vary  the  mix  of  digital  content,  broadcasting  one  program  in  high  definition 
 (HDTV)  or  several  in  standard  definition  (SDTV).  Broadcasters  will  have  a  broad  range  of  channel  options 
 in  their  business  mix.).  These  variations  in  quality  are  explored  in  more  detail  at  Part  II  (C-  D),  inj?  a. 
 39  Currently,  childrens  E/  I  programming  must  air  between  7  a.  m.  and  10  p.  m.  which  is  a  1  5-  hour  period  for 
 each  day.  Seven  days  of  15  programmable  hours  totals  105  hours  per  week. 
118
 Children  Now  14 
 As  the  Advisory  Committee  notes,  Applying  existing  public  interest  obligations  to  this 
 variegated  universe  will  not  be  easy,  and  will  certainly  not  entail  a  simple  one-  for-  one 
 exchange.  40  Given  these  risks,  Children  Now  believes  that  it  is  of  utmost  importance  for 
 the  FCC  to  examine  the  public  interest  obligations  under  the  Childrens  Television  Act, 
 especially  the  Three-  Hour  Rule,  as  they  will  apply  to  the  digital  era.  We  provide  a  set  of 
 recommendations  addressing  this  requirement  at  Part  IV,  infra. 
 C.  Multiplexing  -  Ancillary  &  Supplementary  Services 
 The  FCC  Notice  and  the  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996  characterize  DTV 
 services  such  as  datacasting,  paging,  and  interactivity  as  ancillary  and  supplementary.  41 
 These  services  may  be  offered  by  themselves  or  in  conjunction  with  broadcast 
 programming,  and  broadcasters  will  manage  their  bandwidth  distribution  accordingly. 
 The  transmittal  of  DTV  programming  and  ancillary  and  supplementary  services  at  the 
 same  time  is  termed  multiplexing.  42 
 DTVs  ancillary  and  supplementary  services  are  closely  related  to  the  futurist 
 concept  of  convergence,  whereby  the  many  discrete  pieces  of  technical  hardware  in  use 
 today  -  such  as  personal  computers,  Internet,  video  gaming  consoles,  fax/  modems, 
 broadcast  radio  and  television,  cellular  communications,  cable  -  will  merge  into  one 
 platform.  43  Convergence  raises  several  new  policy  concerns  with  respect  to  children, 
 many  of  which  have  been  previously  addressed  separately  within  their  respective  media 


 4o  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.10  (emphasis  added). 
 4  Notice  at  713  (.  .  .  services  other  than  free,  over-  the-  air  services.);  Fifih  Report  and  Order,  supra,  at 
 1282  1,730;  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  What  is  Digital  Television? 
 42  Notice  at  710;  Fifth  Report  and  Order,  supra,  at  12826,  fi42.  See  Carvin  &  CPB,  supra  (  The  last  -  and 
 perhaps  most  important  -  difference  with  digital  and  analog  TV  is  that  DTV  will  allow  you  to  combine  TV 
 signals  with  other  types  of  digital  content.).  Note  that  broadcasters  who  transmit  multiple  programming 
 channels  and  ancillary  and  supplementary  services  at  the  same  time,  are  multicasting  and  multiplexing. 
119
 Children  Now  15 
 (e.  g.,  Childrens  Television  Act  for  television,  Childrens  Online  Privacy  Protection  Act 
 for  Internet  marketing,  parental  advisory  labels  for  music).  Technological  advances 
 toward  convergence  will  necessarily  expedite  the  need  and  timeline  for  solutions  and 
 applications.  44  While  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  look  to  those  discrete  policy 
 solutions  for  guidance,  we  also  recognize  the  need  to  explore  new  solutions  specific  to 
 convergence  and  DTV. 
 Although  the  full  capacity  of  ancillary  and  supplementary  services  has  not  been 
 determined,  commentators  are  clearly  aware  of  their  enormous  potential  and 
 opportunities.  45  Digital  technology  is  currently  utilized  in  personal  computers  and  on  the 
 Internet  to  provide  large  amounts  of  data  and  to  interact  with  users.  DTV  broadcasters 
 have  the  capacity  to  use  a  portion  of  their  6  MHz  bandwidth  to  provide  similar  services, 
 currently  characterized  broadly  as  datacasting  and  interactivity. 
 Datacasting  is  providing  data  via  the  DTV  bitstream.  Any  information  that  can 
 be  coded  in  the  binary  scheme  of  1  s  and  Os  can  be  transmitted,  such  as  stock  quotes, 
 product  prices,  computer  software,  closed  captioning,  database  content,  weather 
 animation,  sports  scores,  Internet  content,  interactive  educational  material,  multimedia 


 43  See  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  What  is  Digital  Television  ?;  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  0  Whats  on  the  TV?  (  The  convergence  of  television  and  computers  is  going  to  take  a  major  step  with  digital 
 broadcasts.). 
 44  For  example,  commentators  have  noted  that  the  issues  of  violence,  pornography,  and  privacy  on  the 
 Internet  are  affecting  increasingly  larger  populations.  See,  e.  g.,  Paul  Van  Slambrouck,  New  Computer 
 Chip:  Useful  Tool  or  Privacy  Invasion.,  7  The  Christian  Science  Monitor,  Feb.  16,  1999,  at  2.  If  DTV  and 
 its  convergence  narrow  the  Digital  Divide  by  lowering  the  entry  price  points  for  Internet  connection,  then 
 those  issues  affect  a  far  greater  population  than  before  and  become  much  more  urgent. 
 45  See  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  $  /  Want  My  Enhanced  TV  (  Nobody  really  knows  how  well  interact  with 
 our  televisions  in  the  next  few  years,  but  TV  is  never  going  to  be  the  same.);  NAB  & 
 PricewaterhouseCoopers  LLP,  supra  (  The  concept  of  data  broadcasting  is  still  in  its  infancy;  however, 
 there  are  a  number  of  entrepreneurial  companies  ready  to  exploit  the  business  opportunities  offered  by  a 
 true  point-  to-  multipoint  data  push  model,  and  The  prevailing  DTV  Format  will  be  an  HDTV  Multicasting 
 tjbrid  -  but  the  Killer  App  will  be  datacasting  combined  with  two-  way  interactivity.). 
 Notice  at  73. 
120
 Children  Now  16 
 games,  or  illustrated  articles.  47  Selecting  personalized  data  will  be  a  function  of  user 
 interaction  with  the  television.  User  interactivity  through  the  television  has  been 
 attempted  previously  with  costly  external  network  connections,  but  digital  television  will 
 embed  interactivity  inside  the  broadcast  signal,  resulting  in  low  costs.  48  Viewers  will 
 be  able  to  communicate  with  the  television  and  with  others  through  the  television, 
 creating  a  more  personalized  and  potentially  educational  experience.  49 
 DTV  datacasting  and  interactivity  offer  significant  opportunities  and  risks  for 
 children.  Many  digital  commentators  have  envisioned  how  DTV  enhancements  may 
 improve  television  viewing,  including  programming  for  children.  For  example,  viewers 
 watching  a  documentary  on  dinosaurs  could  download  additional  information  on  certain 
 species  or  the  biography  of  a  scientist  on  the  program.  50  The  PBS  website  describes 
 possibilities  such  as  watching  a  lifelike  documentary  on  National  Parks  in  Africa  with 
 amazing  clarity  and  5.1  channel  sound,  followed  by  personalized  news  programming 
 that  presents  your  stocks,  weather,  sports  scores,  and  interest  pieces,  followed  by  E/  I 
 programming  where,  You  and  your  kids  play  some  learning  games  with  Big  Bird,  replay 
 the  sing-  along  a  few  times,  and  then  print  out  a  picture  for  coloring  together.  Your  kids 


 47  See  Advisory  Committee  Report  at    I,  What  is  Digital  Television?  (,.  .  .  digital  code,  which  is 
 increasingly  becoming  the  common  language  for  all  electronic  media.),  111.4(  c);  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at 
 $  I  Want  My  Enhanced  TV;  FCC,  Digital  Television  Tower,  supra,  at  Question  2;  People  for  Better  TV,  The 
 Potential  Benefits  ofDTV,  supra.  Current  television  programs  that  approximate  this  multiplexing  vision 
 include  financial  shows  with  the  NYSE  ticker  tape  and  MTVs  Total  Request  Live  with  e-  mail  input  from 
 viewers. 
 4X  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  4  The  Experiments  (describing  experiments  in  the  1980s  conducted  by  TCI 
 and  Time  Warner,  where  subscribers  could  shop  online,  play  games  with  people  across  town,  and  do  a  lot 
 of  the  things  we  dreamed  an  interactive  TV  should  offer.). 
 49  But  see,  Carvin  &  CPB,  supra  (describing  possible  limits  with  DTV  interactivity  due  to  lack  of  a  back 
 channel  similar  in  quality  to  DTV  broadcast;  in  the  interim,  Carvin  predicts  that  the  Internet  will  be  the  user 
 upstream  channel  and  will  provide  some  interactivity,  albeit  at  slower  rates  than  incoming  data).  See  also, 
 Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.4.~  (discussing  important  interactive  aspects  that  combines  television 
 broadcasting  and  the  Internet). 
 5o  Ballard,  supra,  at  3D. 


 _--  _.  _  --_--.  -  _._-..-- 
121
 Children  Now  17 
 are  learning  by  doing.  5  People  for  Better  TV  conjectures  that  DTV  may  make  it 
 possible  for  a  child  in  West  Virginia  to  talk  to  an  astronaut  aboard  a  space  station.  52 
 Benton  Foundation  DTV  pundit  Andy  Carvin,  formerly  of  the  Corporation  for  Public 
 Broadcasting,  presents  detailed  examples  and  actual  experiments  of  enhanced  TV  applied 
 to  education,  from  PBS  documentaries  on  Henry  V  and  Frank  Lloyd  Wright 
 supplemented  by  multimedia  content,  to  a  NOVA  special  where  children  can  construct 
 virtual  Stonehenges  or  pyramids,  to  a  Great  Performances  program  where  children  can 
 isolate  instruments  and  rearrange  music.  53  Carvin  also  identities  the  possibilities  for 
 teacher  professional  development  through  DTV.  54  Through  technological  advancements, 
 DTV  can  expand  greatly  the  educational  mission  of  public  television.  55 
 Another  pivotal  opportunity  lies  in  DTVs  ability  to  affect  the  Digital  Divide.  56 
 While  the  majority  of  Americans  do  not  currently  have  Internet  connectivity  at  home, 
 most  Americans  do  have  television  set.  Because  DTV  can  broadcast  websites  and  other 
 multimedia  content  without  high-  speed  Internet  connectivity,  DTV  is  able  to  bring  the 
 Internet  to  millions  of  people  at  home  or  in  institutions  such  as  schools,  through  the 
 purchase  of  DTV  tuner  PC  cards,  set-  top  boxes,  or  digital  televisions.  57  However,  the 
 Digital  Divide  cannot  be  overcome  unilaterally.  Although  the  content  provider  end  of 
 Internet  services  will  be  able  to  send  digital  data  through  free  broadcast  airwaves,  end- 
 users  still  require  new  hardware  to  receive.  The  actual  closure  of  the  divide  will  depend 


 5  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at  $  The  Many  Faces  of  HDTK 
 52  People  for  Better  TV,  The  Potential  Benefits  of  DTV,  (last  visited  Mar.  13,  2000) 
 4tt~://  www.  bettertv.  or&  benefits.  html>. 
 53  Carvin  &  CPB,  supra. 
 54  Id. 
 j5  Ballard,  supra,  at  3D. 
 56  For  more  information  regarding  the  Digital  Divide,  see  generally,  The  Digital  Divide  Network,  (last 
 visited  March  23,  2000),  <hthx//  www.  DiPitalDivideNetwork.  org>. 
 57  Carvin  &  CPB,  supra. 
122
 Children  Now  18 
 on  the  price  points  for  conversion  (i.  e.,  whether  it  will  be  financially  accessible  to  a 
 greater  population)  and  overcoming  relevant  biases.  58  Nonetheless,  as  the  government 
 and  broadcasting  industry  urge  convergence  on  the  DTV  platform,  a  massive  conversion 
 may  result  simply  because  current  television  owners  will  not  forego  their  basic  television 
 services  as  they  currently  forego  the  Internet.  The  externality  of  making  people  buy 
 digital  televisions  to  get  basic  television  would  be  closing  the  current  Internet  divide.  In 
 any  case,  DTVs  actual  effect  on  the  Digital  Divide  remains  to  be  determined  as 
 technology,  market  economics,  politics,  and  policy  continue  to  develop. 
 Exclusion  from  enhancement,  personalized  commercialization,  and  invasions  of 
 privacy  are  some  of  the  primary  risks  for  children  regarding  datacasting  and  interactivity 
 services.  Just  as  DTV  has  the  opportunity  to  enhance  childrens  education  and  close  the 
 Digital  Divide,  there  is  the  converse  risk  that  childrens  programming  will  be  excluded 
 from  higher-  end  services  and  that  lower-  income  populations  will  not  receive  DTV. 
 Further,  as  DTV  becomes  interactive  and  personalized,  companies  will  collect  more 
 information  about  viewers  and  can  customize  integrated  advertising  and  direct  marketing 
 within  programming.  Just  as  todays  Internet  marketers  can  track  user  movements  and 
 purchases,  convergence  will  enable  marketers  to  monitor  viewers  program  choices  and 
 behavior  with  enhanced  information-  gathering  techniques.  This  will  result  in 
 commercials  that  can  address  the  viewer  -  especially  children  -  directly  and  intimately, 


 58  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  Consumer  Demandfor  DTV.  For  price  point  concerns,  see,  e.  g.,  Joel 
 Brinkley,  HDTV:  High  in  Definition,  High  in  Price,  N.  Y.  Times,  August  20,  1998,  at  Gl;  A  Technophobes 
 Guide  to  HDTV,  Daily  Variety,  April  6,  1998,  at  A2  (describing  digital  television  priced  from  $7,000  to 
 $10,000,  and  lower  quality  converter  boxes  at  approximately  $100).  For  relevant  biases,  see,  e.  g.,  J.  Raloff, 
 Internet  Access:  A  Black-  and-  White  Issue,  Science  News,  Apr.  18,  1998,  at  247. 
123
 Children  Now  19 
 aggressively  urging  purchases.  59  Children  Now  addresses  these  risks  at  Part  IV.  B(  3), 
 infra. 
 Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  consider  the  opportunities  for  fuller  and  richer 
 childrens  education  through  the  affirmative  allocation  of  bandwidth  to  datacasting  and 
 interactivity  to  childrens  programming.  We  also  urge  the  FCC  to  consider  the  risks 
 associated  with  possible  exclusion  from  ancillary  and  supplementary  services,  and  with 
 personalized  commercialization  and  advertising  to  young  people.  Finally,  Children  Now 
 urges  the  FCC  to  monitor  the  actual  effects  of  the  DTV  convergence  on  the  current 
 Digital  Divide. 
 D.  Digital  Viewer  Experience  Quality  (DVEQ)  &  Bandwidth  Management 
 The  upshot  of  these  technological  advances  is  that  broadcasters  will  have  a 
 limited  amount  of  bandwidth,  but  exponentially  more  power  and  flexibility  than  ever 
 before.  Technology  has  made  the  capacity  of  the  6  MHz  bandwidth  seemingly  limitless. 
 In  the  digital  era,  broadcasters  have  the  phenomenal  ability  to  vary  the  viewers 
 experience  by  allocating  A/  V  quality,  datacasting,  interactive  components,  and  multiple 
 programming  hours,  in  any  combination  or  permutation  that  they  wish.  Overall 
 bandwidth  management  will  be  more  than  simply  channels  and  A/  V  quality.  60 
 Throughout  the  pre-  digital  era,  the  public  television  viewing  experience  was 
 mostly  standard  from  channel  to  channel.  Each  broadcaster  had  an  identical  finite 
 amount  of  programming  hours  per  week  and  all  broadcasts  had  the  same  analog  A/  V 


 59  People  for  Better  TV,  The  Dangers  of  DTV,  (last  visited  Mar.  13,200O) 
 <htt~:/  i~~  ww.  bettertv.  org/  dangers.  html>;  Center  for  Media  Education,  supra. 
 6o  See  Carvin  &  CPB,  supra  (  Theres  no  one  single  rule  for  utilizing  DTV  spectrum  -  broadcasters  will 
 have  to  figure  out  for  themselves  what  method  is  best  for  them.  But  there  are  so  many  options:  if  you  can 
 take  content  and  convert  it  to  1  s  and  Os,  youll  be  able  to  send  that  content  through  the  DTV  signal.  Its 
 just  a  matter  of  figuring  out  what  kinds  of  content  youd  want  to  transmit.). 
124
 Children  Now  20 
 quality.  With  DTV,  the  experience  can  range  from  a  program  similar  to  yesterdays 
 analog  broadcast  to  an  16:  9,  high-  definition,  multi-  casting,  surround-  sound  program 
 enhanced  with  streaming  datacast  and  interactive  participation.  6  To  quantify  this  range, 
 Children  Now  introduces  a  variable  entitled  Digital  Viewer  Experience  Quality  (DVEQ) 
 that  refers  to  the  different  types  of  experiences  that  are  now  possible  with  DTV. 
 The  primary  concern  with  DVEQ  and  children  is  the  exact  same  concern  we  have 
 identified  regarding  multicasting,  multiplexing,  and  the  inverse  relationship  between 
 quality  and  quantity  -  Will  children  s  programming  become  segregated  at  the  low  end  of 
 the  quality  spectrum  ?  Given  the  higher  production  costs  associated  with  HDTV, 
 datacasting,  and  interactivity,  how  much  E/  I  programming  will  be  broadcast  in  low- 
 definition  with  nothing  else?  Will  childrens  E/  I  programming  be  afforded  the  important 
 opportunity  to  participate  in  advanced  technology  for  expanded  learning  experiences,  or 
 will  those  technologies  be  designated  exclusively  for  high  profit  margin  ventures  such  as 
 sporting  events  and  pay-  per-  view  events  ?  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  further 
 consider  these  concerns  regarding  exclusion  in  its  rule-  making  process. 


 III.  THE  CHILDRENS  TELEVISION  ACT 
 A.  Background 
 Since  the  1960s,  childrens  advocates  have  urged  the  FCC  to  protect  the  public 
 interest  of  children  by  mandating  a  minimum  level  of  educational  childrens 
 programming.  Since  then,  an  ongoing  debate  has  ensued  among  broadcasters,  Congress, 


 6  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $1,  What  is  Digital  Television?  (  Because  different  gradations  of  HDTV 
 and  SDTV  picture  resolution  are  possible  -  there  are  18  different  transmission  formats  -  a  station  can  mix 
 and  match  video  programming  with  data  services,  provided  that  the  various  signals  fit  within  the  6  MHz 
 bandwidth.);  Cringely  &  PBS,  supra,  at    The  Many  Facts  of  HDTV. 


 - 
 -  _  _.__,  _  ._  ---._-  _--_  1-- 
125
 Children  Now  21 
 the  FCC,  advocates,  and  parents  about  minimal  standards  for  childrens  educational 
 programming  and  how  such  standards  should  be  deIined.  62 
 Thirty  years  of  debate  about  commercial  broadcasters  obligation  to  air  childrens 
 educational  programming  demonstrate  one  certainty.  Without  stringent  requirements 
 mandated  by  the  FCC,  broadcasters  do  not  voluntarily  serve  the  needs  of  children.  Self- 
 regulation  is  not  an  option  to  ensure  the  protection  of  childrens  public  interest.  As  the 
 FCC  considers  policy  recommendations  for  the  application  of  the  Childrens  Television 
 Act  in  the  digital  arena,  Children  Now  urges  the  mandating  of  specific  guidelines.  The 
 history  of  the  Childrens  Television  Act  demonstrates  that,  for  the  most  part,  unless  faced 
 with  external  pressure,  the  commercial  broadcast  industry  has  largely  neglected 
 childrens  educational  programming.  63 
 During  the  1970s  the  FCC  did  not  mandate  specific  policy  on  childrens 
 educational  television  requirements.  In  197  1,  the  FCC  did  initiate  a  rulemaking  on 
 childrens  television,  which  yielded  voluntary  changes  in  the  National  Association  of 
 Broadcasters  code  two  years  later.  64  The  NAB  agreed  to:  1)  make  clear  distinctions 
 between  childrens  programs  and  commercials;  2)  prohibit  the  practice  of  host-  selling;  3) 
 ban  ads  for  drugs  and  vitamins  during  childrens  shows;  and  4)  proposed  self-  regulated 
 limits  for  commercials  of  9  minutes  per  hour  on  weekdays  and  12  minutes  per  hour  on 
 weekends.  65  These  limits,  according  to  the  FCC,  struck  a  balance  between  the  needs  of 
 children,  who  were  judged  uniquely  susceptible  to  commercial  influence,  and  the  needs 


 Q  Mark  R.  Bamer,  Sex-  Role  Stereotyping  in  FCC-  Mandated  Children  s  Educational  Television,  43  Journal 
 of  Broadcasting  and  Electronic  Media.  55  1  (1999). 
 63  Dale  Kunkel,  Policy  and  the  Future  of  Children  s  Television  in  Children  &  Television:  Images  In  A 
 Changing  Sociocultural  World  273,  276  (Gordon  L.  Berry  et  al  eds.,  1993)  [hereinafter  Kunkel  and 
 Children  &  Television]. 
 6J  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $11,  The  Public  Interest  in  Children  s  Educational  Programming. 
 65  Id. 
126
 Children  Now  22 
 of  broadcasters,  who  were  dependent  upon  advertising  revenue  to  maintain  the  childrens 
 program  offerings.  66  Thus,  instead  of  mandating  rules,  the  FCC  issued  a  1974  PoEicy 
 Statement  noting  that  broadcasters  have  a  special  obligation  to  serve  children  67  and 
 asked  stations  to  provide  a  reasonable  amount  68  of  educational  programming. 
 By  the  late  197Os,  the  FCC  determined  that  broadcasters  self-  regulation  was  not 
 working,  and,  in  its  1979  ChiZdren  s  Television  Report,  offered  more  prescriptive  rules.  69 
 These  rules,  however,  were  never  implemented  as  new  commissioners  came  to 
 Washington  in  the  1980s.  In  1984,  led  by  Commissioner  Mark  Fowler,  the  FCC 
 determined  that  the  marketplace  alone  could  adequately  respond  to  childrens  needs.  70 
 Commercial  broadcasters  no  longer  had  to  air  educational  programming  as  long  as 
 childrens  needs  could  be  served  by  other  services  such  as  public  television,  cable, 
 satellite,  and  videos. 
 This  new  policy  resulted  in  a  notable  decline  in  childrens  educational 
 programming,  and  several  studies  documented  this  dramatic  decrease.  7  One  study,  for 
 example,  showed  that  commercial  broadcasters  did  not  provide  a  single  childrens 
 educational  show  during  a  sample  week  in  the  greater  Los  Angeles  area.  72  According  to 
 Professor  Dale  Kunkel  at  the  University  of  California  at  Santa  Barbara,  Even  the 
 relatively  small  amount  of  educational  programs  that  had  been  provided  previously  on 


 66  Dale  Kunkel  and  Don  Roberts,  et  al.  in  Mary  C.  Martin,  Childrens  Understanding  of  the  Intent  of 
 Advertising:  A  Meta-  Analysis,  16,  JOURNAL  OF  PUBLIC  POLICY  &  MARKETING  205  (1997). 
 67  Benton  Foundation  ,  The  Public  interest  Standard  in  Television  Broadcasting,  (last  modified  Jan.  19, 
 1999)  <  httD://  www.  benton.  or&  PlACisec2  >. 
 68Kunkel  and  Children  &  Television,  supra,  at  276. 
 69  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $11,  The  Public  Interest  in  Children  s  Educational  Programming. 
   Id. 
 Kunkel  and  Children  &  Television,  supra,  at  277. 
 72  Id. 
127
 Children  Now  23 
 commercial  television  essentially  disappeared  once  the  FCC  deregulated  kids 
 television.  73 
 During  the  198Os,  the  FCC  also  ruled  that  the  market  place  should  determine  how 
 much  commercial  content  could  be  included  in  childrens  programming.  The  FCC 
 therefore  dropped  the  limits  on  the  amount  of  advertising  in  childrens  television  and 
 relinquished  the  previously-  established  ban  on  program-  length  commercials,  30- 
 minute,  toy-  based  programs.  Subsequently,  advertising  on  childrens  programming 
 increased  considerably;  a  study  found  that  childrens  advertising  on  the  networks  in  1990 
 averaged  lo:  05  minutes  per  hour  compared  to  eight  minutes  in  1983.74  Similarly,  there 
 was  a  tremendous  increase  in  program-  length  commercials;  for  example,  profits  from 
 the  sale  of  licensed  products  based  on  the  program,  Teenage  Mutant  Ninja  Turtles, 
 yielded  $1.1  billion  by  199  1  .75 
 B.  The  Childrens  Television  Act  of  1990 
 Throughout  the  198Os,  it  became  increasingly  evident  that  the  FCC  could  not  rely 
 on  broadcasters  self-  regulation  to  meet  the  educational  needs  of  children.  Thus,  in  1990, 
 Congress  passed  the  Childrens  Television  Act  (CTA)  which  marked  a  new  era  for 
 television  broadcasters.  Under  the  CTA,  as  part  of  their  obligation  to  serve  the  public 
 interest,  television  station  operators  and  licensees  should  provide  programming  that 
 serves  the  special  needs  of  children.  76  The  Childrens  Television  Act  also  limited 
 advertising  during  childrens  programs  to  12  minutes  per  hour  on  weekdays,  10.5  minutes 


 73  Id. 
 74  Dale  Kunkel  8~  Walter  Gantz,  Children  s  Television  Advertising  in  the  Multichannel  Environment,  42  J. 
 Comm.  134,  143-  144,  147  (1992). 
   Kunkel  and  Children  &  Television,  supra,  at  278. 
 76  Childrens  Television  Act  of  1990,  Pub.  L.  No.  101-  437,  104  Stat.  996-  1000  codified  at  47  U.  S.  C.  $101. 
 [hereinafter  Childrens  Television  Act  of  19901. 
128
 Children  Now  24 
 per  hour  on  weekends.  Finally,  the  Act  mandated  that  the  FCC  revisit  and  re-  examine  its 
 policy  on  childrens  program-  length  commercials.  77 
 In  subsequent  years,  the  broad  coalition  of  groups  that  helped  ensure  the  passage 
 of  the  CTA  -  including  Action  for  Childrens  Television,  the  National  PTA,  the  National 
 Education  Association,  and  the  American  Academy  of  Pediatrics  -  was  often 
 disappointed  with  how  the  Act  was  being  implemented.  Because  there  were  no  specific 
 mandates  about  quantity  of  programming,  broadcasters  aired  as  little  as  30  minutes  of 
 educational  programs  a  week.  In  addition,  many  programs  that  stations  deemed  FCC- 
 friendly  were  scheduled  in  pre-  dawn  time  slots  when  few  people  were  likely  to  be 
 watching  78  or  were  often  preempted  by  Saturday  sports  programming.  Finally,  without 
 qualitative  guidelines  on  what  constitutes  educational  and  informational  programming, 
 many  networks  documented  shows  such  as  The  Jetsons  and  Leave  It  to  Beaver  as 
 educational. 
 Yet  when  it  came  to  the  quantifiable  commercial  time  limits  for  childrens 
 programming,  broadcasters  made  considerable  strides  in  complying  with  the  Act. 
 According  to  a  November  1993  FCC  study,  98  percent  of  stations  showed  compliance 
 with  the  commercial  limits,  up  from  95  percent  in  1992.79  Thus,  it  appears  that  setting 
 specific  quantifiable  requirements  under  the  Childrens  Television  Act  is  helpful,  and 
 arguably  essential,  in  garnering  broadcasters  compliance. 


   Childrens  Television  Act  of  1990,  supra,  $303a  (  Except  as  provided  in  subsection  (c)  of  this  section, 
 the  standards  prescribed  under  subsection  (a)  of  this  section  shall  include  the  requirement  that  each 
 commercial  television  broadcast  licensee  shall  limit  the  duration  of  advertising  in  childrens  television 
 programming  to  not  more  than  10.5  minutes  per  hour  on  weekends  and  not  more  than  12  minute  per  hour 
 on  weekdays.). 
   Center  for  Media  Education,  A  Field  Guide  to  the  Children  s  Television  Act,  (visited  Feb  29,  OO) 
 <httn:  i/  www.  cme.  org/  ctatooWf~  uide.  html>. 
   Christopher  Stem,  98%  of  Stations  Under  Limit  On  Kids  Ads;  FCC  Survey  on  Commercial  Time  Limit 
 Compliance,  124  Broadcasting  and  Cable  65  (March  28,  1994). 


 -_.  .  ..-.  .-  _,_-  ---  I_-_.~.  l___-  l---~_  l_.~  -_  --  --- 
129
 Children  Now  25 
 C.  The  Childrens  Television  Act-  More  Stringent  Rules 
 In  1996,  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  revised  the  CTA  to  address 
 the  concerns  of  advocates  and  parents,  by  providing  more  stringent  and  specific 
 quantifiable  rules  for  childrens  educational  programming.  The  FCC  guidelines  require 
 that  core  programming  be  designed  to  educate  and  inform  children  ages  16  and  under.  80 
 Under  the  FCCs  new  guidelines,  broadcasters  are  required  to:  1)  broadcast  a  minimum 
 of  three  hours  per  week  of  educational  and  informational  television  for  children;  2) 
 specify  in  writing  the  educational  and  informational  objective  of  a  program,  as  well  as  its 
 target  child  audience;  3)  air  programs  between  the  hours  of  7:  OOam  and  1O:  OOpm;  4) 
 ensure  that  broadcasts  are  regularly  scheduled  to  assist  parents  in  selecting  educational 
 programs  for  their  children;  5)  broadcast  programs  that  are  at  least  30  minutes  in  length; 
 and  6)  identify  E/  I  programs  (for  educational  and  informational)  at  the  beginning  of 
 each  program.  8 
 D.  The  Three-  Hour  Rule:  Is  It  Living  Up  To  Its  Expectations? 
 In  September  1997,  the  Three-  Hour  Rule  went  into  effect,  and  several 
 improvements  to  childrens  programming  have  been  documented.  The  Annenberg  Public 
 Policy  Center  at  the  University  of  Pennsylvania  issues  an  annual  report  on  broadcasters 
 compliance  with  the  Childrens  Television  Act.  The  most  recent  study,  The  Three-  Hour 
 Rule:  Is  it  Living  Up  to  Expectations?  examined  the  quantity  and  quality  of  broadcasters 
 second  year  efforts  (1998-  99  TV  season)  at  compliance,  and  found  that  commercial 


 So  Policies  and  Rules  Concerning  Childrens  Television  Programming,  Revision,  Revision  of  Programming  Policies  for  Television  Broadcast  Stations,  MM  Docket  No.  93-  48,  Report  and  Order, 
 11  FCC  Red  10660  (1996)  at  gIV.  84  [hereinafter  Policies  and  Rules  Concerning  Childrens  Television  Programming,  19961. 


 (  Accordingly,  as  proposed  in  the  NPFW,  we  will  require  that  core  programming  be  specifically  designed 
 to  meet  the  educational  and  informational  needs  of  children  ages  16  and  under  and  have  educating  and 
 informing  children  as  its  significant  purpose.). 
 *  Policies  and  Rules  Concerning  Childrens  Television  Programming,  l996,  supru,  at  1(  3-  5). 
130
 Children  Now  26 
 broadcasters  are  airing  the  required  three  hours  of  educational  programming.  82  The  report 
 found  that  the  Three-  Hour  Rule  has  effectively  increased  the  number  of  programs 
 available  to  children  during  hours  when  they  are  likely  to  watch.  In  addition,  6OO/  o  of 
 stations  offer  more  than  the  three-  hour  minimum  of  core  educational  programming. 
 Whereas  before  the  Three-  Hour  Rules  implementation  many  of  the  E/  I 
 (educational/  informational)  programs  were  aired  in  pre-  dawn  hours,  the  1998/  99  TV 
 seasons  programs  can  be  found  between  the  hours  of  7:  OOam  and  1O:  OOpm. 
 The  report  also  found  that  approximately  80%  of  the  E/  I  programs  evaluated  in  a 
 nationally  representative  media  market  are  meeting  the  letter  and  sometimes  the  spirit  of 
 the  law.  One  third  of  these  programs  are  even  highly  educational.  The  highly 
 educational  programs  come  from  a  variety  of  sources,  including:  programs  that 
 originally  aired  on  PBS  (such  as  Magic  School  Bus,  Bill  Nye,  Tlze  Science  Guy  and  New 
 Zoo  Revue);  those  developed  as  a  result  of  the  Three-  Hour  Rule  (such  as  Pepper  Ann, 
 Popular  Mechanics  for  Kids  and  Brain  Stew);  locally-  produced  programs  (such  as  UP  N 
 Running  and  HyperTek);  Spanish  language  programs  (Pistas  de  Blue  and  Plaza  Sesame); 
 religious  programs  (Al  Denson  s  Studio  828  and  QuigZey  s  Wage)  and  those  airing  in 
 syndication  (Real  Life  I01  and  Nick  News).  These  programs  tackle  a  variety  of  lessons 
 and  audiences  and  are  particularly  effective  at  making  these  lessons  relevant  to  the  lives 
 of  children. 
 While  they  note  these  and  other  improvements,  the  Annenberg  reports  also  show 
 that  there  is  still  a  need  to  monitor  the  progress  of  the  CTA.  For  instance,  over  one-  fifth 


 of  the  programs  labeled  educational  and  informational  in  their  sample  had  little  or  no 


   Kelly  L.  Schmidt,  The  Annenberg  Public  Policy  Center  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  The  Three- 
 Hour  Rule:  Is  It  Living  Up  To  Expectations?  (1999). 


 .__  .  _  ._-_  ..-.  .__  ~.-^.-.  l....  I.  _.  _.  .-_---..  .~----.-..-.- 
131
 Children  Now  27 
 educational  value  and  failed  to  meet  the  guidelines  set  forth  by  the  FCC.  83  While  these 
 shows  do  not  deserve  the  E/  I  label,  they  continue  to  air  on  commercial  broadcast  stations 
 (programs  such  as  N&  4  Inside  Stuffand  Peer  Pressure  have  aired  in  two  consecutive  TV 
 seasons  without  any  noticeable  improvement). 
 There  also  still  appears  to  be  some  confusion  at  the  station  level  about  what 
 constitutes  E/  I  programming.  There  were  several  questionable  programs  identified  on  the 
 FCC  398  reports  that  were  not  validated  by  the  syndicator  or  network  contact;  however 
 there  is  less  variation  in  the  way  that  broadcasters  are  complying  with  the  childrens 
 television  act  under  the  Three-  Hour  Rule. 
 The  report  found  that  while  broadcasters  are  complying  with  the  Three-  Hour 
 Rule,  and  making  an  effort  to  meet  the  educational  needs  of  children,  their  efforts  warrant 
 improvement.  There  are  still  too  many  programs  airing  that  are  not  educational  and  too 
 few  highly  educational  programs  available. 
 E.  The  Three-  Hour  Rule:  Insiders  Reactions 
 In  order  to  evaluate  tilly  the  Three-  Hour  Rule,  the  Annenberg  Public  Policy 
 Center  also  conducted  a  poll  of  television  industry  executives,  academics,  and 
 advocates.*  Most  noted  an  improvement  in  childrens  educational  programming,  citing 
 more  diversity  in  type  of  programming,  and  an  increased  quantity  and  quality  of  shows. 


 Respondents  noted  that  violent  and  offensive  shows  disappeared,  and  the  number  of 
 programs  devoid  of  educational  content  decreased  by  50  percent.  They  also  reported  that 


 83  Schmidt,  supra,  at  3.    See  Amy  B.  Jordan,  The  Annenberg  Public  Policy  Center  of  the  University  of  Pennsylvania,  The  Three- 
 Hour  Rule:  Insiders    Reactions  (1999). 
132
 Children  Now  28 
 the  rule  resulted  in  an  increased  dialogue  between  the  broadcast  industry  and  the 
 scholarly  and  academic  communities.  85 
 Despite  the  improvements,  more  than  half  of  the  respondents  felt  that  the 
 educational  objectives  of  the  rule  were  not  being  fully  realized.  They  found  that  while 
 childrens  programming  was  less  objectionable  after  implementation  of  the  rule,  it 
 nevertheless  could  not  be  deemed  truly  educational,  noting  that  a  majority  of  the 
 programming  address  social  and  emotional  concerns  rather  than  teaching  academic 
 concepts.  To  address  this  concern,  respondents  recommended  that  broadcasters: 
 1)  diversify  all  aspects  of  the  programs; 
 2)  increase  promotion  and  media  coverage  of  childrens  programming; 
 3)  establish  funding  sources  for  new  educational  programs; 
 4)  provide  more  research  to  create  efficient  educational  programs  that  appeal  to 
 children; 
 5)  create  a  national  public  information  campaign  about  educational 
 programming. 
 F.  Local  Observations  Relevant  to  the  Childrens  Television  Act 
 Over  the  last  several  months,  the  broad  coalition  of  organizations  known  as 
 People  for  a  Better  TV  (PBTV)  have  assessed  compliance  of  their  local  television 
 stations  with  the  guidelines  of  the  CTA  by  recording  childrens  programs  and  examining 
 the  public  files  at  their  local  stations.  Comments  and  observations  about  local  stations 
 commitment  to  childrens  programming  centered  mostly  on  station  compliance  with  the 
 three-  hour  requirement  and  critiques  of  the  types  of  programs  offered  to  children. 


   Jordan,  supra,  at  4. 
133
 Children  Now  29 
 Overall,  local  organizations  across  the  country  found  that  most  stations  comply 
 with  the  minimum  required  hours  with  most  stations  airing  only  three  to  four  hours  of 
 educational  programming.  86  For  example,  the  California  chapter  of  the  National 
 Organization  for  Women  stated  that  IRON,  the  NBC  affiliate  in  San  Francisco,  makes, 
 ONLY  the  minimal  commitment  to  childrens  programming  [with]  3  to  3.5  hours  per 
 week  [and]  no  programs  during  the  week.    Children  Now  noted  that  KPIX,  the  CBS 
 affiliate  in  San  Francisco,  aired  less  than  their  self-  reported  three  hours,  as  their 
 childrens  programming  was  preempted  by  sports. 
 Other  stations  across  the  country  were  also  shown  to  have  only  minimum 
 compliance.  The  Massachusetts-  based  Center  for  Technology  &  Society  evaluated  the 
 CBS  affiliate  in  Boston,  WBZ,  and  noted  they  aired  exactly  three  hours  of  childrens 
 programming,  a  drop  from  1997  when  they  aired  6  hours.  A  Detroit  station,  WXYZ 
 (ABC)  fared  slightly  better  than  Bostons  WBZ,  with  four  hours  of  childrens 
 programming. 
 While  stations  claim  to  be  airing  three  hours  a  week  of  E/  I  programming,  they  are 
 not  consistently  labeling  shows  as  such.  Many  of  these  programs  came  up  repeatedly  in 
 the  evaluations  including  Pepper  Ann,  Squigglevision,  Popular  Mechanics  for  Kids, 
 Sabrina  the  Animated  Series,  and  Mythic  Warriors.  The  Christian  Communication 
 Council  of  Detroit  observed  that  some  of  these  programs  were  identified  specifically  to 


 educate  and  inform  children,  thus  complying  with  the  E/  I  label  requirement,  while 
 others  were  simply  identified  for  children  of  all  ages.  Children  Now  noticed  similar 
 inconsistency  in  the  programs  that  they  monitored.  Three  of  the  four  stations  reviewed 


 86  The  ABC  affiliate  in  Houston,  KTRK,  aired  4.5  hours  of  educational  programming.  The  Fox  and  ABC  affiliates  in  San  Francisco,  aired  8  hours  and  5.5  hours  of  childrens  programming  respectively. 
134
 Children  Now  30 
 had  the  E/  I  logo  and  only  two  listed  the  target  age  group  for  which  the  program  was 
 designed. 
 In  addition  to  the  inconsistency  in  identifying  E/  I  programming,  there  was  a 
 perception  that  programs  were  not  labeled  in  a  way  that  is  convenient  for  parents.  Jim 
 Jones  of  Child  Serve  noted  the  difficulty  of  planning  ahead  because  most  newspapers  do 
 not  carry  the  E/  I  logo  and  he  wrote,  you  must  be  quick  and  on  time  to  find  the 
 designation  as  the  show  begins  because  the  E/  I  logo  appears  only  briefly  on  screen. 
 Some  organizations  questioned  the  true  educational  value  of  programs  that  were 
 labeled  as  E/  I  shows.  In  a  review  of  WAE3Cs  public  files  in  New  York  City,  the 
 characterization  of  101  Dalmatians  and  Sabrina  as  E/  I  programming  was  deemed 
 questionable.  Similarly,  Children  Now  noted  that  at  the  San  Francisco  ABC  affiliate, 
 KGO,  only  two  out  of  five  programs  [had]  a  clearly  educational  intent.  Other 
 organizations  remarked  on  the  perceived  leniency  of  labeling  programs  as  educational  or 
 informational.  For  instance,  NYU  graduate  students  who  visited  the  public  files  of  the 
 Fox  affiliate  in  New  York  City  said,  Of  particular  interest  in  the  childrens/  educational- 
 programming  files  are  these  TV  shows  listed  as  programming  of  interest  to  children: 
 Beverly  Hills  90210,  Party  of  Five,  and  The  Simpsons.  Child  Serves  Jim  Jones  notes,  I 
 fail  to  see  how  some  of  these  shows  can  be  deemed  educational  or  informational.  .  .  .  The 
 majority  of  the  shows  teach  children  that  it  is  vital  to  be  cool,  outsiders  will  always  be 
 treated  poorly  and  although  being  yourself  is  very  important,  you  better  be  good  looking, 


 good  at  sports  or  well-  dressed  because  brains  still  work  against  you.  The  Center  for 
 Technology  &  Society  summed  up  these  concerns  by  saying,  A  clever  writer  could  take 
 almost  any  program  on  television  and  laud  about  its  ability  to,  say,  improve  social 


 ..__.  .  .  _--.-  ..--.  _  ._  l__  l_  ___--  ..,._..  ___-___  ----- 
135
 Children  Now  31 
 skills.    They  continued  by  saying  their  organization  would  like  to  see  clear  evidence 
 that  professionals  involved  with  childrens  learning  such  as  librarians,  education  faculty, 
 and  communications  faculty  are  examining  and  shaping  these  few  shows  for  their 
 positive  effect  on  children. 
 G.  Mandating  Rules  in  a  New  Digital  Era 
 Broadcasting  is  a  business;  it  would  be  naive  to  ignore  the  fundamental  role  of  the 
 bottom  line  for  broadcasters.  Indeed,  the  history  of  the  Childrens  Television  Act 
 demonstrates  that,  when  left  to  regulate  themselves,  broadcasters  will  not  choose  a  public 
 interest  obligation  to  our  nations  children  over  advertising  revenues.  Even  those 
 broadcasters  whose  personal  philosophies  might  dictate  doing  the  right  thing,  are 
 operating  in  an  intensively  competitive  sphere.  When  left  to  self-  regulation,  acting  on 
 honorable  intentions  carries  too  great  a  business  risk  for  the  great  majority  of  those  in  the 
 industry. 
 As  the  Annenberg  studies  and  People  for  Better  TVs  local  observations 
 demonstrate,  while  broadcasters  currently  are  generally  complying  with  the  Childrens 
 Television  Act,  there  is  still  room  for  considerable  improvement.  Stringent,  quantifiable 
 rules  continue  to  be  necessary  to  ensure  that  broadcasters  meet  childrens  educational 
 needs.  As  television  moves  from  an  analog  to  a  digital  system,  Children  Now  urges  the 
 FCC  not  to  rely  once  again  on  self-  regulation  and  good  faith  from  the  broadcasting 
 industry.  Rather,  fair  regulations,  defined  and  enforced  by  the  FCC,  can  ensure  that 
 broadcasters  meet  their  obligation  to  children  in  this  new  digital  age. 
136
 Children  Now  32 
 IV.  ANALYSES  &  RECOMMENDATIONS 
 Children  Now  proposes  the  following  recommendations  with  the  hope  that  public 
 interest  service  in  broadcasting  will  be  continued  and  enhanced.  For  all  these 
 recommendations,  Children  Now  also  advises  that  the  FCC  consider  careful  phasing-  in 
 and  implementation  of  standards  and  obligations  over  the  period  of  time  for  transition 
 and  conversion  from  analog  to  digital.  87  Each  recommendation  should  have  built-  in 
 periodic  reconsideration,  particularly  for  technological  advances,  market  responses,  and 
 any  other  factors  that  may  impact  the  overall  effectiveness  of  a  recommendation. 
 A.  Minimum  Public  Interest  Obligations  Should  Be  Specific 
 Along  with  People  for  Better  TV,  members  of  the  Advisory  Committee,  the 
 Media  Access  Project,  and  the  Benton  Foundation,  Children  Now  believes  that  minimum 
 public  interest  standards  and  obligations  must  be  specific  and  detailed  in  order  to  give 
 them  meaning  and  effect.  88  Moreover,  the  conversion  to  digital  is  an  unprecedented, 
 complex  process  and  necessarily  requires  specific  guidelines  during  the  transition  period 
 and  afterwards.  These  requirements  and  guidelines  should  be  communicated  clearly  to 
 broadcasters  during  the  license  renewal  process  to  ensure  compliance  and  to  ease  any 
 broadcasters  concerns  regarding  their  status.  Children  Now  supports  the  Advisory 
 Committees  recommendation  of  five  categories  for  minimum  standards,  in  addition  to 
 the  specific  recommendations  contained  in  these  comments.  89  Compliance  would  be 
 facilitated  through  quarterly  reporting  as  detailed  in  Part  IV.  C,  infra. 


 *  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.3  C  Any  set  of  minimum  standards  should  be  drafted  by  the  FCC  in 
 close  conjunction  with  broadcasters  and  representatives  of  the  public,  and  phased  in  over  several  years 
 beginning  with  stations  transmission  of  digital  signals.  (emphasis  added)). 
 88  Id.;  Notice  at  721  n.  68. 
 89  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.3. 
137
 Children  Now  33 
 B.  Serving  the  Nations  Children 
 The  following  recommendations  are  particular  to  the  FCCs  request  regarding 
 how  to  serve  nations  children.  (Notice  at  112). 
 1.  The  Childrens  Television  Act  in  Digital 
 Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  maintain  and  enforce  all  of  the  current 


 requirements  of  the  Childrens  Television  Act  in  the  digital  era.  In  addition  to 
 complying  with  a  proportional  Three-  Hour  Rule  described  below,  broadcasters  still  must 
 be  required  to:  1)  specify  in  writing  the  educational  and  informational  objective  of  a 
 program,  as  well  as  its  target  child  audience;  2)  air  programs  between  the  hours  of 
 7:  OOam  and  1O:  OOpm;  3)  ensure  that  broadcasts  are  regularly  scheduled  to  assist  parents 
 in  selecting  educational  programs  for  their  children;  4)  broadcast  programs  that  are  at 
 least  30  minutes  in  length;  and  5)  identify  E/  I  programs  at  the  beginning  of  each 
 program.  Again,  as  evidenced  from  the  history  of  the  Childrens  Television  Act,  if  the 
 FCC  does  not  explicitly  state  and  enforce  these  rules,  broadcasters  will  not  voluntarily 
 meet  the  educational  and  informational  needs  of  children  in  the  new  digital  era. 
 However,  Children  Now  also  recognizes  that  the  digital  television  landscape  is 
 complex,  creating  difficulties  in  applying  directly  the  current  public  interest  obligations 
 regarding  children.  As  the  Advisory  Committee  noted, 
 Analog  broadcasters  send  one  signal,  usually  24  hours  a  day.  Digital  broadcasters  may 
 send  one  or  multiple  signals,  at  many  different  time  periods  throughout  the  day.  Some  of 
 these  signals  may  be  programs;  others  may  involve  data  transmissions  or  other  broadband 
 and  telecommunications  services.  The  vast  new  range  of  choices  inherent  in  digital 
 television  technology  makes  it  impossible  to  transfer  summarily  existing  public  interest 
 obligations  to  digital  television  broadcasting.  A  key  mandate  for  the  Advisory 


 9o  See  Notice  at  74,  citing  Fifth  Report  and  Order,  supra,  at  12809,  128  lo-  128  11,  12830  (1997)  (  Likewise, 
 in  implementing  section  336,  the  Commission  reaffirmed  that  digital  broadcasters  remain  public  trustees 
 with  a  responsibility  to  serve  the  public  interest,    and  state  that  existing  public  interest  requirements 
 continue  to  apply  to  all  broadcast  licensees.);  Fifth  Report  and  Order,  supra,  at  12830,  jiSO. 
 9  Policies  and  Rules  Concerning  Childrens  Television  Programming,  1996,  supra,  at  1(  3-  5). 
138
 Children  Now  34 
 Committee,  therefore,  has  been  to  suggest  how  traditional  principles  of  public-  interest  performance  should  be  applied  in  the  digital  era.  92 


 Thus,  Children  Now  recommends  that  the  FCC  apply  the  current  Childrens 
 Television  Act  and  corresponding  FCC  rules  to  digital  broadcasters  in  the  following 
 manner: 
 a.  The  Digital  Three-  Hour  Rule  for  E/  I  Programming: 
 Proportional  Hours  Requirement 


 As  the  Advisory  Committee  accurately  notes,  .  .  .  if  broadcasters  decide  to  use 
 their  digital  real  estate  for  multiple  commercial  channels  (whether  or  not  they  are  high 
 definition),  each  generating  its  own  revenue  stream,  then  it  is  appropriate  to  consider 
 whether  the  public  interest  requires  a  different  formz&  z.  193  With  respect  to  multicasting, 
 this  argument  for  reconsideration  of  particular  public  interest  formulas  is  strengthened  by 
 the  fact  that  although  the  FCC  assesses  fees  from  digital  broadcasters  who  get  paid  for 
 ancillary  or  supplementary  services,  the  multicasting  feature  is  free  of  charge.  94 
 First,  each  digital  broadcaster  should  provide  an  amount  of  weekly  E/  I 
 programming  that  is  proportional  to  the  three  hours  per  week  requirement  currently 
 administered  under  the  Childrens  Television  Act  of  1990.  This  rule  transfers  the  current 
 Three-  Hour  Rule  to  digital  in  a  fair  and  commensurable  way,  accounting  for  the 
 increased  amount  of  programming  possible  through  multicasting.  Unlike  a  flat  hour  rule, 
 it  does  not  penalize  broadcasters  who  choose  to  program  fewer  hours  than  their 
 colleagues.  Thus,  the  obligation  of  digital  broadcasters  is  effectively  the  same  as  it  was 
 during  the  analog  era. 


 92  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.  93  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.5  (emphasis  added). 
 94  Id. 
139
 Children  Now  35 
 Children  Now  recommends  an  application  of  the  traditional  Three-  Hour  Rule  that 
 becomes  the  Three-  Percent  Rule.  First,  we  establish  a  baseline  proportion  of  three  hours 
 per  one-  hundred  and  five  (105)  programmable  broadcast  hours  per  week  -  premised  on 
 the  current  15  hours  per  day  (between  7  a.  m.  and  10  p.  m.)  window  for  E/  I  programming 
 for  seven  days  per  week.  This  provides  a  simple  and  realistic  percentage  to  apply  to 
 expanded  hours  in  the  digital  era  -  3/  l  05  or  approximately  3%  for  administrative 
 simplicity.  Once  broadcasters  have  calculated  their  total  digital  broadcast  hours  per 
 week,  they  should  multiple  that  total  by  3%  and  round  up  to  the  closest  five-  tenths  (i.  e., 
 0.5)  since  half-  hour  segments  are  the  smallest  unit  for  programming.  This  will  yield  a 
 preliminary  E/  I  hours  requirement,  subject  to  adjustment  by  the  proportional  DVEQ 
 process  detailed  in  Part  IV.  B(  l)(  b),  infya.  Children  Now  has  provided  a  sample  case 
 study  worksheet  in  Appendix  A. 
 Broadcasters  are  currently  required  to  file  quarterly  reports  that  detail  meeting 
 their  E/  I  requirements,  and  this  calculation  and  evaluation  process  will  follow  the  same 
 schedule  in  the  digital  era.  The  amounts  and  figures  required  for  the  Digital  Three-  Hour 
 Rule  will  be  reported  in  the  quarterly  filings,  and  will  determine  the  broadcasters  E/  I 
 requirements  for  the  following  quarter.  The  sample  worksheet  in  Appendix  A  functions 
 similarly  to  the  disclosure  worksheet  proposed  by  the  Advisory  Committee  -  it  is  a 
 simple  and  minimally  burdensome  method  to  assure  the  public  and  broadcasters  that 
 public  interest  obligations  are  being  fulfilled. 
 b.  The  Digital  DVEQ  Rule  for  E/  I  Programming: 
 Proportional  DVEQ  Requirement 


 Second,  the  rules  should  also  protect  against  segregation  of  E/  I  programming  into 
 the  lowest  DVEQ  as  determined  by  A/  V  quality  and  multiplexing  (e.  g.,  datacasting  and 
140
 Children  Now  36 
 interactive  participation).  E/  I  programming  must  partake  of  the  technological  advances 
 in  the  same  proportion  that  a  broadcaster  chooses  to  use  them  overall.  Children  Now 
 recommends  that  with  each  quarterly  report,  broadcasters  must  file  a  calculation  of  how 
 their  programming  hours,  apartfrom  ELprogramming,  is  distributed  with  respect  to 
 DVEQ  (e.  g.,  How  many  hours  are  broadcast  in  HDTV  with  streaming  datacast?  How 
 many  hours  are  broadcast  in  SDTV  as  part  of  a  four-  channel  multicast  with  no 
 multiplexing?  How  many  hours  are  broadcast  in  each  of  the  18  possible  formats?).  Once 
 this  overall  DVEQ  distribution  is  computed,  broadcasters  must  apportion  their  required 
 E/  I  programming  hours  accordingly.  All  calculations  must  round  up  to  the  nearest  five- 
 tenths,  since  half-  hour  segments  will  be  the  smallest  unit  for  programming. 
 Importantly,  this  recommendation  preserves  the  broadcasters  flexibility  and 
 power  to  determine  their  optimal  mix  of  services  and  bandwidth  management.  The  FCC 
 determined  that  this  flexibility  was  prudent  and  declined  to  mandate  a  standard  amount  of 
 services  that  would  rest  on  a  prior  assumptions  as  to  what  services  viewers  would 
 prefer.  95  However,  this  recommendation  also  protects  E/  I  programming  against 
 segregation  and  also  promotes  use  of  advanced  technologies  to  enhance  the  educational 
 experiences  of  television.  Childrens  E/  I  programming  should  participate  in  the  benefits 
 of  multiplexing  and  high-  definition  A/  V  as  much  as  broadcasters  choose  to  use  these 
 services.  Children  Now  has  provided  a  sample  case  study  worksheet  in  Appendix  A. 
 C.  Pay  or  Play  Model 


 If  the  FCC  wants  to  maximize  broadcasters  flexibility,  they  could  consider  a 
 Pay  or  Play  model  as  a  way  in  which  broadcasters  could  meet  their  obligation  to  the 
 digital  Three-  Hour  Rule.  Under  this  model  public  interest  obligations  are  quantified,  and 
141
 Children  Now  37 
 broadcasters  have  the  choice  of  meeting  these  obligations  through  their  own 
 programming  or  by  paying  a  share  of  revenues  to  bypass  those  obligations.  96 
 Should  the  FCC  consider  such  a  model,  Children  Now  urges  them  to  consider  it 
 as  a  means  of  expanding  our  recommendation  for  a  digital  Three-  Hour  Rule.  Again, 
 under  Children  Nows  proposal  for  a  digital  Three-  Hour  Rule,  broadcasters  obligation  to 
 E/  I  programming  would  increase  proportionally  to  the  number  of  hours  they  are  multi- 
 casting.  A  Pay  or  Play  model  would  simply  increase  broadcasters  flexibility  in 
 meeting  this  public  interest  obligation. 
 Children  Now  encourages  the  FCC  to  consider  a  Pay  or  Play  approach  that  is 
 analogous  to  the  trading  of  pollution  rights  under  the  Clean  Air  Act  Amendment  of 
 1990.  Essentially,  the  Act  successfully  reduced  sulfur  dioxide  emissions  by  giving 
 companies  allowances  that  they  could  buy,  save,  or  use  from  other  companies.  97  With  its 
 public  interest  obligation  already  quantified,  the  Childrens  Television  Act  could  serve  as 
 an  appropriate  archetype  for  the  Pay  or  Play  mode1.98 
 The  FCC  could  maximize  broadcasters  flexibility,  by  giving  them  the  option  of 
 airing  the  required  hours  of  E/  I  programming  on  their  own  channels,  paying  other 
 networks  or  channels  to  air  these  hours  for  them,  or  a  combination  thereof. 
 As  it  stands,  the  1996  Childrens  Television  Act  enables  broadcasters  to  serve 
 children  by  producing  or  supporting  shows  that  are  then  broadcast  by  another  station.  99 


 95  Fifth  Report  and  Order,  supra,  at  12826,142. 
 96Advisory  Committee  Report  at  ~111.10,  New  Approaches  to  Public  Interest  Obligations  in  the  New 
 Television  Environment. 
 97  Campbell,  Angela,  Toward  A  New  Approach  to  Public  Interest  Regulation  of  Digital  Broadcasting 
 (visited  March  7,  2000)  <  ht~:  llwww.  as~  eninst.  or&  x!  ksldb~  il  l.  asi  >  at  f~  Proposal  4:  The  Pay  or  Play 
 Option  [hereinafter  Campbell]. 
 98  /d. 
 99  Id.  (  The  Childrens  Television  Act  in  fact  has  adopted  this  approach  in  permitting  broadcast  licensees  to 
 meet  part  of  their  obligation  to  serve  the  educational  and  information  needs  of  children  by  demonstrating 


 _  _......_  _  *.  ._  ..-.  --  .-  .  .._  ~-  -,___  ..___.~_ 
142
 Children  Now  38 
 To  date,  broadcasters  have  not  taken  advantage  of  this  opportunity  but  the  Pay  or  Play" 
 model  could  facilitate  their  participation.  One  of  the  benefits  of  this  model  is  that  it  could 
 promote  partnerships  between  commercial  broadcasters  or  commercial  and  non- 
 commercial  broadcasters  in  a  given  market.  lW  The  model  also  could  provide  much 
 needed  financial  support  to  public  broadcasters,  who  have  a  strong  interest  in  and 
 commitment  to  E/  I  programming. 
 There  are  several  drawbacks  to  the  Pay  or  Play  model  that  the  FCC  should  take 
 into  account  if  they  are  to  mandate  such  a  policy.  Critics  contend  that  under  such  a 
 model,  broadcasters  will  opt  for  the  least  expensive  alternative,  which  will  most  likely  be 
 to  air  programming  on  their  own  stations,  which  could  be  of  extremely  poor  quality.   
 Critics  also  argue  that  this  model  will  relegate  public  interest  programming  to  public 
 broadcasting,  which  would  result  in  less  exposure  for  Americas  children.  02  Another 
 concern  is  that  commercial  broadcasters  may  not  pay  public  broadcasters  enough  to  be 
 able  ameliorate  the  current  public  broadcaster  funding  shortage,  which,  in  the  end,  could 
 reduce  the  quality  of  E/  I  programming.  03 
 Such  concerns  could  be  mitigated  if  the  FCC  mandates  stringent  guidelines  to  a 
 Pay  or  Play  model  for  the  Childrens  Television  Act.  The  FCC  should  develop  a 
 formula  to  quantify  the  economic  value  of  an  hour  of  E/  I  programming.  *04  Such  a 


 special  efforts  to  produce  or  support  [childrens  educational]  programming  broadcast  in  another  station  in 
 the  licensees  marketplace.). 
 loo  Id. 
 O  Id. 
 lo2  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.10,  New  Approaches  to  Public  Interest  Obligations  in  the  New 
 Television  Environment. 
 lo3  Campbell,  supra,  at  $  Proposal  4:  The  Pay  or  Play  Option. 
 lo4  According  to  proponents  of  this  model,  a  payout  of  all  public  service  requirements  (not  just  E/  I 
 programming)  would  be  about  two  percent  of  broadcasters  gross  revenues,  currently  valued  at  $26  billion. 
 See  Neil  Hickey,  Television  News  Is  Moving  From  the  Drab  Old  Neighborhood  to  Beachfront  Property  on 
 the  Cyber  Sea,  Columbia  Journalism  Review  47  (September/  October  1999);  Henry  Geller, 


 ..  _  _._  _  _--.  _...__  ..-  ..~--- 
143
 Children  Now  39 
 formula  should  take  into  account  Children  Nows  proposed  DVEQ  (digital  viewer 
 experience  quality)  as  a  means  of  quantifying  the  range  of  experiences  that  are  now 
 possible  with  DTV.  Thus,  the  price  tag  for  an  hour  of  E/  I  programming  would  vary 
 depending  on  the  level  of  the  DVEQ  of  the  program.  As  previously  stated,  broadcasters 
 should  apportion  their  required  E/  I  programming  hours  according  to  their  overall  DVEQ 
 distribution.  Such  apportionment  should  mollify  some  of  the  concerns  about  E/  I 
 programming  quality  in  a  Pay  or  Play  model. 
 The  Pay  or  Play  model  will  require  more  data  gathering  and  monitored 
 enforcement  by  the  FCC  to  ensure  broadcasters  compliance.  When  broadcasters  file  their 
 quarterly  reports  on  their  E/  I  obligation,  they  should  be  required  to  report  whether  they 
 aired  these  hours  themselves  or  paid  another  station  to  fulfill  their  responsibility.  They 
 must  disclose  the  name  of  the  station  that  aired  the  hours  for  them,  and  the  amount  that 
 they  paid.  Again,  the  payment  must  be  based  on  the  formula  previously  determined  by 
 the  FCC,  which  should  include  the  DVEQ  as  a  variable.  The  FCC  must  be  prepared  to 
 enforce  these  rules,  and  to  apply  fines  when  necessary  to  ensure  compliance. 
 d.  Diversity  of  Programming 
 In  order  to  meet  the  educational  needs  of  the  vast  child  audience,  it  is  essential 
 that  broadcasters  provide  a  range  of  E/  I  programming.  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  be 
 cognizant  of  the  importance  of  diversity  in  childrens  educational  programming, 
 particularly  in  regards  to:  1)  the  age  of  the  target  audience;  and  2)  the  production  locale. 


 Implementation  of    Pay  Models  and  the  Existing  Public  Trustee  Model  in  the  Digital  Broadcast  Era, 
 (visited  Mar.  10,  2000)  <  httD:/!  wwwasveninst.  orglc&  s/  dbvi24.  asj  >. 
144
 Children  Now  40 
 i.  Target  Audience 
 Age-  related  differences  in  childrens  cognitive  abilities  influence  their  ability  to 
 comprehend  and  decipher  media  messages.  05  Preschool-  age  and  young  children  often 
 cannot  understand  media  content  because  it  is  too  conceptual  or  complex,  causing  their 
 attention  to  wane.  lo6  In  order  to  attract  childrens  attention,  broadcasters  must  create 
 programming  that  is  targeted  to  different  age  groups,  taking  into  account  the  needs  and 
 abilities  of  children  of  these  specific  groups.  o7  According  to  Dr.  Kelly  Schmidt,  author  of 
 The  Three-  Hour  Rule:  Is  It  Living  Up  To  Expectations?,  minimal  E/  I  programming  exists 
 for  children  under  the  age  of  five.  Although  this  trend  may  represent  a  reluctance  among 
 broadcasters  to  label  programming  appropriate  for  that  age  group,  it  also  could  be  that 
 some  advertisers  feel  that  preschoolers  are  not  a  legitimate  market.  lo8 
 Our  youngest  children  can  benefit  tremendously  from  E/  I  programming  that  is 
 developmentally  appropriate;  it  cannot  only  educate  and  entertain,  but  it  can  prepare 
 children  for  school,  and  has  even  been  shown  to  improve  test  scores.  According  to  a  1995 
 University  of  Kansas  study,  preschoolers  in  low-  income  areas  who  watched  educational 
 childrens  programming  were  not  only  better  prepared  for  school,  but  actually  performed 
 better  on  verbal  and  math  tests  as  late  as  age  7  than  would  have  been  expected  otherwise. 
 The  study  also  found  that  preschoolers  who  only  watched  adult  programs  and 


 lo5  Dale  Kunkel  &  Brian  Wilcox,  Children  and  Media  Policy,  in  Handbook  on  Children  and  Media 
 (Dorothy  and  Jerome  Singer,  eds.,  forthcoming  2000). 
 lo6  Kunkel  &  Wilcox,  supra,  at  $  Adequacy  of  Television  s  Service  to  Children. 
 O  Id. 
 lo8  Schmidt,  sup-  a,  at  11. 
145
 Children  Now  41 
 entertainment-  oriented  cartoons  did  worse  on  those  later  tests  than  would  have  been 
 anticipated.  lo9 
 Under  the  1996  Childrens  Television  Act,  broadcasters  are  required  to  disclose 
 the  target  age  group  that  their  E/  I  programs  serve.  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to 
 minimally  require  the  same  disclosure  of  digital  broadcasters  and  to  consider  the 
 importance  of  serving  all  children  in  the  new  digital  era. 


 ii.  Production  Locale 
 Locally-  produced  programs  provide  an  important  niche  for  children,  as  they  can 
 educate  and  inform  them  about  their  community,  as  well  as  offer  ideas  of  local  activities 
 in  which  to  participate.  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  consider  the  benefits  that  locally- 
 produced  shows  bring  to  the  children  in  the  communities  they  serve.  Currently,  there  is  a 
 dearth  of  such  types  of  E/  I  programming.  According  to  the  Annenberg  Public  Policy 
 Center,  only  65  of  about  1200  E/  I  shows  were  locally  produced  in  1999;  commercial 
 broadcasters  generally  receive  all  of  their  E/  I  programming  from  the  network  with  which 
 they  are  affiliated.  0 
 Most  respondents  of  the  Annenberg  poll,  The  Three-  Hour  Rule:  The  Insiders   
 View,  feel  that  there  is  a  lack  of  E/  I  programs  being  produced  by  local  stations,  and  many 
 complained  that  there  is  a  diminishing  cadre  of  players  in  the  production  community.  The 
 FCC  may  want  to  consider  ways  of  encouraging  local  broadcasters  to  produce  some  of 
 their  own  E/  I  programming,  as  a  means  of  diversifying  E/  I  programming  available  to 
 children  in  different  communities. 


 lo9  Lawrie  Mifflin,  Study  Finds  Educational  TV  Lends  Preschoolers  Even  Greater  Advantages,  N.  Y.  Times, 
 May  31,  1995,  at  B8. 
 lo  Schmidt,  supra,  at  25. 
146
 Children  Now  42 
 e.  Ratings  and  the  V-  Chip 
 In  1997,  after  great  debate  between  childrens  advocates  and  broadcasters,  a  new 
 voluntary  television  ratings  system  was  implemented  to  give  parents  adequate 
 information  about  the  programs  that  their  children  watch.  Parents  now  have  a  ratings 
 system  that  includes  content-  based  ratings,  instead  of  age-  based  ratings  only.  The  new 
 system  consists  of  content  descriptors  (V,  S,  L,  D)  which  inform  parents  about  shows  that 
 contain  high  levels  of  violence,  sexual  situations,  coarse  language,  and  suggestive 
 dialogue,  respectively.  These  ratings  are  used  to  rate  most  types  of  television  shows 
 including  dramas,  comedies,  soap  operas,  movies,  and  talk  shows.  The  new  system  also 
 enhances  the  ratings  for  childrens  programs  by  adding  an  indicator  for  childrens  shows 
 that  include  violent  material  (FV  for  fantasy  violence). 
 V-  Chip  technology,  when  used  in  conjunction  with  the  TV  ratings  system, 
 enables  parents  to  block  programming  they  consider  inappropriate  for  their  children. 
 During  the  first  fifteen  minutes  of  a  program,  broadcasters  send  an  electronic 
 identification  signal  that  indicates  a  programs  rating;  the  V-  Chip  then  receives  and 
 processes  this  signal.      If  parents  have  blocked  shows  with  specific  ratings,  the  V-  Chip 
 prevents  such  shows  from  appearing  on  their  television  screen. 
 As  television  moves  from  an  analog  to  a  digital  system,  Children  Now  urges  the 
 FCC  to  ensure  that  the  V-  Chip  and  ratings  system  are  available  to  parents.  According  to  a 
 1999  poll  conducted  by  the  Henry  J.  Kaiser  Family  Foundation,  more  than  three  fourths 
 of  parents  (77%)  said  that  if  they  had  a  V-  Chip  at  home,  they  would  use  it  to  block  out 


 I  Center  for  Media  Education  and  the  Henry  J.  Kaiser  Family  Foundation,  What  Parents  Should  Know 
 About  the  V-  Chip  (visited  3/  23100)<  htttx//  www.  vchineducation.  oralDagesJusiner.  html.> 
147
 Children  Now  43 
 programming  they  deemed  inappropriate  for  their  children.  12  Similarly,  six  out  of  ten 
 parents  said  they  are  concerned  a  great  deal  that  their  children  are  being  exposed  to  too 
 much  sex  (66%)  or  violence  (60~).  13  With  broadcasters  new  multicasting  capability, 
 children  will  have  access  to  many  more  channels  and  programs,  potentially  exposing 
 them  to  more  violence,  sex,  crude  language  and  suggestive  dialogue.  Thus,  the  ratings 
 and  accompanying  V-  Chip  technology  should  be  available  so  that  parents  can  monitor  the 
 shows  their  children  watch  in  the  digital  age. 
 Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  consider  how  the  advanced  capabilities  of  digital 
 broadcasting  can  help  to  provide  ratings  information  to  parents.  Currently,  the  ratings 
 symbol  appears  in  the  top  upper  left-  hand  comer  of  the  screen  during  the  first  fifteen 
 seconds  of  a  television  program.  In  order  to  determine  the  rating  of  a  show,  parents  must 
 either  watch  the  beginning  of  the  program,  or  check  their  local  TV  guide.  More  than  two 
 thirds  of  parents  (67%)  report  that  even  when  they  looked  for  the  rating  on  their 
 television  screen,  they  frequently  missed  it.  l14  Similarly,  eight  out  of  ten  parents  who  use 
 the  ratings  said  that  the  ratings  symbol  should  appear  on  the  screen  more  ofien.  5  With 
 digital  televisions  capability  to  transmit  data  simultaneous  with  programming, 
 broadcasters  could  make  ratings  (as  well  as  E/  I  information)  available  throughout  the 
 length  of  a  program.  Broadcasters  could  also  use  datacasting  to  provide  parents  with 
 information  as  to  why  a  show  received  a  particular  rating  or  is  categorized  as  E/  I 
 programming.  Using  the  interactive  capabilities  that  potentially  will  be  available,  with  a 


 I*  Campaign  To  Educate  Parents  About  the  V-  Chip  Announced,  The  Henry  J.  Kaiser  Family  Foundation 
 Press  Release,  May  10,  1999  available  at  <www.  kff.  org/  contentJarchive/  1477/  vchio.  html>.  I3  Id. 


 I4  The  Henry  J.  Kaiser  Family  Foundation,  Parents,  Children  and  the  Television  Ratings  System,  (May  1988),  p.  5. 
 j  The  Henry  J.  Kaiser  Family  Foundation,  Parents,  Children,  and  the  Television  Ratings  System,  supra,  at  8. 
148
 Children  Now  44 
 click  of  the  mouse,  parents  could  access  pertinent  program  information  at  any  point 
 during  the  broadcast. 
 Children  Now  also  asks  that  the  FCC  consider  using  digital  televisions  increased 
 capabilities  to  augment  the  current  ratings  system  to  provide  even  more  information  to 
 parents.  The  FCC  has  indicated  that  it  would  take  an  open,  flexible  approach  to  the 
 development  of  industry  standards  and  regulations  that  would  accommodate  the  possible 
 development  of  multiple  ratings  systems.  t6 
 The  FCC  should  consider  requiring  broadcasters  to  provide  additional  content 
 ratings  information  from  independent  sources.  Eight  out  of  ten  voters  favor  an 
 independent  ratings  system  (84%),  and  think  that  developing  such  a  system  is  important 
 (87%).    Digital  technology  should  allow  for  the  provision  of  multiple  ratings  systems. 
 Such  systems  could  be  made  available  through  the  V-  Chip  itself  (by  using  the  additional 
 spectrum  available)  or  by  providing  links  to  the  Internet  where  such  information  could  be 


 accessed.  More  research  needs  to  be  conducted  as  to  how  the  V-  Chip  and  TV  ratings 
 system  can  work  most  effectively  for  parents  in  the  digital  era.  Children  Now  urges  the 
 FCC  to  issue  an  NO1  to  further  explore  this  issue  and  to  determine  how  to  maximize 
 content  and  ratings  information  for  parents. 


 f.  Commercials 
 As  television  moves  from  an  analog  to  a  digital  system,  Children  Now  urges  the 


 FCC  to  maintain  the  current  regulations  about  advertising  and  childrens  television 
 programming,  specifically  in  regards  to  time  limits  and  program-  commercial  separation. 


 I6  13  FCCRcd  11248,  11251  (1998). 
149
 Children  Now  45 
 .  1.  Time  Limits 


 The  Childrens  Television  Act  of  1990  limited  advertising  during  childrens 
 programs  to  12  minutes  per  hour  on  weekdays,  and  10.5  minutes  per  hour  on  weekends. 
 Broadcasters  have  overwhelmingly  adhered  to  this  rule,  with  a  1993  study  showing  98% 
 of  stations  in  compliance.  8  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  uphold  this  rule  in  the 
 digital  era,  and  maintain  these  limits  on  advertising  during  childrens  programming. 


 ii.  Program-  Commercial  Separation 
 Research  indicates  that  by  the  age  of  five,  most  children  are  able  to  identify 
 commercials  aired  during  television  programs.  It  is  not  until  age  seven  or  eight,  however, 
 that  they  truly  understand  the  persuasive  intent  of  advertising.  In  other  words,  children 
 under  seven  see  advertisements  as  part  of  television  entertainment,  while  children  seven 
 and  older  are  coming  to  terms  with  the  fact  that  advertisers  are  trying  to  get  people  to 
 buy  something.    Thus,  Children  Now  urges  the  FCC  to  uphold  three  current  rules  which 
 help  children  to  distinguish  between  commercials  and  the  content  of  the  show: 
 1)  Program  length  commercials:  Broadcasters  cannot  air  a  program  associated 
 with  a  product  in  which  commercials  for  that  product  are  aired.   
 2)  Host-  selling:  Program  characters  or  show  hosts  are  not  allowed  to  sell 
 products  in  commercials  during  or  adjacent  to  their  shows.  *   


     FCC  Urged  to  Hold  Public  Hearings  As  Group  Releases  Poll  Showing  Support  for  Independent  Ratings 
 System  for  Violence,  Sexual  Content  and  Inappropriate  Language,  People  for  Better  TV  Press  Release,  July 
 2,  1999,  available  at  <www.  bettertv.  org/  release0702.  html>. 
 *  Stem,  supra,  at  65. 
 I9  Kunkel  &  Wilcox,  supra,  at  0  Fairness  of  Television  Advertising  To  Children. 
 Izo  Id. 
150
 Children  Now  46 
 3)  Bumpers:  Required  during  childrens  programs,  bumpers  are  five  seconds 
 long  and  separate  programs  and  commercials.  They  include  messages  like, 
 And  now  a  word  from  our  sponsor.   
 2.  Additional  Opportunities  and  Obligations 
 In  addition  to  applying  traditional  principles  of  public-  interest  performance  with 
 appropriate  modifications,  the  Advisory  Committee  also  discussed  appropriate  additional 
 public  interest  obligations  given  the  enhanced  opportunities  and  advantages  that 
 broadcasters  may  receive  through  digital  broadcasting.**  Children  Now  agrees  with  the 
 principle  that  there  should  be  some  additional  benefit  to  the  public  if  its  grant  to 
 broadcasters  of  the  valuable  digital  television  spectrum  results  in  enhanced  economic 
 *  benefits  for  broadcasters.  23  Further,  as  detailed  above  at  Part  II,  supra,  the 
 technological  advances  of  DTV  offer  exponentially  more  opportunities  to  meet  childrens 
 educational  and  informational  needs.  The  FCC  should  ensure  that  those  opportunities  for 
 Americas  children  are  not  overlooked  in  this  pivotal  transition. 


 Comments  from  the  Center  for  Media  Education  (hereinafter,  CME)  present  a 
 set  of  options  that  broadcasters  may  use  to  satisfy  their  additional  public  interest 
 obligations  to  children.  The  Advisory  Committee  laid  out  a  similar  model  of  alternatives 
 in  its  discussion  of  multiplexing  capabilities  and  the  need  for  additional  benefits  to  the 
 public.  24  The  CME  model  is  composed  of  two  levels  of  options,  offering  broadcasters 
 maximum  flexibility  and  control.  125  None  of  the  options  are  mutually  exclusive,  giving 


 I22  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111;  Fifth  Report  and  Order,  supra,  at  12830,  flSO  (  Broadcasters  and 
 the  public  are  also  on  notice  that  the  Commission  may  adopt  new  public  interest  rules  for  digital 
 television.). 
 I?  3  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.5. 
 24  Id. 
   See  Comments  of  Center  for  Media  Education  at  $1  (filed  March  27,  2000  in  MM  Docket  No.  99-  360) 
151
 Children  Now  47 
 broadcasters  the  power  to  combine  options  and  to  optimize  their  bandwidth  management. 
 CME  suggests  that  broadcasters  may  choose  to  fulfill  their  obligations  by:  providing 
 more  educational  and  informational  (E/  I)  programming;  paying  a  fee  to  a  fund  that 
 support  noncommercial  programming;  or  providing  broadband  and  datacasting  services 
 to  local  schools  and  libraries.  For  each  of  these  options,  broadcasters  have  a  variety  of 
 methods  to  consider.  For  example,  providing  more  E/  I  programming  may  be 
 accomplished  by  dedicating  an  entire  channel  to  E/  I  programming,  dedicating  one  hour  of 
 E/  I  programming  for  every  20  hours  of  multicasting,  setting  aside  a  channel  for  childrens 
 programming  and  dedicating  a  substantial  amount  to  E/  I  shows,  or  setting  aside  a  channel 
 for  noncommercial  public  interest  programming  and  dedicating  a  substantial  amount  to 
 E/  I  shows.  26 
 Children  Now  recommends  that  the  FCC  consider  additional  obligations  for 
 digital  broadcasters  regarding  children  and  childrens  programming.  Further,  Children 
 Now  recommends  that  the  FCC  consider  the  flexible  and  effective  model  proposed  by 
 CME  as  part  of  its  rule-  making  process. 
 3.  Childrens  Privacy  &  Protection  on  DTV 
 Convergence  through  the  DTV  platform  will  necessarily  bring  the  current  Internet 
 policy  issues  of  invasions  of  privacy  and  excessive  advertising  to  the  television  arena.  As 
 detailed  above  at  Parts  1.  A  and  II.  C,  supra,  it  is  possible  that  these  policy  concerns  will 
 quickly  affect  a  much  larger  population  of  children  if  the  Digital  Divide  is  narrowed  by 
 DTV.  Correspondingly,  Children  Now  recommends  that  the  FCC  consider  additional 
 rule-  making  to  protect  children  from  invasions  of  privacy  and  excessive  and  abusive 
 advertising  in  the  digital  era.  The  Center  for  Media  Education  has  conducted  pioneering 


 _  ._  _  __  -  _  ._--.--  -... 
152
 Children  Now  48 
 research  and  advocacy  in  these  new  media  policy  arenas.  Comments  submitted  by  CME 
 detail  recommendations  for  additional  safeguards,  including:  the  application  of  the 
 Childrens  Online  Privacy  Protection  Act  of  1998  (COPPA)  and  corresponding  Federal 
 Trade  Commission  rules  to  DTV  broadcasters  collecting  information  from  children;  the 
 application  of  existing  advertising  policies  and  regulations  on  all  programs  that  are 
 directed  toward  children  twelve  (12)  and  under  regardless  of  what  program  stream  they 
 are  on;  and  a  prohibition  of  all  links  to  advertising  or  sales  during  childrens 
 programming.  27 
 Children  Now  recommends  that  the  FCC  consider  the  expertise  of  CME  and  their 
 proposals  for  additional  privacy  and  advertising  safeguards,  in  its  rule-  making  process. 
 C.  Disclosure  Requirements 
 Children  Now  agrees  with  the  principle  that  effective  self-  regulation  requires 
 broadcasters  to  disclose  adequately  their  information  regarding  what  they  are  doing.  The 
 current  FCC  disclosure  rules  require  commercial  TV  broadcasters  to  include  in  their 
 public  files  separate  quarterly  reports  regarding  their  non-  entertainment  programming 
 responsive  to  community  needs  and  their  childrens  programming.  t2  These  data  include 
 items  such  as  citizen  agreements,  records  concerning  public  office  candidate  broadcasts, 
 employment  reports,  correspondence  with  the  public,  issues/  programming  lists,  records 
 concerning  commercial  limits  in  childrens  programming,  and  childrens  programming 
 reports.  129  Toward  the  goal  of  significant  and  effective  disclosures  in  the  digital  era, 


 Children  Now  makes  the  following  recommendations: 


 12  Id.  at  $11. 
 12*  47  C.  F.  R.  $3  73.3526,  73.3527. 
 29  Notice  at  716  (citing  47  C.  F.  R.  5  73.3526(  e));  see  also  In  the  Matter  of  Review  of  the  Commissions 
 Rules  Regarding  the  Main  Studio  and  Local  Public  Inspection  Files  of  Broadcast  Television  and  Radio 
153
 Children  Now  49 
 First,  Children  Now  recommends  that  the  current  information  reporting 
 requirements  established  for  implementing  the  Childrens  Television  Act  continue  to 
 apply  to  all  digital  broadcasting,  including  ancillary  and  supplementary  services. 
 Second,  Children  Now  joins  the  recommendations  of  the  Advisory  Committee 
 and  People  for  Better  TV  regarding  enhanced  disclosure  requirements  for  digital 
 broadcasters.  13  Enhanced  reporting  is  necessary  due  to  the  complex  and  exponentially 
 richer  landscape  of  DTV  compared  to  analog  broadcasting.  Broadcasters  should  report 
 on  their  public  interest  programming  and  activities  on  a  quarterly  basis,  using 
 standardized  check-  off  forms  that  reduce  administrative  burdens  and  can  be  easily 
 understood  by  the  public.  3  The  enhanced  set  of  data  should  include  but  not  be 
 limited  to  contributions  to  political  discourse,  public  service  announcements,  childrens 
 and  educational  programming,  local  programming,  programming  that  meets  the  needs  of 
 underserved  communities,  and  community-  specific  activities.  3,132 
 Third,  Children  Now  recommends  that  the  FCC  affirmatively  revisit  its  repeal  of 
 previous  ascertainment  requirements,  and  explore  whether  any  of  the  revoked 
 requirements  have  particular  relevance  and  application  to  DTV.  33  This  exploration 
 should  consider  whether  a  specific  requirement  is  applicable  today  as  well  as  whether  it 
 will  be  applicable  as  the  transition  to  digital  television  proceeds, 
 Finally,  Children  Now  joins  the  Advisory  Committee  in  its  recommendation  that 
 digital  broadcasters  take  affirmative  steps  to  distribute  their  public  interest  obligation  data 


 Stations,  MM  Docket  No.  97-  138,  Report  and  Order,  13  FCC  Rdc  1569  1  (1998)  (Public  File  Report  and 
 Order). 
 I30  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.1;  Letter  from  People  for  Better  TV  to  William  E.  Kennard, 
 Chairman,  FCC,  Nov.  16,  1999;  Notice  at  115. 
 13  Advisory  Committee  Report  at    III.  l,  Appendix  A. 
 13*  Iri.  at    III.  1. 
 33  See  Notice  at  716  n.  63. 


 _  I  _  .._  _...  .  ..-  ..--_  l_-.-  ^_.  -_-.--.. 
154
 Children  Now  50 
 more  widely  through  channels  such  as  local  newspapers,  local  program  guides,  and  the 
 Internet.  34  Members  of  the  People  for  Better  TV  coalition  took  considerable  effort  to 
 obtain  public  information  from  broadcasters  during  the  early  part  of  2000  in  order  to 
 comment  in  this  proceeding;  any  measures  that  facilitate  this  process  would  better  serve 
 the  public  and  fulfill  the  true  intent  of  the  rule.  35 
 D.  Diversity 
 Diversity  of  programming  has  long  been  a  cornerstone  of  the  broadcasting 
 industry,  from  the  Great  Lakes  Broadcasting  Co.  rules  in  1929  to  the  Blue  Book  policy 
 statement  in  1946  to  the  1960  Programming  Policy  Statement,  and  up  to  recent  national 
 discussions  regarding  prime-  time  diversity  highlighted  by  the  National  Association  for 
 the  Advancement  of  Colored  People  in  1999.  36  Both  the  FCC  and  the  Advisory 
 Committee  have  addressed  the  importance  of  diversity  in  broadcasting  with  respect  to 
 viewpoint,  ownership,  and  employment.  37  As  the  FCC  notes,  many  of  the  Advisory 
 Committees  recommendations  bear  on  its  goal  of  diversity  in  broadcasting,  with 
 proposals  ranging  from  the  capacity  of  multicasting  to  better  serve  under-  represented 
 minorities  in  content  and  entrepreneurship  to  the  use  of  recovered  analog  spectrum  for 
 noncommercial  programming  directed  at  underserved  segments  of  the  community  to 
 hiring  and  promotion  policies  that  result  in  significant  representation  of  minorities  and 
 women  in  the  decision-  making  positions  in  the  broadcast  industry.  i3* 


 j4  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.1. 
 I35  See,  e.  g.,  Part  III.  F,  supra;  see  also  comments,  observations,  and  letters  filed  by  People  for  Better  TV 
 members  for  this  FCC  proceeding  (MM  Docket  No.  99-  360). 
 36  See  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $11,  Encouraging  Diversity  of  Programming;  Great  Lakes  Broad. 
 Co.,  3  FRC  Ann.  Rep.  32  (1929);  Public  Service  Responsibility  of  Licensees  (the  Blue  Book)  (1946);  En 
 bane  Programming  Inquiry,  44  FCC  2303  (1960);  Greg  Braxton,  NAACP  Will  Fight  Network  TV  Lineups, 
 L.  A.  Times,  July  12,  1999,  at  Al. 
 13  Notice  at  ljT[  29-  33. 
 I38  Notice  at  132  (citing  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.9). 


 -__..  ____-  ,-..___  l--.  l- 
155
 Children  Now  51 
 A  consistent  theme  in  the  Advisory  Committees  final  report  is  that  serving 
 diverse  interests  and  promoting  diversity  in  broadcasting  is  both  good  business  and  good 
 public  policy.]  39  The  Advisory  Committee  addresses  growing  commitments  to  equal 
 employment  opportunities  in  the  digital  era,  expanded  possibilities  for  diversity  of 
 programming  due  to  multicasting  and  multiplexing  (e.  g.,  narrowcasts),  designated 
 noncommercial  educational  channels  and  datacasting  to  underprivileged  and  minority 
 communities,  and  enhanced  audio  capabilities  for  increased  use  of  foreign  language 
 tracks.  I40  Children  Now  recommends  that  the  FCC  consider  all  of  the  Advisory 
 Committees  proposals  and  arguments  for  promoting  diversity  in  broadcasting  in  its  rule- 
 making  process,  and  supports  the  FCC  in  its  undertaking  of  initiatives  designed  to 
 diversify  broadcast  ownership  and  employment. 
 Children  Now  also  recommends  that  the  FCC  consider  the  effects  of  DTV 
 convergence  on  the  Digital  Divide  and  diversity,  as  discussed  at  Part  II.  C,  supra.  While 
 the  actual  closure  of  the  divide  will  depend  primarily  on  the  price  points  of  receiver 
 hardware,  the  politics  of  convergence  may  force  the  public  to  purchase  and  thereby  bring 
 a  greater  population  on-  line. 
 Finally,  Children  Now  and  its  Children  and  the  Media  Program  have  been 
 engaged  in  issues  of  diversity  and  identity  formation  for  several  years,  and  we  submit  the 
 following  research  reports  to  be  placed  in  the  record  of  this  proceeding:  4 
 i.  Fall  Colors:  How  Diverse  is  the  1999-  2000  TV  Season  s  Prime-  Time 
 Lineup?  (2000)  [Appendix  B]; 


   Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $111.9. 
 I40  See  Advisory  Committee  Report  at  $511,  Encouraging  Diversity  of  Programming,  II,  Equal  Employment 
 Opportunit),,  111.4(  b),  The  Creation  of  New  Noncommercial,  Educational  Channels,  111.9,  Diversity  in 
 Broadcasting. 
   All  reports  are  available  on-  line  at  ~httrxCwww.  childrenandmedia.  org>. 
156
 Children  Now  52 
 ii.  Boys  to  Men:  Media  Messages  About  Masculinity  (Entertainment  Media) 
 (1999)  [Appendix  C]; 


 .  .  .  111.  Boys  to  Men:  Media  Messages  About  Masculinity  (Sports  Media)  (1999) 


 [Appendix  D]; 


 iv.  The  News  Media  s  Picture  of  Children:  A  Five-  Year  Update  and  A  Focus  on 
 Diversity  (1999)  [Appendix  E]; 


 V.  A  Different  World:  Native  American  Children  s  Perceptions  of  Race  and 
 Class  in  the  Media  (1999)  [Appendix  F]; 


 vi.  A  Different  World:  Media  Images  of  Race  and  Class  (conference  report) 
 (1998)  [Appendix  G]; 


 vii.  A  Different  World:  Children  s  Perceptions  of  Race  and  Class  in  the  Media 
 (1998)  [Appendix  H]; 


 viii.  Reflections  of  Girls  in  the  Media  (Fourth  Annual  Children  &  the  Media 
 Conference)  (1997)  [Appendix  I];  and 


 ix.  Reflections  of  Girls  in  the  Media:  A  Two-  Part  Study  on  Gender  and  Media  - 
 Summary  of  Key  Findings  (1997)  [Appendix  J]. 


 This  body  of  research  presents  a  comprehensive  examination  of  how  Americas 
 young  people  perceive  issues  of  diversity  such  as  race,  class,  and  gender  in  the  broadcast 
 media  that  they  consume.  Children  speak  about  the  lack  of  diversity  and  the  unfair 
 representation  of  minorities  in  the  media.  Further,  many  young  people  express  their 
 desire  for  more  balanced,  realistic,  and  real  programming.  Concurrently,  these  reports 
 also  provide  content  analyses  of  the  most  popular  media  among  young  people,  with 
 respect  to  these  diversity  issues.  While  some  pictures  have  improved,  there  is  still  much 
 room  for  greater  positive  diversity  in  programming. 
 Children  Now  submits  this  body  of  research  into  the  record  and  recommends  that 
 the  FCC  take  note  of  the  findings.  The  voices  of  Americas  children  should  be  included 
 in  this  rule-  making  process. 


 -  _-_.__--  .-  ..  l_-_.^-  ..  I  ------.-.--I  ^ 
157
 Children  Now 
 APPENDIX  A 
 Sample  Case  Study  Worksheet  for  the  Childrens  Television  Act  in  Digital 


 +  How  to  Calculate  the  Diqital  Three-  Hour  Rule  Requirement  (3%  Rule) 
 1)  Sample  Digital  Broadcaster:  WXYZ  in  Los  Angeles,  CA 
 2)  Total  Digital  Broadcast  Hours  Per  Week  (multicasting):  400  hours 
 3)  Multiply  Total  Hours  by  3%:  12  hours 
 4)  Rounding  Up  to  the  Nearest  /  2  Hour:  12  hours 
 5)  Preliminary  E/  l  Hours  Requirement:  12  hours 


 +  How  to  Calculate  the  Diaital  DVEQ  Rule  Requirement 
 1)  Sample  Digital  Broadcaster:  WXYZ  in  Los  Angeles,  CA 
 2)  Total  Digital  Broadcast  Hours  Per  Week  (multicasting):  400  hours 
 3)  Preliminary  E/  l  Hours  Requirement  (from  above):  12  hours 
 4)  Total  Non-  E/  l  Hours  (400-  12):  388  hours 
 5)  DVEQ  Distribution  of  Total  Non-  E/  l  Hours): 


 Datacasting  &  Interactivity 
 SDTV  Six-  Channels  25%  (97  hours) 


 -  .._-.  -    _,._  _  ,_  ___.  ._.,  -,.  _  ^  .-.-  ---__  .._  ,__  .-.~.  --..-  I  _I___-_ 
158
 Children  Now 
 6)  Apportioning  E/  l  Hours  Requirement  According  to  DVEQ  Distribution  of 
 Non-  E/  l  Hours: 


 HDTV  Single  Channel  With 
 Datacasting  &  Interactivity 
 25%  x  12  hours  = 
 3  hours 
 3  hours 


 HDTV  Dual  Channels  With  Datacasting  25%  x  12  hours  =  3  hours 
 3  hours 
 SDTV  Four-  Channels  25%  x  12  hours  =  3  hours 
 3  hours 


 SDTV  Six-  Channels  25%  x  12  hours  = 
 3  hours 
 3  hours 


 7)  Final  Total  E/  l  Hours  Requirement:  12  hours  distributed  among  4  DVEQ 
 categories 


 ..--..  .__-_-.  _  -...  .---.~--l  -.-----  -..-- 
159
 Children  Now 
 APPENDIX  B 
 Fall  Colors:  How  Diverse  is  the  1999-  2000  TV  Seasons  Prime-  Time  Lineup?  (2000) 


 Available  for  download  at  <htttx\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  orq>. 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 


 APPENDIX  C 
 Boys  to  Men:  Messages  About  Masculinity  (Entertainment  Media)  (1999) 
 Available  for  download  at  <httrx\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  ora>. 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 


 APPENDIX  D 
 Boys  to  Men:  Messages  About  Masculinity  (Sports  Media)  (1999) 
 Available  for  download  at  <http:\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  ora>. 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 


 APPENDIX  E 
 The  News  Medias  Picture  of  Children:  A  Five-  Year  Update  and  A  Focus  on  Diversity  (1999) 


 Available  for  download  at  chttp:\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  ora>. 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 


 APPENDIX  F 
 A  Different  World:  Native  American  Childrens  Perceptions  of  Race  and  C/  ass  in  the  Media  (1999) 


 Available  for  download  at  <htttx\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  ors>. 
160
 Children  Now 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 


 APPENDIX  G 
 A  Different  World:  Media  images  of  Race  and  C/  ass  (conference  report)  (1998) 
 Available  for  download  at  <htttx\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  ora>. 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 


 APPENDIX  H 
 A  Different  World:  Childrens  Perceptions  of  Race  and  C/  ass  in  the  Media  (1998) 
 Available  for  download  at  chttp:\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  ora>. 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 


 APPENDIX  I 
 Reflections  of  Girts  in  the  Media 
 (Fourth  Annual  Children  &  the  Media  Conference)  (1997) 


 Available  for  download  at  chttp:\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  orq>. 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 


 APPENDIX  J 
 Reflections  of  Girls  in  the  Media:  A  Two-  Part  Study  on  Gender  and  Media  -  Summary  of  Key  Findings  (1997) 


 Available  for  download  at  chtIp:\\  www.  childrenandmedia.  ora>. 
 Hard  copy  of  report  attached  to  Children  Nows  filing  by  paper. 
161
 ALL  CHILDREN  NOW 
 ATTACHMENTS  ARE  SUBMITTED 
 UNDER  SEPARATE  FILING  BY 
 CHILDREN  NOW. 
162

163
 Before  the 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 In  the  Matter  of 
 Public  Interest  Obligations 
 Of  TV  Broadcast  Licensees 
 MM  Docket  No.  99-  360 


 NOTICE  OF  INQUIRY 
 COMMENTS  OF  THE  CONSUMER  FEDERATION  OF  AMERICA 


 Mark  Cooper,  Phd.,  Research  Director 
 Travis  B.  Plunkett,  Legislative  Director 
 Consumer  Federation  of  America 
 1424  16th  Street,  N.  W.,  Suite  604 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20036 
 (202)  387-  6121 


 March  27,200O 
164
 V.  WIDENING  THE  DIGITAL  DIVIDE 
 A.  Measuring  the  Digital  Divide 
 B.  The  Impact  of  the  Digital  Transition  on  the  Digital  Divide 
 C.  Policy  Recommendations 


 24 


 VI.  THE  THREAT  TO  DIVERSITY  AND  EXPRESSION  WITH  A 
 COMMERCIALLY  DRIVEN  DIGITAL  TELEVISION  DEPLOYMENT 
 A.  Concerns  about  the  Impact  of  Commercialization  on  Civic  Discourse 
 B.  Economic  Pressures  on  Diversity  in  the  Media 
 C.  Policy  Recommendations 


 33 


 VII.  THE  ROLE  OF  LOCAL  BROADCASTlNG  IN  THE  IMPLEMENTATION  40 
 OF  DIGITAL  TELEVISION 


 VIII  CONCLUSION  42 


 IV.  THE  INVASION  OF  PRIVACY  AND  ABUSE  OF  INFORMATON  TO  OVERSELL 
 A.  Pre-  Purchase  Problems 
 B.  Point-  of-  Sale  Problems 
 C.  Post-  Purchase  Problems 
 D.  Policy  Recommendations 


 TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 
 I.  INTRODUCTION  1 
 II.  SUMMARY 
 A.  The  Digital  Television  Business  Model  Presents  Unique 
 Consumer  Concerns 
 B.  The  Invasion  of  Consumer  Privacy  and  the  Abuse  of  Information  to  Oversell 
 C.  Widening  the  Digital  Divide 
 D.  The  Threat  to  Programming  Diversity  and  Civic  Discourse 
 E.  Local  Broadcasters  Should  Meet  Consumer  and  Public  Interest  Obligations 
 F.  Policy  Recommendations 


 2 


 111.  DIGITAL  TELEVISION  COMMERCIAL  MODEL  AND  COSTS 
 A.  Appliance  and  Industry  Upgrade  Costs 
 B.  Subscription  Fees 
 C.  Advertising  Revenue 


 10 


 17 
165
 I.  INTRODUCTION 
 The  Consumer  Federation  of  America  (CFA)  is  the  nations  largest  consumer  advocacy 
 organization.  CFA  is  a  non-  profit  association  of  260  state  and  local  affiliates  representing 
 consumer,  senior  citizen,  low-  income,  labor,  farm,  public  power  and  cooperative  organizations. 
 CFA  represents  consumer  interests  before  Congress  and  federal  agencies  and  assists  its  state  and 
 local  members  in  their  local  jurisdictions. 
 CFA  commends  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  (FCC)  for  opening  this  Notice 
 of  Inquiry  (NOI)  into  the  public  interest  obligations  of  digital  broadcast  licensees.  However, 
 CFA  strongly  urges  the  FCC  to  expand  the  scope  of  inquiry  to  examine  consumer  pocketbook 
 implications  that  will  be  unique  to  the  broadcast  of  digital  television.  While  digital  television  has 
 the  potential  to  offer  consumers  new  educational,  civic  participation  and  programming  choices,  it 
 also  presents  very  serious  potential  hazards.  Some  of  these  hazards,  such  as  the  possibility  that 
 the  significant  costs  that  will  be  incurred  to  convert  from  analog  to  digital  television  will 
 diminish  access  to  the  media  for  many  Americans  who  are  already  on  the  wrong  side  of  the 
 digital  divide,  are  addressed  by  the  NOI.  The  NO1  also  properly  includes  queries  regarding  the 
 effect  of  digital  television  on  programming  diversity  and  civic  and  political  discourse,  as  well  as 
 how  local  broadcasters  can  respond  to  community  needs. 
 However,  several  extremely  important  consumer  issues  that  stem  directly  from  the  likely 
 commercial  model  that  will  pay  for  digital  TV  are  not  addressed  by  the  NOI.  These  concerns  are 
 unique  to  the  digital  era.  These  issues  include  the  high  likelihood  that  viewers  privacy  could  be 


 invaded  on  an  unprecedented  scale  unless  protections  are  in  place,  as  well  as  the  very  strong 
 incentive  that  broadcasters  will  have  to  abuse  this  information  by  overselling  to  viewers.  It  is 


 1 
166
 inconceivable  that  the  FCC  would  conduct  an  examination  of  the  public  interest  obligations  of 
 digital  broadcasters  and  not  consider  the  far-  reaching  consumer  consequences  of  this  new 
 medium. 


 II.  SUMMARY 
 The  Commissions  view  of  its  role  in  establishing  the  public  interest  obligations  on 
 digital  TV  must  recognize  that  digital  TV  has  been  swept  up  in  the  convergence  of  the  television 
 and  the  telecommunications  industries.  The  traditional  obligations  that  public  policy  has 
 properly  asked  broadcasters  to  shoulder  as  the  means  of  mass  communications  are  intersecting 
 with  the  traditional  obligations  that  public  policy  has  asked  telecommunications  companies  to 
 shoulder  as  the  means  of  interactive  communications.  The  traditional  limits  that  have  been 
 placed  on  advertisers  and  markets  must  be  extended,  and  perhaps  expanded,  to  apply  to  this  new 
 more  powerful  marketing  medium.  We  believe  that  the  public  interest  obligations  that  should 
 fall  on  this  new  medium  of  communications  should  be  commensurate  to  the  immense  economic 
 and  political  power  that  it  will  possess. 
 We  see  very  powerful  economic  forces  creating  huge  commercial  opportunities  and 


 potentially  significant  social  problems  (see  Exhibit  1).  We  believe  that  the  Commission  has 
 more  than  adequate  authority  to  define  an  aggressive  public  policy  that  will  allow  the  new 
 industry  to  develop  while  preserving  and  advancing  the  fundamental  goals  of  consumer 
 protection,  civic  discourse,  and  social  responsibility. 


 2 
167
 EXHIBIT  1: 
 THE  EXPANDING  ROLE  OF  DIGITAL  TV  AND  THE  BASIS  FOR  PUBLIC  INTEREST  POLICY 


 ECONOMIC  FORCES  PUBLIC  POLICY  CONCERNS  BASIS  FOR  THE 
 PUBLIC  INTEREST 
 OBLIGATIONS 


 --.  DIGITAL  DIVIDE  COMMUNICATIONS  ~ 
 UNIVERSAL  SERVICE  APPLIANCE  COST 


 OPEN  ACCESS 


 NETWORK  UPGRADE 
 COSTS 


 CAPACITY  BASED 
 REVENUE  OPPORTUNITIES 


 COMMERCIAL  SQUEEZES 
 7 
 BROADCASTERS  USE 
 OUT  CIVIC  DISCOURSE  PUBLIC  RESOURCE 


 LOSS  OF  DIVERSITY  AND 
 LOCAL  INPUT 


 ABUSIVE  MARKETING  7  CONSUMER 
 PROTECTOIN 


 NEW  ADVERTISIN  INVASION  OF  PRIVACY 
 DIRECT  MAIL  ON 
 STEROIDS 


 3 
168
 A.  The  Digital  Television  Business  Model  Presents  Unique  Consumer  Concerns 
 At  one  time,  it  might  have  been  possible,  or  fashionable,  to  think  about  digital  television 
 as  just  a  better  way  to  deliver  better  broadcast  television  pictures  with  one  signal  through  high 
 definition  television  (HDTV).  The  much  more  likely  scenario  is  that,  rather  than  using  their 
 spectrum  to  deliver  one  high-  quality  picture,  broadcasters  will  divide  it  up  into  multiple  channels 
 and  sell  more  entertainment,  as  well  as  goods  and  services.  As  digital  television  expands  the 
 capacity  to  deliver  programming,  and  the  convergence  of  communications,  computing  and 
 television  entertainment  takes  hold,  pay  television  services  are  expected  to  increase  in  number 
 and  price. 
 The  new  services  could  be  expensive  because  of  the  studio  equipment  necessary  to 
 produce  programming  that  takes  advantage  of  the  new  appliance  and  also  because  of  the 
 infrastructure  necessary  to  deliver  interactive  services  is  expensive.  Whether  the  signals  are 
 broadcast  over-  the-  air  or  through  cable  or  satellite  technologies,  subscription  services  are 
 expected  to  proliferate,  with  subscription  fees  rising. 


 B.  Invasion  of  Consumer  Privacy  and  the  Abuse  of  Information  to  Oversell 
 The  drive  to  till  more  advertising  space  and  sell  more  products  over  the  digital 
 communications  network  and  the  ability  of  that  network  to  gather  information  in  an  interactive 
 context  raises  concerns  about  the  use  of  private  information  for  marketing.  On  the  interactive 
 network,  programmers  and  system  operators  can  know  what  people  watch  and  what  they  buy 
 with  remarkable  detail.  This  information  is  extremely  useful  in  targeting  advertising  and 
 increasing  sales.  Since  there  is  a  strong  need  to  sell  more,  it  is  hard  to  imagine  that  digital 
 broadcasters  will  not  exploit  this  information  to  the  fullest. 


 4 
169
 The  result  will  be  an  electronic  direct  mail  on  steroids  pumped  up  by  the  ability  of 
 viewers  to  click  through  digitally  inserted  advertising  for  purchases.  The  advertising  will  be 


 targeted  at  demographically  compatible  viewers  identified  by  detailed  information  on  viewing 
 patterns  and  past  purchases.  This  information  will  be  embedded  in  programming,  as  suggested 
 by  an  intuitive  programming  guide  and/  or  restricted  by  the  affiliate  relationships  of  the 
 broadcaster  or  cable  provider. 
 Digital  television  also  presents  the  likelihood  of  extremely  aggressive  advertising  and 
 overselling  on  a  scale  that  has  never  occurred,  not  even  on  the  Internet.  The  ability  to 
 distinguish  advertisements  from  entertainment  programming  and  to  exercise  informed  choice 
 will  be  undermined  in  this  new  media  environment,  especially  for  children.  As  advertising 
 becomes  more  immediate  through  the  use  of  interactive  technology,  consumers  are  disarmed. 
 Electronic  transactions  that  provide  little  opportunity  for  consumers  to  reflect  on  the  purchase 
 and  make  post-  purchase  remedies  more  uncertain  increase  concerns  about  overselling. 


 C.  Widening  the  Digital  Divide 
 The  commercial  model  that  is  driving  digital  TV  leads  directly  to  a  second  public  policy 
 concern  that  is  addressed  in  part  IIC  of  the  NOI.  The  expense  of  equipment,  the  cost  of  services, 
 and  the  targeting  of  marketing  points  to  a  commercial  model  in  which  high-  value,  high  income 
 consumers  participate  and  are  targeted. 
 If  digital  TV  were  just  a  luxury  diversion  for  the  rich,  its  potential  cost  might  not  be  a 
 great  source  of  concern  to  consumers  and  consumer  advocates.  However,  television  is  the 
 primary  source  of  news  and  information  dissemination  in  our  country  and  consumers  rely  on 
 television  as  their  primary  source  of  gathering  information.  Broadband  services,  delivered  over 


 5 
170
 digital  TV,  hold  the  potential  to  increase  the  power  of  the  TV  medium  by  adding  interactivity 
 and  much  higher  visual  quality  to  a  medium  that  already  has  great  communicative  power  due  to 
 its  reach,  immediacy  and  real  time  delivery.  Its  role  in  e-  commerce  and  political  expression  may 
 be  unprecedented. 
 Companies  introducing  technologies  can  identify  the  likely  adopters  and  orient  their 
 product  distribution  to  maximize  the  penetration  within  that  market  segment.  The  competitive 
 energies  of  the  industry  are  focused  on  the  premier  segment,  with  innovative  offerings  and 
 consumer-  friendly  pricing,  while  the  remainder  of  the  population  is  ignored  or  suffers  price 
 increases.  The  merging  of  informational,  educational  and  employment  opportunities  over  the 
 Internet  with  the  commercial  activities  of  interactive  TV  raises  concerns  that  the  commercial 
 model  might  further  isolate  those  who  have  been  disadvantaged  by  the  digital  divide. 
 There  is  nothing  inherent  in  the  digital  transformation  that  will  alleviate  the  problem  of 
 information  haves  and  have-  nots  and  much  that  could  exacerbate  it.  The  digital 
 transformation  does  nothing  to  reduce  the  economic,  personal  and  social  barriers.  As  the  effects 
 of  the  digital  transformation  spread,  those  who  do  not  have  command  of  the  technology  become 
 marginalized. 


 D.  The  Threat  To  Programming  Diversity  And  Civic  Discourse 
 Because  of  the  development  of  powerful  commercial  models  that  exploit  the  new 
 capabilities  of  digital  TV,  it  will  likely  take  vigorous  public  policy  intervention  to  ensure  that 


 digital  TV  serves  the  public  interest  with  diverse  program  choices  and  socially  relevant  content 
 and  access  to  the  means  of  public  expression  of  views.  The  need  to  produce  and  sell 
 commercial  programming  may  squeeze  out  educational,  cultural  and  informational  programming 


 6 
171
 or  cause  this  type  of  programming  to  be  sold  on  a  pay-  per-  view  basis,  limiting  its  availability  to 
 part  of  the  population. 
 This  traditional  public  policy  debate  in  the  broadcast  area  has  it  origins  in  the 
 longstanding  public  policy  of  demanding  socially  responsible  behavior  from  broadcasters  who 
 have  used  a  scarce  public  resource  -  broadcast  spectrum  -  at  no  charge.  Although  it  can  be 
 argued  that  spectrum  is  no  longer  scarce,  there  is  no  question  that  it  is  still  very  valuable  and 
 broadcasters  use  it  without  paying  for  it.  The  nucleus  of  the  debate  remains  the  same.  It  focuses 
 on  broadcasters  receiving  their  new  spectrum  free  of  charge,  without  restrictions  in  place  to 
 dictate  how  they  can  use  the  fresh  channels  and  airtime. 
 Because  policymakers  recognize  the  uniquely  important  role  that  broadcast  media  play  in 
 civic  discourse  -  radio  and  later  television  -  policy  has  sought  to  prevent  concentration  of 
 economic  power  from  controlling  the  flow  of  ideas  by  placing  limits  on  the  ownership  of  media 
 outlets  and  imposing  obligations  to  expand  programming  beyond  what  is  simply  profitable.  The 
 advent  of  interactive  multimedia  digital  TV  increases  the  power  of  the  medium  and  the 
 commercial  drive  of  digital  TV  reinforces  that  concern. 


 E.  Local  Broadcasters  Should  Meet  Consumer  and  Public  Interest  Obligations 
 Public  policy  should  seek  compensation  for  the  use  of  the  broadcast  spectrum,  which 
 remains  a  remarkably  valuable  input  into  the  production  of  broadcast  television.  It  should  seek 
 to  balance  the  powerful  forces  driving  the  commercialization  of  the  TV  industry  by  promoting 


 culturally  diverse  programming  that  may  not  be  commercially  attractive  but  that  is  educational 
 and  uplifting.  Public  policy  should  seek  to  ensure  that  this  new  more  powerful  medium  does  not 
 result  in  the  abuse  of  political  power  by  those  who  control  it  and  ensure  that  digital  TV  does  not 


 7 
172
 widen  the  gap  between  information  haves  and  have  riots...  Obligations  should  be  placed  on 
 those  who  benefit  from  the  federally  mandated  transition  to  digital  TV  help  to  narrow  the  gap 
 that  currently  exists. 
 Local  broadcasting  will  play  a  vital  role  in  the  distribution  of  programming.  Ensuring 
 cultural  diversity  and  socially  relevant  programming  is  a  matter  of  local  programming  to  meet 
 community  needs.  The  gathering  and  compilation  of  viewer  information  will  be  a  local  matter  - 
 with  information  gathered  in  the  set  top  box  and  compiled  by  the  local  cable  operator  or  the  local 
 broadcaster.  It  is  highly  likely  that  the  local  station  will  be  the  one  that  controls  the  information 
 for  marketing  purposes. 


 F.  Policy  Recommendations 
 Given  the  initial  nature  of  this  proceeding,  the  Commission  should  identify  broad  categories  of 
 public  interest  policies  and  outline  its  existing  authority  and  public  interest  policies. 
 Privacy:  The  potential  invasion  of  privacy  under  this  business  model  will  be  massive. 
 Without  consumer  protections  in  place,  communications  companies  and  media  providers  will 
 gather  information  about  consumer  viewing  habits,  purchase  patterns  and  lifestyle  and  use  or 
 resell  that  information  for  targeted  marketing  The  FCC  should  require  broadcasters  to  obtain 
 consumer  consent  before  sharing  information  with  third  parties  and  corporate  affiliates  and  to 
 provide  consumers  with  notice  of  broadcasters  information  sharing  practices.  Consumers 
 should  also  have  the  right  to  review  information  collected  about  them. 
 Consumer  Protection:  The  FCC  should  propose  comprehensive  measures  to  protect 
 consumers  who  make  purchases  through  digital  television  and  that  curb  potential  marketing 
 abuses.  These  measures  should  include  disclosures  and  remedies  to  protect  consumers  at  every 


 8 
173
 stage  of  the  purchase  process,  such  as  cooling  off  periods  before  sales  become  final.  The  FCC 
 should  also  consider  options  to  allow  consumers  to  block  unauthorized  purchases  and  restrictions 
 on  interactive  digital  advertising  directed  at  children, 
 Digital  Divide:  The  FCC  should  monitor  the  market  to  ascertain  whether  equipment 
 costs,  subscription  fees  and  pay-  per-  view  charges  are  affordable  and  reserve  the  right  to  require 
 broadcasters  to  charge  reasonable  rates  for  pay  services.  The  Commission  should  also  extend  the 
 principles  of  commercial  leased  access  and  free,  or  low  cost  civic  discourse  channels  and  require 
 the  production  of  new  programming  with  diverse  content. 
 Local  Input:  One  important  avenue  for  accomplishing  many  of  these  goals  would  be  to 
 place  obligations  on  local  broadcasters.  Local  broadcast  stations  can  play  a  crucial  role  in 
 helping  to  address  these  issues  precisely  because  they  are  local.  Local  broadcasting  has  a  long- 
 standing  obligation  to  promote  the  public  interest  because  of  its  institutional  nature.  Local 
 broadcasters  will  use  digital  spectrum  to  distribute  the  majority  of  the  most  watched 
 programming  and  they  have  not  paid  for  that  spectrum. 
 There  is  no  one  federal  policy  that  can  solve  these  problems.  There  should  be  many  local 
 policies,  but  there  is  one  step  that  is  necessary  at  the  federal  level.  Because  the  allocation  of 
 spectrum  was  a  federal  act,  federal  action  is  necessary  to  ensure  that  local  use  of  the  spectrum 
 will  be  responsive  to  local  demands.  Federal  regulators  have  the  authority  to  require  local 
 broadcasters  to  be  responsive  to  local  needs,  provide  access  to  local  programming,  and  work  out 
 privacy  policy  in  response  to  local  values.  If  they  do  not,  local  broadcasters  are  likely  to  resist 
 because  they  will  be  caught  up  in  the  whirlwind  of  commercial  forces  that  the  new  technology 
 and  federal  policy  have  created. 
 Programming  Diversity:  In  exchange  for  new  digital  spectrum  that  has  been  granted  at 
 no  cost,  the  FCC  should  increase  public  interest  obligations  on  broadcasters.  This  could  be 
 9 
174
 achieved  in  a  number  of  ways,  i.  e.  requiring  programming  directed  at  typically  neglected 
 population  groups,  instituting  minimum  requirements  for  public  service  announcements  and 
 public  affairs  programming,  etc. 


 III.  DIGITAL  TELEVISION  COMMERCIAL  MODEL  AND  COSTS 
 The  key  pocketbook,  programming  and  access  issues  that  the  FCC  should  examine  all 
 stem  from  an  analysis  of  the  potential  problems  created  by  consumer  economics  of  the  transition 
 to  digital,  broadband  TV,  as  well  as  the  likely  business  model  that  will  be  used  to  pay  for  digital 
 television. 
 In  the  few  years  since  federal  policy  became  committed  to  the  rapid  deployment  of  digital 
 television,  in  general,  and  HDTV,  in  particular,  the  consumer  pocketbook  issues  have  grown 
 quite  complex.  At  one  time  it  might  have  been  possible  to  think  about  HDTV  as  just  a  better 
 way  to  deliver  broadcast  television  pictures.  In  this  simple  world,  consumers  who  had  analog 
 televisions  would  replace  them  with  digital  televisions  and  receive  a  much  better  picture.  That 
 simple  formulation  of  the  problem  has  dropped  by  the  wayside. 
 It  now  appears  that  standard  definition  digital  television,  not  high  definition,  will  be  the 
 dominant  form  of  digital  TV.  The  quality  of  the  picture  will  be  less  important  than  the  new 
 services  made  available  and  the  new  ways  in  which  the  TV  is  used.  Digital  TV  will  be 
 thoroughly  embedded  in  the  overall  transition  to  interactive,  digital  multimedia  services.  Digital 
 TV  is  now  viewed  as  much  more  than  an  appliance.  Because  of  the  way  the  services  it  supports 
 will  be  delivered,  it  is  more  likely  to  be  part  of  the  terminal  in  the  home  -  the  customer  premise 


 10 
175
 equipment  -  for  the  information  superhighway.    It  will  be  the  link  to  the  information  age  of  the 
 2  1  century.  As  such,  it  will  combine  all  of  the  dynamic  technological  developments  at  the 
 intersection  of  computing  networks  (the  Internet),  video,  and  telephony.  Thus,  digital  TV  is 
 increasingly  viewed  as  a  high-  powered  communications  device  connected  to  a  high  volume 
 communications  pipe  delivering  not  only  entertainment,  but  also  interactive  communications 
 and  e-  commerce. 
 The  economic  forces  that  are  shaping  digital  TV  involve  customer  equipment  that  is  more 
 expensive  than  has  been  the  norm  and  substantial  system  upgrade  costs.  Offsetting  these  costs  is 
 the  ability  to  deliver  a  large  volume  of  services  in  an  interactive  environment.  This  creates  a 
 huge  commercial  potential.  A  dramatic  increase  in  capacity  and  the  ability  to  target  consumers 
 with  information  and  advertising  as  well  as  to  sell  on  the  spot  suggests  that  revenue  streams  will 
 grow  dramatically. 
 The  cost  to  consumers  of  watching  TV  can  be  measured  today  in  three  areas  -  appliance 
 costs,  subscription  fees  and  advertising.  These  three  revenue  streams  that  support  the  delivery  of 
 video  services  will  persist  in  the  digital  age;  they  will  simply  become  bigger  to  offset  the  higher 
 costs  of  service  delivery.  The  ways  they  will  become  bigger  are  of  substantial  consequence  to 
 consumers. 


 A.  Appliance  and  Industry  Upgrade  Costs 
 The  costs  of  the  switch  from  conventional  to  digital  TV  are  both  direct  and  indirect. 
 Direct,  out-  of-  pocket  costs  include  the  cost  of  the  DTV  equipment,  such  as  new  TV  sets  or  set- 


   A.  T.  Kearney,  Digital  Television  in  a  Digital  Economy:  Opportunities  for  Broadcasters  (National  Association  of 
 Broadcasters,  April  1998),  Chapter  1,  notes  that  the  advent  of  digital  television  will  place  broadcast  stations  in  the  midst  of  the  digital  economy. 


 11 
176
 top  box  converters,  and  service  subscription  fees,  resulting  from  broadcaster  and  network 
 operator  needs  to  cover  the  expenses  of  converting  their  equipment  to  digital  capability,  a  multi- 
 billion  dollar  venture.  Indirect  costs  include  the  costs  of  advertising. 
 The  cost  of  early  HDTV  equipment  has  been  exorbitant  --  inaugural  HDTV  sets  at  $8,000 
 in  retail  price*  and  current  prices  in  the  range  of  $2,000-$  4,000.3  Programming  has  been 
 minimal.  Yet  experts  remain  confident  that  within  15  years  all  television  broadcasting  in  the 
 United  States  will  be  digital4  and  that  two-  thirds  of  households  will  own  some  sort  of  digital 
 device.   
 Station  conversion  costs  are  estimated  above  $5  to  $10  billion  for  broadcasters  and  cable 
 TV  network  upgrade  costs  are  in  the  tens  of  billions  of  dollars.  As  increased  attention  has  been 
 placed  on  digital  televisions  emergence  into  the  mainstream  market,  increased  concern  has  been 
 expressed  about  the  cost  of  this  new  entertainment  and  communications  appliance.  It  has 
 become  clear  that  HDTV  may  very  well  be  a  service  attainable  for  only  a  small  percentage  of  the 
 wealthiest  households. 


 B.  Subscription  Fees 


 *  Advisory  Committee  on  Public  Interest  Obligations  of  Digital  Television  Broadcasters:  The  Origins  and  Future  Prospects  of  Digital  Television;  www.  benton.  orP/  PIAC/  sec  1  .html 
 3  Profile  with  Bob  Wright:  The  Agony  Before  the  Ecstasy  of  Digital  TV,    Digital  Television,  April  1999,  p.  40. 
 4  Maxwell,  Kim.  Residential  Broadband:  An  Insiders  Guide  to  the  Battle  for  the  Last  Mile  (John  Wile:  New  York:  1999);  pp.  9-  10 


 5  Higgins,  John,  Cable-  digital  Marriage  a  Blessing,  Broadcasting  and  Cable,  May  3,  1999;  Morgan  Stanley  Dean 
 Witter,  The  Digital  Decade,  April  6,  1999. 


 12 
177
 These  large  conversion  and  upgrade  costs  raise  concerns  that  subscription  fees  will 
 increase  in  frequency  and  rise  in  costs.  6  There  is  a  concern  that  subscriptions  will  become  a 
 more  important  source  of  revenue  for  the  television  industry  than  ad  sales,  which  presently  make 
 up  55%  of  revenue.  By  breaking  the  digital  signal  into  a  number  of  channels,  broadcasters  will 
 seek  to  require  consumers  to  pay  for  several  of  these.  The  shift  to  subscription  fees  will  cause 
 even  higher  direct  costs  for  DTV  consumers.    Cable  and  satellite  services  (DBS),  which  already 
 charge  fees  for  service,  will  increase  their  fees  in  addition  to  adding  more  pay-  per-  view  services. 
 As  digital  TV  expands  the  capacity  to  deliver  programming  and  the  convergence  of 
 communications,  computing  and  TV  entertainment  takes  hold,  pay-  TV  services  are  expected  to 
 increase  in  number  and  price.  The  new  services  could  be  expensive  because  of  the  studio 
 equipment  necessary  to  produce  programming  that  takes  advantage  of  the  new  appliance  and 
 also  because  the  infrastructure  necessary  to  deliver  interactive  services  is  expensive.  Whether 
 the  signals  are  broadcast  over-  the-  air  or  with  cable  or  satellite  technologies,  subscription  services 
 are  expected  to  proliferate  and  subscription  fees  are  expected  to  rise. 
 Another  area  of  concern  is  that  vigorous  marketing  of  new  services  and  options  for 
 consumers  may  lead  to  additional  costs.  Consumers  will  have  many  more  services  to  choose 
 from,  from  high-  definition  programming  and  multicasting  of  niche-  audience  channels  to  near- 
 video-  on-  demand  to  computer-  interactivity.  8  The  strengthened  technology  could  result  in  the 
 offer  of  more  products  to  consumers  in  the  form  of  Digital  TV  programming  packages.  The 


 6  Davis,  Jim.  April  21,  1999,  Zdnet.  com;  Seminal  TV  Firm  SarnofGoes  Digital 
   Digital  Terrestrial,  p.  5. 
 it  will  (some  say  must,  if  it  is  to  prosper)  change  the  norm  in  TV  from  free-  to-  air  to  Pay-  TV: 
 digital  TV  will  be  in  effect,  Pay-  TV,  with  free-  to-  air  channels  in  the  minority 


 13 
178
 ability  to  deliver  large  numbers  of  channels  with  specialized  packages  leads  to  an  effort  to  tailor 
 and  personalize  offerings.    This  creates  choice  for  consumers,  but  the  choices  can  be  influenced 
 or  controlled  by  the  provider.  This  control  can  come  in  one  of  three  ways  -  suggestions  made  by 
 programmers,  lo  control  over  interfaces  with  electronic  programming  guides,    I  or  discriminatory 
 policies  with  respect  to  programmers  who  are  not  affiliated  with  the  cable  system  owners.  12 


 C.  Advertising  Revenue 
 Advertising  will  be  transformed  in  the  digital  age.  In  order  to  generate  more  revenue  to 
 programmers,  advertisers  must  be  convinced  that  their  advertising  will  produce  more  sales. 
 Current  thinking  is  that  the  best  way  to  improve  the  effectiveness  of  advertising  is  to  target  it 


 *  Advisory  Committee  on  Public  Interest  Obligations  of  Digital  Television  Broadcasters:  The  Origins  and  Future 
 Prospects  of  Digital  Television;  www.  benton.  org/  PIAC/  sec  1  .html 
 9  Menezes,  Bill,  Replay,  TiVo  Get  Cash  for  Consumer  Push,  Multichannel  News,  April  5,  1999,  p.  48. 


 Investors  and  programming  partners  believe  that  by  enabling  subscribers  to  record  shows,  to 
 search  channel  content  for  genre-  or  actor-  specific  programs  and  to  create  their  own  customized 
 program  line-  up  the  boxes  and  recording  devices  will  drive  viewership  and  new  subscribers  to 
 premium  and  pay  per  view  channels. 


 lo  Shaw,  Russell,    Tapeless  VCR  Does  the  Thinking  for  Viewers,  Electronic  Media,  April  5,  1999,  p.  18 
 (Hereafter  Tapeless  VCR  Does  the  Thinking  for  Viewers). 


 TiVo  will  off  Showcases  that  will  make  on-  screen  suggestions  to  viewers  about  possible  taping 
 choices.  It  will  base  these  recommendations  on  technology  that  will  compare  aspects  of  certain 
 shows  to  others.  It  will  automatically  deduce,  for  example,  that  people  who  have  taped  a  spy 
 movie  might  like  to  record  other  movies  in  the  genre. 


 Salfino,  Catherine  Setting,  TiVo  and  Replay  Hope  to  Change  the  Way  We  Watch  TV,  Digital  Television, 
 February  1999,  p.  29. 


 TiVo  explains  that  it  has  to  charge  the  service  fee  because  it  is  providing  an  intuitive  service  that 
 learns  what  you  watch  (something  that  constantly  changes)  and  presents  it  to  the  viewer. 


   Weightman,  Donald,  The  Broadband  Internet  Wars,  Slashdot,  July  20,  1999.  Markoff,  John,  Microsoft  Hunts 
 Its  Whale,  the  Digital  Set-  Top  Box,  New  York  Times,  May  10,  1999.  Boersma,  Matthew,  Microsoft,  @Home 
 Make  Broadband  Pact,  ZDNET,  May  13,  1999. 


 i2  Consumer  Action  and  Consumer  Federation  of  America,  Transforming  the  information  Superhighway  Into  A 
 Private  Toll  Road  (September  1999). 


 14 


 __  ._.  _  -___-  .-  .  _-.  _.-  ._-_  -  -.-.-.  I  ..  -- 
 ..___----- 
179
 better.    3  Interactive  digital  networks  create  the  possibility  of  generating  the  information 
 necessary  to  identify  individual  preferences  and  tailor  the  message  -  either  by  delivering  it 
 selectively  to  a  higher  probability  audience  or  by  making  it  more  appealing.  Not  only  can 
 advertising  be  targeted  better,  but  also  interactivity  makes  it  easier  to  buy  the  advertised  product. 
 In  a  sense,  a  new  advertising  industry  may  be  is  born  in  the  transition  to  digital  TV.  The 
 only  way  in  which  a  dramatic  increase  in  advertising  can  be  accomplished  is  through  a 
 fundamental  change  in  the  nature  of  the  activity.  Advertising  revenues  are  driven  by  the  ability 
 to  sell,  and  digital  TV  changes  the  business  of  selling  through  television.  The  huge 
 transformation  of  advertising  is  driven  by  two  characteristics  of  the  new  advertising  medium  - 
 the  immediacy  of  the  purchase  and  the  targeting  of  the  message. 
 One  key  factor  in  increasing  the  likelihood  that  advertisers  will  sell  their  products  is  the 
 ability  of  the  viewer  to  purchase  instantaneously  or  to  otherwise  establish  an  immediate 
 connection  with  the  advertiser.  Instead  of  having  to  dial  a  number  or  write  a  letter,  the  consumer 
 is  only  one  click  away  from  the  purchase.  The  connection  can  be  made  immediately  from  the 
 device  on  which  the  advertisement  is  being  viewed  and  without  ever  leaving  the  context  of  the 
 advertisement. 
 The  second  key  characteristic  that  transforms  advertising  is  the  ability  to  use  information 
 about  the  consumer  to  target  the  advertising.  Advertising  can  be  imbedded  and  tailored  not  only 
 to  the  specific  type  of  program  being  watched,  but  it  can  be  correlated  with  information  about  the 
 viewer  that  has  been  gathered  over  the  course  of  previous  viewing  sessions  and  interactions. 


 I3  Van  Orden,  Bob,  Top  Five  Interactive  Digital-  TV  Applications,  Multichannel  News,  June  21,  1999,  p.  143, 
 Keamey,  Chapter  4. 


 15 
180
 Detailed  information  is  available  at  the  subscriber  level  within  the  digital  set-  top  box  to 
 allow  highly  targeted  marketing.  The  technology  not  only  allows  the  consumer  to  select  and 
 store  preferred  programs,  but  it  could  allow  consumer  specific  advertising  to  be  inserted. 
 A  whole  new  approach  to  advertising  is  made  possible  by  the  detailed  information  and 
 high  level  of  control  over  the  flow  of  images  and  information.  Advertisers  can  insert  their 
 promotions  into  a  stream  of  bits  in  real  time  or  in  play  back.  Live  video  insertion  has  already 
 aired  in  prime  time.  I4  Technology  with  the  capability  to  insert  specific  advertising  into 
 programming  that  is  being  recorded  for  later  playback  is  already  being  marketed.  l5 
 With  this  level  of  control,  the  potential  for  forced,  banner-  type  advertising  that  cannot  be 
 fast-  forwarded  grows.  Advertising  can  be  embedded  in  program  and  targeted  to  audiences  so 
 that  it  must  be  viewed. 


 I4  Berger,  Robin,  Digital  Technology  Virtually  Blurs  Reality,  Electronic  Media,  April  5,  1999,  p.  14. 
 Sports  fans  have  seen  the  handiwork  of  Princeton  Video  Image,  the  Sengali  behind  the  Southwest 
 Airlines  pre-  season  logo  and  the  Bravo  sign  behind  home  plate  at  Qualcomm  Stadium.  Neither 
 appeared  in  real  life..  . 


 Algorithms  in  the  software  fix  on  the  recognizable  pattern  of  a  landmark  and  digitally  insert 
 artwork  track  the  insertion  through  the  take  and  keep  foreign  objects  in  perspective 


 I5  Tapeless  VCR  Does  the  Thinking  for  Viewers,  p.  18. 
 Both  services  are  basing  their  revenue  model  on  their  capability  to  handle  proprietary  advertising 
 that  could  run  in  the  interface  the  viewers  would  see  during  playback. 


 We  are  also  a  back  channel  with  an  opportunity  for  different  forms  of  transaction  interactivity, 
 Mr.  Plant  [director  of  marketing  for  Replay  Networks]  says.  There  could  be  advertising,  [or  an 
 invitation]  to  receive  a  brochure. 


 Adds  Mr.  Hitt  [TiVos  director  of  product  marketing  management],  Well  offer  advertisers  the 
 ability  to  buy  promotions  and  have  them  run  in  front  of  showcases  that  consumers  want  to  view. 


 TiVos  Mr.  Harris  calls  this  option  frame-  by-  frame  replacement  advertising.  An  advertiser 
 could  place  demographically  compatible  commercial  or  a  click  for  brochure  in  the  stream  of  a 
 show  to  be  recorded  for  later  viewing  by  TiVo  subscribers  -  even  if  the  company  doesnt  advertise 
 on  that  show. 


 16 
181
 IV.  INVASION  OF  PRIVACY  AND  ABUSE  OF  INFORMATION  TO  OVERSELL 
 The  sensitivity  of  consumers  to  the  potential  exploitation  and  abuse  of  this  personalized 
 information  has  brought  forth  assurances  that  the  information  will  be  held  securely  and  utilized 
 only  in  the  aggregate.  However,  it  is  hard  to  imagine  that  this  valuable  information  will  sit 
 unused  in  the  set-  top  box  at  the  fingertips  and  under  the  control  of  the  service  provider.  Since 
 there  is  a  strong  need  to  sell  more,  it  is  likely  that  the  information  will  be  exploited  to  the  fullest. 
 Not  only  will  they  use  it  directly,  but  they  may  sell  it  to  others. 
 Concerns  about  overselling  also  have  been  raised.  Traditionally,  restraints  on 
 advertising  and  overselling  have  focussed  on  the  most  vulnerable  population  -  children.  The 
 concern  is  that  children  are  unable  to  distinguish  the  advertisement  from  the  entertainment  and 
 unable  to  exercise  informed  choices.  As  the  advertising  becomes  more  powerful  and  targeted 
 through  the  use  of  personal  information  and  the  purchase  becomes  more  immediate  through  the 
 use  of  interactive  technology,  the  concern  about  overselling  spreads  to  the  general  population. 
 The  concerns  about  aggressive  marketing  and  overselling  arise  from  two  interconnected 
 factors.  First,  the  presentation  of  choices  and  alternatives  may  be  manipulated  so  that  the 
 consumer  loses  control  over  what  is  viewed.  Second  the  likely  reliance  on  highly  targeted 
 advertising  which  is  built  on  detailed  personal  information  about  viewing  and  purchase  patterns 
 disarms  the  consumer. 
 As  noted  above,  the  amount  of  information  available  to  network  operators  is  staggering. 
 It  is  possible  to  monitor  viewing  patterns,  including  which  shows  are  tuned  in,  which 
 commercials  are  skipped,  etc.  It  is  also  possible  to  keep  records  of  purchase  patterns,  which  sites 
 are  visited,  what  information  is  requested  and  which  goods  are  bought.  This  information  is 


 17 
182
 extremely  valuable  to  advertisers.  One  must  assume  that  unless  prevented  from  doing  so,  they 
 will  use  it. 
 The  threat  to  privacy  in  this  commercial  model  is  clear.  The  privacy  protections  afforded 
 to  telecommunications  consumers  in  current  policy  is  very  uneven.  t6  It  goes  without  saying  that 
 consumers  have  a  right  to  control  their  personal  information.  Moreover,  the  vast  majority  of 
 Americans  strongly  support  FCC  measures  to  protect  digital  television  consumer  privacy.  17  In 
 keeping  with  our  focus  on  pocketbook  issues,  we  ask  whether  the  use  of  personal  information  in 
 the  context  of  an  interactive,  electronic  transaction  creates  a  risk  of  overselling  by  abusing 
 personal  information  and  the  intimacy  (immediacy,  seclusion)  of  the  interactive  TV 
 environment. 


 A.  Pre-  Purchase  Problems 
 The  utilization  of  detailed  consumer  information  to  target  the  advertising  is  liable  to  catch 
 the  consumer  unaware.  Consumers  do  not  expect  marketers  to  have  such  information.  The  irony 
 of  the  fit  between  the  message  and  the  individual  consumer  may  be  disarming,  lowering  the 
 consumers  guard. 
 Consumers  also  are  confronted  with  a  difficult  problem  of  sorting  out  the  nature  of  the 
 source  of  the  information  when  presented  in  this  digital  context.  Infomercials  and  advertorials, 
 whose  purpose  it  may  be  to  confuse  consumers,  will  become  even  more  challenging  when  they 
 are  personalized. 


 I6  Whyma,  Bill,  Cables  Data  Privacy  Rules  Stumbling  Block  for  E-  Commerce  and  @Home?,  Legg  Mason  Precursor  Research,  April  6,  1999. 
   80  percent  of  voters  favor  FCC  guidelines  to  protect  consumer  privacy;  83  percent  think  establishing  privacy 
 protetion  guidelines  is  important;  Lake  Snell  Perry,  May  1999. 


 18 
183
 The  educational  and  information  gathering  process  that  consumers  would  normally  go 
 through  in  the  pre-  purchase  phase  is  distorted  by  the  use  of  personal  information  embedded  in 
 the  interactive  context  of  digital  communications.  The  immediacy  of  the  purchase,  which  is 
 facilitated  by  interactivity,  may  create  a  condition  of  urgency  and  time  constraint,  which 
 diminishes  the  tendency  of  the  consumer  to  search  for  alternatives.  The  ability  to  distinguish 
 between  what  must  be  done  without  delay  and  what  is  optional  may  be  limited.  18 
 Warning  messages  about  a  purchase  may  not  be  effective  in  this  context.  If  they  require 
 a  consumer  to  react  quickly,  like  hang  up  or  tune  out  before  billing  starts,  the  message  may  be 
 missed.  Since  the  purchase  decision  is  not  focused  on  the  array  of  products  being  offered, 
 warnings  and  cautions  are  less  likely  to  be  heeded.  A  lack  of  involvement  may  result  in 
 confusion.*   


 B.  Point-  of-  Sale  Problems 
 The  billing  pattern  for  these  services  is  also  problematic.  There  is  a  disconnection 
 between  the  purchase  and  the  bill.  Many  weeks  may  elapse  between  the  purchase  and  the  bill. 
 Further,  the  bill  may  make  it  difficult  to  identify  exactly  what  costs  how  much.  The  difficulty  of 


 I8  Newman,  J.  W.,  Consumer  External  Search:  Amount  and  Determinants,  in  A.  G.  Woodside,  J.  N.  Sheth,  and  P. 
 D.  Bennet  (Eds.),  Consumer  andlndustrial  Buyer  Behavior  (New  York:  North  Holland,  1977);  Newman,  J.  W.  and 
 R.  Staelings,  Multivariate  Analysis  of  Differences  in  Buyer  Decision  Time,  Journal  of  Marketing  Research  8, 
 1971,  Prepurchse  Information  Seeking  for  New  Cars  and  Major  Household  Appliances,  Journal  of  Marketing  Research,  9,  1972;  Claxon,  1974;  Beatty,  SE.  and  S.  M.  Smith,  External  Search  Effort:  An  Investigation  Across 


 Several  Product  Categories,  Journal  of  Consumer  Research,  14,1987. 
 Wilkie,  1982;  Funkhouser,  1984. 


 I9  Wilkie,  1987,  Funkhouser,  1984. 
 *  Jacoby  and  Hoyer,  Laczniak  and  Grossbart,  1990. 


 19 
184
 sorting  the  bill  out  renders  pre-  purchase  information  gathering  and  post-  purchase  follow  up  less 
 likely.  2 
 Electronic  transactions  also  frequently  allow  for  little  pause  to  contemplate.  When 
 consumers  are  on-  line,  over  the  phone  or  at  the  computer,  they  may  feel  rushed  by  tying  up  the 
 line.  On-  line  environments  frequently  give  warning  messages  about  idle  time.  Since  the 
 transaction  is  conducted  electronically,  there  is  little  opportunity  for  point-  of-  sale  information 
 gathering.  Information  gathering  for  later  review  assists  in  decision  making.  22  No  immediate 
 record  of  the  transaction  exists  and  the  transaction  is  not  available  for  public  scrutiny.  23 


 C.  Post-  Purchase  Problems 
 It  is  extremely  difficult  to  police  these  transactions.  Sellers  know  that  the  transaction 
 cannot  be  observed.  Consumers  do  not  have  records  to  study  or  use  for  dispute  resolution.  They 
 do  not  take  possession  immediately.  The  bill  does  not  come  until  some  time  later.  There  may 
 also  be  uncertainty  about  redress  and  responsibility  for  service.  The  former  utility  will  typically 
 be  seen  as  the  responsible  party,  but  that  may  be  correct  only  under  some  circumstances.  Sorting 
 out  whom  is  responsible  for  which  part  of  the  total  service  may  be  difficult.  When  three  or  four 
 companies  become  involved,  transaction  costs  for  the  consumer  can  mount  quickly. 
 It  is  clear  that  return  policies  are  being  influenced  by  the  nature  of  goods  sold  in  e- 
 commerce.  Shrink-  wrapped  software  is  the  best  example.  You  open  the  box;  it  is  yours.  If  it 


 2  Chaiken,  S.,  Heuristic  versus  Systematic  Information  Processing  and  the  Use  of  Source  versus  Message  Cues  in  Persuasion,  Journal  of  Personality  and  Social  Psychology,  39,  1980;,  Zimmerman,  L.  K.  and  L.  V.  Gesfeldt, 
 Economic  Factors  Which  Influence  Consumer  Search  for  Price  Information,  Journal  of  Consumer  Affairs,  18, 
 1984;  Beaty  and  Smith;  Newman,  1977. 


 **  Wilkie,  1982. 
 *  Bloom. 


 20 


 I  ._  _.  __.  -.-.  l_  _-.-.  -.  -.,__  _-______.  ..-..-.  l--.-.-. 
185
 does  not  work,  you  can  exchange  it,  but  you  cannot  get  your  money  back.  Why  not?  The  no 
 return  policy  places  more  emphasis  on  the  post-  purchase  phase.  If  the  consumer  cannot  get  his 
 or  her  money  back,  then  customer  service  or  post-  purchase  remedies  must  ensure  that  the 
 product  works. 
 The  physical  aspect  of  returning  goods  also  changes.  Goods  are  generally  returned  in  the 
 way  they  are  purchased.  If  the  consumer  got  it  from  a  store,  he  or  she  will  typically  be  told  to 
 return  it  to  the  store.  If  the  consumer  received  it  by  mail  order,  the  consumer  will  be  required  to 
 return  it  mail  order.  Credit  card  transactions  will  be  credited  after  the  returned  product  is 
 received.  If  the  product  was  downloaded,  is  it  returned  by  uploading?  Industry  analysts  and 
 consumer  advocates  have  argued  that  more  vigorous  post-  purchase  remedies  are  necessary  to 
 create  confidence  in  e-  commerce  transactions.  24 


 D.  Policy  Recommendations 
 1.  Customer  Privacy.  The  FCC  should  require  broadcasters  to  comply  with  privacy  guidelines 
 that  meet  the  following  principals: 
 a.  Notice:  Broadcasters  must  inform  their  customers  in  a  clear  and  conspicuous  manner  when 
 they  plan  to  collect,  use,  and/  or  disclose  personally  identifiable  information,  and  customers  must 
 be  told  the  intended  recipient  of  the  information  and  the  purpose(  s)  for  which  it  shall  be  used. 
 b.  Consent:  Broadcasters  must  receive  prior  affirmative  consent  of  the  customer  before  it 


 discloses  that  customer-  specific  viewing,  purchasing  or  financial  information  to  any  third  party 
 or  affiliate.  No  customer  can  be  denied  any  product  or  services  by  a  broadcaster  for  refusing  to 


 24  Consumers  International,  1998 
 21 
186
 give  consent  to  the  disclosure  of  the  customers  personal  information  except  where  necessary  to 
 determine  eligibility  for  a  specific  product. 
 c.  Access:  Customers  must  have  access  to  personally  identifiable  information  held  by  the 
 broadcaster  to  make  sure  it  is  accurate,  timely  and  complete  and  customers  must  have  the  ability 
 to  correct  erroneous  information. 
 2.  Purchase  Protections/  Abuse  of  Information  to  Oversell.  As  telecommunications  and 
 broadcasting  technologies  begin  to  converge,  so  should  consumer  government  oversight.  The 
 FCC  should  consult  the  Federal  Trade  Commission  and  propose  comprehensive  measures  to 
 protect  digital  television  consumers  before,  during  and  after  the  purchase  of  goods  or  services. 
 These  measures  should  be  consistent  with  basic  guidelines  for  online  commerce  developed  by 
 the  Consumer  Federation  of  America  and  an  international  working  group  of  consumer 
 organizations.  25  The  FCC  should  seek  specific  comments  from  stakeholders  regarding  potential 
 remedies  aggressive  advertising,  including: 


 25  Guidelines  proposed  by  the  Transatlantic  Consumer  Dialogue: 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 


 5. 
 6. 
 7. 


 8. 
 9. 


 Consumers  should  have  transparent  and  effective  protections  that  are  at  least  at  the  same  level  as  those 
 afforded  in  other  forms  of  commerce. 
 Businesses  should  disclose  their  legal  names  and  physical  locations,  and  provide  consumers  with  an  easy 
 means  of  contacting  them,  both  online  and  offline. 
 Marketing  material  should  be  clearly  identified  as  such  in  any  electronic  format  in  which  it  is  conveyed. 
 Information  about  the  businesses,  the  products  or  services  they  offer,  and  the  terms  of  the  transactions, 
 including  price,  delivery,  payment,  taxes,  cost  of  transportation,  duties,  etc.,  should  be  stated  in  a  clear, 
 conspicuous,  accurate  and  easily  accessible  manner  before  a  consumer  is  required  to  give  personal 
 information  or  payment  information. 
 Businesses  should  not  make  any  representations  or  omissions,  or  engage  in  any  practices,  that  are  likely  to 
 be  unfair,  deceptive  or  fraudulent. 
 Businesses  should  be  able  to  substantiate  any  claims  they  make,  express  or  implied.  Businesses  should  develop  and  implement  methods  by  which  consumers  can  confirm  the  decision  to 


 purchase  or  withdraw  from  a  purchase  before  a  transaction  is  completed.  Consumers  should  have  no 
 liability  for  unintentional  or  erroneous  transactions  where  the  business  failed  to  provide  an  adequate 
 opportunity  to  correct  the  error. 
 Businesses  should  develop  and  implement  methods  by  which  consumers  can  receive  confirmation  of  their 
 purchases  and  retain  records  of  the  transactions. 
 Businesses  must  abide  by  any  post-  purchase  cancellation  rights  that  may  be  provided  by  self-  regulatory  guidelines  and  the  law  in  consumers  jurisdictions. 


 22 
187
 a.  Post-  purchase  remedies,  including  the  right  of  recision  to  cancel  purchases  made  through 
 digital  television  for  up  to  three  days. 


 10.  Businesses  should  develop  and  implement  methods  to  prevent  identity  theft  and  other  frauds  and  verify  that 
 payment  is  being  made  by  the  authorized  account  holder.  The  burden  of  proof  regarding  authenticity  should 
 rest  with  the  business  and/  or  payment  systems  operator,  as  appropriate.  Consumers  should  be  responsible  to 
 notify  the  appropriate  entity  promptly  once  aware  of  possible  theft  or  loss,  and  should  have  no  liability  for 
 transactions  they  did  not  authorize. 
 11.  Consumers  payment  and  other  information  that  they  provide  to  businesses  should  be  secured  from  theft  or 
 abuse. 
 12.  Consumers  should  have  no  liability  to  pay  for  products  or  services  that  were  never  delivered  or  were 
 misrepresented.  In  those  events,  electronic  payment  methods  should  provide  for  chargeback  rights  and 
 prompt  return  of  any  payments  made. 
 13.  Businesses  should  develop  and  implement  simple  procedures  for  consumers  to  indicate  that  they  do  not 
 wish  to  receive  unsolicited  e-  mails  and  honor  their  do  not  e-  mail  requests. 
 14.  Consumers  privacy  rights  should  be  respected  in  accordance  with  the  recognized  principles  set  out  in  the 
 1980  OECD  Guidelines  Governing  the  Protection  of  Privacy  and  Transborder  Flow  of  Personal  Data  and 
 taking  into  account  the  OECD  Ministerial  Declaration  on  the  Protection  of  Privacy  on  Global  Networks. 
 15.  Consumers  must  have  methods  of  redress  that  are  practical,  accessible,  affordable,  timely  and  enforceable 
 no  matter  where  businesses  against  whom  they  have  complaints  are  located. 
 16.  The  countries  in  which  consumers  reside  have  the  obligation  to  protect  them  in  electronic  commerce  and 
 must  guaranty  that  there  are  appropriate  means  for  resolving  consumers  disputes.  Consumers  should  never 
 be  denied  the  protections  and  remedies  afforded  to  them  by  the  laws,  rules  and  regulations  of  their  respective  jurisdictions. 


 B.  Jurisdiction 
 Consumers  must  have  access  to  adequate  redress  if  problems  arise  when  buying  goods  and  services  on  the 
 Internet.  Although  the  marketplace  is  global,  consumers  must  have  the  right  to  take  action  before  their  own 
 national  court.  Consumers  should  only  be  pursued  before  a  court  in  the  consumers  home  country.  A  choice  of 
 forum  clause  in  a  consumer  contract  is  not  enforceable.  International  co-  operation  is  needed  to  enforce 
 judgements  against  companies  in  cross-  border  disputes. 


 C.  Alternate  Dispute  Resolution 
 Consumers  need  alternative  dispute  resolution  systems  where  consumers  can  file  complaints  without  going  to 
 court.  Alternative  dispute  resolution  systems  to  resolve  consumer  complaints  in  the  context  of  electronic 
 commerce  should  be  based  on  these  principles: 


 I.  Framework  for  ADR  systems  should  be  set  by  legislation  and  presented  as  a  voluntary  option  for 
 consumers,  not  a  legal  or  contractual  requirement. 
 2.  ADR  systems  should  be  easily  accessible  and  convenient.  Information  about  procedures,  costs,  basis  for 
 decisions,  and  the  enforceability  of  decisions  should  be  provided  prominently  and  clearly. 
 3.  ADR  systems  should  be  free  or  low-  cost  and  operate  in  an  expeditious  manner. 
 4.  ADR  systems  should  be  independent,  operated  by  reputable  third-  parties.  Personnel  should  have  no  direct 
 interests  in  the  disputes  or  the  parties  involved. 
 5.  Meaningful  enforcement  of  decisions  reached  by  ADR  is  essential. 
 6.  Consumers  who  submit  disputes  to  ADR  systems  should  not  be  asked  to  waive  their  legal  rights. 
 Consumers  use  of  ADR  systems  should  not  prevent  law  enforcement  authorities  or  others  from  using  their 
 cases  in  actions  to  stop  fraud  or  abuse. 


 23 
188
 b.  Requiring  digital  television  providers  to  offer  purchase  screening  options  that  would,  for 
 instance,  allow  parents  to  block  the  unauthorized  purchase  of  goods  and  services  by  their 
 children. 
 c.  Restrictions  on  interactive  digital  advertising  directed  at  children. 


 V.  WIDENING  THE  DIGITAL  DIVIDE 
 As  digital  communications  become  the  dominant  form  of  communications,  the  high  costs 
 for  the  appliance  and  increasing  presence  of  subscription  services  may  price  many  consumers  out 
 of  the  market.  As  a  result,  they  would  be  cut  off  from  the  higher  quality  services  and 
 information  sources  that  are  commanding  societys  resources  and  attention.  High  costs  of  digital 
 TV  could  solidify  the  Digital  Divide  that  many  fear  has  been  growing  in  America.  26 
 Not  only  could  low  income  and  minority  groups  be  denied  access  to  commercial  services, 
 but  also  they  could  be  cut  off  from  the  primary  driver  of  economic  opportunity  as  well  as  the 
 major  arena  for  civic  and  political  discourse  in  the  21St  century. 


 A.  Measuring  the  Digital  Divide 
 The  Digital  Divide  can  be  measured  in  at  least  three  different  ways.  The  Consumer 
 Federation  of  America  and  Consumers  Union  (CFAKU)  recently  analyzed  the  digital  divide  in 
 terms  of  the  use  of  communications  services  -  telephone,  cable  television  and  Internet.  The 
 Clinton  Administration  has  analyzed  the  digital  divide  in  terms  of  ownership  of  computers  and 


 26  Cooper  Mark  and  Gene  Kimmelman,  Digital  Divide:  Economic  Reality  Confronts  Public  Policy  (Consumer 
 Federation  of  America  and  Consumers  Union,  January  1999);  NTIA..  . 


 24 
189
 use  of  the  Internet.  27  Social  analysts  discuss  the  digital  divide  in  terms  of  economic  skill  and 
 employment  prospects.  All  three  approaches  yield  a  similar  and  reinforcing  picture  of  a  major 
 and  extremely  serious  division  in  society  (see  Exhibit  2). 


 27  (Petty,  1998) 
 25 


 _,  ._  I_  _  ____.__  ^__^  -____.._.  -~-  -..  -.-.--.----.- 
190
 EXHIBIT  2: 
 CHARACTERIZATIONS  OF  THE  DIGITAL  DIVIDE 


 SOURCE  CFAKU  NTIA  SOCIAL  COMMENTARY 
 ANALYTIC 
 APPROACH 


 CLASSES 
 UPPER 


 Digital  Divide  defined  Digital  Divide  defined 
 by  usage  of  communications  by  computer  ownership 
 and  Internet  use 
 %  of  Pop.  %  of  Pop. 


 Premier  24  Computer  26 
 &  Internet 


 UPPER  MIDDLE  Transitional  15  Computer  16 
 no  Internet 
 LOWER  MIDDLE  Mobile  16 


 >  >  No  Computer  58  LOWER  Modest  45 


 SOURCE: 


 Digital  Divide  defined 
 by  employment  skill  category 


 %  of  Pop. 
 Symbolic  Analyst  20 


 Support  personnel  20 
 Casual  Middle  30 
 Bottom  30 


 CFA/  CU:  Cooper,  Mark  N.  and  Gene  Kimmelman,  The  Digital  Divide  Conjkonts  the  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996:  Economic 
 Reality  vs.  Public  Policy,  (Consumer  Federation  of  America  and  Consumers  Union,  February  1999). 


 NTIA:  Falling  Through  the  Net:  DeJining  the  Digital  Divide,  July  1999. 
 SOCIAL  COMMENTARY:  Hall,  Peter,  Changing  Geographies:  Technology  and  Income,  and  Manuel  Castells,  The  Informational 
 City  is  a  Dual  City:  Can  It  Be  Reversed,  in  Donald  A.  Schon,  Bish  Sanyal  and  William  J.  Mitchell,  High  Technology  and  Low- 
 Income  Communities  (MIT  Press:  1999). 


 27 
191
 CFA/  CU  identified  a  top  segment  of  the  population  with  large  communications 
 expenditures,  which  represents  about  one  quarter  of  the  population.  Borrowing  a  term  from 
 industry  business  models,  we  called  this  the  premier  market  segment.  A  second  closely  related 
 group  we  called  the  transitional  group.  Taken  together,  we  estimated  these  two  groups  as  40 
 percent  of  the  population. 
 In  the  CFA/  CU  analysis  the  bottom  60  percent  is  generally  not  hooked  into  the 
 information  age.  The  bottom  60  percent  did  not  have  access  to  the  Internet  and  spent  relatively 
 little  on  communications  services.  The  bottom  45  percent  had  only  one  telephone  line,  no 
 Internet  access  and  no  cellular  service.  Another  15  percent  had  one  telephone  line,  no  Internet 
 access,  but  did  have  a  cellular  phone. 


 B.  The  Impact  Of  The  Digital  Transition  On  The  Digital  Divide 
 The  description  of  the  Digital  Divide  tells  us  nothing  about  how  the  transition  to  digital 
 TV,  embedded  in  the  broader  transition  to  a  digital  information  society  will  affect  the  divide. 
 The  obvious  concern  is  that  the  high  cost  of  acquiring  these  new  services  will  make  matters 
 worse. 
 The  well-  established  field  of  diffusion  research  provides  support  for  this  concern.  The 
 academic  literature  on  the  adoption  of  innovations  certainly  suggests  that  the  early  adopters  will 
 be  the  wealthier,  better-  educated  segments  of  the  population. 
 The  cost  of  appliances,  relative  to  income  is  a  major  determinant  of  their  diffusion 
 throughout  the  population.  About  a  decade  ago,  CFA  found  that  the  best  approach  to 
 understanding  affordability  is  to  express  the  cost  of  the  service  (including  equipment  and 
 monthly  charges)  as  a  percentage  of  income.  This  captures  the  two  most  important  variables 


 28 


 __-  .__-._.  ..-  ._------  .  I  -- 
192
 that  are  generally  identified  in  the  diffusion  literature,  price  and  income.  What  we  found  in  that 
 earlier  research  was  that  an  appliance  or  service  needs  to  drop  below  2  percent  of  income  before 
 it  becomes  affordable. 
 The  belief  by  at  least  one  TV  executive  that  the  TV  set  needed  to  be  on  a  price  trajectory 
 from  $1,000  to  $250  is  well  founded.  28  This  is  the  price  trajectory  of  the  VCR,  which  penetrated 
 very  rapidly  in  the  1980s  to  reach  more  than  80  percent  in  less  than  a  decade.  Digital  TV  is  still 
 quite  a  distance  away  from  this  price  trajectory.  The  most  recent  experience  with  computers 
 appears  to  bear  this  out.  After  hovering  in  the  $1,000  to  $1,500  range  for  a  number  of  years,  a 
 significant  price  reduction  occurred  in  late  1998  and  has  persisted  through  1999.  The  average 
 price  has  dropped  to  below  $900,  with  many  models  selling  in  the  $500  range. 
 With  median  income  in  the  range  of  $38,000  a  $500  computer  is  well  below  2  percent  of 
 median  household  income.  Early  indications  are  that  this  will  increase  the  penetration  of 
 computers  significantly. 
 Even  the  most  optimistic  price  trajectory  of  HDTV  would  leave  it  at  a  relatively  high 
 level  even  at  the  end  of  the  next  decade.  It  will  simply  not  be  priced  in  a  manner  to  be  widely 
 affordable  and  achieve  high  levels  of  penetration.  The  problem  is  not  limited  to  HDTV, 
 however.  Even  considering  Standard  Definition  Digital  television,  affordability  is  a  problem. 
 The  SDTV  set  is  projected  in  the  range  of  $500  for  equipment.  This  is  about  twice  the 


 price  of  an  analog  TV.  Moreover,  the  SDTV  is  only  useful  if  one  subscribes  to  cable  (another 
 $30-$  40  per  month)  and  then  pays  for  additional  digital  services  (another  $lO-$  40  per  month). 


 The  cost  of  service  is  driven  well  above  the  level  where  diffusion  is  rapid. 


 28  Bob  Wright. 
 29 
193
 This  picture  of  the  likely  early  adopters  had  not  changed  in  ten  years.  29  It  is  quite  similar 
 to  the  results  one  finds  in  a  very  long  tradition  of  innovation  adoption  research.  30  There  is  a  very 
 strong  base  of  support  for  the  importance  of  income  and  education  in  the  adoptions  of  high 
 technology  innovations  like  computers  and  telecommunications  equipment.  31  The  strong 
 predictors  of  inclination  to  early  adoption  point  directly  to  market  segmentation  strategies.  32  In 
 other  words,  companies  introducing  technologies  can  identify  the  likely  adopters  and  orient  their 
 product  distribution  to  maximize  the  penetration  within  that  market  segment. 
 This  observation  dovetails  with  the  CFAKU  analysis  of  the  digital  divide  that  focused  on 
 the  business  models  that  were  being  applied  by  the  telecommunications  companies.  CFA/  CU 
 found  that  the  competitive  energies  of  the  industry  are  focused  on  the  premier  segment,  with 
 innovative  offerings  and  consumer  friendly  pricing,  which  the  remainder  of  the  population  is 
 ignored  or  suffers  price  increases.  33 


 29  Dupagne. 
 So  Sakar,  Jayati,  Technological  Diffusion:  Alternative  Theories  and  Historical  Evidence,  Journal  of  Economic 
 Surveys,  12:  2,  1998;  Martinez,  Evan,  Yolanda  Polo  and  Carlos  Flavian,  The  Acceptance  and  Diftision  of  New 
 Consumer  Durables:  Differences  Between  First  and  Last  Adopters,  Journal  of  Consumer  Marketing,  1.5:  4,  19998. 


 31  Meeks,  Carol  B.,  Anne  L.  Sweaney,  Consumers  Willingness  to  Innovate:  Ownership  of  Microwaves,  Computers 
 and  Entertainment  Products,  Journal  of  Consumer  Studies  and  Home  Economics,  16,  1992;  Savage,  Scott  Gary 
 Madden  and  Michael  Simpson,  Broadband  Delivery  of  Educational  Services:  A  Study  of  Subscription  Intentions  in 
 Australian  Provincial  Centers,  Journal  of  Media  Economics,  lO:  l,  1997;  Atkin,  David  J.,  Leo  W.  Jeffres  and 
 Kimberly  A.  Neuendorf,  Understanding  Internet  Adoption  as  Telecommunications  Behavior,  Journal  of 
 Broadcasting  and  Electronic  Media,  42:  4,  1998;  Neuendorf,  Kimbelry  A.,  David  Atkin  and  Leo  W.  Jeffies, 
 Understanding  Adopters  of  Audio  Information  Innovations,  Journal  of  Broadcasting  and  Electronic  Media,  42~  4, 
 1998;  Lin,  Carolyn,  A.,  Exploring  Personal  Computer  Adoption  Dynamics,  Journal  of  Broadcasting  and 
 Electronic  Media,  42~  4,  1998. 


 32  Sultan,  Fareena,  Consumer  Preferences  for  Forthcoming  Innovations:  The  Case  of  High  Definition  Television, 
 Journal  of  Consumer  Marketing,  16:  1999,  p.  37. 


 33  Cooper,  Mark  N.  and  Gene  Kimmelman,  The  Digital  Divide  Confronts  the  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996: 
 Economic  Reality  vs.  Public  Policy,  (Consumer  Federation  of  America  and  Consumers  Union,  February  1999),  pp. 
 3-  4. 


 Thus,  the  continuous  debate  since  the  passage  of  the  96  Telecom  Act  over  the  need  to  deploy 
 infrastructure  to  eliminate  the  digital  divide  has  been  significantly  misplaced.  That  expression 


 30 
194
 Social  analysts  have  expressed  similar  concerns.  They  caution  that  there  is  nothing  inherent 
 in  the  digital  transformation  that  will  alleviate  the  problem  of  the  digital  divide  and  much  that 
 could  exacerbate  it.  In  short,  the  digital  transformation  does  nothing  to  reduce  the  economic, 
 personal  and  social  barriers.  34  As  the  effects  of  the  digital  transformation  spread,  those  who  do 


 has  been  used  to  refer  to  the  possibility  that  some  groups  of  consumers  would  be  cut  off  from  the  expanding  possibilities  of  the  information  age  because  of  a  failure  of  private  sector  firms  to  deploy 
 the  necessary  infrastructure.  This  paper  shows  a  digital  divide  from  a  vastly  different  perspective. 
 We  present  evidence  that  the  market  activities  of  the  firms  in  the  industry  are  creating  a  divide  not 
 on  the  basis  of  infrastructure,  but  on  the  basis  of  economics.  The  current  infrastructure  is  more 
 than  adequate  to  generate  a  very  high  stream  of  revenue  and  meet  the  needs  of  virtually  all 
 consumers.  The  companies  appear  to  be  interested  in  competing  for  the  business  of  a  small 
 segment  of  the  market  -  intensive  users  of  numerous  telecommunications  and  TV  services.  The 
 group  of  consumers  who  are  attractive  to  companies  is  quite  small.  The  drive  to  expand  the 
 infrastructure  serves  the  needs  of  this  small  group  and  leaves  the  rest  behind. 


 If  policymakers  allow  the  debate  over  the  high-  end  markets  to  drive  public  decisions  about 
 infrastructure  deployment,  the  digital  divide  will  grow,  not  be  reduced.  The  availability  of  more 
 infrastructure  will  expand  economic  opportunity  at  the  top  of  the  market  and  reduce  the  likelihood 
 that  companies  will  have  to  work  their  way  down  the  market  to  increase  their  economic  rewards. 
 Profit  maximizers  will  simply  exploit  the  demand  for  more  service  in  the  upper  end  of  the  market 
 more  intensity. 


 This  findamental  economic  observation  is  crucial  to  developing  sound  public  policy.  Massive 
 industry  consolidation  under  a  law  that  fails  to  differentiate  areas  of  likely  competitive  opportunity 
 from  areas  of  persistent  monopoly  is  leading  to  a  new  era  of  telecommunications  haves  and  have- 
 nots  as  described  below. 


 34  Donald  Schnook,  Bit  Sandal  and  William  J.  Mitchell,  High  Technology  and  Low-  Income  Communities  (MIT 
 Press,  Cambridge,  1999),  pp.  7,  12,  5  1. 


 Much  advanced  service  activity  depends  on  what  one  can  call  access  to  privileged  information: 
 whether  in  the  City  of  London,  or  Midtown  Manhattan,  or  Silicon  Valley,  or  Hollywood,  higher- 
 level  information  workers  spend  a  lot  of  their  time  picking  up  informal  information,  much  of  it  semi-  gossip,  which  is  vital  to  the  judgement  they  make  about  other  more  formal  information..  . 


 In  these  and  other  similar  places  we  find  an  extraordinary  synergy  between  telecommunications 
 exchange  and  face-  to-  face  exchange. 


 The  rise  of  advanced  information  technology  is  unlikely,  left  to  itself,  to  do  anything  for  low- 
 income  people,  or  the  communities  in  which  they  congregate.  The  poor  lack  access  to  the 
 economic  opportunities  that  advance  information  technologies  present.  This  lack  of  access  hinges 
 on  issue  of  transportation,  education,  work  readiness,  and  computer  skills. 


 Effective  access  is  a  multi-  layered  proposition,  consisting  of  access  to  the  pipes,  the  affordable 
 appliance,  the  user-  friendly  software,    and  the  will  and  motivation  to  exploit  all  of  the  above. 


 31 
195
 not  have  command  of  the  technology  become  marginalized.  To  the  extent  that  they  have  skills, 
 those  skills  are  devalued  and  their  bargaining  power  is  undermined  by  the  changes  in  the 
 production  process.  35 


 C.  Public  Policy  Recommendations 
 Ultimately,  digital  divide  questions  are  very  large  social  issues.  The  Commissions  braod 
 policies  to  promote  computer  and  Internet  literacy  address  the  a  part  of  the  problem  that  deals 
 with  the  human  capital  aspect  of  the  digital  divide. 
 The  Commission  should  certainly  monitor  the  market  to  ascertain  whether  equipment 
 costs  are  affordable.  Having  finally  crossed  the  threshold  to  rapidly  expanding  computer 
 ownership  with  the  recent  declines  it  price,  it  would  be  ironic  if  the  next  generation  of  Internet 
 access  became  unaffordable  because  the  preferred  appliance,  the  TV  plus  set  top  box,  shifts  the 
 costs  to  much  higher  levels. 
 With  respect  to  content,  the  Commission  should  extend  the  principles  of  commercial 
 leased  access  and  free,  or  low  cost  civic  discourse  channels.  Support  for  production  of  new 
 digital/  broadband  programming  with  diverse  content  should  also  be  required. 
 The  Commission  should  also  monitor  subscription  and  pay-  per-  view  charges  and  reserve 
 the  right  to  requre  broadcasters  to  charge  reasonable  rates  for  pay  services.  Given  the  costs 


 The  real  barrier  to  entry  is,  in  this  case,  not  physical  capital  but  human  capital,  which  depends 
 on  education,  training  in  computer  skills,  and  job  experience;  and  social  capital,  which  consists  of 
 the  formation  of  a  network  of  useful  business  contacts. 


 35  Schon,  p.  7. 
 If  anything,  Wolpert  sees  advanced  information  technology  as  driving  the  working  poor  and  layers 
 of  middle  management  out  of  the  mainstream  economy,  depriving  even  more  people  of  its 
 benefits. 


 32 


 _-_  ._  ___  ___  ___.  ..-  ...-_.--.  .-  -.------  ..- 
196
 associated  with  offering  digital  television,  it  is  quite  possible  that  broadcasters  will  charge  for 
 programming  that  is  now  offered  free.  The  public  would  strongly  support  efforts  to  keep 
 television  programming  within  reach  of  average  and  moderate  income  families.  36 


 IV.  THE  THREAT  TO  DIVERSITY  AND  EXPRESSION  WITH  A 
 COMMERCIALLY  DRIVEN  DIGITAL  TELEVISION  DEPLOYMENT 


 While  the  digital  divide  affects  lower  and  middle  income  groups,  there  is  a  broader 
 concern  that  the  powerful  commercial  forces  that  are  driving  the  transition  to  the  digital 
 information  age  will  overwhelm  the  public  purposes  served  by  television.  The  need  to  produce 
 and  sell  commercial  programming  may  squeeze  out  educational,  cultural  and  informational 
 programming. 


 A.  Concerns  about  the  Impact  of  Commercialization  on  Civic  Discourse 
 Though  it  is  unclear  when  digital  TV  will  appear  on  the  market  in  full  force,  consumer 
 advocates  have  long  been  involved  in  debates  about  the  content  that  will  be  aired  over  the 
 revolutionary  transmission  medium.  The  transformation  of  TV  is  not  only  quite  costly,  but  also 
 a  huge  commercial  opportunity.  Afraid  that  the  new  spectrum  will  result  in  strictly  revenue- 
 making  ventures  by  broadcasters,  without  regard  for  the  publics  interest  in  new  quality 


 36  73  percent  of  voters  support  FCC  rate  regulation  of  pay-  per-  view  programming;  75  percent  think  this  is  important; 
 Lake  Snell  Perry,  May  1999. 


 33 
197
 programming,  consumer  groups  have  attempted  to  ensure  that  Digital  TV  reflects  beneficial 
 public  purpose. 
 The  transformation  of  digital  TV  into  a  high-  cost,  high-  powered  marketing  platform 
 raises  the  prospect  of  the  medium  becoming  even  more  highly  commercialized  than  at  present. 
 This  advances  an  ongoing  commercialization  that  has  been  a  source  of  concern,  37 
 This  traditional  public  policy  debate  has  it  origins  in  the  longstanding  public  policy  of 
 demanding  socially  responsible  behavior  from  broadcasters  who  have  used  a  scarce  public 
 resource  -  broadcast  spectrum  -  at  no  charge.  Although  it  can  be  argued  that  spectrum  is  no 
 longer  scarce,  there  is  no  question  that  it  is  still  very  valuable  and  broadcasters  use  it  without 
 paying  for  it.  The  nucleus  of  the  debate  remains  the  same.  It  focuses  on  broadcasters  receiving 
 their  new  spectrum  free  of  charge,  without  restrictions  in  place  to  dictate  how  they  can  use  the 
 fresh  channels  and  airtime.  Though  the  FCC  has  required  broadcasters  to  provide  one  free 
 channel  of  programming,  the  remaining  spectrum  has  not  been  regulated. 
 Because  policymakers  recognize  the  uniquely  important  role  that  broadcast  media  -  radio 
 and  later  television  -  play  in  the  marketplace  of  political  ideas  and  in  forming  cultural  values, 
 policymakers  have  rejected  the  notion  that  economics  alone  should  decide  the  nature, 
 availability,  and  content  of  political  and  cultural  programming.  Instead,  policy  has  sought  to 
 prevent  concentration  of  economic  power  from  controlling  the  flow  of  ideas  in  the  broadcast 


   Winsbury,  p.  4. 
 But  we  mustnt  forget  the  enormous  potential  of  this  new  technology:  the  worlds  foremost  mass-  market  medium  is  being  allied  with  mankinds  largest  library.  It  is  an  educational  tool  on  a  scale 
 never  previously  imagined;  new  forms  of  drama,  comedy  and  even  perhaps  art  are  waiting  to  be 
 explored;  it  could  offer  a  voice  to  all  manner  of  voiceless  groups  from  political  parties  to  local 
 communities  and  special  interest  groups;  democracy  could  be  enhanced  by  creating  new  forums 
 for  discussion  on  every  level.  It  is  worrisome  that  regulators  and  governments  seem  to  be  doing 
 little  to  ensure  that  these  opportunities  arent  wasted.  We  will  have  to  hope  that  companies 
 involved  in  these  new  services  take  up  the  challenge. 


 34 
198
 media  by  placing  limits  on  the  ownership  of  media  outlets  and  imposing  obligations  to  expand 
 programming  beyond  what  is  simply  profitable.  38  In  short,  what  is  good  enough  in  the  economic 
 marketplace  has  not  been  considered  to  be  good  enough  in  the  political  and  cultural  marketplace. 


 B.  Economic  Pressures  on  Diversity  in  the  Media 
 Almost  three-  quarters  of  a  century  of  public  policy  toward  the  mass  media  have  been 
 predicated  on  the  recognition  of  the  uniquely  powerful  impact  of  that  media.  39The  digital 
 communications  network  takes  the  role  of  the  broadcast  media  to  a  higher  leve14  adding 
 interactivity  to  immense  reach,  4  real  time  immediacy,  42  and  visual  impact.  43  Because  it  is  such  a 
 potent  method  of  information  dissemination,  economic  control  over  mass  media  can  result  in 
 excessive  political  power.  44  Media  concentration  has  an  impact  on  political  activity  and  political 


 38  The  Federal  Communications  Commission,  Further  Notice  of  Proposed  Rulemaking  in  the  Matter  of  Review  of 
 the  Commissions  Rqulations  Governing  Television  Broadcastinp,  MM  Docket  No.  91-  221,  January  17,  1995,  pp. 
 54-  55;  Hopkins,  Wat  W.,  The  Supreme  Court  Defines  the  Marketplace  of  Ideas,  Journalism  and  Mass 
 Communications  Quarterly,  Spring  1996. 


 39  C.  M.  Firestone  and  J.  M.  Schement,  Toward  an  Information  Bill  of  Rights  and  Resnonsibilities  (Aspen  Institute, 
 Washington,  D.  C.,  1995),  p.  45;  Tempell,  Guido  H.  III,  and  Thomas  Hat-  grove,  Mass  Media  Audiences  in  a 
 Changing  Media  Environment,  Journalism  and  Mass  Communications  Quarterly,  Autumn  1996;  Gunther,  Albert 
 C.  The  Persuasive  Press  Inference:  Effects  of  Mass  Media  on  Perceived  Public  Opinion,  Communications  Research,  October  1998;  American  Civil  Liberties  Union  v.  Janet  Reno,  929  F.  Supp.  824  (E.  D.  Pa.  1996)  117  S.  Ct. 


 2329  (1997). 
 4o  Shapiro,  Andrew,  The  Control  Revolution  (Century  Foundation,  New  York:  1999). 


 4  Bagdakian  describes  the  economic  and  cultural  impact  of  television  as  follows  (p.  182): 
 42Gigi  Sohn  and  Andrew  Jay  Schwartzman,  Broadcast  Licensees  and  Localism:  At  Home  in  the  Communications  Revolution,    Federal  Communications  Law  Journal,  December  1994;  M.  Griffin,  Looking  at  TV  News:  Strategies 
 for  Research,  Communication,  1992. 
 43  Kathryn  Olson,  Exploiting  the  Tension  between  the  New  Medias  Objective    and  Adversarial  Roles:  The  Role 
 Imbalance  Attach  and  its  Use  of  the  Implied  Audience,  Communications  Quarterly  42:  1,  1994  (pp.  40-  41);  A.  G. 
 Stavitsky,  The  Changing  Conception  of  Localism  in  U.  S.  Public  Radio,  Journal  of  Broadcastine  and  Electronic 
 Media  1994.  -3 


 35 
199
 outcomes  because  the  economic  interests  of  media  owners  influences  their  advertising  and 
 programming  choices4  --  private  interests  inevitably  attempt  to  dictate  the  access  to  political 
 information.  46 
 Relying  on  economic  forces  alone  will  not  produce  diversified  programming  adequate  to 
 create  the  rich  political  and  cultural  arena  demanded  by  political  discourse  because  the  dictates 
 of  mass  audiences  creates  a  lowest  common  denominator  ethic  that  undercuts  that  ability  to 
 deliver  politically  and  culturally  relevant  diversity.  47  Technological  answers  do  not  alter  the 
 underlying  economic  relationships.  48  The  mass-  market  audience  orientation  of  the  business 


 44  P.  C.  Washburn,  Top  of  the  Hour  Radio  Newscasts  and  the  Public  Interest,  Journal  of  Broadcasting  and 
 Electronic  Media,  1995,  pp.  74-  75. 


 Widespread  belief  in  economic  competition  as  the  foundation  for  a  genuine  marketplace  of  ideas 
 was  exploited  effectively  by  the  Reagan  administration  and  by  powerful  corporations  such  as  AT&  T,  ITT,  General  Electric,  CBS,  Capital  Cities,  and  IBM  to  eliminate  much  of  the  regulatory 


 structure  of  Americas  communications  industry. 
 45  Bazelon,  pp.  230-  23  1. 
 46  W.  L.  Bennet,  News.  The  Politics  of  Illusion  ((  New  York:  Longmans,  1988);  J.  C.  Bustema,  Television 
 Ownership  Effects  on  Programming  and  Idea  Diversity:  Baseline  Data,  Journal  of  Media  Economics,  1988;  E.  S. 
 Edwards  and  N.  Chomsky,  Manufacturing  Consent  (New  York:  Pantheon,  1988);  J.  Katz,  Memo  to  Local  News  Directors,  Qlumbia  Journalism  Review,  1990;  J.  McManus,  Local  News:  Not  a  Pretty  Picture,  Columbia 


 Journalism  Review,  1990;  J.  McManus,  How  Objective  is  Local  Television  News?,  Mass  Communications 
 Review,  1991;  Price,  Monroe,  E.,  Public  Broadcasting  and  the  Crisis  of  Corporate  Governance,  Cardozo  Arts  & 
 Entertainment,  17,  1999. 


   Bagdikian,  pp.  182...  188;  P.  Clarke  and  E.  Fredin,  Newspapers,  Television,  and  Political  Reasoning,  Public  ODinion  Quarterly,  1978;  M.  Pfau,  A  Channel  Approach  to  Television  Influence,  Journal  of  Broadcast&  and 
 Electronic  Media,  1990;  D.  T.  Cundy,  Political  Commercials  and  Candidate  Image,  in  New  Persnectives  in  Political  Advertisinp  (L.  L  Kai,  et.  al,  Eds.);  G.  J.  OKeefe,  Political  Malaise  and  Reliance  on  the  Media, 
 Journalism  Ouarterly,  1980;  S.  Becker  and  H.  C.  Choi,  Media  Use,  Issue/  Image  Discrimination,  COmnWniCatiOnS 
 Research,  1987;  J.  P.  Robinson  and  D.  K.  Davis,  Television  News  and  the  Informed  Public:  An  Information 
 Process  Approach,  Journal  of  Communication  1990;  Slattrey,  Karen  L.  Ernest  A.  Hakanen  and  Mark  Doremus,  The  Expression  of  Localism:  Local  TV  news  &overage  in  the  New  Video  Marketplace,  Journal  of  Broadcasting 


 &  electronic  Media,  40,  1996.  Voakes,  Paul  S.  Jack  Kapfer,  David  Kurpius  and  David  Shano-  yeon  Chem, 
 Diversity  in  the  News:  A  Conceptual  and  Methodological  Framework,    Journalism  and  Mass  Communications 
 Quarterly,  Autumn,  1996;  Carroll,  Raymond  L.  and  C.  A.  Tuggle,  The  World  Outside:  Local  TV  News  Treatment 
 of  Imported  News,  Journalism  and  Mass  Communications  Quarterly,  Spring  1997. 


 48  Aufderheide,  u,  p.  55;  D.  Le  Due,  Bevond  Broadcastin  ((  New  York:  Longman,  1987);  T.  Streeter,  The 
 Cable  Fable  Revisited;  Discourse,  Policy,  and  the  Making  of  Cable  Television,  Critical  Studies  in  Mass 
 Communications,  1987;  B.  Winston,  Rejecting  the  Jehovahs  Witness  Gambit,  Intermedia,  1990;  N.  M.  Sine,  et  al., 
 Current  Issues  in  Cable  Television:  A  Re-  balancing  to  Protect  the  Consumer,  Cardozo  Arts  Jc  Entertainment  Law 


 36 
200
 takes  precedence.  49  The  introduction  of  new  technologies  has  not  dramatically  altered 
 diversity.  50 
 Empirical  evidence  clearly  suggests  that  concentration  in  media  markets  has  a  negative 
 effect  on  diversity.  51  Greater  concentration  results  in  less  diversity,  while  diversity  of  ownership 
 across  geographic,  ethnic  and  gender  lines  is  associated  with  diversity  of  programming.  52 


 Journal,  1990;  A.  S.  Dejong  and  B.  J.  Bates,  Channel  Diversity  in  Cable  Television,  Journal  of  Broadcastine  and 
 Electronic  Media,  1991;  A.  E.  Grant,  The  Promise  Fulfilled?  An  Empirical  Analysis  of  Program  Diversity  on 
 Television    The  Journal  of  Media  Economics,  1994.  R.  H.  Wicks  and  M.  Kern,  Factors  Influencing  Decisions  by 
 Local  Television  News  Directors  to  Develop  New  Reporting  Strategies  During  the  1992  Political  Campaign, 
 Communications  Research,  1995;  Motta  Massimo  and  Michele  Polo,  Concentration  and  Public  Policies  in  the 
 Broadcasting  Industry,  Lubunski,  Richard,  The  First  Amendment  at  the  Crossroads:  Free  Expression  and  New 
 Media  Technology,  Communications  Law  and  Policy,  Spring  1997. 


 49  V.  E.  Ferrall,  The  Impact  of  Television  Deregulation,  Journal  of  Communications,  1992,  p.  26;  K.  C.  Loudon, 
 Promise  versus  Performances  of  Cable,  in  W.  H.  Dutton,  et  al.,  Wired  Cities:  Shaping  the  Future  of 
 Communications  (Boston,  K.  G.  Hall,  1987). 


 So  A.  S.  Dejong  and  B.  J.  Bates,  Channel  Diversity  in  Cable  Television,  Journal  of  Broadcastina  and  Electronic 
 Media  1991;  A.  E.  Grant,  The  Promise  Fulfilled?  An  Empirical  Analysis  of  Program  Diversity  on  Television,  The 
 Gl  of  Media  Economics,  1994. 


 5  W.  R.  Davie  and  J.  S.  Lee,  Television  News  Technology:  Do  More  Sources  Mean  Less  Diversity,  Journal&  f 
 Broadcasting.  and  Electronic  Media,  1993,  p.  455;  H.  J.  Levitt,  Program  Duplication,  Diversity,  and  Effective 
 Viewer  Choices:  Some  Empirical  Findings,  American  Economic  Review,  1971;  S.  Lacy,  A  Model  of  Demand  for 
 News:  Impact  of  Competition  on  Newspaper  Content,  Journalism  Ouarterly,  1989.  T.  J.  Johnson  and  W.  Wanta, 
 Newspaper  Circulation  and  Message  Diversity  in  an  Urban  Market,  -Mass  Communications  Review,  1993;  W. 
 Wanta  and  T.  J.  Johnson,  Content  Changes  in  the  St.  Louis  Post-  dispatch  During  Different  Market  Situations, 
 Journal  of  Media  Economics,  1994;  D.  C.  Coulson,  Impact  of  Ownership  on  Newspaper  Quality,  Journalism 
 Quarterly,  1994;  D.  C.  Coulson  and  Anne  Hansen,  The  Louisville  Courier-  Journals  News  Content  After  Purchase 
 by  Gannet,  Journalism  and  Mass  Communications  Ouarterlv,  1995;  Iosifides,  Petros,  Diversity  versus 
 Concentration  in  the  Deregulated  Mass  Media,  Journalism  and  Mass  Communications  Quarterly  Spring  1999. 


 52  M.  Fife,  Th  Im  ty  Ownership  on  Broadcast  Program  Content:  A  Case  Studv  of  WGPR-  TVs  Local  e  nac  o  t  f  Minori 
 News  Content  (Washington,  D.  C.,  National  Association  of  Broadcasters),  1979);  M.  Fife,  The  Imnact  of  Minoritv  Ownershin  on  Broadcast  Program  Content:  A  Multi-  Market  Study  (Washington,  D.  C.,  National  Association  of 


 Broadcasters),  1986);  Congressional  Research  Service,  Minoritv  Broadcast  Station  Ownership  and  Broadcast 
 Proaramminp-  Is  There  a  Nexus?  (Washington,  D.  C.,  Library  of  Congress),  1988;  T.  A.  Hart,  Jr.,  The  Case  for 
 Minority  Broadcast  Ownership,  Gannet  Center  Journal,  1988;  K.  A.  Wimmer,  Deregulation  and  the  Future  of 
 Pluralism  in  the  Mass  Media:  The  Prospects  for  Positive  Policy  Reform,  Mass  Communications  Review,  1988;  T. 
 G.,  Gauger,  The  Constitutionality  of  the  FCCs  Use  of  Race  and  Sex  in  Granting  Broadcast  Licenses, 
 Northwestern  Law  Review,  1989;  H.  Klieman,  Content  Diversity  and  the  FCCs  Minority  and  Gender  Licensing 
 Policies,  Journal  of  Broadcasting  and  Electronic  Media,  1991;  L.  A.  Collins-  Jarvis,  Gender  Representation  in  an  Electronic  City  Hall:  Female  Adoption  of  Santa  Monicas  PEN  System,  Journal  of  Broadcastine  and  Electronic 


 Media,  1993;  Lacy,  Stephen,  Mary  Alice  Shaver,  and  Charles  St.  Cyr,  The  Effects  of  Public  Ownership  and 
 Newspaper  Competition  on  the  Financial  Performance  of  Newspaper  Corporation:  A  Replication  and  Extension, 
 Journalism  and  Mass  Communications  Quarterly,  Summer  1996. 


 37 
201
 The  shift  toward  greater  reliance  on  economic  forces  has  not  resulted  in  greater 
 competition  and  has  resulted  in  greater  concentration  in  the  many  markets.  53  Greater 
 concentration  results  in  less  competition.  54  There  is  evidence  of  the  anticompetitive  behaviors 
 expected  to  be  associated  with  reductions  in  competition,  such  as  price  increases  and  excess 
 profits.  55 
 The  shift  toward  greater  reliance  on  economic  forces  has  produced  considerable  evidence 
 that  the  market  will  reduce  public  interest  and  culturally  diverse  programming.  56  News  and 


 53  Bagdakian,  pp.  ix-  x;  J.  G.  Blumer  and  C.  Spicer,  Prospects  for  Creativity  in  the  New  Television  Marketplace: 
 Evidence  from  Program  Markets,  Journal  of  Communications.  1990;  H.  Boyte  and  S.  M.  Evans,  Free  Soaces:  The 
 Source  of  Democratic  Change  in  America  (New  York,  Harper  and  Rowe,  1986);  W.  H.  Melody,  The  Information  in 
 I.  T.:  Where  Lies  the  Public  Interest?,  Intermedia,  1990a;  W.  H.  Melody,  Communication  Policy  in  the  Global 
 Information  Economy:  Wither  the  Public  Interest?,  In  M.  Furgeson  (Ed.),  Public  Communication:  The  New 
 Imnerativa,  (London:  Sage,  1990);  R.  M.  Entenman,  Democracy  Without  Citizens  (New  York:  Oxford,  1989);  D. 
 A.  Graber,  Mass  Media  and  American  Politics  (Washington,  D.  C.,  Congressional  Quarterly  Press,  1993).  H.  H. 
 Howard,  TV  Station  Group  and  Cross-  Media  Ownership:  A  1995  Update,  Journalism  and  Mass  Communications 
 1995.  Ouarterly, 


 54  S.  Lacy,  The  Effects  of  Intracity  Competition  on  Daily  Newspaper  Content,  Journalism  Ouarterlv,  1987;  S. 
 Lacy,  et  al.,  Cost  and  Competition  in  the  Adoption  of  Satellite  News  Gathering  Technology,  Journal  of  Media 
 Economics  1988;  S.  Lacy,  et  al.,  Competition  and  the  Allocation  of  Resources  to  Local  News,  Journal  of  Media 
 Economic,  1989;  S.  Lacy,  et  al.,  The  Relationship  among  Economic,  Newsroom  and  Content  Variables:  A  Path 
 Analysis,  Journal  of  Media  Economics,  1989;  D.  L.  Lasorsa,  Effects  of  Newspaper  Competition  on  Public 
 Opinion  Diversity,  Journalism  Ouarterlv,  1991;  S.  Lacy  and  J.  M.  Bernstein,  The  Impact  of  Market  Size  on  the 
 Assembly  cost  of  Local  Television  News,  Mass  Communications  Review,  1992;  J.  P.  Vermeer,  Multiple 
 Newspapers  and  Electoral  Competition:  A  County-  Level  Analysis,  Journalism  and  Mass  Communications 
 Quarterly,  1995,  p.  104. 


 55  M.  0.  Wirth,  The  Effects  of  Market  Structure  on  Television  News  Pricing,  Journal  of  Broadcasting,  1984;  J. 
 Simon,  W.  J.  Primeaux,  and  E.  Rice,  The  Price  Effects  of  Monopoly  Ownership  in  Newspapers,  Antitrust  Bulletin, 
 1986;  W.  B.  Ray,  FCC:  The  Ups  and  Downs  of  Radio-  TV  Regulation  (Iowa:  Iowa  State  University  Press,  1990);  R. 
 Rubinovitz  (Market  Power  and  Price  Increases  for  Basic  Cable  Service  Since  Deregulation,  (Economic  Analysis  Regulatory  Group,  Department  of  Justice,  August  6,  1991);  B.  J.  Bates,  Station  Trafficking  in  Radio:  The  Impact  of 


 Deregulation,  Journal  of  Broadcasting  and  Electronic  Media,  1993. 
 56  V.  A.  Stone,  Deregulation  Felt  Mainly  in  Large-  Market  Radio  and  Independent  TV,  Communicator, 
 April,  1987,  p.  12;  P.  Aufderheide,  After  the  Fairness  doctrine:  Controversial  Broadcast  Programming  and  the 
 Public  Interest,  Journal  of  communication  (1990)  pp.  50-  51;  M.  L.  McKean  and  V.  A.  Stone,  Why  Stations  Dont 
 Do  News,  Communicator,  1991,  pp.  23-  24;  V.  A.  Stone,  New  Staffs  Change  Little  in  Radio,  Take  Cuts  in  Major 
 Markets  TV,  RNDA,  1988;  K.  L.  Slattery  and  E.  A.  Kakanen,  Sensationalism  Versus  Public  Affairs  Content  of 
 Local  TV  News:  Pennsylvania  Revisited,  Journal  of  Broadcast  c  Med  a  in  p  and  E  ectro  1  ni  i  ,  1994;  J.  M.  Bernstein  and 
 S.  Lacy,  Contextual  Coverage  of  Government  by  Local  Television  News,  Journalism  Ouarterly,  1992;  R.  L. 
 Carrol,  Market  Size  and  TV  News  Values,  Journalism  Ouarterlv,  1989;  D.  K.  Scott  and  R.  H.  Gopbetz,  Hard 


 38 
202
 public  affairs  programming  is  particularly  vulnerable  to  these  economic  pressures.  57  As  market 
 forces  grow,  this  programming  is  reduced.  58  The  quality  of  the  programming  is  also 
 compromised.  59  Thus  the  concern  about  the  impetus  for  commercial  activity  provided  by  the 
 new  business  model  for  digital  TV  is  well  founded  in  past  experience  with  the  broadcast  and 
 news  media. 
 For  example,  in  comments  submitted  separately  in  this  proceeding,  consumer 
 organizations  from  throughout  the  country  have  identified  a  range  of  serious  problems  with  the 
 quality  and  breadth  of  local  programming,  including:  the  lack  of  in-  depth  coverage  of  significant 
 consumer,  disability  and  racial  diversity  issues  [Massachusetts  Consumer  Coalition;  Harlem 
 Consumer  Education  Council];  unwillingness  by  local  television  broadcasters  to  run  Public 
 Service  Announcements  frequently  and  at  times  when  most  viewers  will  see  them  [Illinois  Public 
 Interest  Research  Group;  Columbia  Consumer  Education  Council];  the  elimination  of 
 community  ascertainments  requirements  and  station  community  relations  departments 
 [Consumer  Action],  and  the  lack  of  programming  dealing  in-  depth  with  issues  of  importance  to 
 particular  geographic  and/  or  racial  and  ethnic  communities  [Harlem  Consumer  Education 
 Council,  Arizona  Consumer  Council]. 


 News/  Soft  News  Content  of  the  National  Broadcast  Networks:  1972-  1987,  Journalism  @mrterly,  1992;  Washburn, 
 op.  tit,  p.  75;  Ferrall,  pp.  21...  28...  30. 


 57  J.  H.  McManus,  What  Kind  of  a  Commodity  is  News?,  Communications  Research,  1992;  Olson,  op.  cit. 
 *  Bagdakian,  pp.  220-  221;  D.  L.  Paletz  and  R.  M.  Entmen,  Media.  Power.  Politics,  (New  York,  Free  Press,  1981). 
 N.  Postman,  Amusinp  Ourselves  to  Death:  Public  Discourse  in  the  Age  of  Show  Business  (New  York  Penguin 
 Press,  1985);  S.  Lacy,  The  Financial  Commitment  Approaches  to  News  Media  Competition,  Journal  of  Media 
 Economics,  1992. 


 59  B.  R.  Litman,  The  Television  Networks,  Competition  and  Program  Diversity,  mrnal  of  Broadcasting,  1979;  B. 
 R.  Litman  and  J.  Bridges,  An  Economic  Analysis  of  Daily  Newspaper  Performance,  Newspaper  Research  Journal 
 1986;  J.  C.  Butema,  Television  Station  Ownership  Effects  on  Programming  and  Idea  Diversity:  Baseline  Data,: 
 Journal  of  Media  Economics,  1988;  J.  Kwitny,  The  High  Cost  of  High  Profits,  Washington  Journalism  Review, 


 39 
203
 The  manner  in  which  the  spectrum  was  rationed  out  has  also  raised  concerns  about  it 
 limiting  diversity  in  the  marketplace  of  ideas.  60  Consumer  advocates  argue  that  serving  diverse 
 interests  within  a  community  is  both  good  business  and  good  public  policy.  61  They  argue  that 
 the  extra  capacity  provided  by  digital  transmission  be  used  for  free  time  for  political  candidates, 
 increased  childrens  educational  programming,  and  public  slots  for  independent  civic 
 discourse.  62 


 C.  Public  Policy  Recommendations 
 One  suggestion  that  has  been  made  is  to  make  broadcasters  exchange  new  digital  spectrum 


 for  increased  public  interest  obligations,  63  possibly  including  some  programming  directed 
 towards  typically  neglected  population  groups.  Another  approach  would  be  for  the  FCC  to 
 institute  minimum  public  interest  requirements  for  Digital  TV  broadcasters  in  the  areas  of  public 
 service  announcements  and  public  affairs  programming.  64 


 V.  THE  ROLE  OF  LOCAL  BROADCASTING  IN  THE  IMPLEMENTATION  OF  DIGITAL  TV 
 From  the  point  of  view  of  television  itself,  local  broadcasting  will  play  a  vital  role  in  the 
 distribution  of  programming.  Therefore,  it  can  play  a  vital  role  in  the  distribution  of  solutions  to 


 1990;  A.  Powers,  Competition,  Conduct,  and  Ratings  in  Local  Television  News:  Applying  the  Industrial 
 Organization  Model,  Journal  of  Media  Economics,  1993. 


   Media  Access  Project.  Digital  TV  and  the  Spectrum  Grab  of  I997 
 6Picture  This:  DTV  and  the  Future  of  Television;  www.  benton.  orP/  Policv/  TV/  diPital.  html. 


 62  Media  Access  Project.  Digital  TV  and  the  Spectrum  Grab  of  1997 
 63  Sohn,  Gigi.  Pretty  Pictures  or  Pretty  Profits:  Issues  and  Options  for  the  Public  Interest  and  NonproJt 
 Communities  in  the  Digital  Broadcasting  Debate 


 40 
204
 programming  problems.  Ensuring  cultural  diversity  and  socially  relevant  programming  is  a 
 matter  of  local  programming  to  meet  community  needs. 
 Many  aspects  of  the  use  of  personal  information  to  market  and  sell  goods  are  governed 
 by  private,  corporate  decisions.  Federal  or  national  policy  on  marketing  is  very  thin. 
 Individual  corporations  decide  how  the  will  market  their  goods  and  services.  When  they  make  a 
 decision  to  gather  information  about  customers,  to  sell  directly,  or  advertise  on  specific  types  of 
 programs,  they  are  private  decisions.  These  decisions  can  and  should  be  influenced  by  the 
 publics  that  are  affected.  Public  reaction  against  a  specific  type  of  advertising  or  marketing 
 practice  can  influence  choices.  In  broadcast,  local  input  should  influence  those  corporate 
 marketing  decisions  since  the  public  is  so  directly  affected  by  what  are  likely  to  be  much  more 
 intrusive  selling  tactics. 
 The  gathering  and  compilation  of  viewer  information  will  be  a  local  matter  -  with 
 information  gathered  in  the  set  top  box  and  compiled  by  the  local  cable  operator  or  the  local 
 broadcaster.  It  is  highly  likely  that  the  local  station  will  be  the  one  that  controls  the  information 
 for  marketing  purposes. 
 From  the  point  of  view  of  governance,  it  is  easier  for  citizens  to  become  directly  involved 
 in  solutions  at  the  local  level. 
 Local  broadcasting  is  also  an  obvious  means  for  the  expression  of  social,  cultural  and 
 political  ideas  by  individuals.  Local  facilities  are  geographically  accessible  to  individuals. 
 Thus,  local  broadcasting  appears  to  be  a  natural  point  of  entry  for  public  policy 
 discussion.  Moreover,  from  the  point  of  view  of  public  policy,  local  broadcasting  has  a  long- 
 standing  obligation  to  promote  the  public  interest  because  of  its  institutional  nature.  Local 


 64  Picture  This:  Digital  TV  and  the  Future  of  Television;  www.  benton.  or4Policv/  TV/  dkital.  html 
 41 


 .,  .  _.  ._-__-  .  .  --  -----  __..  -  -....  - 
205
 broadcasters  will  use  digital  spectrum  to  distribute  the  majority  of  the  most  watched 
 programming.  They  actually  control  the  spectrum  that  has  been  given  to  them.  Indeed,  it  may 
 be  foolish  to  think  that  there  is  one  federal  policy  that  can  solve  these  problems.  There  should  be 
 many  local  policies. 
 There  is  one  step  that  is  necessary  at  the  federal  level,  however.  Because  the  allocation 
 of  spectrum  was  a  federal  act,  federal  action  is  necessary  to  ensure  that  local  use  of  the  spectrum 
 will  be  responsive  to  local  demands.  Federal  regulators  have  the  authority  to  require  local 
 broadcasters  to  be  responsive  to  local  needs,  provide  access  to  local  programming,  and  work  out 
 privacy  policy  in  response  to  local  values.  If  there  is  no  federal  obligation  to  promote  these 
 public  policy  goals,  local  broadcasters  are  likely  to  resist  because  they  will  be  caught  up  in  the 
 whirlwind  of  commercial  forces  that  the  new  technology  and  federal  policy  has  created. 


 VIII.  CONCLUSION 
 The  FCCs  NO1  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  digital  licensees  comes  none  too 
 soon.  The  economic,  social  and  political  implications  of  the  transformation  of  television  are 
 extremely  broad.  The  transformation  of  TV  represents  a  major  change  in  the  commercial  nature 
 of  the  industry  that  requires  aggressive  policy  to  promote  the  public  interest.  If  this  public 
 policy  does  not  address  the  economic  and  consumer  consequences  of  this  technology,  it  will 
 have  failed.  The  FCC  should  expand  its  NO1  to  consider,  at  a  minimum,  implications  for 
 consumer  privacy  and  abusive  advertising.  More  broadly,  the  FCC  should  oversee  the  transition 


 to  digital  television  with  the  following  essential  public  policy  goals  in  mind: 
 +  Public  policy  should  seek  compensation  for  the  use  of  the  broadcast  spectrum,  which 
 remains  a  remarkably  valuable  input  into  the  production  of  broadcast  television. 


 42 
206
 +  Public  policy  should  seek  to  balance  the  powerful  forces  driving  the  commercialization  of 
 the  TV  industry  by  promoting  culturally  diverse  programming  that  may  not  be 
 commercially  attractive  but  that  is  educational  and  uplifting. 


 +  Public  policy  should  seek  to  ensure  that  this  new  more  powerful  medium  does  not  result 
 in  the  abuse  of  political  power  by  those  who  control  it. 


 +  Public  policy  should  seek  to  ensure  that  the  deployment  of  digital  TV  does  not  make  the 
 digital  divide  worse  but  ensures  that  policies  to  improve  access  help  to  reduce  the  divide. 


 43 
 _.,  ..  I.  _.  __.  -.  .._  .  _  -....  e--  w.---  -..___-  _,._,  I-  ._.- 
207

208
 Ldtzc  Foundation,  Inc. 
 BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS 
 Paul  Gamn,  Jr.,  RE. 
 Part  National  Pm&  m 
 OfLUkaC  1970-  1971 
 Chairman 


 Mario  Oblrdo,  Eq.  Part  National  Red&  r 
 ofluhc  I984-  1986 
 Vice-  Chairman 


 Edvprdo  P&  a,  Jr.,  Esq. 
 Part  National  Pmidcnr 
 of  L&  c  1978-  1979 
 SCCW+  y 


 Oscar  M.  Laard  Erq. 
 Pact  National  Pmidrnr 
 TmL;  h;,  l  955-  I756 


 EdMorga 
 Part  National  Rcsidmt 
 of  L&  c  1977-  1978 
 Mrmbn 


 Hector  Godinez 
 Past  National  Prai&  t 
 ofLukx  1964-  1965 
 Member 


 Rick  DovaIina,  Esq. 
 Lulnc  National  President 
 1999-  2000 
 Member 


 Ms.  A&  P&  a 
 Womrn  ;  B&  nm 
 Repr~  smmtim 
 Member 


 March  23,200O 
 The  Honorable  Chairman  William  E.  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  Twelfth  Street,  S.  W. 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Attn:  Ms.  Magalie  Roman  Salas,  Office  of  the  Secretary 
 Re:  In  the  Matter  of  Public  Interest  Obligations  of  TV  Broadcast 
 Licensees  MM  Docket  No.  99-  360 


 Dear  Mr.  Chairman: 
 I  am  writing  on  behalf  of  the  League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens 
 (LULAC),  and  the  LULAC  Foundation.  LULAC  is  the  nations  oldest  and 
 largest  Hispanic  civil  rights  organization  with  115,000  members  throughout 
 the  U.  S.  and  Puerto  Rico  and  we  would  like  to  congratulate  the  Federal 
 Communications  Commission  (FCC)  for  issuing  a  Notice  of  Inquiry  (NOI) 
 regarding  the  public  interest  obligations  of  digital  broadcasters.  This  is  an 
 important  first  step  in  determining  what  the  public  can  expect  from 
 television  broadcasters  in  exchange  for  the  free  use  of  the  airwaves.  We 
 are  particularly  interested  in  issues  of  diversity  as  they  affect  ownership, 
 employment,  programming  and  the  accountability  of  local  television 
 stations  to  all  of  the  members  of  the  community  they  are  licensed  to  serve. 


 The  mission  of  the  League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens  (LULAC), 
 has  long  been  to  advance  the  economic  condition,  educational  attainment, 
 political  influence,  health  and  civil  rights  of  the  Hispanic  population  of  the 
 United  States.  Since  it  was  founded  in  1929,  LULAC  has  helped 
 Hispanics/  Latinos  move  toward  full  participation  in  American  business  and 
 American  democracy.  LULAC  assisted  Latinos  to  acquire  U.  S. 
 citizenship,  defend  their  civil  rights,  and  build  political  strength.  We  won 
 landmark  Supreme  Court  decisions  that  outlawed  the  poll  tax  and 
 prohibited  the  segregation  of  Hispanic  children  in  the  public  schools. 
 When  Mexican-  Americans  returned  from  service  during  World  War  II, 
 LULAC  helped  them  to  secure  their  benefits  and  supported  a  transition  to  civilian  life  that  began  with  new  educational  opportunities.  Whether  the 


 transition  was  from  field  to  factory,  or  industry  to  information,  LULAC  has  been  at  the  forefront  of  organizations  determined  to  insure  that  no 
 American  is  left  behind  in  this  transition.  The  current  transition  to  digital 
 communications  is  a  major  national  shift,  and  given  the  importance  of 
 television  in  our  society,  and  the  merging  of  television  and  the  computer, 


 1601  Mutamoros  StreetlRO.  Box  880  Laredo,  Texas  78042-  0880  TeL  (956)  722-  S%@  Fux  (956)  722-  7731 
 IRS-  501  (c)(  3)  Char-  it&  L  Organization  Since  1973 
209
 digital  television  may  well  be  at  the  center  of  this  important  transition.  It  will  certainly 
 have  an  impact  on  economic  development  and  educational  opportunity.  We  emphasize 
 that  it  is  important  that  the  entire  nation  --  rich  and  poor,  black  and  white,  Latin0  and 
 Native  American,  consumer  and  citizen  --  all  of  us  must  make  this  transition  to  the 
 digital  age  together. 


 LULAC  has  actively  participated  in  numerous  FCC  proceedings  since  the  early  1960s. 
 Its  petitions,  briefs,  and  motions  to  deny  have  primarily  focused  on  employment  rights, 
 the  need  for  diversity  in  ownership,  and  the  importance  of  programming  which 
 addresses  the  needs  of  minority  communities.  We  feel  that  all  too  often,  despite  the 
 merit  of  our  cause,  we  have  fought  largely  a  losing  battle.  We  simply  cannot  muster  the 
 financial  and  political  strength  enjoyed  by  the  broadcast  industry,  given  their  great 
 advantage  inherent  in  their  control  of  the  airwaves.  We  have  found  the  FCC  at  times  to 
 be  sympathetic,  but  otherwise  powerless  or  unwilling  to  accept  its  role  as  the  protector 
 and  advocate  of  the  public  interest. 


 LULAC  has  joined  People  for  Better  TV  because  we  understand  that  no  other  medium  - 
 not  newspapers,  not  radio,  not  cable,  and  certainly  not  the  Internet  -  has  as 
 powerful  an  impact  on  communities  in  the  U.  S.  as  television.  When  asked  where  they 
 get  their  information  the  vast  majority  of  Americans  consistently  point  to  local  television 
 news.  Hispanic  respondents  in  a  national  survey  by  the  Tomas  Rivera  Policy  Institute 
 (TRPI)  reported  nearly  identical  TV  ownership  as  non-  Hispanic  whites  with  over  99 
 percent  of  their  households  having  at  least  one  TV,  and  an  average  of  2.3  televisions 
 per  household.  Content  studies  of  local  news  continue  to  reveal  a  focus  on  urban 
 crime,  particularly  violent  crime  committed  by  minorities.  Over  60%  of  Hispanics  polled 
 said  they  felt  Latinos  are  more  likely  to  be  portrayed  as  being  violent  on  English- 
 language  TV  than  on  Spanish-  language  TV.  Latinos  also  said  they  believe  English- 
 language  TV  tends  to  be  more  violent  than  Spanish-  language  television  (Tomas  Rivera 
 Policy  Institute).  Recent  studies  also  show  that  this  myopic  reporting  reinforces  racist 
 beliefs,  and  drives  people  out  of  urban  areas,  undermining  the  economic  health  of  cities. 
 No  one  doubts  the  importance  of  television.  Now  we  have  an  opportunity  to  make  sure 
 that  televisions  future  improves  upon  televisions  past  and  present. 


 LULAC  councils  throughout  the  United  States  and  Puerto  Rico  are  concerned  about  the 
 way  in  which  television  serves  their  communities.  .  The  LULAC  Foundation  recently 
 invited  LULAC  members  in  Phoenix,  Houston,  Los  Angels,  Chicago,  and  Washington, 
 D.  C.  to  comment  on  television  in  their  area.  In  Houston  and  Phoenix  LULAC  members 
 joined  People  for  Better  TV  activists  to  monitor  the  programming  of  local  broadcasters, 
 visit  television  stations,  and  review  the  public  records.  LULAC  members  in  Houston, 
 and  Phoenix  offered  these  perspectives  on  television  in  their  communities: 


 Carlos  Calbillo  is  Director  of  the  Video/  Film  Program  for  Talent0  Bilingue  de  Houston. 
 In  a  memo  detailing  his  recent  visits  to  Houston  broadcasters  he  comments  that 
 Houston  broadcasters  have  drastically  reduced  their  public  affairs  and  community 
 programming,  claiming  to  meet  their  public  interest  responsibilities  through 
 programming  produced  as  part  of  their  regular  news  department  operations.  Mr. 


 2 
210
 Calbillo  argues  that  news  stories  are  increasingly  sensationalistic  and  that  there  are 
 relatively  few  stories  on  the  positive  aspects  of  a  community. 


 My  argument  is  verified  by  the  public  file,  where  one  can  see  that  the 
 station  will  state  that  they  have  addressed  the  issue  of  crime  by  a  6pm 
 sensationalistic  news  segment  on  carjacking,  or  that  a  IOpm  news  blurb 
 on  back  alley  abortions  satisfies  their  covering  BOTH  a  un-  wed  mothers 
 and  a  crime  and  youth  requirement.  (Carlos  Calbillo) 


 Further,  Mr.  Calbillo  questions  the  manner  in  which  broadcasters  conduct  community 
 ascertainments.  He  questions  the  extent  to  which  participants  in  the  ascertainment 
 process  are  truly  representative  of  the  community  and  the  extent  to  which  the  station 
 allows  them  to  engage  in  a  meaningful  dialogue  about  the  issues  which  they  see  as 
 important.  The  invitees  are  overwhelmingly  elected  or  appointed  public  officials;  and 
 while  they  presumably  would  have  a  handle  on  the  issues,  they  are  arguably  removed 
 from  day-  to-  day  knowledge  of  specific  communities  and  specific  community  problems. 


 Johnny  N.  Mata  chairs  the  Media  Relations  and  Communications  committee  for  LULAC 
 District  18.  Mr.  Mata  notes  the  clear  and  steady  decline  in  commitment  to  public  affairs 
 programming  by  KHOU-  TV,  Channel  11  (CBS).  Until  about  1985,  KHOU  offered  O/  a 
 Amigos  as  a  weekly  program  serving  Hispanics.  In  1992,  the  station  announced  a  new  program,  First  Sunday  which  would  serve  all  minority  communities  once  a  month.  First 


 Sunday  aired  until  1996  and  Mr.  Mata  tells  us  that  no  other  program  has  been  offered 
 by  this  station  to  address  the  needs  of  diverse  communities  in  Houston.  Mr.  Mata  goes 
 on  to  say  that  KPRC-  TV  Channel  2  (NBC)  has  also  eliminated  its  Hispanic  public  affairs 
 program  and  that  KTRH-  TV  Channel  13  (ABC)  has  consolidated  public  service 
 programming  combining  Viva  Houston,  Crossroads,  Vision-  Asian,  and  County  Line,  into 
 one  weekly  thirty-  minute  program. 


 Julia  Zozaya  is  a  LULAC  member  from  Phoenix,  AZ  and  formerly  served  as  the 
 organizations  first  National  Vice-  President  for  Women.  In  a  recent  letter  to  People  for 
 Better  TV  she  writes  about  her  concerns  over  the  high  cost  of  equipment  to  access 
 video  descriptive  services  and  of  how  few  broadcasters  offer  this  service.  She  writes 
 that  the  only  broadcaster  she  is  aware  of  offering  the  service  in  her  area  is  Channel  8, 
 the  local  PBS  broadcaster.  She  is  concerned  that  a  transition  to  digital  technology  in 
 her  area  will  mean  buying  new  equipment,  an  expense  she  says  many  who  are  blind 
 cannot  afford. 


 Ms.  Zozaya  is  troubled  by  the  depiction  of  Latinos  on  television.  I  am  concerned  that 
 the  broadcasters  in  my  area  do  not  fairly  represent  Latinos  or  women  on  television.  I 
 believe  that  broadcasters  should  do  more  to  reach  out  to  diverse  populations  as  way  to 
 better  serve  the  communities  which  they  are  licensed  to  serve.  She  goes  on  to  write,  I 
 previously  owned  a  radio  station  and  we  made  special  efforts  to  reach  out  to  diverse 
 communities.  I  do  not  see  television  stations  making  an  effort  to  provide  real 
 community  programming  responsive  to  the  day-  to-  day  realities  in  our  neighborhoods. 


 3 
211
 Clearly,  local  television  stations  across  the  country  can  do  better.  As  Congress  made 
 clear  in  1996,  these  businesses  are  the  beneficiaries  of  free  federal  licenses  in 
 exchange  for  their  agreement  to  operate  in  the  public  interest.  Somehow,  too  many 
 public  trustees  believe  they  can  ignore  part  of  the  public. 


 Contrary  to  what  many  may  think,  the  airwaves  still  belong  to  the  American  people,  all 
 of  them.  Those  few  who  are  licensed  by  the  FCC  to  broadcast  television  signals  are 
 authorized  to  do  so  in  the  public  interest.  We  would  argue  that  the  public  interest,  is 
 the  motivating  factor  that  justifies  the  license,  not  the  amount  of  the  broadcasters 
 profits.  We  believe  that  Congress,  the  courts,  and  the  FCC  have  at  times  confused  the 
 two. 


 LULAC  is  concerned  that  there  are  not  enough  Latinos  in  decision-  making  positions  within  the  broadcast  industry  and  that  local  broadcasters  are  not  sufficiently  responsive  to  local  Latin0 
 concerns,  issues  and  interests.  We  propose  that  the  Commission  immediately  begin  a  rule 
 making  proceeding  to  require  all  digital  television  broadcasters  to  report  on  their  web 
 sites  job  opportunities,  and,  if  their  workforce,  including  management,  fails  to  comprise 
 at  least  half  of  the  makeup  of  the  community  of  license,  the  broadcasters  should  report 
 to  the  community  through  their  web  site  on  how  they  plan  to  achieve  a  more  diverse 
 workplace. 


 LULAC  is  concerned  that  the  images  of  Latinos  on  television  and  in  the  entertainment  industry 
 do  not  accurately  reflect  who  we  are  as  vital  and  productive  members  of  American  society.  We 
 propose  that  the  Commission  immediately  begin  a  rule  making  proceeding  to  require  all 
 local  broadcasters  to  invite  comments  from  a  broad  range  of  leading  organizations  in 
 their  community  to  ascertain  the  issues  important  to  that  community.  These  comments 
 should  be  made  available  for  public  review  on  the  stations  web  site.  The  local 
 broadcasters  should  then  be  required  to  demonstrate  on  this  same  web  site  what 
 programs  they  are  airing  to  address  the  ascertained  local  issues.  Broadcasters  should 
 also  make  clear  the  means  which  they  employed  to  solicit  comments. 


 LULAC  is  concerned  that  all  Americans  are  served  fairly  and  equally  as  broadcasters 
 deploy  digital  technology  in  television.  We  propose  that  the  Commission  immediately 
 begin  a  rulemaking  proceeding  to  require  all  broadcasters  to  make  emergency  and 
 disaster  related  information  available  in  a  variety  of  languages  appropriate  to  the 
 communities  they  are  licensed  to  serve.  While  English  may  not  be  the  dominant 
 language,  for  many  immigrants,  English-  language  television  is  the  primary  source  of 
 news,  weather,  and  emergency  information.  We  believe  that  broadcasters  could 
 reasonably  be  required  to  scroll  emergency  information  across  the  bottom  of  television 
 screens  which  would  help  to  alert  non-  English  speakers  of  life-  saving  instructions. 


 Broadcasters  have  long  argued  that  the  limits  of  the  broadcast  day  made  it  impossible 
 to  put  on  more  programs  addressing  the  concerns  of  different  segments  of  their 
 audience.  Digital  television  broadcasters  have  the  ability  to  send  much  more 
 information,  and  more  channels,  than  standard  analog  broadcasts.  Why  not  use  that 
 ability  to  provide  more  service  to  a  more  diverse  audience?  Why  not  use  that  ability  to 


 4 
212
 put  on  programs  about  the  local  needs  and  interests  of  minority  communities  at  a  time 
 when  those  programs  can  be  seen? 


 There  are  several  ways  the  flexibility  of  digital  broadcasts  might  better  serve  the  needs 
 of  their  communities  of  license.  Commercial  broadcast  stations  might  multicast  to  make 
 programs  accessible.  Programs  once  available  only  on  Sunday  morning  might  now  be 
 available  at  a  time  when  a  larger  audience  can  see  the  program.  A  commercial 
 broadcaster  might  serve  the  local  community  by  making  one  of  their  multicast  channels 
 available  for  public  access,  educational,  or  government  programming  -  much  like 
 cable.  Or,  borrowing  again  from  the  cable  industry  support  of  C-  SPAN  and  Cable  in  the 
 Classroom,  the  stations  could  be  allowed  to  pay  to  support  educational  productions  or 
 public  affairs  programs.  Another  public  interest  service  might  be  to  provide  parts  of  their 
 spectrum  to  non-  for-  profit  educational,  health  care,  or  community  service  institutions  for 
 datacasting  purposes.  We  suggest  that  local  broadcasters  be  allowed  flexibility  with 
 regard  to  how  they  satisfy  their  obligation  to  operate  in  the  public  interest,  but  that  the 
 broadcaster  be  required  to  report  regularly  to  the  Commission  and  the  community  about 
 how  it  purports  to  meet  that  public  interest  obligation.  And,  most  important,  that  if  it  the 
 broadcaster  does  not  do  something  it  should  not  be  given  a  license.  If  digital  television 


 broadcasters  are  given  free  licenses  in  exchange  for  operating  in  the  public  interest, 
 they  must  be  truly  accountable  to  the  public. 


 In  conclusion,  these  proceedings  present  a  second  chance  for  the  commission  and  the 
 broadcast  industry  to  re-  learn  the  lessons  brought  to  light  by  the  Kerner  Commssion 
 Report  almost  35  years  ago.  We  feel  that  the  findings  and  conclusions  with  respect  to 
 the  broadcasting  industry  at  that  time  are  relevant  today  and  we  feel  that  each 
 commissioner  should  review  that  report  in  the  context  of  these  proceedings. 


 We  look  forward  to  the  opportunity  to  expand  on  these  ideas  in  a  proceeding  to 
 establish  clear  guidelines.  Again,  the  League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens 
 believes  that  such  a  proceeding  is  long  past  due.  With  councils  in  all  of  the  markets 
 now  providing  digital  service,  we  would  like  to  know  what  service  our  communities  are 
 going  to  receive. 


 Sincerely, 


 Eduardo  Petia 
 LULAC  Representative 
 to  People  for  Better  TV 


 cc:  Commissioner  Susan  Ness 
 Commissioner  Harold  Furchtgott-  Roth 
 Commissioner  Michael  Powell 
 Commissioner  Gloria  Tristani 


 5 
213
 t 
214
 National  Association  of  the  Deaf 
 814  Thayer  Avenue 
 Silver  Spring  MD  20910-  4500 


 October  25,  1999 
 DISABILITY  ACCESS  TO  DIGITAL  PROGRAMMING 
 Introduction 
 In  recent  years,  Congress  has  taken  bold  steps  to  ensure  access  to  communications 
 technologies  by  individuals  with  disabilities.  For  example,  in  1996,  Congress  enacted  Section 
 305  of  the  Telecommunications  Act,  which,  for  the  first  time  in  our  nations  history,  requires 
 comprehensive  closed  captioning  of  television  programming.  Earlier,  in  1990,  the  Legislature 
 enacted  the  Television  Decoder  Circuitry  Act  of  1990,  requiring  that  new  television  technologies, 
 including  digital  technologies  be  capable  of  transmitting  closed  captions  to  viewing  audiences. 
 Consistent  with  the  above  legislative  acts,  broadcasters  who  are  now  entering  the  digital 
 age  should  be  required  to  take  advantage  of  increased  bandwidth  as  well  as  other  emerging 
 features  of  digital  technologies  that  can  serve  to  enhance  access  to  digital  TV  for  deaf  and  hard  of 
 hearing  Americans.  Below  are  a  series  of  recommendations  to  expand  disability  access  in  the 
 digital  era. 


 I  Much  of  the  text  contained  in  this  statement  appears  in  the  final  report  released  by  the 
 Gore  Commission  on  December  18,  1998. 
215
 Closed  Captioning 
 The  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996  mandates  that  broadcast  and  cable  programming  be 
 fully  accessible  through  the  provision  of  closed  captioning.  2  Last  year,  the  Federal 
 Communications  Commission  (FCC)  promulgated  regulations  to  implement  Section  305, 
 requiring  100  percent  of  new  television  programming  to  be  captioned  over  an  eight  year  period, 
 and  75  percent  of  pre-  rule  programming  to  be  captioned  over  a  ten  year  period.  3  The 
 obligation  to  provide  captioning  access  will,  of  course,  continue  into  the  digital  era.  The  1990 
 Television  Decoder  Circuitry  Act  requires  that  new  television  technologies,  such  as  digital 
 technologies,  be  capable  of  transmitting  closed  captions.  4  Passage  of  both  the  TDCA  and 
 Section  305  reflect  Congress  strong  intent  to  ensure  that  our  nations  twenty  eight  million 
 Americans  who  are  deaf  or  hard  of  hearing  continue  to  receive  access  to  televised  news, 
 information,  education,  and  entertainment  in  the  digital  age. 
 Digital  technology  will  open  new  avenues  to  enhance  and  expand  captioning  access.  For 
 example,  the  ability  to  alter  the  size,  font,  color  and  placement  of  captions  will  enable  viewers  to 
 customize  their  captions  for  enhanced  viewing.  In  July  of  1999,  the  FCC  proposed  a  standard  for 
 the  receipt  and  display  of  closed  captions  by  digital  television  equipment.  Unfortunately,  as 


 2  Section  305,  Telecommunications  Act  of  1996,  Pub.  L.  104-  l  14,  110  Stat.  56 
 (1996)(  codified  at  47  U.  S.  C.  613). 


 3  The  FCC  exempted  certain  programming  from  its  captioning  mandates.  The  75  percent 
 requirement  for  pre-  rule  programming  refers  to  programming  that  was  first  exhibited  or 
 produced  prior  to  January  1,  1998,  the  effective  date  of  the  FCCs  captioning  rules. 


 4  Pub.  L.  No.  101-  431,  104  Stat.  960  (1990)  (codified  at  47  U.  S.  C.  303(  u),  303(  b)). 


 _.  _  -  -..  .._  .-_--.~  l-  ---. 
216
 drafted,  this  standard  falls  short  of  enabling  viewers  to  take  advarhge  of  all  ofthe  features  that 
 new  digital  technologies  have  to  offer.  The  proposed  standard  would  require  only  one  font,  one 
 size,  and  one  stream  of  closed  captions.  In  contrast,  new  digital  technologies  would  enable 
 caption  viewers  to  fully  control  caption  fonts,  sizes,  colors,  and  backgrounds,  and  would  permit 
 decoding  and  processing  of  six  standard  services  and  up  to  fifty  seven  additional  extended 
 services.  Many  of  the  new  digital  features  are  expected  to  provide  maximum  choice  and  quality 
 for  caption  viewers,  so  that  the  captioning  they  enjoy  in  the  digital  age  will  be  functionally 
 equivalent  to  audio  transmissions.  The  FCCs  final  digital  captioning  standard  should  enable 
 viewers  to  fully  exploit  the  versatility  of  these  new  digital  technologies. 
 The  FCCs  rules  on  captioning  currently  exempt  certain  categories  of  programming, 
 including  advertisements  under  five  minutes,  certain  late-  night  programming,  and  certain  local 
 non-  repeat  programming.  5  In  addition,  the  rules  require  only  certain  networks  and  providers  to 
 caption  their  news  programs  with  real-  time  captioning,  a  method  that  ensures  simultaneous 
 captioning  of  full  newscasts.  The  vast  majority  of  stations  are  permitted  to  continue  utilizing  a 
 lesser  effective  method,  the  electronic  newsroom  captioning  technique  (ENCT).  With  ENCT, 
 viewers  see  text  from  the  teleprompter  for  pre-  scripted  portions  of  the  show.  For  this  reason, 
 ENCT  misses  significant  portions  of  news  programs,  including  late-  breaking  stories,  sports  and 
 weather  updates,  and  field  reports. 
 The  various  gaps  that  now  exist  in  the  FCCs  rules  should  be  closed  in  the  digital  age. 


 Captioning  costs  are  expected  to  drop,  as  demand  increases  and  caption  technologies  improve. 
 In  particular,  a  basic  principal  in  the  digital  age  should  be  that  where  obligations  are  imposed  on 


 5  47  C.  F.  R.  79.1  (a)(  l). 
217
 networks  to  provide  PSAs,  public  affairs  programming,  and  political  discourse,  there  should  be 
 an  accompanying  obligation  to  caption  those  programs.  Otherwise  stated,  a  broadcast  station 
 should  be  required  to  provide  closed  captioning  of  all  of  its  PSAs,  public  affairs  programming, 
 and  political  programming,  to  ensure  that  deaf  and  hard  of  hearing  Americans  can  be  part  of  the 
 informed  electorate. 
 As  stations  switch  to  digital  programming,  they  should  also  be  required  to  provide  real- 
 time  captioning  for  all  of  their  news  programming.  Section  305s  mandate  to  provide  full 
 television  access  can  only  be  met  with  real-  time,  up  to  the  minute  captioning  of  newscasts.  Most 
 importantly,  the  FCC  should  require  all  digital  broadcasters  to  provide  real-  time  captioning 
 access  for  all  televised  information  about  emergencies  and  disasters. 
 Video  Description 
 Section  305  of  the  Telecommunications  Act  also  directed  the  FCC  to  conduct  an  inquiry 
 into  the  provision  of  video  description  on  video  programming.  j  Video  description  provides  a 
 verbal  narration  of  key  visual  elements  in  a  television  program,  to  allow  blind  and  visually 
 disabled  viewers  to  follow  along  with  a  programs  story  line.  The  verbal  descriptions  provide 
 access  to  visual  information  such  as  settings,  gestures,  action,  graphics,  subtitles,  and  costumes. 
 The  narration  is  inserted  into  natural  pauses  in  the  programs  dialogue  in  a  manner  that  does  not 
 interfere  with  the  original  audio  of  the  program.  Utilization  of  video  description  as  a  form  of 
 providing  access  has  been  hindered  by  the  analog  standard,  which  only  permits  delivery  of 
 descriptions  via  the  secondary  audio  program  channel.  In  contrast,  digital  technology  offers 
 multiple  audio  channels,  with  significantly  greater  bandwidth,  that  can  more  easily  and 


 6  Communications  Act  of  1934,  713(  f),  codified  at  47  U.  S.  C.  613(  f). 


 ,.  _...  _  -_  .,..-  ...  __.  ^.-.----  --- 
218
 inexpensively  accommodate  video  descriptions.  Broadcasters  should  be  required  to  allocate 
 sufficient  audio  bandwidth  for  the  transmission  and  delivery  of  video  description  in  the  digital 
 age,  in  anticipation  of  expanded  use  of  this  access  technology.  Toward  this  end,  the  Commission 
 should  require  that  all  digital  TV  receivers  support  simultaneous  multi-  channel  audio-  decoding 
 capability  so  that  descriptions  can  be  delivered  separately  from  a  programs  main  audio.  Such 
 dual  decoding  capability  will  require  less  bandwidth  -  as  it  will  not  need  to  include  the  main 
 program  audio  as  well  -  and  will  reduce  the  costs  of  the  description  process  by  eliminating  the 
 need  for  professional  audio  mixing  of  sessions.  Finally,  the  FCC  should  establish  a  schedule  for 
 digital  broadcasters  to  begin  providing  video  description  for  their  programming. 
 Ancillary  and  Supplementary  Services 
 In  addition  to  providing  high  definition  and/  or  multiple  streams  of  television 
 programming,  new  digital  compression  technologies  promise  an  array  of  ancillary  and 
 supplementary  services,  including  the  rapid  delivery  of  huge  amounts  of  data,  interactive 
 educational  materials,  and  other  video  subscription  or  non-  subscription  services.  It  is  critical  that 
 the  needs  of  individuals  with  disabilities  not  be  ignored  with  the  advent  of  these  new 
 technologies.  The  provision  of  these  new  ancillary  services  can  open  a  world  of  opportunities  for 
 individuals  with  disabilities  who  are  seeking  full  participation  in  our  society.  The  resulting 
 greater  access  in  employment,  education,  recreation,  and  other  areas  can  provide  significant 
 benefits  to  individuals  with  disabilities  and  to  society  as  a  whole. 
 Recent  rules  issued  by  the  FCC  to  implement  Section  255  of  the  Telecommunications 


 Act  require  manufacturers  and  providers  of  telecommunications  products  and  services  to  provide 
 access  to  their  products  and  services  by  individuals  with  disabilities,  if  readily  achievable.  These 


 rules  recognize  that  it  is  easier  and  less  expensive  to  make  products  and  services  accessible  when 
219
 they  are  designed  with  access  in  mind.  It  is  a  logical  extension  of  the  access  laws  described 
 above  to  require  broadcasters  to  provide  disability  access  to  the  ancillary  and  supplementary 
 applications  provided  over  their  digital  television  streams,  where  doing  so  would  not  impose  an 
 undue  burden.  (The  undue  burden  standard  already  applies  to  existing  closed  captioning 
 mandates.)  Among  other  things,  this  would  entail  requiring  a  text  option  for  material  that  is 
 presented  orally  and  an  audio  option  for  material  otherwise  presented  visually.  Similarly,  the 
 FCC  should  ensure  that  the  provision  of  ancillary  and  supplementary  services  does  not  impinge 
 upon  the  9600  baud  bandwidth  currently  set  aside  for  captioning  of  digital  programs. 
 Digital  Equipment 
 Finally,  the  FCC  and  other  regulatory  authorities  should  work  with  set  manufacturers  to 
 ensure  that  modifications  in  audio  channels,  decoders,  and  other  technical  areas  be  built  to  ensure 
 the  most  efficient,  inexpensive,  and  innovative  capabilities  for  disability  access.  Amongst  other 
 things,  this  will  include  requiring  DTV  manufacturers  to  take  full  advantage  of  new  digital 
 technologies,  so  that  viewers  are  able  to  control  the  font,  size,  color,  placement,  and  other 
 characteristics  of  closed  captions. 
 Statement  submitted  by: 
 Karen  Peltz  Strauss 
 Legal  Counsel  for  Telecommunications  Policy 
 National  Association  of  the  Deaf, 
 Prior  Member,  Advisory  Committee  on  Public  Interest  Obligations  of  Digital 
 Television  Broadcasters  (  Gore  Commission) 


 Joined  by: 
 American  Association  of  the  Deaf-  Blind 
 American  Athletic  Association  of  the  Deaf 
 American  Deafness  and  Rehabilitation  Association 
 American  Society  for  Deaf  Children 
 American  Speech-  Language-  Hearing  Association 


 __~-  _  l---.~-  - 
220
 Association  of  College  Educators:  Deaf  and  Hard  of  Hearing 
 Association  of  Late  Deafened  Adults 
 The  Caption  Center  (WGBH) 
 Conference  of  Educational  Administrators  Serving  the  Deaf,  Inc. 
 Convention  of  American  Instructors  of  the  Deaf 
 Deaf  Women  United,  Inc. 
 Gallaudet  University  Alumni  Association 
 Jewish  Deaf  Congress 
 League  for  the  Hard  of  Hearing 
 National  Association  of  the  Deaf 
 National  Black  Deaf  Advocates 
 National  Court  Reporters  Association 
 National  Fraternal  Society  of  the  Deaf 
 National  Hispanic  Council  of  Deaf  and  Hard  of  Hearing  People 
 Registry  of  Interpreters  for  the  Deaf,  Inc. 
 Telecommunications  for  the  Deaf,  Inc. 
 World  Institute  on  Disability 


 __  _  ~I--  ,_  _  ~__  .-.__  .~  -  ----  ._...  .  .-.._-.  ___. 
221

222
 . 
 r 
 READY  INDEX*  INDEXING  SYSTEM 
223

224
 NORTHEAST 
 Massachusetts 


 Andrea  Lee 
 National  Organization  for  Woman  (Greater  Boston  Chapter) 
 Boston,  MA 
 312100 


 Catherine  Bell  (Somerville,  MA  -  3/  2/  00) 
 Pilar  Dellano  (Boston,  MA  -  3/  3/  00) 
 Lauren  Fogarty  (Boston,  MA  -  2125100) 
 Natalie  Gallant  (Boston,  MA  -  2/  29/  00) 
 Rachel  Hull  (Boston,  MA  -  2/  28/  00) 
 Andrea  Kelly  (Boston,  MA  -  2/  28/  00) 
 Alexandra  Miller  (Boston,  MA  -  2129100) 


 Ceasar  McDowell 
 Newton,  MA 
 3/  l/  00 


 Allen  Perez 
 Cambridge,  MA 
 No  date  on  letter 


 Dr.  W.  Curtiss  Priest 
 Center  for  Information,  Technology  &  Society 
 Melrose,  MA 
 2/  29/  00 


 Steve  Provizer 
 Citizens  Media  Corps. 
 Allston,  MA 
 2/  29/  00 


 Tab  D-  la 


 Paul  Schlaver 
 Massachusetts  Consumers  Coalition 
 Cambridge,  MA 
 2/  29/  00 
225
 March  2,200O 
 Mr.  William  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard, 
 We  are  writing  on  behalf  of  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Greater  Boston  Chapter  of  the  National  Organization  for  Women  (NOW)  to  express  our  concern 
 for  the  current  use  of  the  public  airwaves.  When  Congress  gave  away  the  digital  spectrum  to  the  major  media  broadcasters  for  free,  it  put  a  condition 
 on  its  gift:  that  the  broadcasters  use  these  airwaves  to  serve  the  public  interest.  However,  currently  there  is  no  definition  of  what  the  terms  in 
 the  public  interest  mean.  In  absence  of  a  clear  definition  from  the  FCC,  the  major  broadcasters  have  defined  these  terms  and  what  constitutes 
 compliance  with  Congress  mandate  for  themselves.  Because  Greater  Boston  NOW  is  passionate  about  regaining  true  community  use  of  public  airwaves,  interns 
 and  activists  monitored  locally  produced  programming  and  visited  local  television  stations  in  order  to  determine  whether  these  stations  are 
 fulfilling  this  commitment. 
 Unfortunately,  the  results  did  not  demonstrate  that  the  broadcasters  are  fulfXng  their  commitment.  Although  our  researchers  were  pleased  with  some 
 of  their  findings,  they  found  many  areas  in  which  these  stations  could  make  better  use  of  their  public  aiwrwaves.  Particularly,  our  researchers  found 
 that  broadcasters: 
 *  Failed  to  fairly  represent  women  and  minorities  in  their  programs. 
 *  Broadcast  local  programming  that  did  not  always  focus  on  local  issues  and  concerns  and  was  almost  never  positive  in  content 


 *  Lacked  truly  truly  educational  programming. 
 *  Had  almost  no  programming  for  children  under  six. 
 *  Offered  only  a  few  shows  for  children  between  the  ages  of  six  and  eleven. 


 *  Claimed  to  satisfy  their  public  interest  requirement  with  offerings  of  short,  two  to  three  minute  shows. 


 *  Perpetrated  stereotypes  of  women  and  racial  minorities. 
 *  Did  not  adequately  respond  to  viewers. 


 We  at  NOW  believe  that  in  exchange  for  free  use  of  new  digital  technology, 
 1 
226
 broadcasters  should,  as  promised,  provide  us  with  programming  that  serve[  s]  the  public  interest,  convenience,  and  necessity.  This  includes  offering 
 public  interest  programs  comparable  in  length  and  depth  to  the  sit-  corns,  dramas,  and  cartoons  that  are  offered,  instead  of  the  current  length  and 
 depth  that  is  more  comparable  to  the  average  commercial.  It  also  includes  better  compliance  with  the  Childrens  Television  Act  and  an  end  to  racial  and 
 sex  stereotyping  in  the  shows  offered. 
 Only  with  clearer  guidelines  can  the  public  truly  be  guaranteed  that  the  airwaves,  its  property,  will  be  used  in  its  interests.  Therefore,  we  urge 
 the  FCC  to  immediately  begin  rule-  making  sessions  to  determine  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters.  Further,  we  encourage  you  to  utilize 
 the  recommendations  for  these  guidelines  that  People  for  a  Better  TV  has  offered  as  you  begin  this  process  (see  attached). 


 Thank  you  for  your  consideration. 
 Sincerely, 
 The  Greater  Boston  NOW  Board  Andrea  Lee,  President 
 Rebecca  Pontikes  Toni  Troop 
 Vivienne  Esrig  Jo  Trigilio 
 Judith  Gondehnan  Constance  Kowtna 
 Jeanette  Mihalek  Sharon  Winston 
 Jen  Alt  Bonnie  Mulliken 
 Cortney  Harding 


 2 
 - 
227
 Date:  Thu,  02  Mar  2000 
 From:  Natalie  Gallant  <ngallant@  bu.  edu> 
 March  2,  2000 
 William  Kennard,  Chair  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard, 
 I  believe  that  television  is  unique  in  its  potential  to  educate  and  inform,  its  potential  to  add  to  the  overall  health  of  our  society.  I  also  believe 
 that  television  plays  an  integral  role  in  the  propagation  of  many  potentially  harmful  cultural  norms  and  beliefs,  including  limiting  gender 
 roles  and  racial  and  ethnic  stereotypes.  One  gauge  for  measuring  television's  contribution  to  the  public  interest  is  the  public  file  that 
 each  broadcasting  station  is  required  to  maintain. 
 As  an  advocate  for  women's  rights  and  a  concerned  citizen,  1  decided  to  examine  the  public  file  of  ABC  Channel  5  in  its  Needham,  Massachusetts 
 office.  I  arrived  at  the  office  at  approximately  1:  30  on  Thursday,  February  24.  Myself  and  a  fellow  activist  were  shown  to  a  receptionist  at  the  front 
 desk  and  told  her  that  we  wished  to  view  the  public  file,  knowing  that  we  had  the  right  to  see  this  file  without  an  appointment  during  any  working 


 day. 
 After  some  confusion,  the  receptionist  called  in  a  station  employee  who  showed  us  to  a  group  of  files  containing  information  about  political 
 candidates.  We  explained  that  we  wanted  to  view  the  files  that  contained  information  about  public  interest  programming.  This  explanation  was  met 
 with  more  confusion  on  the  part  of  several  station  employees.  Finally,  after  much  discussion  with  his  fellow  workers,  the  employee  showed  us  back  out  to 
 the  waiting  room  and  told  us  to  wait  there.  Approximately  fifteen  minutes  later,  he  returned  to  tell  us  that  the  person  who  maintained  the  public 
 files  was  away  and  her  assistant  was  out  --  we  would  not  be  able  to  view  them  that  day.  He  gave  us  the  contact  information  for  the  aforementioned 
 employees  and  sent  us  on  our  way. 
 I  was  disappointed  in  the  reception  that  my  companion  and  I  recieved  at  ABC  Channel  5.  Expecting  to  have  free  and  easy  access  to  files  maintained 
 specifically  for  public  view,  we  were  met  with  disorganization,  confusion,  and  inconvienience.  The  employees  and  receptionist  were  not  able  to 
 sufficiently  recognize  our  request  even  when  we  produced  an  FCC  document  mandating  open  access  to  the  public  files. 


 One  way  to  ensure  that  television  is  truly  used  in  the  public  interest  is  to  require  a  rigorous  stardard  of  accountability  of  broadcasters.  I 
 respectfully  request  that  digital  broadcasters  be  required  to  disclose  their  public  interest  programming  on  a  regular  basis  and  in  comprehensible  form.  I 
 also  request  that  broadcasters  be  required  to  regularly  report  to  the  public  on  their  efforts  to  reflect  the  racial  and  ethnic  diversity  of  the  United 
 States. 
 I  hope  that  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  will  work  with  the  citizens  of  this  country  to  ensure  that  television  is  used  to  improve,  and 
 not  weaken,  the  foundations  of  equality  upon  which  our  nation  rests. 
 Sincerely, 
 Catherine  Bell  National  Organization  for  Women 


 Somerville,  MA 


 -...  ..~.^  _.____  __  lll___._  _.~-.  -_______  I- 
228
 Date:  Fri,  03  Mar  2000  19:  05:  10  -0500 
 From:  Natalie  Gallant  <ngallant@  bu.  edu> 


 William  Kennard,  Chair  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard, 
 I  recently  visited  WCVB  television  station  in  Boston,  Massachusetts.  It  is  an  ABC  station  located  at  5  TV  Pl.,  Needham  Branch,  MA,  02494.  The  purpose 
 of  my  visit  was  to  examine  the  public  file  as  a  consumer  and  an  activist  for  the  National  Organization  for  Women.  I  am  writing  to  report  on  the 
 state  of  programming  in  the  Boston  area. 
 The  people  of  this  area  are  concerned  that  local  television  does  not  reflect  either  the  great  diversity  or  the  concerns  of  the  community. 


 When  I  visited  the  station  I  called  ahead  to  make  sure  that  I  would  have  access  to  the  file,  yet  when  I  arrived  the  receptionist  denied  any  such 
 call.  After  several  minutes  I  and  another  activist  were  shown  into  an  office  and  asked  to  sign  a  'statement  of  access'  before  we  saw  the  file. 


 I  examined  e-  mail  and  mail  files  for  the  station  and  found  a  number  of  complaints  saying  that  the  station  had  trivialized  the  issue  of  domestic 
 violence  and  restraining  orders  in  a  news  broadcast.  As  a  woman  and  activist  for  NOW,  this  concerns  me  greatly.  Domestic  violence  is  one  of 
 many  issues  that  the  community  could  be  educated  about  through  local  television.  For  such  an  influential  media  force  to  trivialize  this  issue 
 is  simply  wrong. 
 Also  in  the  public  files  was  an  issues  program  list,  detailing  network  and  local  programming  devoted  to  issues  of  concern  for  the  community. 
 These  programs  covered  a  vast  range  of  issues,  including  local  news,  crime  and  public  safety,  economics,  taxation  and  the  cost  of  living,  children, 
 youth,  and  family,  health  and  human  services,  social  justice,  and  urban  environment.  I  applaud  WCVB  for  their  efforts  at  covering  these  issues, 
 but  the  absence  of  a  file  for  women's  issues  or  gay  and  lesbian  issues 
 means  that  there  are  still  important  stories  that  aren't  being  covered  here. 


 The  rest  of  the  public  file  was  divided  into  six  sections,  including  an  FCC  file  on  children's  programming  with  education  content,  commercial 
 compliance  certificates,  non-  broadcast  community  outreach,  information  for  children's  website  pages,  a  log  of  local  children's  report  slots,  and  a  log 
 of  all  Saturday  programming  schedules.  WCVB  is  complying  with  current  FCC  rules,  but  it  is  my  contention  that  these  rules  are  not  enough. 
 The  airwaves  belong  to  all  of  us.  The  FCC  has  the  power  to  ensure  that  our  public  airwaves  are  being  used  in  our  best  interest.  I  would  like  to 
 suggest  that  you  hold  public  rule-  making  sessions  so  that  I  and  other  community  members  can  have  a  chance  to  help  you  to  know  what  we  find  in  our 
 interest. 
 Sincerely, 


 Pilar  Dellano  National  Organization  for  Women 
 Boston,  MA 


 ..-  .  --  -  _  ._  ._^  Ix  ._  ___  -_ 
 l___  l_._-  1.  ._~_.  1_..  .-  .,  --  -.- 
229
 February  25,200O 
 William  Kennard,  Chair  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard: 
 I  am  a  concerned  citizen  writing  about  the  lack  of  positive  images  of  women  and  people  of  color  on  television.  It  is  to  my  understanding  that  on  May 
 1,  1999,  television  broadcasters  in  major  cities  across  the  United  States  began  implementing  the  use  of  digital  television  signals.  I  am  interested 
 to  find  out  what  responsibilities  broadcasters  will  be  required  to  assume  in  exchange  for  the  free  use  of  our  airwaves. 


 I  was  recently  watching  Chronicle,  a  local  program  on  ABC  (Channel  5)  at  7:  30  pm  on  February  10,200O.  It  ran  for  half  an  hour.  There  were 
 approximately  4  commercials  between  every  story.  All  three  of  the  programs  segments  dealt  with  brutal  murder  to  some  degree.  This  program 
 did  not  consult  one  female  when  interviews  were  shown  with  professionals,  doctors,  or  police  officers.  In  fact,  all  of  the  interviews  were  with 
 white  men.  I  feel  this  program  does  not  accurately  portray  the  variety  of  professional  positions  that  women  and  people  of  color  hold  in  our  society. 
 But  this  is  not  surprising,  given  that,  87  %  of  the  guests  on  Sunday  public  affairs  programs  are  males.  This  is  why  I  feel  it  is  necessary  to 
 issue  guidelines  for  television  stations--  because  on  their  own,  these  stations  continue  to  perpetuate  the  stereotype  that  the  only  experts  are 
 white  men. 
 Myself  and  fellow  television  viewers  have  urged  you  to  begin  holding  public  rule-  making  sessions  so  we  can  let  our  voices  be  heard  concerning  public 
 interest  obligations,  specifically  womens  access  to  and  images  in  the  media.  The  airwaves,  a  public  resource  that  we  have  simply  given  away,  are 
 valuable  and  I  expect  some  accountablity  from  those  who  are  using  them. 
 Sincerely, 
 Lauren  Fogarty  National  Organization  for  Women 
 Boston,  Massachusetts 


 .---  --_._._..  -  ._.  I.._  I___.    ...~--  ____.  -- 
230
 February  29,200O 
 William  Kennard,  Chair  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard, 
 I  am  a  NOW  activist,  a  television  viewer,  and  a  concerned  citizen.  I  am  well  aware  that  the  1996 
 Telecommunications  Act  gave  television  stations  access  to  digital  technology  to  broadcast  over  public  airwaves  as  long  as  they  serve  the  public  interest,  convenience  and  necessity.  However,  I  am  not  at  all 


 clear  on  what  the  definition  of  these  terms  are.  I  have  also  not  heard  of  any  hearings  scheduled  to  discuss  guidelines  of  this  requirement. 
 This,  as  far  as  I  can  tell,  leaves  broadcasters  in  charge  of  deciding  what  is  in  the  public  interest.  It  does  not  seem  fair  to  me  that  such  important  intricacies  be  left 


 to  profit-  driven  corporations,  most  of  which  are  now  parts  of  major  media  conglomerates. 
 Curious  as  to  what  one  of  these  stations  considers  a  fUllhnent  of  these  guidelines,  I  visited  NBC  (channel  7)  to  examine  its  public  record.  At  about  noon  on  February  28,2000,  a  fellow  NOW  volunteer 
 and  I  went  to  the  station  located  at  7  Bullfinch  Place  in  Boston. 
 We  viewed  the  fourth  quarter  reports  for  1999  that  listed  childrens  programs,  public  service  announcements  and  other  broadcasts  that  were  geared  toward  community  needs  and  interests.  We 
 also  examined  a  file  that  contained  viewer  responses. 
 The  staff  was  friendly  and  seemed  eager  to  help,  however  no  one  in  the  offices  that  surrounded  the  room  where  the  file  was  kept  seemed  to  know  very  much  about  the  record. 
 For  example,  there  were  check  marks  on  about  half  of  the  viewer  responses  in  the  file.  When  we  inquired  what  they  meant,  three  people  had  to  be  asked  in  order  to  find  the  answer--  that  the  check  marks 
 were  an  indication  that  the  letters  had  been  answered.  This  lead  me  to  wonder  why  only  half  of  the  letters  had  been  checked. 


 There  was  also  some  content  in  the  file  that  I  found  particularly  noteworthy.  In  the  report  for  childrens  programming,  it  was  interesting  to  see  that  there  was  no  programming  listed  for  children  under  the  age 
 of  six.  In  fact,  there  was  only  one  program,  Awesome  Adventures,  listed  for  children  under  the  age  of  eleven.  Incidentally,  Awesome  Adventures  was  the  only  show  that  adhered  to  the  limited  number  of 
 commercials  allowed  by  the  Childrens  Television  Act  of  1990.  The  other  shows  described  as  childrens  programs  all  targeted  ages  thirteen  through  sixteen  and  therefore  were  not  subject  to  these  guidelines. 


 Also  contained  in  this  report  was  a  list  of  programs  that  were  considered  educational  and  for  a  general  audience.  It  astounded  me  that  there  were  only  two  programs  listed  for  October  through  December, 
 This  was  a  total  of  only  three  hours  in  three  months!  I  found  it  even  more  surprising  that  one  of  the  three  hours  counted  as  educational  was  an  episode  of  the  comedy/  drama  program  called  Freaks  and 
 Geeks.  It  is  difficult  for  me  to  understand  how  one  third  of  the  educational  programming  listed  on  a  stations  quarterly  report  is  a  show  about  teens  having  a  keg  party.  Though  the  show  may  be 
 entertaining  and  this  particular  episode  did  send  a  moral  message  to  teens,  I  do  not  think  that  I  would  put  it  in  the  same  category  as  the  two-  hour  National  Geographic  special  that  filled  the  other  two 
 educational  hours  for  NBC  in  the  final  months  of  1999. 


 1 
231
 NBC  is  doing  exactly  what  you  are  allowing  it  to  do--  making  its  own  rules.  The  FCC  has  set  a  limit  on  the  number  of  commercials  that  can  be  shown  during  childrens  programming. 
 It  does  not  seem  coincidental  that  NBC  gears  all  of  its  programming  toward  an  older  audience  and  in  effect,  avoids  said 


 standard.  It  is  decisions  like  these  that  make  me  question  a  stations  ability  to  judge  what  is  in  the  public  interest,  convenience  and  necessity. 


 This  is  why  I  and  so  many  other  television  consumers  are  urging  you  to  schedule  public  rule-  making  sessions.  We  would  like  to  have  a  say  about  what  is  broadcast  over  the  valuable  airwaves  that  belong  to 
 all  of  us. 
 Sincerely,  Natalie  Gallant 
 National  Organization  for  Women  Boston,  Massachusetts 


 2 
232
 February  28,200O 
 William  Kennard,  Chair  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard, 
 As  a  concerned  consumer  and  an  activist  for  the  National  Organization  for 
 Women,  I  visited  the  Boston  CBS  Station  WBZ  on  February  23,200O  at  approximately  I  :30  PM.  Managed  by  Edward  Goldman,  it  is  located  at  1170 


 Soldiers  Field  Rd,  Boston,  MA  02134.  Television  in  the  Boston  area,  especially  with  the  use  of  digital  signals,  has  the  capacity  to  do  great 
 things  for  our  diverse  community.  1  did  not  see  that  happening  in  my  visit..  As  Congress  has  given  control  of  the  airwaves  over  to  the  networks 
 for  free,  they  have  the  responsibility  to  use  them  for  the  greater  good  of  the  public  they  serve.  Stations  like  WBZ  currently  keep  careful  records  of 
 what  they  call  Significant  Programming  which  is  supposed  to  prove  that  they  are  making  good  use  of  the  resources  we  have  given  them. 
 The  content  of  the  Significant  Programming  file  shows  that  WBZ  simply  isnt  doing 


 enough  for  the  communitiy. 
 Lack  of  programming  addressing  local  issues  and  womens  issues  is  especially  disturbing.  Most  of  these  programs  are  actually  2-  4  minute 
 spots  within  a  full  days  worth  of  more  common  shows  featuring  violence  and 
 overflowing  with  negative  race  and  sex  stereotypes.  What  WBZ  is  doing  is  mostly  positive,  but  they  arent  doing  enough. 


 The  Significant  Programs  file  is  updated  quarterly  and  the  report  I  examined  was  dated  December  3  1,  1999.  It  consisted  of  a  list  of 
 descriptions  of  programs  that  the  station  considered  significant,  and  each  description  included  the  length  of  the  program  and  what  time  it  ran  on  a 
 weekly  basis.  A  more  specific  list,  detailing  the  exact  topic  for  each  week,  was  included  at  the  back  of  the  report.  Included  in  this  were  such 
 programs  as  Consumer  News,  I-  Team  Investigative  Reports,  For  Your  Health,  and  Centro.  All  of  these  programs  were  produced  locally  and 
 lasted  from  two  minutes  to  four  and  a  half  minutes,  and  are  broadcast  between  one  and  ten  times  a  week. 


 Other  shows  included  in  the  Significant  Programming  file  are  nationally  produced  shows  like  Face  the  Nation,  60  Minutes,  and  48  Hours.  Detailed 
 descriptions  of  the  stories  that  WBZ  felt  were  significant  are  included  along  with  dates  of  broadcast. 


 The  most  interesting  of  the  locally  produced  shows  is  Centro,  described  as  an  in-  depth  exploration  of  Latin0  community  issues.  This  seems  like 
 exactly  the  kind  of  programming  the  FCC  wants  to  encourage:  locally 
 produced,  informative,  and  of  real  interest  to  community  members.  However, 


 1 
233
 there  is  some  question  about  how  in-  depth  a  program  can  be  that  only  lasts  four  and  a  half  minutes,  and  although  no  figures  were  provided,  it 
 seems  unlikely  that  very  many  people  see  a  program  that  airs  once  a  week  on  Saturday  at  7:  50  AM. 


 Records  from  1998  include  a  show  called  Rap  Around,  a  half  hour  show  featuring  discussions  of  relevant  issues  by  and  for  teens  aged  16  and 
 under.  This  show  used  to  air  at  1  PM  on  Saturdays;  unfortunately,  this  show  featuring  real  teens  and  real  issues  seems  to  have  disappeared  from 
 the  WBZ  schedule. 
 The  Significant  Programming  file  is  legible  and  up-  to-  date,  but  its  contents  leave  something  to  be  desired.  There  is  a  dearth  of  locally 
 produced  programming  that  lasts  longer  than  the  average  commercial  break  included  in  the  WBZ  lineup.  Although  the  short  programs  listed  seem  to  be 
 of  interest  to  the  community  and  in  the  spirit  of  public  good,  it  simply  isnt  enough.  Shows  like  Centro  that  are  only  minutes  long  could 
 certainly  be  expanded,  and  shows  of  a  similar  nature  reaching  out  to  other  ethnic  groups  in  the  area  would  be  of  interest  to  WBZ  viewers. 


 I-  Team  claims  to  include  local  political  news  and  is  aired  10  times  a  week,  but  it  is  only  2-  4  minutes  long.  Boston  politics  could  easily  fill 
 an  hour-  long  show  every  weekend,  and  such  a  show,  if  designed  to  highlight  different  areas  of  the  city,  would  fill  a  gap  in  local  news  coverage. 


 Although  WBZ  is  currently  doing  an  adequate  job,  improvements  could  be  made  in  scheduling.  More  local  shows  and  community  outreach  can  reasonably  be 
 expected  from  a  station  that  receives  such  broad  support  from  its  viewers  and  liberal  use  of  public  airwaves.  That  is  why  I  ask  that  you  begin 
 scheduling  public  rule-  making  sessions--  so  that  myself  and  other  community  members  voices  may  be  heard.  The  airwaves  belong  to  all  of  us,  and  I 
 would  like  to  see  that  what  is  aired  over  them  benefits  all  of  us. 


 Sincerely,  Rachel  Hull 
 National  Organization  for  Women  Boston,  Massachusetts 


 2 
234
 February  28,200O 
 William  Kennard,  Chair  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard, 
 As  a  television  viewer  I  am  concerned  about  the  quality  of  the  programming  presented  to  myself  and  other  viewers.  I  would  like  to  share  my  findings 
 with  you  in  an  attempt  to  convince  you  that  television  stations  need  enforced  guidelines  so  that  they  live  up  to  the  obligation  of  filling  the  public  interest,  convenience,  and  necessity. 


 I  decided  to  watch  NBCs  1ocHlly  produced  programming  to  see  if  I  thought  this  particular  station  was  fulfilling  this  requirement  with  regard  to  my  local  community--  the  city  of  Boston.  Two  programs  that  I 
 watched,  Revista  Hispana  and  Higher  Ground,  air  f?  om  6  to  6:  30  on  Sunday  mornings.  They  are  two  of  four  programs  that  till  this  time  slot  once  a  month.  Each  of  these  programs  focuses  on  a 
 particular  minority  group. 
 Revista  Hispana,  which  was  on  February  20  this  month,  is  a  program  for  the  Hispanic  population  of  Boston  and  is  broadcast  mostly  in  Spanish.  Although  I  think  this  is  a  good  idea,  I  think  that  it  would  be 
 helpful  to  have  a  translation  at  the  bottom  of  the  screen  so  that  English  speaking  Bostonians  have  a  chance  to  learn  about  their  Hispanic  neighbors.  A  show  like  Revista  Hispana  could  be  used  as  an 
 important  tool  in  helping  the  Caucasian  population  to  understand  the  issues  that  are  pressing  in  minority  communities.  The  people  on  the  show  consisted  solely  of  Hispanic  men--  no  women,  Caucasians,  or 
 other  minority  groups.  Though  I  think  that  having  a  show  devoted  to  a  particular  minority  group  is  important,  I  found  it  particularly  disturbing  that  there  were  no  Hispanic  women  on  the  show.  Also 
 seeing  how  these  individuals  interact  with  other  groups  could  be  important  as  well. 
 Higher  Ground,  which  I  viewed  on  February  27,  focuses  on  African  American  issues,  and  while  they  showed  clips  from  interviews  with  men,  the  primary  person  that  was  being  interviewed  was  female.  The 
 person  conducting  the  interview  was  also  female.  I  was  pleased  with  this  show  and  its  dedication  to  minority  views  and  values.  I  was  also  impressed  that  they  not  only  included  women  in  their  broadcast, 
 but  had  a  woman  leading  the  discussion. 
 Also  on  February  20  and  27,  I  attempted  to  view  the  two  local  programs  Boston  Common  and  Urban  Update.  These  programs  are  scheduled  at  I  1:  30  a.  m.  and  12:  OO  p.  m.  respectively  on  Sunday. 
 I  succeeded  in  watching  Urban  Update  on  both  Sundays.  I  was  very  disappointed  to  find  however,  that  due  to  the  broadcast  of  an  NBA  pre-  game  show  on  February  27,  Urban  update  was  shown  at  11:  30  and 
 Boston  Common  was  not  on  at  all.  On  February  20,  Urban  Update  dealt  with  the  some  important  issues 
 for  the  minority  population  of  Boston,  especially  the  African  American  population.  It  talked  mostly  about  inner  city  happenings  including  urban  housing,  and  an  interracial  Karate  program.  Boston 


 Common,  on  the  other  hand,  talked  about  more  universal  issues,  like  the  changing  structure  of  families,  yet  only  had  Caucasian  representatives  on  the  panel  to  discuss  these  issues.  There  were  two  women  on 
 the  panel  but  not  one  representative  of  a  racial  minority.  Because  the  show  did  bring  up  multicultural  issues,  I  believe  that  it  would  have  been  more  than  fair,  and  in  fact  quite  interesting,  to  include  a  person 
 of  color  on  the  panel. 
235
 The  next  Sunday,  February  27,  Urban  Update  was  again  geared  to  the  African  American  audience.  The  show  was  mostly  about  the  life  of  Duke  Ellington,  alegendary  African  American  band  leader.  I  was 
 disappointed  when  two  women  who  spoke  at  the  beginning  of  the  show,  were  all  but  abandoned  later  in  the  show  when  the  focus  was  shifted  to  interviews  only  of  men. 


 Though  I  have  seen  a  few  examples  of  fair  representation  of  women  and  minorities  on  February  20  and  27,  in  general  what  I  have  seen  in  the  publicly  produced  broadcasts  of  NBC  Sundays  is  inconsistent 
 representation  of  these  groups.  I  also  found  it  unsettling  that  people  in  my  commtmity  cannot  even  rely  on  being  able  to  see  these  publicly  produced  programs  when  they  are  scheduled.  It  is  for  this  reason  that 
 I  think  the  FCC  should  begin  conducting  public  rule-  making  sessions  so  that  myself  and  other  television  consumers  may  voice  our  opinions  about  what  we  believe  is  in  our  interest  for  broadcast  over  our 
 airwaves. 
 Sincerely, 


 Andrea  Kelly  National  Organization  for  Women 
 Boston,  Massachusetts 
236
 February  29,200O 
 William  Kennard,  Chair  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard: 
 Local  news  programming  is  an  extremely  important  way  in  which  the  public  can  learn  about  community  happenings  and  concerns.  Upon  viewing  two  local  programs  recently,  I  became  concerned  that  local 
 television  is  not  focused  enough  on  local  events  and  that  they  too  often  dwell  on  negative  issues. 
 Five  on  Five,  a  locally  produced  weekly  ABC  program  that  airs  on  Saturday,  ran  a  show  on  February  13,200O  that  talked  about  a  murder  in  Rhode  Island,  Hilary  Clintons  Senate  run  and  hate  speech  in  pro 
 sports.  While  these  topics  may  be  interesting  and  are  certainly  timely,  they  are  covered  in  national  news  shows.  They  do  not  really  fit  the  description  of  local  and  therefore  should  not  be  included  in  a  broadcast 
 of  a  show  like  Five  on  Five. 
 Chronicle  is  another  locally  produced  ABC  program  that  airs  every  night  from  7:  30-  8:  O0.  On  its  February  10,200O  show,  it  talked  about  three  local  murders.  Again,  interesting  and  timely,  but  on  a 
 program  that  runs  for  half  an  hour,  perhaps  Chronicle  could  have  balanced  this  negative  local  news  with  coverage  of  some  positive  community  happenings  or  non-  violent  community  issues. 


 Another  concern  I  had  with  both  of  these  programs  was  the  commercials  each  one  contained.  Obviously,  stations  need  the  financial  support  they  get  by  airing  commercials.  However,  I  must  ask 
 myself  what  kind  of  control  these  advertisers  have  over  the  content  of  such  programs.  During  these  are  local  news  programs,  I  would  have  expected  to  see  more  public  service  announcements,  for  they  would 
 seem  more  connected  to  the  purpose  of  the  programs.  Perhaps  paid  commercials  including  those  about  furniture  and  car  dealerships  should  be  left  for  broadcast  during  network  programming. 


 The  power  of  television  should  be  used  to  expand  peoples  perceptions  about  the  political,  social,  and  cultural  climate  they  live  in;  it  should  not  dramatize,  exploit  or  ignore  it  altogether.  And  above  all  this 
 power  should  not  be  taken  for  granted.  People  should  be  able  to  see  a  fair  representation  of  the  world  they  live  in,  especially  on  the  locally  produced  programming  of  their  area.  That  is  why  I  request  that 
 you  hold  public  rule  makingsessions  so  that  people  can  have  a  say  about  what  is  broadcast  over  our  valuable  airwaves.  They  belong  to  all  of  us! 


 Sincerely,  Alexandra  Miller 
 National  Organization  for  Women  Boston,  Massachusetts 
237
 Ceasar  McDowell 
 986  Walnut  Street 
 Newton,  MA  02461 


 March  1,200O 


 William  Kennard,  Chair 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard: 


 Re:  Comments  on  Digital  Television 
 Television  has  been  and  will  continue  to  be  an  important  aspect  of  American 
 culture.  As  such  we  are  obligated  to  think  carefully  about  the  public  service 
 function  of  television  and  correspondingly,  the  public  service  obligations  of 
 television  broadcasters.  This  obligation  not  only  derives  from  the  role  of 
 television  in  our  society  but  also  from  broadcasters  use  of  the  airwaves  which 
 belong  to  the  public.  It  is  these  obligations  that  I  wish  to  address  in  these 
 comments. 


 First  a  few  things  about  myself  and  the  context  from  which  I  make  these 
 comments,  I  have  been  associated  with  the  worlds  of  media,  education  and 
 community  advocacy  for  almost  30  years.  I  have  served  as  an  Associate 
 Superintendent  of  schools,  and  documentary  filmmaker,  and  academic  and  the  founder  of  several  community-  based  organizations.  But  perhaps  the  most 


 important  perspective  I  bring  to  this  issue  is  that  of  an  African-  American  parent 
 who  has  raised  two  children  in  this  media  rich  age.  These  experiences  have 
 provided  a  specific  lens  through  which  I  view  and  understand  the  public  interest 
 role  of  television  in  my  own  community  (Boston)  and  the  larger  society. 


 When  I  first  thought  of  submitting  comments  to  the  FCC,  I  started  to  pay 
 particular  attention  to  local  broadcast  behavior.  This  meant  viewing  news 
 shows,  the  very  few  locally  produced  shows  and  of  course  the  network  shows. 
 However,  it  became  clear  to  me  that  I  would  not  be  able  to  mount  a 
 comprehensive  review  of  current  practice  in  order  to  bolster  my  position.  What  I 
238
 McDowell  Digital  TV  Comments  Page  2  of  4 
 have  decided  to  do  instead  is  present  you  with  a  look  at  the  issues  that  emerge 
 for  me  as  I  engage  the  media  in  my  daily  life. 


 There  are  a  few  specifics  that  inform  my  advocacy  for  the  public  interest 
 obligations  of  broadcasters.  The  FCC  has  a  responsibility  to  the  public  to  insure 
 that  the  use  of  public  resources  for  private  interest  returns  some  advantage  to  the 
 general  public.  This  I  refer  to  as  the  public  interest  obligation.  Moreover,  in 
 addition  to  the  publics  ownership  of  the  airwaves,  the  shear  power  of  broadcast 
 media  in  sustaining  and  building  democracy  also  requires  some  public  interest 
 obligations.  These  obligations  fall  into  three  categories.  One  category  is  related 
 to  informing  the  public,  another  is  to  do  no-  harm  to  the  public,  and  the  final 
 category  is  to  support  civic  engagement. 


 I  believe  each  of  these  categories  has  specific  rules  that  can  insure  that 
 broadcasters  met  their  public  service  obligation. 


 Informing  the  Public 
 A  few  weeks  ago  a  colleague  took  on  the  task  of  visiting  several  of  the  local  TV 
 stations  in  the  Boston  area  to  view  their  public  record.  Her  visits  provided  her 
 with  a  first  hand  experience  of  the  ease  and  difficulty  for  the  public  to  get 
 information  on  how  well  stations  are  serving  the  public  interest  obligations. 
 What  was  most  apparent  from  her  visit  was  that  while  the  station  keep  a  public 
 file,  the  organization  of  the  information  and  the  presentation  of  the  information 
 made  it  relatively  useless.  Broadcasters  need  to  be  in  relationship  with  the 
 public.  Moreover,  the  information  they  provide  the  public  should  be  accessible 
 to  all  of  the  different  types  of  people  who  make  up  the  public.  I  therefore 
 recommend  the  following: 


 1. 


 2. 
 Ascertainment  information  and  station  compliance  with  the  ascertainment 
 process  should  be  reported  on  a  quarterly  basis.  The  reporting  should  be 
 available  through  the  Internet,  electronic  subscription  and  through  publication  in  the  communitys  paper  of  record  as  well  as  the  various  ethnic 


 presses. 
 All  programming  should  be  closed  captioned  and  with  descriptive  services  for  the  blind.  This  should  particularly  apply  to  any  programming  activity 


 that  is  designated  as  fulfilling  public  interest  obligations. 
 Doing  No  Harm 


 Three  weeks  ago  in  Providence,  RI  police  mistakenly  shot  and  killed  an  African- 
 American  policeman.  The  story  headlined  every  news  show  in  the  greater 
 Boston  area.  A  week  later  in  Newton,  MA,  a  fire  in  an  office  complex  left  5 
239
 McDowell  Digital  TV  Comments  Page  3  of  4 
 people  missing.  It  took  3  days  to  recover  the  bodies.  In  covering  both  of  the 
 stories  every  TV  news  program  thought  it  important  to  not  only  cover  the  facts 
 of  the  story  but  they  also  felt  obligated  to  intrude  on  the  personal  lost  of  the 
 family  members.  So  intense  was  the  intrusion  that  one  family  was  feature  night  after  night  as  they  stood  vigil  over  the  recovery  effort.  The  same  was  true  with 


 the  family  of  the  slain  police  officer. 
 This  tendency  to  not  allow  people  the  dignity  of  their  own  grief  is  a  form  of 
 voyeurism  that  does  not  rate  as  news  coverage  but  instead  is  a  sensationalism 
 that  robs  grieving  family  members  of  an  sense  of  privacy.  It  is  uncalled  for  and 
 adds  nothing  to  our  understanding  of  the  story  nor  does  it  assist  the  family  in  its 
 grief.  These  are  just  two  examples  of  the  way  in  which  broadcaster  can  do 
 harm.  While  it  is  hard  to  imagine  regulatory  structures  that  could  minimize  this 
 particular  harm,  there  are  clear  regulatory  steps  that  can  protect  the  most 
 vulnerable  in  our  society:  Children. 


 1.  Children  should  be  protected  from  undue  advertising;  especially  advertising 
 that  is  disguised  as  programming. 
 2.  There  should  be  an  independent  rating  system  to  assist  parents  and  others  in 
 making  accurate  choices  about  their  viewing  habits.  Digital  broadcasters 
 should  be  required  to  post  ratings  as  to  the  sexual  and  violent  nature  of 
 programming. 
 3.  With  the  potential  of  digital  technology  to  combine  broadcast,  telephone  and 
 Internet  services,  broadcasters  must  be  requiring  to  protect  the  information  of 
 users.  Accordingly  consumers  should  be  invested  with  the  power  to  prevent 
 the  collection  and  sale  of  information  related  to  their  personal  profile  and 
 their  program  or  product  choices. 


 Civic  Engagement 
 In  reviewing  the  public  file  from  two  stations  it  is  clear  that  stations  fulfill  their 
 public  interest  obligations  by  piecing  together  unrelated  and  often  non-  local 
 programming.  As  a  result,  one  station  counted  PSA  for  UNCEF,  to  MADD  as 
 their  public  service  activity.  While  such  ISAs  are  valuable  they  indicated  that 
 the  stations  are  not  inclined  to  build  a  comprehensive  approach  to  keeping  the 
 public  informed,  especially  on  local  issues.  This  nonchalant  approach  to  civic 


 engagement  only  serves  to  distance  the  public.  This  is  further  exacerbated  in  this 
 election  year.  While  every  station  has  numerous  stories  on  the  presidential 
 campaign,  not  one  of  our  stations  has  an  ongoing  show  for  gathering  and/  or 
 informing  public  discussion  on  the  issues  that  should  inform  this  election. 
 Accordingly,  the  public  is  treated  as  a  sidebar  to  the  presidential  race  rather  than 


 the  main  player  in  a  democracy.  Accordingly,  I  recommend  that: 
240
 1. 
 2. 


 3. 


 McDowell  Digital  TV  Comments  Page  4  of  4 
 Digital  broadcasters  should  be  required  to  set-  aside  channel  space  for  non- 
 commercial  use.  These  channels  should  be  used  to  support  public  service. 
 The  allocation  of  these  channels  should  not  relieve  broadcasters  of  the 
 primary  public  service  obligations. 
 Digital  broadcasters  should  be  required  to  expand  their  public  affairs 
 programming  to  at  least  one  hour  per  day  per  channel.  In  addition, 
 broadcasters  should  use  this  opportunity  to  specifically  create  programs  at 
 the  local  level  that  open  dialogue  among  the  various  populations  of  the 
 communities. 
 Any  broadcaster  should  be  required  to  reflect  the  diversity  of  this  nation  in 
 their  programming,  hiring,  and  management. 


 Finally,  the  most  important  request.  If  the  FCC  does  not  convene  hearings  it  will 
 serve  to  silence  those  of  us  concerned  with  these  issues.  More  important,  it  will 
 prevent  the  FCC  from  truly  hearing  the  voice  of  the  American  people.  I 
 respectfully  request  that  the  FCC  convene  hearings  on  the  public  interest 
 obligations  of  digital  broadcasters. 


 I  offer  these  recommendations  in  the  hope  that  the  power  of  digital  television  can 
 be  used  to  benefit  the  public  interest.  I  believe  that  these  recommendations  and 
 those  offered  by  organizations  like  Citizens  for  Better  TV  can  help  us  create  a 
 media  system  that  is  both  responsive  to  the  public  while  simultaneously 
 profitable  to  the  industry. 


 I  thank  you  for  your  time  and  look  forward  to  your  announcement  of  the  hearing 
 process. 


 Sincerely, 


 Ceasar  McDowell 
241
 Allen  Perez  5  Walden  Street,  #3 
 Cambridge,  MA  02  140 


 Federal  Communications  Commissioners  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Commissioners, 
 My  name  is  Allen  Perez  and  I  am  a  member  of  two  communities  in  Boston  that  local  broadcasters  underrepresent:  the  Latino  and  liberal  religious  denominations  communities. 
 I  pose  these  two  questions  to  the  FCC,  why  is  it  that  I  must  turn  to  Channel  19  to  view  local  and  international  news  for  topics  of  interest  regarding 
 the  Latin0  communities  and  why  do  local  broadcasters  neglect  the  valuable  resources  of  the  church  when  addressing  issues  of  local  interest?  I  have 
 simple  answers  to  these  questions.  Local  broadcasters  do  not  care  and  are  not  putting  efforts  into  these  areas.  Most  of  the  major  local  stations  do  not  even  have  a  community  liaison  like  a  community  service 
 director  or  coordinator.  Public  relations  directors  are  far  too  busy  handling  the  stations  reputations  to  truly  be  effective  at  the  community  level.  An  evening  of  watching  my  local  broadcast  stations  reveals 
 these  findings  which  exemplify  the  above  mentioned  point: 
 3/  29/  00  Channel  7  News:  not  a  single  mention  of  Latin0  issues.  (1  lpm  news) 


 3/  29/  00  Channel  4  News:  not  a  single  mention  of  Latin0  issues.  (Evening  news) 
 4/  02/  00  Channel  5  News:  not  a  single  news  of  Latin0  issues.  (Morning  news) 
 No  mention  at  all  of  activities  of  liberal  religious  denominations,  not  necessarily  Christians.  Brief  mentions  to  the  role  of  the  Christian  Coalition 
 in  the  Republican  primaries.  The  Christian  Right  has  enough  TV  programs.  This  is  typical  of  the  findings  in  the  public  files  at  the  stations.  Channel  7-  WHDH  had  recorded  into  the  files  for  the  last 
 quarter  of  1999  that  there  was  only  two  Latin0  news  stories  worthy  enough  for  the  programming  logs. 
 Although  I  am  not  a  member  of  The  League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens  (LULAC),  the  Mexican  American  Legal  Defense  and  Education  Fund  (MALDEF), 
 The  National  Association  of  Latin0  Elected  and  Appointed  Officials  (NALEO),  or  the  National  Puerto  Rican  Coalition  (NPRC)  all  of  whom  are  members  of  the 
 People  for  Better  TV  coalition  calling  on  the  FCC  to  set  guidelines  for  how  broadcasters  will  serve  the  public.  I,  as  a  Latin0  individual  would  like  to 
 concur  with  these  organizations.  Surely,  Boston  can  and  should  produce  better  local  programming. 
 Thank  you, 
 Allen  Perez 
242
 Center  for  Information,  Technology  &  Society 
 Furthering  Advances  in  Communication,  Computers,  and  Networks  for 


 Improved  Education,  Health,  and  Humanity 
 466  Pleasant  Street  Melrose,  MA  02176-  4522 


 (fax:  781-  662-  6882)  781-  662-  4044 
 bmslib@  mit.  edu,  wvw.  CyberTrails.  Org 


 Response  to  FCC  Docket  No.  99-  360 
 Public  Interest  Obligations 
 TV  Broadcast  Licensees 


 By:  The  Center  for  Information,  Technology  &  Society  (CITS) 
 Date:  February  29,200O 


 For  the  record,  CITS  is  a  5Ol(  c)  3  charitable  nonprofit  dedicated  to  improving  all  forms  of  communications  that  better 
 society,  culture,  and  knowledge. 


 Introduction:  CITS  was  originally  the  Program  for  Information,  Technology  &  Society  at  MIT.  In  1986  the  Center 
 became  a  freestanding  nonprofit.  In  1996,  the  Director,  Dr.  W.  Curtiss  Priest,  was  recognized  by  Newsweek  as  one 
 of  the  50  people  who  matter  most  on  the  Internet    The  Center  has  worked  closely  with  government  agencies, 
 including  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Education,  in  developing  an  Internet  world  that  is  informative  and  constructive  for 
 students  in  K-  12  education.  With  the  Corporation  for  Public  Broadcasting,  the  Center  has  developed  a  web-  based 
 volunteer  organization  site.  Links  are  provided  at  the  Centers  web  site  CyberTrailsOrg 


 Preface:  CITS  recognizes  that  this  country  is  witnessing  a  degree  of  privatization  that  is  unparalleled  in  its  history. 
 That  this  privatization  has  produced  many  efficiencies  is  also  acknowledged 
 Nonetheless,  this  organization  does  not  believe  that  self-  serving  corporate  interests  will  provide  the  healthy  world  for 
 its  citizens  nor  its  children.  Thus,  it  is  firmly  in  support  of  a  vigorous  role  for  the  FCC  to  champion  the  public 
 good. 


 That  there  are  significant  political  forces  that  would  dissolve  the  FCC  also  cannot  be  ignored.  Such  dreams  that  this 
 entity  should  disappear  are  born  out  of  the  Friedman  Chicago  school  of  economics  and  elsewhere. 


 It  is  imperative  that  the  FCC,  including  Chairman  Kennard  and  the  commissioners,  resist  the  temptation  to  turn  all 
 solutions  over  to  private  markets 


 This  petitioner  recognizes  the  issues  raised,  in  particular  by  Commissioner  Harold  Furchgott-  Roth.  In  response  to 
 those  issues,  this  respondent  asserts  that  the  Communications  Act  of  1934  clearly  states: 


 Nothing  m  this  section  shall  be  construed  as  relieving  a 
 television  broadcasting  station  from  its  obligation  to  serve  the 
 public  interest,  convenience  and  necessity. 


 Commissioner  Furchgott-  Roth  raises  the  excellent  question  as  to  how  far  this  statutory  language  is  to  guide  the  FCC. 
 In  the  considered  opinion  of  this  respondent,  we  believe  that  the  world  of  1934  had  just  witnessed  the  go-  go  years 
 of  the  1920s  and  the  domination  of  various  industries  such  as  telecommunications  and  railroads  by  the  Bell 
 Telephone  Company  and  Mr.  Morgans  banking  interests. 


 fihether  the  go-  go  years  of  the  90s  will  transpire  into  the  economic  conditions  that  accompanied  the  Act  of  1934  is 
 yet  to  be  seen  Regardless,  there  IS  a  level  of  corporate  dominated  telecommunications  that  must  be  countervailed  by 
243
 the  FCC 
 The  free  market  bandwagon  of  this  era  must  be  balanced  by  the  thoughtful  and  judicious  considerations  of  the  FCC 
 -  regardless  of  all  political  circumstances  that  may  work  to  the  contrary. 


 Cable  Access  As  a  Model 
 Cable  access  has  been  a  serious  and  important  mitigating  response  to  the  success  of  the  cable  television  industry. 
 Every  community,  at  every  point  m  the  renegotiation,  strives  to  maintain  this  availability  of  public  access. 
 Digital  Television 
 The  digital  television  migration  will  be  no  different. 
 Take  6  Mhz  of  bandwidth.  With  the  advent  of  superior  digital  technologies,  we  find  that  there  are  choices.  6  Mhz 
 can  be  devoted  to  an  extremely  high  level  of  digital  broadcast  or  the  broadcaster  can  make  trade-  offs.  They  can 
 broadcast  1  or  2  video  transmissions  of  medium  quality,  and  they  can  carve  out  the  rest  for  commercial  gain.  They 
 might  provide  this  bandwidth  for  cellular  expansion  or  they  might  expand  this  for  pay  television.  Either  way,  they 
 are  capitalizing  on  a  freely  given  spectrum  space. 


 It  is  this  respondents  interpretation  of  the  1934  Act  that  all  channels  must  respond  to  the  public  good.  IGo  channel 
 may  be  subverted,  solely  for  commercial  gain  -  unless  a  commensurate  amount  of  bandwidth  and  time  is  dedicated 
 to  the  public  interest  on  other  channels.  Further,  we  must  avoid  the  process  by  which  a  stations  public  service  is 
 relegated  to  channels  that  are  less  watched  Such  a  process  would  weaken  the  stations  ability  to  carry  out  the  intent 
 of  the  Act. 


 A  visit  to  a  local  station  -  WBZ  in  Boston  -  recently  acquired  by  CBS: 
 On  February  29th,  Dr.  W.  Curtiss  Priest  vlsited  WBZ  at  1170  Soldiers  Field  Rd.,  Boston,  MA  02135 
 Access  to  the  records  was  expeditious  because  of  interest  in  the  stations  coverage  of  political  events  (it  being  the  eve 
 of  the  Presidential  election.) 


 In  the  October  1  to  December  3  1,  1999  period,  the  station  had  just  three  hours  of  childrens  programming,  provided 
 by  CBS,  consisting  of: 


 0  Anatole 
 o  Blasters  Universe 
 o  Rescue  Heroes 
 o  Flying  Rhino  Junior  High 
 o  New  Tales  from  the  Cryptkeeper 
 o  Mythic  Warriors:  Guardians  of  the  Legend 


 The  description  of  these  shows,  as  provided  to  the  FCC,  made  each  and  every  one  of  these  sound  pertinent  to  the 
 need  for  quality  childrens  programming. 


 In  that  two  made  references  to  childrens  book  awards,  Dr.  Priest  talked  Prof.  Mercier,  who  has  served  on  childrens 
 award  committees  and  is  Associate  Director  of  Childrens  Literature  at  Simmons  College.  To  better  address  the 
 actual  shows,  they  both  watched  the  episodes  aired  on  March  4th. 


 Anatole  (the  mouse)  is  based  on  a  book  by  Eve  Titus  which  received  a  Caldecott  honor  book  award  in  1957.  Of  the 
 various  shows,  this  one  presented  its  characters  in  various  family  contexts.  Prof.  Mercier  said  this  was  unusual  for 
 childrens  books;  often  parents  are  despatched  to  leave  children  to  their  own  adventures.  Dr.  Priest  found  the 
 interplay  of  characters  to  be  warm,  thoughtful.  and  somewhat  charming.  Nonetheless,  there  were  various  themes  of 
244
 3 
 the  episode  that  were  bothersome.  Anatole  leaves  his  children  with  an  uncle,  Gaston.  In  the  interplay  amongst 
 Gaston  and  the  children,  Gaston  is  made  to  look  foolish  as  an  adult.  He  misunderstands  when  Anatole  mentions  a 
 10  PM  bedtime,  saying,  I  am  always  in  bed  by  10  PM.  The  children  giggle  at  this  point,  placing  them  in  a  superior 
 position.  A  minute  later  Gaston  and  the  children  are  riding  their  bicycles  (in  France)  and  Gaston  goes  the  wrong 
 way  Again,  the  children  take  the  upper  hand.  Only  a  while  later,  when  one  of  the  children  claims  to  have  done 
 homework  and  Gaston  notices  otherwise,  is  Gaston  portrayed  as  an  observant  parent.  But,  with  regard  to  homework, 
 the  children  all  chime,  do  we  have  to?  When  the  subject  of  health  and  exercise  is  briefly  mentioned,  Gaston  says, 
 who  said  exercise  is  good  for  your  health.    So,  various  stereotypes  are  continued  in  the  context  of  this  show 


 1,  Children  are  superior  to  their  parents  (a  common  theme  across  both  television  shows  and  television 
 commercials  in  this  era). 


 2.  Learning  (homework)  IS  seen  as  some  required  evil  rather  than  a  positive  activity  of  daily  living 
 3.  Lack  of  exercise  is  excused. 
 Nonetheless,  Prof.  Mercier  thought  there  were  some  distinctive  pluses  of  Anatole.  There  was  no  gratuitous  violence. 
 There  were  two  stories  being  told  at  the  same  time  (one  about  the  adventures  of  Anatole;  the  other  about  the 
 children)  and  the  ability  for  a  viewer  to  follow  a  show  constructed  this  way,  helps  children  learn  to  follow  such 
 stories.  There  was  literary  parallelism  in  the  way  the  uncle  becomes  locked  in  the  basement  and  the  way  Anatole 
 and  others  get  locked  in  a  cage. 


 And,  the  moral  of  the  story  that  cheaters  never  prosper,    while  perhaps  idealistic,  does  help  affirm  a  good  society.   
 Blasters  Universe  is  based  on  a  math  game  by  that  name.  Here  there  are  no  parents,  so  there  is  no  opportunity  to 
 portray  family  life.  Instead,  there  are  two,  a  girl  and  a  boy  as  a  team,  who  light  a  villain  who  presents  math  puzzles. 
 Dr  Priest  found  this  show  to  be  fundamentally  disturbing.  The  team  clearly,  naturally  excel  in  math.  The  foil  in  the 
 story  is  a  boy  who  plays  pranks  on  his  friends  and  only  engages  in  math  when  he  believes  he  is  playing  some  kind  of 
 virtual  game.  The  message  of  this  subterfuge  is  that  math  is  beyond  kids  like  this,  and  only  by  candy  coating  it  will 
 the  child  learn  The  story  writers  are  not  to  blame  as  much  as  is  our  society;  the  attitude  that  learning  must  be  turned 
 into  a  game  to  engage  the  learner  runs  deep  in  societys  views  about  education  and  math. 


 Regardless,  the  show  presented  interesting  math  challenges  and  the  dedication  the  boy/  girl  team  showed  in  helping 
 the  prankster  with  learning  math  helps  promote  the  goal  of  peer  mentoring.   


 Rescue  Heros  was,  said  Prof.  Mercier,  preachy.  Both  this  show,  and  the  theme  of  Rhino  Junior  High  were  hyper- 
 focussed  on  safety  issues.  The  intent  is  clear:  safety  is  good  and  a  show  that  teaches  safety  will  be  considered  good 
 childrens  television.  Prof.  Mercier  found  the  emphasis  on  safety  was  so  heavy-  handed  as  to  make  the  show  boring. 


 Regardless,  the  show  demonstrated  characters  with  a  strong  sense  of  teamwork  and  caring  for  each  other.  It  is  this 
 kind  of  relational  kindnesses  that  help  a  child  see  the  value  of  caring  for  others. 


 The  episode  of  Flymg  Rhino  Junior  High  was  about  the  visit  of  a  fireman  to  the  school  and  lectures  about  proper 
 safety  in  school.  The  underlying  message  of  the  show  is  similar  to  that  of  Buffy  the  Vampire  Slayer,  that  principals 
 and  teachers  are  controlling  preachy  and  buffoons  and  the  students  have  to  put  up  with  this.  Unfortunately,  this 
 depiction  of  our  public  education  system  rings  true  in  many  ways.  But  what  are  the  effects  of  a  childrens  show  built 
 around  this  premise?  Perhaps  children  are  permitted  to  laugh  about  it,  thus  giving  them  some  release.  Yet  the  show, 
 in  general.  perpetuates  the  part  of  our  educational  system  that  many  wish  to  improve. 


 If  CBS  contribution  to  childrens  programming  is  confined  to  these  six  programs,  we  believe  that  much  clearer 
 evidence  is  needed  of  their  merits,  A  clever  writer  can  take  almost  any  program  on  television  and  laud  about  its 
 ability  to,  say,  improve  social  skills. 


 It  is  not  that  we  insist  on  blue  ribbon  standards,  but  we  would  like  to  see  clear  evidence  that  professionals  involved 
 with  childrens  learning  such  as  librarians,  education  faculty,  and  communications  faculty  are  examining  and  shaping 
245
 3 
 these  few  shows  for  their  positive  effect  on  children.  While  some  of  the  CBS  shows  credited  educational 
 consultants,  it  may  be  that  such  consultants  are  working  too  much  inside  the  framework  of  the  show  and  not  given 
 the  opportunity  to  restructure  the  shows. 


 And,  have  children  been  asked  their  evaluative  opinion?  For  over  thirty  years,  Educational  Products  Information 
 Exchange  has  found  publishers  of  learning  resources  seldom  ask  for  evaluations  from  teachers  or  students.  And, 
 recently,  the  National  Academy  of  Television  Arts  and  Sciences  has  launched  a  project  called  Creating  Critical 
 Viewers.  The  CBS  shows  would  benefit  from  learner-  evaluations  as  well  as  the  advice  from  professionals 
 mentioned  above. 


 We  encourage  the  FCC  to  not  only  assure  there  is  sufficient  childrens  television  but  to  put  into  place  a  process  by 
 which  these  shows  can  be  evaluated  and  improved 


 Childrens  Programming  in  1997  versus  1999  at  WBZ  (CBS): 
 The  most  telling  difference  between  these  two  years  is  that,  perhaps  due  to  the  acquisition  by  CBS,  WBZs 
 programming  for  children  dropped  by  50%.  In  September  30,  1997  there  were  six  hours  of  programming,  and  in  the 
 October  1997  report  there  were  only  three  hours  of  programming. 


 This  suggests  that  mergers  and  acquisitions  do  what  many  suspect  -  reduce  coverage  to  the  lowest  commitment 
 possible 


 Equal  Opportunity  Employment: 
 Due  to  changes  in  the  law,  the  last  entry  that  accounted  for  the  employment  by  WBZ  by  gender,  race,  etc.  was  date 
 May  27,  1997 


 Change  due  to  CBS  reporting: 
 The  only  significant  reporting  change  (other  than  the  number  of  childrens  hours)  was  the  inclusion  of  the  dollar 
 value  of  the  Public  Service  Announcement  (PSA)  programming.  While  WBZ  include  great  detail  on  PSA 
 programmmg,  it  was  only  in  CBS  reporting  that  the  first  quarter  of  1999  was  shown  to  represent  $93,700  in  outlays. 
 What  was  not  shown  was  what  percentage  this  amount  was  to  the  overall  budget. 


 Outside  of  Programming: 
 No  information  was  found  in  the  files  that  accounted  for  WBZ  or  CBSs  public  activities  outside  of  programming. 
 Letters  to  the  Station: 
 Letters  to  the  station  were  dutifully  filed  in  folders  by  month  and  year.  However,  there  was  no  record  of  any  action 
 or  response  to  these  letters. 


 For  example,  there  was  a  woman  who  wrote  twice  to  express  her  dismay  at  the  kinds  of  morning  news  she  was 
 receiving  and  details  about  who  was  providing  it 


 While  these  letters  were  very  heart-  felt,  there  was  no  indication  that  the  letters  made  any  impact.  There  were  no 
 responses  to  these  letters  in  the  file. 


 When  the  administrator  for  these  files  was  asked  about  reply  letters,  the  response  was  that  these  letters  to  the  station 
 might,  or  might  not,  be  circulated  in  the  appropriate  divisions  of  the  company.  Whether  anyone  responded  to  these 
 letters  would  be  up  to  the  individuals  to  whom  the  letters  were  first  directed.  In  any  case,  no  response  was  filed  with 
 the  letters  as  part  of  the  public  record. 
246
 Immediate  Recommendation  to  the  FCC: 
 All  letters  to  publicly  underwritten  stations  should  be  responded  to  and  all  such  responses  should  be  included  in  the 
 public  record. 


 Summary  comments  by  the  Center  for  Information,  Technology  &  Society: 
 1 
 ?  A. 


 3. 
 4. 


 5  _. 


 6 
 7. 


 8 


 All  channels  of  public  awarded  spectrum  space  should  serve  the  public  interest 
 Each  and  every  digital  channel  (and  sub-  channel)  should  serve  the  public  interest.  Shifting  of  materials  to  lesser 
 watched  channels  or  transmissions  should  not  be  permitted. 


 Stations  should  clearly  indicate  how  they  are  adapting  to  public  needs  by  not  only  receiving  letters  from  the 
 public,  but  also  indicating  how  the  consumer  voice  of  the  public  is  effecting  programming  decisions. 


 Stations  and/  or  networks  should  work  more  closely  with  resources  that  understand  the  value  of  forms  of 
 childrens  education.  Such  clearinghouse  resources  might  be  the  Center  for  the  Study  of  Childrens  Literature  at 
 Simmons  College,  the  Educational  Products  Information  Exchange  of  Hampton  Bays,  NY,  the  Communications 
 Department  of  Emerson  College,  and  the  American  Teachers  Association. 


 Cross  ties  should  be  formed  between  local  Public  Cable  Access  organizations  and  major  television  networks. 
 Materials  produced  by  Cable  Access  that  have  high  merit,  should  be  carried  by  major  networks.  This  cross- 
 fertilization  will  help  reduce  the  gap  between  major  networks  need  to  pander  to  American  Interests  and  shows 
 that  have  sufficient  local  content  and  quality  to  attract  viewers. 


 In  general,  the  FCC  should  carefully  study  the  programming  attitudes  and  values  of  systems  in  Canada,  the  U.  K. 
 and  France.  to  better  understand,  by  cross-  country  comparison,  what  alternatives  there  are  to  the  American 
 formula  for  appealing  to  the  Public. 


 The  FCC  should,  within  whatever  1  st  Amendment  restrictions  exist,  attempt  to  shape  American  Television  into  a 
 positive,  ethically-  based,  humanizing,  civilizing  experience  for  it  viewers.  Parents  of  children  of  many  ages 
 would  be  pleased  to  exchange  the  V-  chip  for  the  opportunity  to  engage  with  superior  programming  that 
 communicates  community,  interrelational  values,  and  an  aspiration  for  learning.  The  separation  of  church  and 
 state  should  not  be  interpreted  as  a  separation  of  redeeming  culture  and  state.  Those  who  would  close  the  FCC 
 should  be  reminded  that  dehumanizing  economists  are  those  who  know  the  price  of  everything;  and  the  value  of 
 nothing    The  market  process  is  no  guarantee  of  a  society  worth  living  in;  the  role  of  nonprofits  is  particularly 
 important  during  eras  of  transition  as  they  often  embody  goals,  virtues,  and  aspirations  that  can  never  be 
 purchased  and  are  never  for  sale. 


 Perhaps  if  stations  and  networks  were  required  to  write  descriptive  materials  about  the  redeeming  aspects  of  all 
 of  its  programming  (as  they  do  already  to  justify  the  redeeming  aspects  of  their  three  hours  of  childrens 
 television),  this  would  be  a  step  in  the  right  direction.  Such  a  process  would,  hopefully,  reveal  to  reviewers  both 
 inside  and  outside  of  television  firms  what  news  and  programs  are  inspiring  and  empowering  and  what  news  and 
 programs  are  simply  pandering  to  base?  debasing  interests  as  epitomized  by  the  presence  of  sex  and  violence 
 without  meaningful  context. 


 The  FCC  should  contract  for  studies  of  the  effects  of  media  concentration.  As  found  above,  WBZ  as  an 
 independent  station  carried  twice  the  level  of  childrens  programming  prior  to  its  acquisition  by  CBS.  Under 
 increased  pressures  from  competition  from  various  sources,  including  cable  and  satellite,  there  may  be  a  rush  to 
 the  bottom  in  terms  of  meeting  the  goals  of  must  carry  and  other  PSA  goals  voiced  in  statute  and  the 
 regulations  by  the  FCC. 


 In  that  there  are  both  positive  and  negative  effects  of  media  concentration,  the  FCC  should  not  expect  that  any 
 one  study  can  be  the  basis  for  policy,  It  is  well  known  that  such  studies  vary  as  widely  as  the  implicit  agendas 
 embodied  in  firms  and  institutions  that  conduct  such  studies.  These  differences  are  not  to  be  avoided,  but  rather 
247
 6 
 used  to  help  illuminate  the  issues  surrounding  the  effects  of  communication;  the  effects  of  the  for-  profit  drive; 
 and  the  voices  of  those  who  see  defects  in  the  current  (and  future)  of  analog  and  digital  television.  Only  with 
 open  discussion  (such  as  this  NOI)  and  government-  provided  resources  for  such  studies  can  good  television  for  a 
 better  socrety  be  assured.  Corporate  interests  are  always  well  funded;  in  contrast,  those  that  would  or  can  speak 
 to  non-  corporate  interests  are  often  teetering  on  the  edge  of  financial  insolvency.  And  while  insolvency  is  a 
 symptom  in  the  business  world  that  this  entity  should  go  out  of  business;  insolvency  in  the  not  for  profit  sector 
 can  often  occur  simply  by  the  process  where  corporations  co-  opt  governments  role  in  funding  activities  - 
 activities  that  help  ensure  that  societal  losses,  damages,  or  lost  opportunities  due  to  market-  failure,  are  not 
 allowed  to  happen  (see  Appendix  A) 


 Respectfully  submitted, 


 Dr.  W.  Curtiss  Priest,  Director 
248
 7 
 Appendix  A 


 Inherent  causes  of  market-  failure  associated  with  Information  and  Communication 


 For  one  discussion  on  market-  failure  in  the  provision  of  communication  and  information  see: 
 www.  eff.  orglpubiGroupslCITSiReports/  citsnii_  framework_  ota.  report  -  especially  these  sections: 


 2.2  Market-  Failure  Related  Characteristics  of  Information 
 2.1  Market  Related  Characteristics  of  Information  as  a  Commodity 
 2.1.1  Intrinsic  Co-  production 
 2.1.2  Time  Constrained  Consumption  of  Information 
 2.1.3  High  Investment  to  Reproduction  Cost  Ratios  of  Information 
 2.1.4  Relevance  of  Information  More  Variable  Across  Consumers 
 2.2  Market-  Failure  Related  Characteristics  of  Information 
 2.2.1  Public  Good  Characteristics  of  Information 
 2.2.1.1  lnappropriability 
 2.2.1.2  Non-  depletability 
 2  2.2  Externalities  (expected  and  unintended) 
 2.2.3  Indivisibilities  (of  supply) 
 2.2.4  Economies  ofScale  and  Scope  (ofproduction) 
 2.2.5  Inherent  Uncertainty  and  Risk  in  Information  Production 
 2.2.6  InformationiKnowledge  About  the  Information 
 2.2.7  Intangibility  (of  benefits  or  values) 
 2.2.8  Transaction  Costs  and  Information 
 2.2.9  Equity/  Distribution  Considerations  (related  to  Universal  Service) 
 2  2.10  Network  Externalities 
 2.3  Non-  market  Related  Characteristics  of  Information 
 2.3.1  High  Intrinsic  Relationship  to  Human  Welfare 
 2  3.2  High  Intrinsic  Relationship  to  Issues  of  Freedom  and  Privacy 
249
 Date:  Tue,  29  Feb  2000 
 From:  stephen  provizer  <improviz@  gis.  net> 


 Feb,  2000 
 Dear  Commissioner: 
 I  am  director  of  an  organization  that  pays  a  great  deal  of  attention  to  television  programming  that  springs  from  and  deals  with  issues  of 
 importance  to  our  community.  Such  programming,  unfortunately,  is  very  difficult  to  find.  Such,  at  least,  was  the  anecdotal  consensus  of  our 
 members  and  recent  visits  to  two  of  Boston's  major  television  outlets  did  nothing  to  alter  this  impression. 


 The  two  stations  we  visited  were  WHDH,  channel  I  and  WSBK,  channel  38.  Both  are  local  affiliates  of  national  broadcasting  corporations-  NBC  and  UPN 
 respectively-  and  both  can  be  considered  "major"  stations.  Their  local  inspection  files  were  a  study  in  inattentiveness  to  local  concerns. 


 WHDH  had  ONE  locally  produced  public  affairs  program,  which  aired  at  6:  30  AM;  no  doubt  for  maximum  viewer  impact.  This  station  had  NO  programming  for 
 young  children  under  6  years  old  and,  in  fact,  no  community  outreach  director  at  all.  Generally  speaking,  the  files  were  in  a  chaotic  state  and 
 2  PSA's  that  were  listed  as  targeting  youth  under  16  included  "designated  driver"  and  "teacher  recruitment." 


 WSBK,  for  its  part,  has  no  newscast  of  any  kind,  local  or  national.  They  air  only  2  locally-  produced  public  affairs  shows,  one  of  which,  aimed 
 toward  youth,  airs  twice  a  year.  They  also  have  no  young  children's  programming.  The  person  in  charge  of  producing  what  local  programming  does 
 exist  is  both  producer  and  on-  air  talent  and  there  is  no  plan  in  place  to  solicit  ideas  or  feedback  from  the  community. 


 It  is  our  belief  that  these  stations  represent  a  norm  rather  than  an  aberration  and  we  hope  that  the  FCC  bears  this  sorry  performance  in  mind  as 
 it  deliberates  on  what  responsibilities  need  to  be  born  by  broadcasters  as  the  country  proceeds  to  implement  digital  television. 


 Sincerely, 
 Stephen  Provizer  Director,  Citizens'  Media  Corps 
 107  Brighton  Ave.  Allston,  MA  02134 
 617-  232-  3174 


 Steve  Provizer  Citizens'  Media  Corps  107  Brighton  Ave.  Allston-  Brighton  Free  Radio 
 Allston,  MA  02134  ***  Voices  for  Community***  617-  232-  3174  <http://  www.  citizensmedia.  org.> 
 <http://  www.  radfrall.  org/> 
250
 MASSACHUSETTS 
 CONSUMERS  COALITION  AN  ASSOCIATION  OF  PUBLIC  AND  PRIVATE  AGENCIES  AFFILIATED  TO  PROMOTE  CONSUMER  INTERESTS 


 PAUL  J.  SCHLAVER,  Chair  DIANE  SZAFAROWICZ.  Vice-  Charr 
 Cambridge  Consumers  Council 
 617-  349-  6152  Attorney  Generals  Office  617-  727-  2200  x  2982 


 JEANNE  FOY,  Secretary 
 MASSPIRG  Consumer  Action  Center 
 781-  335-  0280 


 JEAN  COURTNEY,  Treasurer 
 Consumer  Information  Center 
 413-  283-  6516 


 February  29,200O 
 William  E.  Kermard,  Chairman 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12h  Street  S.  W. 
 Washington  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 I  am  writing  you  to  urge  you  and  the  FCC  to  establish  clear  guidelines  that  broadcasters  in  my 
 community  must  follow  as  they  begin  to  use  digital  signals  and  expand  their  channel  capacity 
 to  reach  us  all  via  television.  As  I  watch  local  television,  especially  news  and  public  affairs 
 type  of  programming  I  believe  more  and  more  that  the  existing  effort  to  meet  current 
 obligations  of  local  broadcasters  are  remise. 


 I  have  a  special  interesting  consumer  issues  as  the  director  of  a  consumer  protection  agency 
 and  chair  of  a  state-  wide  consumer  organization.  While  I  can  point  to  some  local  stations 
 such  as  Channel  7  (NBC  affiliated)  and  Channel  5  (ABC  Affiliated)  as  stations  that  have 
 consumer  reporters  with  regular  segments,  I  must  say  that  all  too  often  their  segments 
 focussed  primarily  of  drama  appealing  scams  discussed  with  the  aid  of  hidden  cameras  to 
 catch  high  pressured  sales  activities  or  sleazy  car  dealers,  and  then  confronting  them  and 
 little  more. 


 The  potentially  in-  depth  shows  that  might  go  beyond  the  dramatic  brief  piece  are  always 
 buried  in  Sunday  morning  time  slots.  Only  New  England  Cable  News  seems  willing  to  afford 
 decent  time  allotments  or  time  slots  to  more  substantial  discussion  of  consumer  issues. 
 The  networks  seem  to  also  mainly  defer  to  the  Dafeline/  20-  20/  60  iblinutes  network  world  to 
 cover  consumer  issues. 


 In  Massachusetts  a  major  100  page  piece  of  legislation  was  filed  last  year  addressing  every 
 aspect  of  privacy  from  the  grocery  store  to  the  Internet.  It  will  be  a  long  time  in  the 
 negotiation  and  re-  write  phase  before  a  final,  passable  bill  comes  out  of  this  effort  yet 
 minimal  attempts  have  been  made  to  address  the  issue,  analyze  the  proposed  legislation,  etc. 
 by  local  TV  stations,  especially  the  network  affiliates.  It  deserves  more  that  being  a  one-  day 
 media  story  on  the  bill  filing  date. 


 _.  __-  -__.  ,..,.._---~-  -- 
251
 Massachusetts  is  certainly  in  the  midst  of  a  substantial  debate  over  the  issue  of  Broadband  Open 
 Access  to  ISP  and  also  the  issue  of  whether  Bell  Atlantic  is  ready  to  be  permitted  to  enter  the 
 long  distance  telephone  service  arena.  The  buying  and  selling  of  Cable  TV  companies  has  been 
 rampant  in  Massachusetts.  I  simply  cannot  recall  one  decent  local  network  offering  some  in- 
 depth  coverage  of  these  complex  issues.  Such  stories  cry  out  for  more  time  and  attention  than 
 reporting  on  a  sports  score  or  weather  report  needs  to  take.  They  are  confusing,  complex  issues 
 than  impact  consumers  future  daily  lifestyles  and  pocketbooks  considerable. 


 Massachusetts  has  many  wonderful  educational  facilities  that  focus  on  disabilities  such  as 
 learning  disabilities,  sightlessness,  and  physical  or  mental  rehabilitation.  There  are  local 
 disabilities  groups  working  with  cities  and  towns  to  tackle  major  physical  access  challenges  in 
 old  New  England  communities  and  buildings  and  also  access  to  public  transportation.  I  wish  one 
 of  these  schools  or  programs  received  15  minutes  of  coverage  every  time  another  news  broadcast 
 focussed  on  Where  is  Whitey  Bulger,  the  South  Boston  gangster  and  FBI  informant! 


 Fortunately  for  us  we  are  blessed  with  the  New  England  Cable  News  station  and  with  our 
 beloved  public  broadcast  station,  WGBH,  and  receive  some  of  these  positive  and  informative 
 stories  that  way.  I  cant  help  but  feel,  though,  that  the  local  network  affiliates  are  simply 
 deferring  to  these  two  successes  and  also  the  national  network  programming  to  fulfill  this 
 public  mission  and  information  need. 


 Cambridge,  my  city,  just  held  two  incredible  events  within  a  week  of  each  other  to  Honor  Black 
 History  Month.  Both  events  honored  diversity,  the  arts,  public  services  and  simply  community 
 efforts  to  live  and  flourish  in  a  diverse  spirit  of  community.  One  event  was  held  in  City  Hall  in 
 the  evening  and  the  second  event  was  held  mid-  day  today  at  the  main  post  office  and  included  an 
 unveiling  ceremony  of  the  Patricia  Roberts  Harris  Stamp  and  the  talents  of  local  black  artists  and 
 leaders  were  showcased.  The  crowds  were  good  at  both  but  no  TV  cameras  came  to  either  event 
 even  though  a  press  release  went  out.  What  did  the  evening  news  focus  on  today?  .  .  .primary 
 elections,  another  school  shooting  and  a  local  doctor  charged  with  shooting  his  wife..  .  .  . 


 I  believe  very  strongly  that  the  lucrative  opportunity  presented  to  broadcasters  with  digital  TV 
 and  the  golden  opportunity  for  us  citizens  to  learn  and  see  more  through  greater  choice  on  TV 
 needs  the  guiding  hand  of  our  government  creating  some  operating  rules  and  parameters  that 
 must  be  followed.  Please  allow  further  review  and  input  through  a  rulemaking  process  as  a  result 
 of  this  inquiry  process. 


 Thank  you  for  your  time  and  attention, 


 Paul  J.  Schlaver,  Chair 
 Massachusetts  Consumers  Coalition 
252
 New  York  Tab  D-  lb 
 Elizabeth  Cohen 
 Staten  Island,  NY 
 l/  3/  00 


 Linda  Cookingham 
 Kingston,  NY 
 2/  28/  00 


 Lucile  Middleton  (Bridge  The  Gap  Family  Day  Care  Network) 
 New  York,  NY 
 2129100 


 Shirley  Middleton  (Bridge  The  Gap  Family  Day  Care  Network) 
 New  York,  NY 
 2/  29/  00 


 Toby  Miller 
 New  York  University  -  Dept.  of  Cinema  Studies 
 New  York,  NY 
 2129/  00 


 Sonia  Ossorio  (NOW) 
 New  York,  NY 
 2/  29/  00 


 Florence  Rice 
 Harlem  Consumer  Education  Council,  Inc. 
 New  York,  NY 
 3/  l/  00 
253
 From:  rnizl~~  l.  com  To:  bkennard@  fcc.  gov 
 Date:  3  Jan  2000 
 Elizabeth  Cohen  76  fumeas  place 
 staten  island,  NY  103  14-  6206 
 Chairman  William  E.  Kennard 
 445  12th  suea,  SW  Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 I  am  a  seventeen  year  old  female  from  new  york  city.  I  have  been  watching  television  since  I  can  remember,  and  Ive  seen  it  change  over  the  years 
 (besides  the  types  of  programs  I  watch).  It  has  grown  more  and  more  disgusting,  as  I  would  hope  you  would  be  aware  of  by  now.  In  fact,  I  have 
 just  about  stopped  my  T.  V.  watching,  and  I  find  it  pretty  amazing  that  a  seventeen  year  old  can  be  so  fed  up  with  the  programs  on  T.  V.  They 
 literally  disgust  me  -  sex,  violence,  vulgar  language,  inappropriate  actions,  etc.  To  see  half  naked  kids  my  age  pretending  to  be  kids  in  junior 
 *high  is  absolutly  abhorrent.  Where  is  the  education?  The  good  old  fashioned  vahla? 
 Do  you  have  children,  Mr.  Kennard?  Do  you  want  your  kids  watching  filth  ,and  trash  on  T.  V.?  If  you  do,  then  I  believe  I  can  safely  say  I  have  lost 
 ,respect  for  you  and  the  television  business.  lhnk  you  for  your  time. 


 %srlcerely, 
 Elizabeth  Cohen 


 cc:  Representative  Vito  Fossella 
 Senator  Charles  Schumer  Senator  Daniel  Patrick  Moynihan 


 -.  _  _..  ____._  __  I  _  I  I  ...-_  l-  l..^  .^.  _I    -__  I  -I  I  -- 
 - 
254
 Date:  Mon,  28  Feb  2000  From:  Edward  &  Linda  Cookingham  <dogwood@  ulster.  net> 
 Subject:  Public  Interest  Obligations 
 To:  FCC  Commissioner,  William  Kennard 
 ,From:  Linda  Cookingham,  Private  Citizen  1134  Dogwood  St. 
 Kingston,  NY  1240  1 
 Attention: 
 My  name  is  Linda  Cookingham  and  I  live  in  the  Hudson  Valley, 
 ,approximately  90  miles  north  of  New  York  City.  My  husband  and  I  tune  in 
 ,the  NYC  TV  stations  for  the  daily  news  and  are  distressed  that  our 
 ,  local  news  is  rarely  broadcast.  In  fact,  the  stations  are  hard 
 ,pressed  to  include  the  Hudson  Valley  in  their  weather  reports.  I  can  ,report  that  FOX  news  does  have  the  Town  of  Poughkeepsie  on  their  weather 


 map  and  CBS  shows  as  far  north  as  Newburgh,  NY.  This  hardly  serves 
 Kingston  or  our  surrounding  areas. 
 The  point  I  am  trying  to  make  is  that  we  watch  the  news  for  local  information,  in  hope  that  these  local  broadcasters  will  serve  their 


 ,entire  viewer  audience,  not  just  the  greater  NYC  area.  My  husband  and  I  both  work  for  a  NYS  Agency  and  are  honest  citizens  who  pay  taxes.  So, 
 why  is  it  that  we  only  see  the  Hudson  Valley  visited  by  NYC  reporters  when  theyre  looking  for  horrific  or  negative  news  to  splash  over  the 
 airwaves?  Stories  like  the  Tawana  Brawley  Case  or  just  recently,  the  Poughkeepsie  serial  killer,  motivated  those  stations  to  send  reporters 
 to  get  the  trashy  and  gory  details. 
 I  have  lived  in  the  Hudson  Valley  for  nearly  30  years  and  never  can  I 
 remember  a  time  when  a  NYC-  based  television  station  has  sought  our  local  opinions  on  politics  or  other  news  worthy  topics  concerning  the  state  of 


 New  York.  Relevant  news  from  the  Hudson  Valley  is  not  aired  nor  do  we 
 have  broadcasters  seeking  expert  opinions  from  our  community  members. 
 It  is  my  hope  to  see  an  increase  in  representation  for  the  Hudson 
 Valley.  Local  broadcasting  stations  receive  licenses  for  free  in  ,exchange  for  serving  public  interest.  Our  local  stations  are  not  earning 


 ,the  right  to  their  free  licenses  because  they  are  not  serving  the 
 ,  entire  public  interest.  My  public  interest  hasnot  been  served  in 
 local  public  affairs  programming,  politics,  weather,  etc. 
255
 I  whole-  heartedly  agree  with  all  of  the  recommendations  that  have  been  ,put  forth  by  People  for  Better  TV  in  regard  to  public  interest 
 obligations  for  the  new  era  of  digital  broadcasting.  I  strongly  suggest 
 that  the  FCC  immediately  hold  rule-  making  sessions  to  determine  the 
 -public  interest  obligations  of  local  broadcasting  stations.  As  an 
 American  citizen  I  believe,  first  and  foremost,  that  local  broadcasters 
 should  serve  their  viewers  with  information  that  is  relevant  to  their 
 local  communities.  Without  rules  in  place,  I  do  not  believe  local  broadcasting  stations  will  voluntarily  serve  the  public  interests. 


 It  is  my  greatest  hope  that  my  voice  will  be  heard  and  that  the  FCC  ,Commission  will  uphold  its  responsibilities  to  all  American  citizens. 
 Thank  You! 


 _.- 
 _.  I  __..  .  ..--  ---.  1_- 
256
 Lucile  Middleton 
 Bridge  The  Gap  Family  Day  Care  Network 
 Manhattanville  Station,  P.  O.  Box  5528 
 New  York,  NY  10007 


 Federal  Communications  Commissioners 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 February,  29  2000 
 Dear  Commissioners, 
 In  all  of  my  years  I  have  never  realized  the  significant  adverse  influence  that  television  has  on  children. 
 My  realization  is  attributed  to  my  getting  up  early  (8am-  12pm)  and  watching  the  television  programs  on 
 channels  7  and  channel  4.  It  is  so  easy  to  let  a  lot  go  unnoticed  when  you  are  not  setting  a  keen  eye  on 
 what  you  are  looking  at.  Not  identifying  or  singling  out  any  one  show  because  it  is  safe  in  this  case  to 
 make  an  assumption,  the  themes  that  radiate  from  the  programs  are  that  violence  is  okay,  popularity  is 
 important,  one  never  dies  when  in  a  violent  situation  and  that  it  is  okay  not  to  be  intelligent.  These 
 themes  are  then  down  played  with  the  numerous  public  service  announcements  that  obviously 
 contradicts  what  the  program  has  or  is  depicting,  (which  in  reality  is  only  noticeable  by  the  mature 
 audience  and  totally  unrelated  to  the  child  who  watches  the  notice).  What  makes  the  PSA  so  humorous 
 is  that  they  are  done  by  actors  and  actresses  that  children  see  on  other  programs,  which  makes  it  difficult 
 for  them  to  see  the  relevance  because  they  are  not  individuals  they  can  identify  with.  Where  is  the 
 reality?  What  relevance  does  such  announcements  provide  for  children  who  are  watching.  There  is  no 
 connection  made.  Therefore  as  a  future  educator  I  do  not  see  what  is  educational  about  these  early 
 morning  cartoons. 


 The  other  thing  that  became  apparent  is  the  amount  of  advertising  that  is  directed  to  children.  In  one 
 half  an  hour  program  I  saw  roughly  10  to  15  commercials  that  could  plant  a  false  idea  in  childrens  that 
 in  order  to  have  true  happiness  you  have  to  have  this  particular  product.  How  terrible  is  this?  With  such 
 an  idea  planted  in  childrens  minds  they  will  never  be  happy  because  they  always  need  to  have  that  toy, 
 that  cereal,  that  clothing,  etc. 


 If  we  do  not  hold  them  accountable  now  then  when? 
 Sincerely, 


 Lucile  Middleton 
257
 Shirley  Middleton 
 Bridge  The  Gap  Family  Day  Care  Network 
 Manhattanville  Station,  P.  O.  Box  5528 
 New  York,  NY  10007 


 Federal  Communications  Commissioners 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 February,  29  2000 


 Dear  Commissioners, 
 I  see  the  game  is  the  same,  the  difference  is  I  am  older  and  the  players  are  different.  Why  cant  people 
 understand  that  elders  arent  where  they  are  in  life  just  by  mistake?  On  February  24h  2000,  I  went  to 
 NBC  and  ABC  with  my  daughter  to  gain  entry  to  the  public  records  and  I  cannot  believe  the  run  around 
 they  tried  to  give  me.  I  say  tried  because  I  could  see  right  through  the  game.  The  stories  I  got  were 
 ridiculous.  I  know  the  best  way  to  avoid  a  person  that  you  truly  do  not  want  to  have  any  dealings  with  is 
 to  say  that  they  are  not  in.  And  to  no  surprise  to  myself  that  is  exactly  what  they  did.  The  key  person 
 who  handled  the  records  was  phantomus.  I  guess  they  use  the  same  phantomus  approach  when  planning 
 programs.  Not  only  did  we  not  gain  entrance,  but  also  we  were  told  at  one  station  that  the  person  we 
 knew  handled  the  tiles  (and  who  had  spoken  to  my  associates,  just  the  day  before)  was  not  an  employee. 


 After  reflecting  on  the  programs  that  I  personally  grew  up  on  and  programs  that  my  children  watched 
 when  they  were  growing  up  and  comparing  them  to  what  I  saw  on  channels  7  and  4,  I  noticed  a 
 tremendous  difference.  The  themes  that  were  illustrated  back  when  my  children  were  younger  were  less 
 abstract  and  less  violent.  However  colorful  and  animated  the  cartoons  and  the  programs  are  today,  the 
 themes  are  frightening.  They  perpetuate  an  idea  of  violence  and  they  put  a  false  idea  in  childrens  mind 
 that  violence  solves  everything  and  like  the  cartoons  or  the  characters  they  are  invincible.  Which  is  by 
 far  the  furthest  from  the  truth.  And  all  of  these  programs  that  are  on  today  are  a  contributing  factor  of 
 why  the  violence  rate  among  small  children  and  teenager  is  on  the  rise. 


 Sincerely, 
 Shirley  Middleton 
 Bride  the  Gap 
258
 Toby  Miller 
 Department  of  Cinema  Studies 
 New  York  University 
 721  Broadway,  Room  600 
 NYNY  10003 
 Email:  toby.  miller@  nyu.  edu 
 Ph:  (212)  9981614 
 Fax:  (212)  9954061 


 Federal  Communications  Commissioners 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 February,  29  2000 


 Dear  Commissioners, 
 My  name  is  Toby  Miller.  I  am  a  Professor  of  Cultural  Studies  and  Cultural  Policy  at  NYU,  and  the 
 author  of  several  books  on  television. 


 My  analysis  of  the  Fox  news  disturbed  me  greatly.  First,  its  long  initial  period  of  commercial-  free 
 reports,  mostly  local  and  fairly  comprehensive,  was  followed  by  single  stories  punctuated  by  numerous 
 commercials.  All  these  later  stories  were  insubstantial--  the  weathermans  battle  with  his  waistline  was 
 allocated  five  minutes,  for  example.  No  story  in  the  second  period  dealt  seriously  with  local  matters.  But 
 even  within  the  first  segment,  with  few  commercials  (designed  to  keep  viewers  watching  through  the 
 bulk  of  the  program  to  follow)  there  were  very  problematic  ways  of  presenting  stories  that  were 
 insensitive  to  the  community.  For  example,  some  quite  competent,  balanced  reporting  of  the  Diallo  and 
 Louima  stories  segued  seamlessly  into  identikit  pictures  of  black  men  accused  of  rape  and  interviews 
 with  white  residents  of  an  area  of  the  city,  along  with  additional  cries  to  be  afraid  and  to  dial  91  l-- 
 suddenly,  blacks  were  the  enemy  again,  and  the  police  an  ally.  No  attempt  to  disentangle  the  stories  was 
 made,  or  to  be  reflexive  about  how  linking  them  might  make  viewers  feel. 


 In  terms  of  issues  that  should  be  covered  in  an  hour  of  news  ostensibly  dedicated  to  localism,  consider 
 the  following:  non-  Mayoral,  borough  politics;  the  environment;  social-  movement  organization; 
 education  (one  story  told  parents  their  children  were  at  risk  on  the  intemet  A  predator,  after  your  child, 
 is  just  one  click  away--  very  irresponsible  reporting  not  backed  up  with  time-  series  statistics),  city 
 services,  and  a  raft  of  other  topics. 


 I  am  hoping  that  the  FCC  will  pay  serious  attention  to  the  question  of  localism  in  the  new  digital 
 environment,  especially  given  the  poor  standard  of  local  news  in  todays  transitional  moment. 


 Sincerely, 
 Toby  Miller 
 Department  of  Cinema  Studies 


   .  .  ._  .  ..-___  --~-- 
259
 National  Organization  for  Women 
 in  New  York  City 
 Sonia  Ossorio 
 Chair  of  media  committee 
 150  W.  28h  St.  #304 
 New  York,  New  York  10001 
 2  12-  627-  9895 


 February  29,200O 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard: 
 Over  the  last  month  the  National  Organization  for  Women  in  New  York  City  has  been 
 documenting  coverage  of  local  programming  in  an  effort  to  determine  if  local  television 
 stations  are  upholding  their  commitment  to  public  interest  programming  by  covering 
 topics  and  events  in  the  area  of  womens  issues. 


 This  report  documents  broadcasters  clearly  are  not.  Broadcasters  have  urged  you  to  issue 
 voluntary  guidelines  regarding  their  public  interest  obligations.  What  is  needed  is 
 mandatory  broadcasting  requirements  to  ensure  womens  voices,  concerns,  and 
 accomplishments  are  part  of  their  public  programming. 


 A  public  hearing  is  needed  to  hear  from  those  of  us  in  the  community  who  are  concerned 
 about  womens  access  to  the  media  and  womens  image  as  presented  by  the  media.  We 
 urge  the  FCC  not  to  give  away  public  property  without  requirements  on  how  to  serve  the 
 public. 


 As  it  stands,  too  many  vital  issues  and  perspectives  of  importance  to  the  nation  remain 
 unexpressed  and  unexamined.  Digital  broadcasters  should  be  required  to  use  the  new 
 power  of  digital  transmission  to  expand  the  number  of  perspectives  expressed  over  the 
 public  airwaves. 


 The  airwaves  are  a  public  trust,  yet  Congress  has  given  exclusive  control  of  those 
 airwaves  to  major  corporations.  What  do  women  get  from  the  seven  corporations  that 
 control  what  is  broadcast  to  American  living  rooms? 


 Not  much.  Women  continue  to  be  marginalized;  as  serious  women  in  business,  sports  and 
 policy  making.  The  issues  important  to  women,  that  must  be  brought  forth  for  debate; 
 substandard  child  care,  pay  inequity  and  the  glass  ceiling  are  not  examined,  highlighted 
260
 and  presented  as  current  American  problems.  Marginalized  as  womens  problems,  these 
 issues  become  more  of  a  private  dilemma  for  individual  families  to  deal  with,  rather  than 
 issues  of  collective  interest  of  the  community. 


 In  exchange  for  free  use  of  the  airwaves,  broadcasters  are  suppose  to  act  in  the  public 
 interest.  Women  have  never  had  fair  representation  and  equal  access  to  the  airwaves.  The 
 public  often  gets  just  the  opposite:  Programming  that  is  filled  with  harmful  and  negative 
 images  and  outdated  stereotypes  of  women. 


 While  it  was  impossible  to  determine  from  local  stations  public  files  the  degree  to  which 
 women  were  marginalized  in  general  news  coverage  and  public  programming  shows  as 
 experts  and  sources,  this  insidious  problem  has  been  documented  by  media  and  womens 
 organizations. 


 In  1996,  87%  of  the  guests  on  Sunday  public  affairs  programs  were  men.  Nearly  60%  of 
 all  guests  invited  to  appear  on  Today  and  Good  Morning  America  were  male.  And 
 women  represent  only  14%  of  business  news  stories,  according  to  the  report  Women, 
 Business,  and  the  Media,  commissioned  by  the  International  Women  in  Media 
 Foundation  and  Catalyst,  a  research  firm  specializing  in  women  in  business. 


 Womens  voices  will  continue  to  be  under-  represented  in  television  public  programming 
 as  long  as  present  practices  persist.  Only  21%  of  correspondents  are  women,  and  there 
 are  only  eight  female  vice  presidents  at  major  networks,  according  the  Executive  Female. 


 Review  of  CBS  Public  Files 
 State  of  the  files 
 The  public  tiles  at  CBS  were  orderly  and  neat,  however,  information  of  public 
 programming  was  not  detailed  or  thorough.  A  years  worth  of  public  programming  was 
 outlined  in  19  pages,  of  which  many  of  those  pages  had  lots  of  white  space. 


 The  public  files  room  at  CBS  was  accessible  and  had  a  desk.  I  was  asked,  however,  what 
 organizations  I  represented,  which  is  prohibited.  Also,  CBS  charged  50  cents  a  page  for 
 copies,  an  inflated  prices  that  discourages  the  public  from  making  copies.  This  is  not 
 accessibility. 


 It  was  difficult  to  find  specifics  on  public  programming  for  women  because  the  files  are 
 not  categorized  under  subjects.  A  table  of  content  with  categories  and  references  to  the 
 pages  on  which  examples  can  be  found  would  be  very  helpful. 


 CBSs  public  files  did  not  contain  ascertainment  files  and  their  involvement  with 
 community  outreach  programs,  such  as  public  service  announcements.  PSAs  serve  an 
 important  function  in  a  media  environment  which  often  blurs  news,  advertising  and 


 2 
261
 entertainment.  A  PSA  is  a  clear  message  of  information.  CBS  should  include  their  PSAs 
 to  represent  a  more  balanced  picture  of  how  they  are  serving  the  public  interest. 


 CBS  is  not  doing  its  fair  share  of  local  programming.  The  only  local  programming 
 outside  of  news  coverage  is  Sunday  Edition. 


 Review  of  Content  of  CBS  Public  Files 
 In  a  review  of  the  past  four  quarters  at  CBSs  public  programming  obligation,  there  was 
 scant  mention  of  public  interest  coverage  on  women.  Domestic  violence  coverage 
 dominated  this  front. 


 Besides  two  segments  on  health  issues  concerning  women  (both  had  to  do  with 
 pregnancy)  and  one  news  segment  on  the  influence  of  women  in  the  Christian  and  Jewish 
 ministries,  the  only  issue  of  concern  to  women  covered  by  local  programming  was 
 domestic  violence,  the  most-  often  reported  story  about  women  in  general 


 Clearly  an  important  and  serious  issue,  but  when  it  is  the  only  category  of  information  the 
 public  receives  about  women,  it  ends  up  making  women  look  like  victims,  or  more 
 specifically,  only  victims. 


 This  is  a  huge  disservice  to  women. 
 In  the  area  of  violence  towards  women,  a  debate  is  heating  up  locally  over  a  statue  of 
 limitations  of  five  years  in  rape  cases.  This  is  an  extremely  timely  story  because  DNA 
 testing  is  pinpointing  rapists  who  cannot  be  charged  for  the  crime  because  the  statue  of 
 limitations  has  run  out.  If  women  are  to  organize  and  appeal  to  their  political 
 representatives  to  introduce  legislation  to  change  this  law,  they  must  first  know  about  this 
 news. 


 In  a  story  about  AIDS,  there  is  no  mention  in  the  public  files  of  it  being  relevant  to 
 women.  The  fact  is  that  women  are  the  fasting-  growing  population  contracting  the  AIDS 
 virus. 


 Mention  of  the  Memorial  Day  Parade  does  not  include  women.  During  the  last  year, 
 finally,  womens  contributions  and  involvement  fighting  for  their  country  have  started  to 
 get  recognized;  yet  their  inclusion  is  not  part  of  the  Memorial  Day  Parade  coverage  CBS 
 lists  as  public  programming. 


 In  a  discussion  of  a  female  politician,  three  men  debate  the  aspirations  of  Hillary  Clinton. 
 No  womens  voice,  no  female  pundits  are  brought  to  the  discussion. 


 As  for  sports,  CBS  virtually  ignored  womens  athletics  and  professional  sports.  On 
 Tuesday  Feb  22  during  the  5  p.  m.  newscast  CBS,  previewed  the  upcoming  Sports 


 3 
262
 Illustrated  swimsuit  edition  bringing  no  opposing  views  to  the  coverage,  no  mention  that 
 professional  female  athletes  make  up  less  than  10%  of  serious  sports  coverage  in  the 
 magazine  throughout  the  year.  This  has  been  a  debate,  controversy  and  tight  for  womens 
 organizations  for  years.  Whats  worse,  is  then  CBS  had  no  stories  about  female  athletes 
 in  its  sports  segment.  So  CBS  served  the  public  interest  by  previewing  a  sports 
 magazines  edition  of  women  as  sex  objects,  not  noting  that  this  magazines  coverage  of 
 professional  female  sports  is  dismally  low.  In  line  with  Sports  Illustrateds 
 marginalization  of  female  athletes,  CBS  did  not  cover  womens  sports  in  its  own 
 broadcast. 


 The  following  day,  Feb  23  on  its  11  p.  m.  the  CBS  newscast  showed  clips  from  mens 
 NCAA  games,  but  not  any  womens  NCAA  games,  eventhough  the  womens  team  is 
 the  leagues  best  team  right  now.  CBS  did  not  even  find  womens  NCAA  games  worthy 
 of  being  on  the  scoreboard  which  flashed  to  give  viewers  a  quick  glance  at  that  days 
 games.  Feb  23  two  important  womens  regional  games  played;  Uconn  and  Rutgers. 


 The  following  day,  again,  women  in  sports  are  ignored.  Feb  24  11  p.  m.  news  CBS 
 reported  6  sports  stories.  Not  one  featured  womens  sports  or  a  female  athlete,  even 
 though  a  beautiful  opportunity  existed  to  feature  the  countries  top  womens  collegiate 
 team  or  some  of  its  top  players  in  this  series. 


 During  the  5:  30  p.  m.  newscast  on  CBS  Feb.  23,  there  were  no  stories  for  or  about  women 
 in  all  areas,  health,  politics,  domestic  violence,  women  in  business.  The  only  story 
 covered  focusing  on  women  was  a  30  second  story  on  Tonya  Harding,  sensational 
 coverage  of  the  former  ice  skating  Olympic  contender  for  being  drunk  and  assaulting  her 
 boyfriend. 


 On  channel  11  (URN)  Wed.  Feb.  23  lo:  30  p.  m.  newscast  the  only  story  on  women  was 
 the  bride  from  the  Who  Wants  To  Marry  a  Mult-  millionaire.  However  on  URN,  Uconn 
 womens  basketball  game  did  get  a  soundbite  on  their  victory  that  day. 


 On  Friday  Feb.  25,  Men  Against  Sexism,  a  local  organization,  protested  the  swimsuit 
 issue  of  Sports  Illustrated.  CBS  did  not  cover  this  event. 


 There  were  no  mentions  of  the  landmark  sexual  harassment  laws  put  in  place  that  are 
 civil  rights  milestones  for  women  in  the  workplace.  Follow  up  to  this  hugely  significant 
 event  would  be  in  the  public  interest. 


 The  National  Organization  For  Women  in  New  York  City  won  a  court  case  against  the 
 New  York  State  division  of  human  rights  to  force  them  to  set  up  policies  to  improve 
 response  time  and  lower  backlog  of  employment  discrimination  suits  filed  with  the  state. 
 CBS,  nor  FOX,  nor  any  other  television  station  responded  to  press  announcements  of  this 
 legal  victory  won  by  NOW. 


 4 
263
 The  Susan  B.  Anthony  awards,  which  honors  women  in  the  community  who  have 
 improved  the  lives  of  women,  was  not  covered  by  any  television  station. 


 The  above-  mentioned  examples  are  only  a  few  of  the  events  and  issues  relating  to  women 
 local  New  York  City  television  stations  simply  ignored.  This  applies  to  both  CBS  and 
 FOX,  the  two  stations  discussed  in  this  report. 


 Review  of  FOX  Public  Files 
 Foxs  public  files  room  was  not  accessible  to  the  public.  To  review  files  one  had  to  sit  on 
 the  floor.  There  were  no  chairs  or  desks.  Area  would  not  likely  accommodate  a 
 wheelchair. 


 Fox  does  have  a  community  affairs  director. 
 Fox  public  programming  tiles  were  very  neat,  detailed  and  clear.  The  station  documents 
 its  public  programming  thoroughly  and  extensively. 


 Segment  time  and  total  time  dedicated  to  subjects  are  noted.  Very  informative  and  useful 
 detail  for  stations  to  include. 


 Fox  did  include  a  table  of  contents,  however  a  subject  category  for  women  was  not  part 
 of  that. 


 In  the  fourth  quarter  FOX  mostly  covered  health  issues  for  women.  Although  womens 
 coverage  was  limited  to  a  great  degree  to  one  subject,  the  health  coverage  was  fresh, 
 going  beyond  the  well-  tethered  stories  that  are  often  the  easiest  to  cover.  For  example,  in 
 the  fourth  quarter  FOX  informed  the  public  about  how  women  are  more  likely  to  develop 
 lung  cancer;  how  Blacks  and  Latinas  are  most  commonly  affected  by  breast  cancer;  new 
 foundation  raising  awareness  and  funding  for  women  under  40  with  breast  cancer. 


 A  good  amount  of  attention  was  given  to  Black  and  Latina  womens  health  issues. 


 FOX  also  covered  issues  of  significance  to  young  women;  teen  dating  and  violence,  the 
 prevalence  of  abusive  relationships  and  advice  on  how  to  steer  clear  of  violent  men. 


 Another  story  on  FOX  focused  on  teen  magazines  and  how  they  portray  unrealistic  body 
 images  for  young  girls. 


 5 
264
 While  FOX  covered  a  womens  health,  and  a  couple  young  girls  issues,  women  were 
 rarely  mentioned  in  any  of  the  following  categories  FOX  accounts  for;  sports,  govt. 
 politics,  environment,  transportation.  Women  were  mentioned  in  crime  and  murder,  in 
 reference  to  stories  about  a  serial  rapist,  a  woman  attacked  with  a  brick  and  a  teacher  who 
 allegedly  molested  a  female  high  school  student. 


 In  addition,  FOX  did  a  good  job  at  documenting  the  stations  PSAs  and  community 
 outreach.  In  the  fourth  quarter,  FOX  was  involved  with  the  NY  Coalition  of  100  Black 
 Women  and  the  NY  Asian  Womens  Center.  No  details  on  how  FOX  was  involved  was 
 noted. 


 FOX  ran  a  PSA  on  breast  and  ovarian  cancer  fund  raiser  13  times  in  the  fourth  quarter, 
 yet  that  was  the  only  one  listed. 


 Wed  10  pm  Fox  news  Feb.  23  no  sports  coverage  of  Womens  NCAA  basketball 
 although  two  important  regional  games  played  that  night:  Uconn  and  Rutgers. 


 6 
265
 Hurlem  Coruumer 
 P.  O.  Box  116S  Triboro  Station,  New  York,  N.  Y.  10035  (2  12)  795-  0234 
 Education  Council,  Inci 


 / 
 Dear  Commissioners: 


 l    LUCjL:  LAzELlA  MlDDLEl-  ON 
 *.  PRESIDENT  YOUTH-~~  COW 


 March  1,200O 


 My  name  is  Florence  M.  Rice.  I  am  a  citizen,  great  grandmother,  consumer  advocate  and  community  leader  here  in  Harlem.  I  have  been  a  resident  of  this  close  community  since  1936  and  it  is  my  personal 
 opinion  that  Harlem  has  been  extremely  neglected  by  local  television  broadcasters. 
 We  live  in  a  time  of  rapid  change  in  technology  and  especially  in  communications.  I  would  like  to  specifically  focus  on  the  transition  from  analog  to  digital  broadcasting.  Most  of  the  members  of  my 
 community  here  in  Harlem  receive  their  information  primarily  from  television,  The  local  news  broadcasts  are  not  considered  entertainment*    in  my  community  and  I,  like  many  others,  resent  any 
 local  stations  claims  to  be  serving  my  communitys  interest. 
 As  a  consumer  advocate  and  President  of  Harlem  Consumer  Education  Council  I  must  point  out  that  on  inspection  of  the  public  tiles  at  WABC,  WNBC,  WCBS  and  WNYW  there  was  no  reference  to 
 consumer  oriented  reports.  Are  we  all  not  consumers  of  some  type?  Local  broadcasters  definitely  remember  that  fact  during  commercial  breaks.  Many  of  the  local  stations  do  have  consumer 
 segments,  yet  they  are  not  deemed  relevant  enough  to  include  in  their  public  files.  WNBC-  4  includes  crime,  education,  ethnic,  government/  politics,  health  and  housing/  homeless  and  WABC-  7  include 
 cultural  and  racial  relationships,  the  economy  and  economic  issues,  education  and  theschool  system,  health  and  healthcare  issues,  quality  of  life  and  the  environment  and  womens  issues.  In  this  thriving 
 economy  where  more  people  are  spending  money,  local  broadcasters  should  pay  greater  attention  to  their  viewers  financial  well-  being  and  cover  more  stories  on  consumer  fraud  by  local  vendors. 


 My  concern  in  relationship  to  bad  press  has  led  me  as  a  mother-  in-  law  to  reff  ect  over  the  years  that  my  daughter  has  been  married  to  theasame  loving  and  caring  man,  and  how  during  all  of  these  years  of 
 marriage,  children,  grandchildren,  and  great-  great-  grandchildren  he  has  been  steadfast  in  his  commitment  to  family.  Ihonor  him  and  the  many  other  African  American  men  taking  care  of  their 
 families  in  New  York.  Local  broadcasters  should  also  honor  these  men  by  including  them  in  their  local  news  broadcasts  instead  of  dedicating  these  precious  minutes  to  the  likes  of  Puffy  Combs. 


 Why  is  it  that  Puffjl  Combs  an  Atican  American  musician  accused  now  of  bribery  as  well  as  assault, 
 received  30  seconds  of  airtime  on  channel  2-  WCBSs  11  oclock  news  and  1  minute  on  FOX  5s  1O:  OOpm  These  news  segments  are  considered  good  news  reporting.  Why?  They  do  not  discourage 


 crime  but  perpetuate  the  stereotype  that  all  African  American  men  are  criminals*.  Why  on  2/  29/  00  FOX  5s  10:  OOpm  news  was  Howard  Stem  and  his  program  of  obnoxious  behavior  worth  three  minutes 


 of  airtime  yet  the  tragic  flooding  in  Mozambique  that  left  thousands  of  people  displaced  from  their  homes  only  received  30  seconds  of  airtime?  My  local  news  focuses  primarily  on  the  rich  and  famous 
 New  Yorkers  seeking  publicity,  It  is  a  great  disappointment  everyday  to  sit  at  home  only  to,  watch  local 
 1 
266
 broadcasters  provide  famous  people  with  free  publicity.  Where  are  the  local  interest  pieces  on  the  news?  An  example  of  how  local  stations  ignore  the  local  interest,  opting  to  cover  the  rich  or  famous 
 happened  on  May  26*  1999. 
 Columbia  Universitys  spring  commencement  was  held  on  that  day,  and  honored  African  Americans  like  Mohammed  Ali  while  outside  the  commencement  ceremony,  local  citizens  picketed.  Along  with 
 20  others,  I  picketed  Columbia  Universitys  hypocrisy.  A  local  organization  called  Fight  Back  was  outraged  that  one  the  largest  institutions  in  Harlem  (Columbia  University)  honored  African  Americans 
 at  the  commencement  ceremony,  yet  contributed  to  the  conditions  of  poverty  in  the  surrounding  community.  Fight  Back  accused  Columbia  University  of  hiring  outside  vendors  and  contractors.  I 
 like  many  others  believed  that  they  ignore  the  wealth  of  human  resources  here  in  Harlem,  so  we  held  a  protest,  There  were  local  stations  at  the  commencement  ceremony,  people  were  interviewed  and  short 
 television  segments  were  produced  on  the  graduation  and  Mohammed  Alis  award.  However,  our  protest  was  not  covered  meaning  it  was  not  considered  newsworthy?  People  in  my  community  ask  the 
 question  Why  are  our  interests  less  important  than  Mohammed  Ali  or  the  graduating  students  at  Columbia  University  ?  Local  stations  wanted  the  famous  and  wealthy  (glamorous)  story  instead  of 
 telling  the  truth,  my  truth  and  my  communitys  truth.  Enough  is  enough. 
 As  local  stations  make  the  transition  Ii-  om  analog  signals  to  digital  I  want  the  FCC  to  step  in  and  protect  local  communities.  The  FCC  should  immediately  start  proceedings  to  determine  the  public  interest 
 obligations  of  digital  broadcasters.  I  am  concerned  that  when  an  associate  of  mine  visited  our  local  broadcasting  stations  the  same  theme  of    we  only  put  in  the  public  files  what  our  lawyers  tell  us  too  or 
 what  the  network  says  to  put  in  the  files  was  repeated  from  station  to  station.  If  the  majority  of  stations  do  not  take  the  initiative  to  voluntarily  include  public  ascertainment  files  why  would  they  voluntarily 
 serve  the  public  interest  without  any  rules.  3  For  the  reasons  listed  above  I  fear  that  without  rules  in  place,  local  stations  will  not  serve  my  communitys  interest.  People  For  Better  TV  is  a  coalition  that  has 
 outlined  modest  suggestions  for  rules  addressing  this  matter,  I  strongly  urge  the  FCC  to  consider  these  recommendations  and  immediately  hold  rule  making  sessions  to  determine  local  broadcasters  public 
 interest  obligations. 


 Thank  you, 
 Florence  M.  Rice 


 2 
267
 ID 
268
 SOUTHEAST 
 Geowia 
 Mrs.  Susie  Green 
 Jonesboro,  GA 
 212  1  IO0 


 Ms.  Doshia  Harris 
 Austell,  GA 
 2/  28/  00 


 Ms.  Marlyn  Hill 
 College  Park,  GA 
 2/  25/  00 


 Ms.  Carolyn  Jenkins 
 Stockbridge,  GA 
 2/  19100 


 Mrs.  Pam  Parks 
 Jonesboro,  GA 
 2/  24/  00 


 South  Carolina 
 Angela  Frazier 
 Columbia  Consumer  Educational  Council 
 Columbia,  SC 
 2/  26/  00 


 Matilda  Foster-  Gamer 
 Columbia,  SC 
 212  1  IO0 


 Dorothy  Garrick 
 Columbia  Consumer  Education  Council  South  Carolina 
 Columbia,  SC 
 3/  7100 


 Rebecca  Rogers 
 Carolina  Peace  Resource  Center 
 Columbia,  SC 
 2122100 


 Tab  D-  2a 
 Tab  D-  2b 
 Ruth  Simpson  A.  Philip  Randolph  Institute 
 Columbia,  SC 
 2/  28100 
269

270
 --  -.  -..  .  .,.  .-  e-  1 
271
 Ms.  DDBHU  HnR~  ls 
 1183  SUMERTONE  ?  RACE 
 AUSTELL,  GA  30  168 


 FEBRUARY  28,200O 
 CHAJFPWAN  WJLUAM  KOJNARO: 
 FgomuL  COMMUNICATIONS  COMMUWON 
 44S  la-    STJRCUT,  NW  WASHINGTON,  DC  POSS4 


 DeAR  CnmthmN  KS~  NNAIWX 
 PLEAS*  ACCEPTTHIS  LEITER  A8  My  RESPONSE  TO  THE 
 NDTJCP:  OF  INQUJRING  ON  THE  PUBLIC  JNTEREST  ObJJOAflON8 
 Of  BROADCASTERS, 


 1  UNDERSTAND  THAT  TJkEVJSJON  BROADCASTERS  JN  MY 
 COMMUNJTY  HAVE  BEGUN  lJ8JNO  ADDmONAl.  PUJWC 
 AJJQWAVESTO  BROADCAST  DJGlTALTEJ.  EVlSION  SIONALB.  f  AM 
 CONCERNED  ABOUT  THE  AFFECT  JT  HAS  ON  TJIE  VJEWJNO 
 AUDIENCE  JN  MY  COMMUNJTY.  ~&  LEZVJ810N  CAN  blE  A  VERY 
 ODDD  THINO,  IF  IT  IS  USED  WJ8ELY  AND  PROPERLY 
 CONTROLLED,  TELEVl8lON  CAN  BE  EDUCATJONAL, 
 INIORMATJVE,  ENTERTAINING,  AND  THOUoHT  PJtOVOKINQ  OR 
 IT  CAN  CAUSE  PEOPLE  TO  WANT  THING8  THAT  ARE  NOT  GOOD 
 fOR  THEM,  BE  PABOIVE  AJUD  UNCREATJVE  OR  EVEN  BECOME 
 VIOLENT. 


 1  THINK  TJiAT  LOCAL  BROADCASTERS  SHOULO  6E  =QUJRED  TO 
 SEl  ASIDE  AN  HOUR  A  DAY  OF  EDUCATIONAL  PROGRAM8  FOR 
 CHILDREN  ON  AJ.  L  THE  CHANNELS  THEY  BRO- 
 BROADCASTCRS  SHOULD  BE  J&  WED  TO  NO  MORE  T&  N  FOUR 
 COMMERCIALS,  NO  MORK  THAN  SIXTY  6ECOND8  LONO,  PER 


 HOUR  DURlNO  CHILDR&  NS  PROGRAMS,  AND  PARENTB  SHOULD 
 c51R  THE  JNFORMATJON  THEY  NEED  TO  JUAJCE  DECISIONS  ABOUT 
 THE  PROGRAMS  THeJR  CHILDREN  ARC  WArCHINO. 
272
 1  Ahi  U~  lbd~  THE  le%  c  TO  Ml  A  DAYE  TO  EmACILISH  CLEAR 
 OUiOCLIN#  tS  fOR  bROADCA@  nt  RS,  AND  NWIFY  ME  ABOLPT 
 THIKIR  ObUQAllQN  TO  SERVE  MY  COMMUNITY.  f=  RESINTLY, 
 BROADCASTERS  IN  MY  COMMUNrrY  AR16  N07  SPtRVINOI  OUR 
 NEEDS. 


 THANK  You  FOR  ANY  AN&  AU  ASSISTANCE  mm  You  CAN 
 RENDER  1N  THtS  PROCagCB, 


 SINCERELY, 


 _.  ._.  ._.__.  -.  .  .  .(-  I--- 
273
 Ms.  Mar&  n  Hill  6370  Forest  Down  Circle 
 College  Park,  GA  8034$  9 


 Chairman  Wb  Kennard:  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 446  l~  Strect,  Nw  Washington,  nc  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kcnnard: 
 I  am  responding  ti  The  Notice  Of  Inquiring  on  the  public  inkrest 
 obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 It  is  very  important  that  the  FCC  set  a  date  to  establish  clear 
 guidelines  for  the  broadcasters  in  my  local  community  that  are  sending  digital  signals.  It  is  unfair  for  the  bxuuicasters  b  be  gimn 


 free  public  airwaves  and  not  meeting  the  needs  of  my  community~ 


 lcletiion  plays  an  important  role  in  my  home,  and  I  &n  concerned  about  the  lack  ofiocal  proming  addressing  the  needs  in  my 
 community  such  as:  l 
 The  lack  of  pmgrammiq  accessible  to  the  disabled.  l 
 The  lack  of  Spanish  speaking  programs 
 l  The  lack  of  programs  pomying  minority  in  positive  roles 


 l  ThelackofXfiicanAmericanlocalpm~ 
 a  The  amount  of  violence  on  television  and  the  high  cost  receiving  digital  sign& 


 Again;  I  urge  the  FCC  tn  establish  clear  guidelines  for  broadcasters 
 in  my  community  who  ate  sending  digital  signals  as  soon  as  possible. 
274
 It  is  iln~&  kr~  t  for  people  like  mc  tn  know  what  I  can  expect  fn>  m  my  kal  hadcastws  in  ~~  AUIII  for  them  getting  such  valuable  public 
 resourte  -  free  ailwaws, 


 Thank  you  for  your  time  and  cfFort  for  making  it  possible  for  me  to 
 pazticipak  in  the  inquiry. 


 Sincerely, 
275
 Ms.  Carolyn  Jenkins  525  Cotillion  Court 
 Stockbridge,  GA  30281 


 February  IQ,  2000 
 Chairman  William  Kennard:  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12m  street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chalnnan  Kennard: 
 I  am  responding  to  The  Notice  of  inquiring  on  the  public  Interest  obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 I  am  whiting  as  a  parent  and  a  concerned  citizen.  There  are  several  reasons  why  i  am  urging  you  to  set  clear  guidelines  for  broadcasters: 
 l  Lacking  of  hiring  and  promotion  of  minorit&  within  the  industry. 
 l  Not  enough  digital  Broadcast  station  providing  closed  captioning 
 an  descriptive  services  for  the  blind  of  FSAs  0  To  much  sex,  violence  and  inappropriate  language  over  the  air- 


 waves.  .  l  Digital  stations  are  not  reaching  out  to  enough  community  leaders 
 and  neighborhood  associations  to  determine  our  community  needs  and  interest. 


 i  am  recommending  that  broadcasters  be  required  to  employ  and  promote  more  minorities.  They  should  provide  enhanced  CloSed 
 captioning  or  video  descriptive  services  for  the  disabled.  They  also  should  provide  an  easy  to  understand  independent  ratings  system  about 
 the  sexual  and  violent  content  of  programs,  ascertaln  the  needs  of  911  the  segments  of  our  community  and  air  programs  accordingly.  . 


 Thank  you,  I  urge  you  to  set  clear  guidelines  for  broadcasters  as  SOOn  8  possible  and  thank  you  for  your  cooperation. 
 Sincerely,  Carolyn  Jenkins 


 __  --.-.  .-.  .-  .I  ._..^  __-  I._.-._  _m--  ----.- 
276

277
 .  . 
 CONSUMER  EDUCATION  COUNCIL  P.  0,  Rex  212101,  Cdulabtk  South  Carot41a  29221-  2101 
 Pbew  (803)  551-  0061  Far:  (803)  731-  2446  E-  M&  CCECSC@  AOL.  COM 


 February  26,200O 
 Chairman  William  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12*  Street,  NW  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 We  are  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcastws, 


 WC  urge  the  FCC  to  set  a  date  to  estabtish  clear  guidelines,  broadcasters  in  my  community  are  sending  digital  signals  and  we  have  8  right  to  know  what  their  obligations 
 are  to  serve  me. 
 We  think  local  broadcasters  should  be  rquired  to  reach  out  to  ordinary  citizens  and  local  leaders 
 to  determine  community  needs  and  interests.  This  process  of  reaching  out  and  involving  the  community  should  serve  as  the  stations  guide  to  addressing  these  needs 


 through  news,  public  affairs,  childrens  and  other  local  programming,  and  public  service  announcements.  The  public  input  should  be  invited  on  a  reb,@  ar  basis  through  postal  and 
 electronic  mail  services  as  well  as  broadcast  announcements.  The  call  for  requests  for  public  input  should  be  accessible  to  the  disabled.  Also,  the  stations  should  report 
 quarterly  during  the  year  to  the  public  on  their  findings, 
 Digital  broadcasters  should  provide  one  public  service  announcement  for  every  four  (4)  commercials,  with  at  least  equal  emphasis  placed  on  independent  and  locally  produced 
 PSAs  a&  k&  g  a  communitys  local  needs.  PSAs  should  run  in  all  day  parts  including  in  primetime  and  at  other  times  of  peak  viewing.  PSAs  should  not  be  a  substitute  for  in- 
 depth  public  stirs  programming. 
 Some  broadcasters  may  claim  to  be  addressing  the  above  recommendation,  however  in  my  community  these  things  are  not  being  done. 


 .-.-  --  .-  -.- 
278
 .  l  . 
 We  would  like  to  see  the  above  recommendations  be  implemented  in  the  future  and  much 
 more. 


 Again,  we  urge  you  to  set  dear  ~,&  Gnes  as  soon  as  possible. 
 Thank  you  for  this  opportunity  to  participate  in  the  inquiry  into  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcastem 


 Sincerely, 
279
 Matflda  Fostw4uner  1024  Skshplne  Lww 
 Columbia,  South  Caroffno  28203 
 February  21,  ZOW 


 Chairman  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12  Street,  NW  Washington,  IX  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 I  am  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcastem.  I  am  a  single  parent  and  a  community 
 volunteer. 
 l  understand  that  television  broadcasters  in  my  community  have  begun  using  addltlonal  public  &waves  to  broadcast  digital  television 
 signals.  In  my  community  television  play8  an  important  and  powerful  role,  and  I  am  deeply  concerned  about  the  amount  of  violence  and 
 sex  on  television,  the  lack  of  programming  accmsible  to  the  disabled,  the  added  cost  to  consumers  who  are  receiving  digital  signals,  the 
 numbers  of  commercials  during  childrens  programming  and  the  lack  of  locat  programming8  addressing  the  needs  in  my  community. 


 Many  of  the  focal  broadcastem  am  not  meeting  the  needs  in  my  community.  Therefore,  I  am  urging  the  FCC  to  set  a  date  to  establish 
 clear  guidelines  for  the  broadcasters  in  order  for  me  to  know  what  their  oblfgations  are  to  serve  me. 


 Thank  you  for  allowing  me  to  share  in  the  inquiry. 
280
 From:  CCECSC@  aol.  com  Date:  Wed,  15  Mar  2000 
 Dorothy  Garrick  16  13  Fairhaven  Drive 
 Columbia,  South  Carolina  29210 


 March  7,200O 
 Chairman  William  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW  Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 I  am  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiring  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 It  is  imperative  that  the  FCC  set  a  date  as  soon  as  possible  to  establish  clea  r  guidelines  for  the  broadcasters  in  my  local  community  that  are  sending 
 digital  signals.  It  is  unfair  for  the  broadcasters  to  be  given  FREE  public  airwaves  and  not  meeting  the  needs  of  my  community. 


 On  March  7,200O  I  visited  one  of  my  local  broadcasting  station,  SCETV  in  Columbia,  South  Carolina  to  inspect  the  public  files  and  was  not  allowed  to 
 see  the  files. 
 These  are  some  of  the  reasons  I  was  given  by  Ms.  Kathy  Gardener-  Jones,  Vice  President-  SCETV  as  to  why  I  could  not  inspect  the  public  files: 


 -I  needed  to  file  a  Freedom  of  Information  request,  unless  I  explained  exactly  what  I  was  looking  for  in  the  public  files.  (She  assumed  1  did  not 
 know  what  Freedom  of  Information  meant,  so  she  proceeded  to  explain  it  to  me  and  how  to  file). 


 -1  needed  to  tell  her  exactly  what  I  was  looking  for  in  the  public  files. 
 -I  could  not  see  the  employees  personnel  files. 
 -Public  tiles  are  not  in  one  (1)  location. 
 -I  needed  to  go  to  different  areas  in  the  building  to  inspect  the  public  files. 


 -Staff  is  very  busy  and  dont  have  a  lot  of  time. 
 -Staffneeded  to  know  exactly  how  much  time  I  would  need  to  inspect  the  public  tiles. 


 -A  staff  member  had  death  in  his  family. 
 -I  needed  to  make  an  appointment  to  see  the  public  files. 
281
 Again,  1  urge  the  FCC  to  set  clear  guidelines  for  broadcasters  in  my  community  to  make  sure  they  understand  their  obligations  to  the  community  for 
 receiving  FREE  use  of  the  public  airwaves. 
 I  would  truly  appreciate  any  and  all  assistance  you  can  render  in  this  inquiry. 


 Sincerely, 


 Dorothy  Ganick 
282
 Chsinnan  William  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12Street,  NW  Washington,  DC.  20554 


 Dear  Cheirman  Kennard: 
 On  behalf  of  the  Cardina  Peace  Resource  (CPC),  we  are  responding  to  the  Notice  of  inquiry  on  the  public  intetwt  obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 We  believe  that  local  broadcasters  should  be  required  to:  provide  datacasting  services  to  non-  profii  and  educational  institutions  in  the  local  community;  set 
 aside  a  minimum  of  7  hours  each  week  to  provide  quality  educational  programs;  digital  broadcasters  should  be  limited  to  no  more  that  four  (4)  commercials,  no 
 more  that  sixty  seconds  long,  per  hour  during  childrens  program;  digit81  ~&&  em  should  be  required  to  provide  an  easy  to  understand  independent 
 ratings  system  about  the  violent  and  sexual  content  of  programs.  Through  the  increased  inbnnation  capability  of  digital  technology  the  present  rating  system 
 can  be  substantially  Improved  upon. 
 Again,  we  urge  you  to  set  clear  guidelines  as  soon  as  possible. 
 Thank  you  for  this  opportunity  to  participate  in  the  inquiry  into  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 537  Harc@  n  Street  l  P.  0,  Drawer  50426  l  Columbia,  South  Carolina  I,  2925&  U426  Ptblted  on  Ikcyc#  Pap 
283
 [A.  PHlWP  flptNI)~  Lffi  iNSTlTur~  I 
 SOlJTH  CAROLINA  STATE  A.  P.  R.  I.  ,    . 


 February  28,200O 


 Dear  Chairman  Kcnnard: 
 I  am  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters,  I  am  President  of  the  A.  Phillip  Randolph  Institute  and  a  member  of  the 
 S.  C  AFL-  CIO  Board  of  Directors  and  a  parent. 
 I  urge  the  FCC  to  set  a  date  to  establish  clear  guidelines  for  broadcasters  in  my  community  sending  digital  signals.  It  is  my  right  to  know  what  their  obligations  are  to 
 serve  me,  especially  since  they  use  public  airwaves  FREE. 
 I  am  recommending  that  broadcaster  should: 
 (.  l)  ,Whe&  it  is  in  prying,  political  discourse,  hiring,  promotion,  or  business 
 opportunities  within  the  industry,  digital  broadcasters  must  make  an  effort  to 
 reflect  the  nations  diversity,  I  also  recommend  that  broadcasten  seize  the 
 opportunities  inherent  in  digital  television  technology  ,to  support  these  goals  and 
 to  report  quarterly  to  the  public  on  their  efforts. 
 (2)  Chifdren  should  not  be  bombarded  with  commercial  advertisements  or  with  advertising  disguised  as  entertainment  or  educational  programs,  Also,  I 
 recommend  that  di@  ti  bro&  astcrs  be  limited  to  no  more  that  four  commercials,  no  more  than  sixty  5ocoQd8  long  per  hour  during  childrtns  programs. 
 (3)  h  a  pent  I  should  get  the  information  about  the  independent  rating  system  in  a  form.  thats  easily  understood  in  order  for  me  to  make  the  piper  decisions  about 
 what  p-  s  my  children  should  watch, 
 Majority  ofthe  broadcasters  in  my  community  LVC  not  addressing  the  recommendations  that  I  have  outlined  above. 


 Again,  J  urge  you  to  set  clear  guidelines  as  soon  as  possible  for  the  broadcasters, 


 - 
284
 .  c 
 Thmk  you  for  this  opportunity  to  participate  in  this  process. 
285

286
 MIDWEST 
 Illinois  Tab  D-  3a 
 Cynthia  Canary 
 The  Illinois  Campaign  for  Political  Reform 
 Chicago,  IL 
 2/  28/  00 


 Rose  Economou 
 Columbia  College 
 Chicago,  IL 
 3123fOO 


 Sara  Livingston 
 Jonathan  Arnold 
 Nick  Arvanitis  and  Ajumand  Khan 
 Scott  Blake 
 Virginia  Matos 
 Erica  Trocchio 
 Zorabel  Valenciano 


 Mary  Ellen  Guest 
 WITS-  Working  In  The  Schools 
 Chicago,  IL 
 3122100 


 James  C.  Jones 
 ChildServ 
 Chicago,  IL 
 3/  13/  00 


 Ricardo  Loza 
 Local  46/  Service  Employees  International  Union 
 Chicago,  IL 
 2/  29/  00 


 Commissioner  Sheila  Lyne 
 Department  of  Public  Health,  City  of  Chicago 
 312  1  IO0 


 Gail  Parson 
 Illinois  Public  Interest  Research  Group 
 Chicago,  IL 
 3/  l/  00 


 Gordon  Quinn  and  Wm.  Jason  McInnes 
 Kartemquin  Films,  Ltd. 
 Chicago,  IL 
 3/  2/  00 
287
 February  28,200O 
 DOCKET  #  B-  360 
 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 


 325  W.  Huron,  Suite  304 
 Chicago,  IL  606  10  phone:  3  12-  335-  1767 


 fax:  312-  335-  1067  www.  ilcampaign.  org 


 director 
 Cynthia  Canary 


 coordinator 
 James  Kales 


 chair 
 Hon.  Paul  Simon 


 I  am  writing  in  response  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest 
 obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 On  behalf  of  the  over  125  Illinois  residents  that  have  signed  the  enclosed 
 letter  calling  on  Illinois  broadcasters  to  devote  more  time  to  campaign  and 
 election  coverage,  I  urge  the  FCC  to  establish  clear  guidelines  on  the 
 public  interest  obligations  of  commercial  television  stations. 


 Broadcasters  have  been  given  access  to  the  public  airwaves  without  charge 
 and  it  is  their  duty  and  obligation  to  serve  the  needs  of  the  public.  Stations 
 that  earn  massive  and  rapidly  escalating  revenue  from  political 
 advertising,  yet  devote  only  minimal  time  to  substantive  political  coverage 
 are  doing  the  public  and,  indeed,  our  democracy  a  great  disservice. 


 We  urge  the  FCC  to  establish  firm  guidelines  requiring  broadcasters  using 
 the  digital  spectrum  to  meet  at  least  the  minimum  recommendation  of 
 broadcasting  five  minutes  a  night  of  candidate-  centered  discourse  in  the  30 
 days  preceding  a  primary  or  general  election. 


 Thank  you  for  your  consideration. 
 Sincerely,  -, 


 Cynthia  Canary 
 Director 
288
 Money  Shouldnt  Be  All  that  Talks  in  the  Next  Election  A  Message  to  Illinois  Broadcasters 
 As  political  contributions  flood  into  the  2000  campaign  at  unprecedented  levels,  we  write  to  voice  a 
 concern  -  and  make  an  appeal  -  about  the  role  of  broadcasters  in  our  democracy.  More  than  one 
 million  political  ads  are  expected  to  run  on  television  next  year.  Candidates  in  2000  will  spend  six 
 times  more  (in  inflation-  adjusted  dollars)  on  television  ads  than  candidates  did  in  1972,  yet  voter 
 turnout  is  expected  to  continue  a  steep  four-  decade  long  decline.  Citizens  are  turned  off  by  the  ads  and 
 by  the  money  chase  that  pays  for  them. 
 We  call  on  you  to  open  the  nations  airwaves  in  2OCCI  to  a  different  kind  of  campaign 
 communication  -  one  whose  currency  is  ideas,  not  money.  A  blue-  ribbon  panel  appointed  by  President 
 Clinton  -  and  made  up  of  broadcast  industry  executives  as  well  as  public  interest  advocates  -  has 
 recommended  that  television  stations  voluntarily  air  five  minutes  a  night  of  candidate-  centered 
 discourse  in  the  month  preceding  all  primary  and  general  elections. 
 We  urge  the  networks  to  take  up  this  challenge  and  broadcast  brief  nightly  issue  forums  with  the 
 presidential  candidates.  We  urge  Illinois  stations  to  do  the  same  for  our  federal,  state  and  local 
 candidates.  These  segments  could  take  a  variety  of  forms,  including  interviews,  issue  statements  or 
 mini-  debates. 
 From  whom  much  has  been  given,  much  is  expected.  Broadcasters  have  been  given  licenses 
 valued  at  tens  of  billions  of  dollars,  free  of  charge,  to  operate  the  publics  airwaves.  In  return,  you  have 
 pledged  to  serve  the  public  interest.  We  can  think  of  no  greater  public  service  at  the  start  of  a  new 
 millennium  than  to  provide  citizens  with  the  information  they  need  to  choose  their  future.  Nightly 
 forums  can  help  break  the  hold  that  money  and  ads  have  on  our  political  campaigns. 


 Jimmy  Carter  Walter  Cronkite  Gerald  Ford 
 Hon.  Paul  Simon-  Illinois  Campaign  for  Political  Reform,  and  the  following  concerned  Illinois  citizens:  Bev  Aainnczyk-  LWV  L&  e  Forest/  L&?  Bluff,  Albert0  Al&  more-  IL  Coalition  Against  1Jnfair  Utilities,  Theresa  Am&  o-  Citizen  Advocacy  Center,  Mehrdad 
 AzemunChicago  Recycling  Coalition,  Raymond  Baranak-  G.  A.  I.  N.,  Henry  Bayer-  AFSCME,  Charles  Benton-  Benton  Foundation,  Margaret  Blake-  Reaume- 
 LWV  Lake  County,  Diane  Brown-  ILPIRG,  Anita  Buchholz-  LWV  Batavia,  Carol  Busch@  LWV  Rochelle,  Hon.  Dawn  Clark  Netsch,  Kathryn  Clay-  LWV 
 Waukegan,  Hon.  Jerry  Costello,  Nancy  Cowles-  Coalition  for  Consumer  Rights,  Hon.  Tom  Dart,  Jeanne  Davick-  LWV  EZmhurst,  Hon.  Miguel  Del  Valle, 
 Susan  Denecke-  LWV  McDonough,  Hon.  Leonard  Deville,  Ellen  Dick-  IANO.  Hon.  Kirk  Dillard,  Arlene  Doblin-  LWV  Winnetka,  John  Donahue-  Chicago 
 Coalition  for  the  Homeless,  Michael  Doyle-  &Center  for  Citizen  Involvement,  Hon.  Richard  Durbin,  Tina  Erickson  -LWV.!  3ber~  llelMundelein,  Hon.  Judy 
 Erwin,  Jan  Flapan-  LWV  IL,  Hon.  Barbam  FlynnCurrie,  Joan  Fragen-  LWV  WinnetkaiNorthfield,  Hon.  Jack  Franks,  Hon.  John  Fritchey.  Hon.  Susan 
 Garrett,  Hon.  Adeline  C+  o-  Karis,  Kirk  Goltry-  United  We  Stand,  Karen  Grafe-  LWV  Park  Forest,  Rev.  Dominic  Grassi-  St.  Josaphat  Church,  Terry  Griflin- 
 LWV  Oak  Park/  River  Forest,  Jacky  Grimshaw-  Center  for  Neighborhood  Technology,  Hon.  Debbie  Halvorson.  Hon.  Julie  Hamos,  Lawrence  Hansen,  Ross 
 Harano-  Asian  Paci&  American  Democratic  Org.,  Robert  Hercules-  Media  Process  Group,  Hon.  Jay  C.  Ho@  nan,  Jim  Howard-  IL  Common  Cause,  Laurie 
 Hug&  LWV  Oak  Park/  River  Forest  II,  Kevin  Jackson-  Chicago  Rehab  Network,  Hon.  Jesse  JacRron,  Jr.,  Barbara  Johnson-  LWV  JoDaviess,  Dan  Johnson- 
 Weinberger-  MDC,  Jan  Korsvik-  LWV  Cook  County,  Hon.  Carolyn  Krause,  Eugene  &  Barbara  Krell-  Protestants  for  the  Common  Good,  Hon.  L.  outs  Lang,  Laura  Lee-  LWV  Glen  Ellyn,  G.  Segvane  Lawrence,  Ricardo  Loza  -  SEIU,  Artti  Lyons.  pearl  Mack-  LWV  Dolton  HarveyRiverdale,  Hon.  Mike  Mizfigan, 


 Hon.  Lisa  Mad&  an.  Carol  Maim-  LWV  Chicago,  Clayton  h4arquardt.  II%.,  Rose  Marsaglia-  LWV  McLean  County.  Rev.  James  Martin-  St.  Benedict  The 
 African-  West,  Jane  McAfee-  LWV  Greater  Rockford,  Hon.  Kevin  A.  McCarthy,  Michael  McConnell-  AFSC,  Hon.  Jack  McGuire,  Patricia  Mendoza- 


 UL!  BEF,  Hon.  Abner  Mikva.  Hon.  Newton  Minow-  Sidlq  &  Au&  n,  Hon.  Andrea  !&  ore,  Hon.  Rowmy  MuNigan,  Hon.  Diana  Nelson,  Kathy  Nesburg-  LWVCook  County,  Hon  Philip  Novak,  Bruce  Orenstein-  Chicago  Video  Project.  Barbara  Pape-  LWV  Wheaton,  Edna  Par&%  LWV  Chicago,  PatrickPatt-  Oak 


 Grove  School  District,  Rev.  John  J.  Pawlikowski-  CTU,  Stephen  A.  Perkins-  CNT,  William  Peterson,  Hon.  David  Phelps.  Hon.  John  E.  Porter,  Hon.  Pat 
 Quinn,  Elm  Redmond-  Access  Living  ,  Hon.  Patricia  Reid  Lindner,  William  Rentschler-  Voice  Publishing  USA..  Richard  &  Ruth  Riha-  OWL,  Claire  Safford- 


 LWV  Adams  County,  Mary  Schaafsma-  PCG.  Carol  Schaal-  LWV  PaloslOrland  Park,  Hon.  Jeff  Schoenberg,  Hon.  Doug  Scott,  Hon.  Sonia  Silva,  Jim  Slama- 
 SIJSTAIP;,  Hon.  Ricca  Slone,  Annette  Smith-  LWV  Naperville,  Hon.  Michael  Smith,  Faith  Smith-  NAES  College,  Susan  Straus-  Chicago  NOW,  Jerry 
 Stermer  -Voices  for  Illinois  Children.  HOR.  Dave  Sullivan,  Marge  Sutaps-  Health  &  Medicine  Policy  Research  Group,  Mary  Ann  Tate-  LWV  Park  Ridge, 
 James  Thindwa-  Metro  Seniors  in  Actron,  Alene  Vlakanar-  IL  Arts  Alliance,  Suzanne  Wear  -LWV  Wheaton,  Margie  Weiss-  LWV  Highland  Park,  Sandy 
 Wellan-  LWV  Oak  Park  River  Forest,  Hon.  Rick  Winkel,  Robert  Wordlaw-  Chicago  Jobs  Council,  Quentin  Young,  MD,  Jane  Pugh  -  Hyde  Park  -Kenwood 
 Community  Conference,  Milton  and  Esther  E&  man  -  LWV  Carbondale,.  Rev.  Dr  David  Chevrier  -Wellington  Ave.  United  Church  of  Christ,  Margie 
 Nicholson  Peopkfor  Better  TV,  Rev.  Calvin  S.  Morris  -  Community  Renewal  Society,  Don  Turner  -  Chicago  Federation  of  Labor,  Gordon  Quinn  - 
 Kartemqum  Films,  Stanley  Cambell  -  RocRford  Urban  Minismes,  Steve  Bruesewitz  -  Kane  County  Democrats  *Organizations  for  Identification  only 
289
 __----  I_..  .  .  -..---  .-.-  --__  ._  ___  I 
 --.-  0. 
290
 COLUMBIA  co  EGE  CHICAGO 
 March  23,200O  JOURNALISM  DEPARTMENT 
 The  Honorable  William  Kennard 
 Chairman 
 Federal  Communication  Commission 
 445  12    Street,  NW 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Re:  Inspection  of  the  Public  Files  of  Chicagos  Television  Stations  in  Response  to  the 
 FCC  Notice  of  Inquiry  Docket  #99-  360 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 Television  broadcasters  must  be  held  accountable  to  their  citizen-  viewers.  I  feel  the  state  of  the 
 public  file  is  in  jeopardy. 


 I  worked  in  broadcast  news  for  over  twenty-  two  years  and  had  always  honored  the  notion  of 
 public  service  and  the  importance  of  a  public  file.  But,  not  until  I  assigned  my  Investigative 
 Reporting  students  to  inspect  those  files,  did  I  come  to  appreciate  their  importance  to  fulfilling  the 
 spirit  of  the  democratic  process  and  demonstrate  respect  for  the  citizen-  viewer. 


 l  Why  are  our  two  public  television  stations  -  WTTW  and  WYCC  -  held  to  a 
 different  standard?  Neither  station  allowed  my  students  to  read  viewer  letters. 


 l  Why  are  stations  so  worried  that  citizens  will  see  complaint  letters?  Why  are 
 they  afraid?  Do  they  have  something  to  hide? 


 l  Why  are  stations  so  disinterested  in  maintaining  a  current  public  file?  Some 
 do  not  even  fulfill  the  minimum  requirements.  Has  a  license  to  broadcast 
 come  to  mean  so  little? 


 This  is  not  a  time  for  loosening  control  of  television  broadcasting  responsibilities.  Stations  must 
 be  held  to  a  higher  standard.  I  do  respect  their  first  amendment  rights,  but  winning  a  license 
 should  not  mean  settling  for  the  lowest  standards  of  programming,  public  service  or  record 
 keeping. 


 I  hope  the  FCC  will  move  forward  by  mandating  public  interest  standards  and  responsibilities.  I  in  calling  for  a  notice  of  proposed  rulemaking. 


 600  South  Michigan  Avenue  Chlcago.  lllmo~  s  60605  1996  312  663  1600 
291
 COtUM  6  I  A  CO  GE  CHilCAGO 
 TELEVISDON  DEPARTMENT 


 March  22,  2000 
 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  1  2t  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard 
 In  response  to  the  FCCs  Notice  of  Inquiry  docket  #99-  360,  I  asked  my  class  in  Television  &  Society  at 
 Columbia  College  in  Chicago  to  watch  and  evaluate  what  our  local  broadcast  channels  had  designated  as 
 their  educational  programming  for  children.  Last  week  my  students  watched  childrens  programming  on 
 Channel  2  (CBS),  5  (NBC),  7  (ABC),  9  (WGN),  and  32  (FOX). 


 This  week  they  turned  in  their  reports  and  we  discussed  their  findings  in  class.  The  students  were 
 concerned  about  diversity  and  said  that  the  representation  of  minorities  was  lacking  in  all  but  one  of  the 
 childrens  programs  that  they  reviewed.  The  only  program  with  substantial  involvement  of  minorities  was 
 Magic  School  Bus;  many  of  the  other  childrens  programs  had  no  minority  characters.  Programs  that  were 
 notable  for  their  lack  of  minority  characters  included  Pepr  Ann  and  Squigglevision.  The  students  also 
 noted  that  the  programming  on  Channel  5  (NBC)  had  diverse  characters,  but  that  most  of  the  programming 
 was  sports  programming  featuring  and  targeted  to  boys. 


 Wejoin  with  People  for  Better  TV  in  calling  upon  the  FCC  to  hold  hearings  on  the  public  interest 
 obligations  of  broadcasters  where  we  can  discuss  the  lack  of  diversity  in  childrens  programming  and  other 
 relevant  issues. 


 Columbia  College 


 600  South  Michigan  Avenue  Chicago,  lllinois  606051996  312  6631600 
292
 Columbia  College  Chicago 
 624  S.  Michigan  Ave.  Suite  1300 
 Chicago,  IL  60605 


 March  22,  2000 
 Mr.  Mark  Lloyd 
 People  for  Better  TV 
 818  18th  Street,  NW  Suite  505 
 Washington  D.  C.  20006 


 Dear  Mr.  Lloyd, 


 As  part  of  your  investigation  through  Columbia  College  and  Rose  Economou,  I  visited  the  NBC  affiliate-  WMAQ-  TV  Chicago 
 Channel  5  with  a  witness,  Michael  Cappozzo.  As  per  our  instructions,  we  asked  to  see  the  public  files.  After  a  wait  of 
 approximately  45  minutes,  we  were  shown  the  file  drawer  containing  only  public  letters  and  e-  mails,  but  were  not  shown  where 
 other  current  and  important  documents  were  kept. 


 Upon  gaining  entrance  to  the  main  office,  we  were  treated  with  courtesy  and  led  to  the  files.  We  were  given  two  chairs 
 adjacent  to  the  filing  cabinet,  albeit  with  no  table,  and  were  told  that  if  we  had  any  questions,  that  we  were  to  ask. 


 Upon  examining  the  files,  we  found  them  to  be  in  good  order.  All  public  letters  were  kept  in  manila  envelopes  sorted  by 
 month.  They  were  current  up  through  the  end  of  February,  2000.  When  we  asked  about  the  most  recent  months  letters,  we 
 were  told  that  they  were  placed  in  the  file  at  the  end  of  every  month  in  order  to  have  adequate  time  to  respond  to  them. 


 There  were,  however,  glaring  omissions.  The  e-  mails  were  only  current  through  September,  1999.  When  we  asked  about  the 
 whereabouts  of  the  past  six  months  of  e-  mails,  we  were  told  that  the  woman  in  charge  of  those  was  out  of  town  at  the  time, 
 which  we  confirmed  through  the  security  guard  at  the  front  desk. 


 Also,  we  were  not  shown  documents  about  programming  addressing  community  issues,  records  concerning  childrens 
 programming  commercial  limits,  as  well  as  quarterly  reports  to  the  FCC. 


 When  we  asked  to  make  copies  of  certain  letters,  we  were  immediately  taken  to  a  copy  machine,  and  were  charged  ten  cents 
 per  copy. 


 Upon  our  departure,  we  again  were  treated  cordially,  and  were  thanked  for  stopping  in.  All  in  all,  our  visit  was  without  incident, 
 and  our  task  was  completed  easily. 


 In  discussing  my  experience  with  classmates,  I  found  that  my  experience  was  not  entirely  unique.  Although  we  were  treated 
 courteously,  the  public  files  were  guarded  to  some  extent.  Unless  you  knew  what  to  ask  for,  you  were  not  given  access  to  it. 
 In  other  words,  compliance  to  FCC  regulations  appeared  to  be  minimal. 


 Sincerely, 


 Student  of  Journalism 
293
 March  20,  2000 
 The  Honorable  William  Kennard  Office  of  the  Chairman  of  FCC 
 445  12th  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Re:  FCC  Requirements 
 Dear  Mr.  Kennard: 
 We  visited  Channel  20,  WYCC,  a  PBS  station.  This  station  is  housed  on  the  campus  of  Daley  College,  and  primarily  broadcasts  telecourses.  We  visited  the  station  to  see  whether 
 this  station  was  complying  with  FCC  regulations  or  not.  We  were  interested  in  two  major 
 things:  the  public  tiles  and  the  attention  given  to  childrens  programming.  We  were  also 
 anticipating  finding  comments  from  viewers  in  the  community  regarding  the  stations  programming. 


 Upon  entering  WYCC  we  were  treated  discourteously  by  the  secretary,  when  we 
 asked  to  see  the  public  file.  She  said,  You  cant  just  walk  in  here  and  ask  to  see  the  public 
 files  and  expect  everyone  to  drop  what  they  are  doing  for  you!  The  secretary  asked  us  to  wait  in  the  lobby,  where  we  waited  for  twenty  minutes.  Then  we  were  directed  to  a  room 


 where  we  were  allowed  to  look  over  the  public  files.  T  he  stations  public  file  consisted  of 
 only  three  binders,  which  contained  no  letters  from  the  public.  Both  the  secretary  and  the 
 Director  of  Programming  told  us  they  are  not  required  to  keep  viewers  comments  in  the  file.  However,  they  assured  us  that  they  do  respond  to  viewers  letters  but  they  are  not  required  to 


 show  us  any  of  those  letters  and  admitted  that  they  dont  even  keep  them  very  long.  Their  file  was  in  good  condition  but  was  not  current,  and  contained  many  letters  from 
 Cable  companies  confirming  that  they  would  be  carrying  WYCC.  The  file  also  contained 
 master  programming  logs  but  none  were  from  the  current  year.  The  station  also  keeps 
 employment  verifications  in  the  public  file  as  well.  Overall,  we  were  disappointed  that  WYCC,  a  PBS  station,  did  not  take  the  initiative 


 to  go  beyond  what  is  expected  of  them.  We  expected  the  files  to  at  least  include  some  letters 
 from  their  viewers.  We  feel  that  their  public  file  was  disorganized  which  indicates  a  disrespect  towards  their  viewers. 


 Respectfully, 
 Nick  Arvanitis  and  Arjumand  Khan 
294
 March  22,  2000 
 The  Honorable  William  Kennard 
 Office  of  the  Chairman 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 This  letter  is  in  regards  to  my  visit  at  WPWR-  TV/  Ch.  50,  in 
 Chicago,  Illinois.  Along  with  my  partner,  Blake  Palmateer, 
 I  visited  the  station  to  inspect  their  public  file. 
 Overall,  the  station  made  things  very  difficult  for  us. 


 After  asking  to  see  the  public  file,  we  were  told  we  would 
 be  unable  to  look  at  the  entire  public  file.  The  reasoning 
 was  that  the  file  was  too  large.  They  then  asked  what  we 
 would  need  to  see,  and  brought  us  the  information  we  asked 
 for.  We  were  then  directed  to  a  conference  room  to  search 
 through  the  files. 


 My  partner  and  I  then  asked  to  make  copies  of  letters  from 
 viewers,  but  were  told  the  station  would  be  unable  to  make 
 the  copies.  Their  explanation  was  there  was  no  one  that 
 had  time  to  make  the  copies.  We  were  informed  the  copies 
 would  have  to  "go  through  the  process"  of  getting  to  us.  I 
 am  not  sure  if  WPWR-  TV/  Ch.  50  is  complying  with  FCC 
 guidelines  or  not,  but  I  do  feel  they  could  have  allowed  us 
 to  view  the  file  and  given  us  the  photocopies  we  requested. 


 Thank  you  for  reviewing  this  letter  and  I  hope  it  has  been 
 helpful. 


 Sincerely, 


 Scott  A.  Blake 
 Apartment  1121 
 400  E.  Randolph  St. 
 Chicago,  IL  60601 
295
 Columbia  College  Chicago 
 600  S.  Michigan  Ave 
 Chicago,  IL  60605 
 The  Honorable  William  Kennard 


 Office  of  the  Chairman 
 FCC 
 445  12th  Street  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 As  part  of  our  investigation  in  conjunction  with  People  For  Better  Television,  we  visited 
 WGN  Channel  9  in  Chicago  on  March  8,200O.  We  were  disappointed  not  to  find  the  letters 
 written  by  members  of  our  class  in  the  public  file. 
 Upon  entering  the  station  at  4:  OO  p.  m.,  Erica  Trocchio  and  I  were  greeted  by  a  security 
 officer  who  asked  for  our  signatures  at  the  front  desk.  Soon  after,  we  were  asked  to  wait  in  the 
 station  cafeteria  until  they  could  contact  Helen  Hoffman  who  would  be  escorting  us  to  the  public 
 files.  When  Helen  arrived,  she  led  us  through  highly  secured  doors  and  through  the  tunnels  of  the 
 station  until  we  reached  the  office.  She  thoroughly  explained  the  order  of  the  files  to  help  us  in 
 our  search.  Ms.  Hoffman  also  offered  to  make  copies  if  necessary. 
 Our  first  search  was  to  confirm  WGNs  receipt  of  our  student  letter  to  the  station.  Ms. 
 Hoffman  explained  that  December  was  the  end  of  their  fourth  quarter  and  that  new  letters 
 wouldnt  be  available  until  April  10th. 
 We  began  to  search  for  viewer  complaint  letters  through  the  public  file  and  came  up  with 
 few  complaints.  Those  available  pertained  to  requests  for  the  Bozo  Show  and  strong  sexuality  in 
 its  prime  time  programming.  The  main  concern  in  the  public  file  pertaining  to  children  was  the 
 question  of  why  WB  Kids,  their  cartoon  segment,  was  taken  off  the  air.  It  was  interesting  to  find 
 that  the  station  had  a  separate  file  for  television  violence.  We  were  led  to  believe  that  WGN 
 responded  letters  within  ten  days  of  arrival.  Although  our  student  letter  has  not  yet  been 
 answered. 
 As  a  student  of  journalism  and  media,  I  interpreted  from  my  investigation  that  the  people 
 at  WGN-  TV  were  cooperative  in  giving  us  information.  Although  I  was  disappointed  to  learn 
 that  the  station  operated  on  a  quarter  system.  Overall,  their  public  files  were  orderly,  the 
 personnel  was  courteous  and  we  were  given  ample  time  to  view  the  files. 


 Sincerely, 


 .  ._  .._.  __  ..-  --  -. 
296
 Columbia  College  Chicago 
 600  S.  Michigan  Ave. 
 Chicago,  IL  60605 
 The  Honorable  William  Kennard 


 Office  of  the  Chairman 
 FCC 
 445  12  Street  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 On  March  8,  2000,  my  fellow  investigative  reporter,  Virgina  Matos  and  I  visited  Channel 
 1  1/  WTTW-  TV  located  in  Chicago.  In  conjunction  with  People  For  Better  Television,  we  were 
 to  evaluate  the  conditions  of  the  stations  FCC  public  files.  Needless  to  say,  we  were 
 disappointed  in  the  lack  of  full  disclosure. 
 We  arrived  at  WITW  at  2:  50pm,  we  left  the  building  at  3:  10.  We  asked  the  station 
 receptionist  to  see  the  FCC  files,  she  was  very  polite  and  we  were  assisted  immediately  in 
 viewing  the  files. 
 In  the  first  public  file  we  found  numerous  letters  from  TCI  cable.  There  was  also  a  great 
 deal  of  letters  with  law  firm  letter  heads  pertaining  to  section  76.58  (commissions  rules).  The 
 only  viewer  letter  in  the  file  was  a  complaint  about  not  being  able  to  get  a  clear  reception  when 
 watching  WTTW.  A  second  file  entitled  Material  relating  to  FCC  Investigation  or  Complaint 
 file  was  empty. 
 My  fellow  reporter  and  I  did  not  find  a  single  viewer  letter.  We  asked  Chris  if  there  were 
 any  other  public  files  that  we  did  not  see,  she  replied,  No.  I  then  asked  her  where  the  viewer 
 letters  were  kept,  and  she  told  us  that  Channel  1  I/  WTIW-  TV  was  not  required  to  keep  any 
 viewer  letters  on  file. 
 My  next  question  to  Chris  was  what  is  the  name  of  the  childrens  contact  for  childrens 


 programming?  She  told  me  there  is  no  one  in  charge  of  the  childrens  programming,  it  is  all 
 done  through  PBS. 
 Overall,  I  was  dissatisfied  with  our  station  visit.  I  went  to  the  station  believing  there 


 would  be  numerous  letters  from  viewers,  complaints  and  compliments,  in  the  public  file.  I  found 
 it  very  hard  to  believe  that  a  highly  recognized  childrens  station  had  no  contact  for  childrens 
 programming.  I  am  curious  to  know  why  WTTW  is  not  required  to  keep  any  viewer  mail  on  file? 
 What  makes  them  an  exception  to  the  rule?  Thank  you  for  your  time. 


 Respectfully, 


 Erica  Trocchio 
297
 March  22,200O 
 Honorable  William  Kennard 
 Office  of  the  Chairman 
 FCC 
 445  12h  Street  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Honorable  William  Kennard, 
 We  are  writing  you  this  letter  to  report  the  results  of  our  investigation  of  the  public  files 
 at  two  local  television  stations.  My  partner  Cecilia  Rios,  and  I  attend  Columbia  College- 
 Chicago,  and  were  assigned  to  visit  WGBO-  TV,  one  of  two  Spanish  speaking  stations 
 and  WBBM-  TV. 


 As  you  already  may  know,  students  wrote  letters  to  the  stations  and  commented  on  TV 
 programming.  What  we  found  was  that  none  of  these  letters  were  in  the  FCC  files  at 
 WGBO-  TV  (Univision)  or  WBBM-  TV  (CBS). 


 At  Channel  2,  WBBM-  TV  (CBS),  their  files  were  organized,  but  only  contained  a  few 
 letters  since  January  2000.  When  we  asked  them  about  the  letters,  they  refused  to 
 comment.  They  werent  friendly  and  rushed  us  throughout  the  whole  process. 


 At  Channel  66,  WGBO-  TV  (Univision),  the  visit  went  rather  smoothly  and  they  were 
 very  cooperative.  We  did  not  find  the  students  letters  and  were  told  that  the  station  does 
 not  post  letters  until  they  have  been  answered.  However,  they  did  file  quarterly  reports 
 required  by  the  FCC,  i.  e.  hours  of  children  programming  they  provide  to  their  viewers. 


 In  conclusion,  the  stations  failed  to  keep  current  files  open  to  public  viewing.  We  were 
 disappointed  in  the  failure  of  both  stations  to  comply  with  minimum  FCC  requirements. 
 Neither  station  maintained  complete  public  files.  Hope  this  information  has  been  of  some 
 help. 


 Sincerely  yours, 


 Zorabel  Valenciano 
298
 WITS  -  Working  In  The  Schools 
 150  East  Huron,  Suite  900 
 Chicago,  It  6061  I 
 312  751  WITS  phone 
 312.751  7244  fox  March  22,200O 


 Mayor  Richard  M.  Doley  Cl-  hman  William  Ketmard 
 Honorary  Chairman  Federal  Conummications  Commission 


 Joanne  Alter  445  12ti  Street  NW 
 Choir  Washington,  DC  20006 


 Robert  6.  Bud  tifton 
 Presldeni  Dear  Chairman  Kennard, 


 Mary  Ellen  Guest 
 Executive  Director  I  am  writing  in  response  to  your  Notice  of  Inquiry  #99-  360.  I  am  the  executive  director  of  Working  in  the  Schools,  an  organization  that  recruits,  trains,  and  transports  tutors  in  the  Chicago 


 Public  Schools.  We  have  more  than  600  volunteer  tutors  in  25  elementary  schools.  I  am  concerned  about  the  influence  of  television  on  our  culture  and  children.  On  March  3,2000,  I 


 visited  WMAQ-  TV,  the  NBC  affiliate  in  Chicago,  with  a  colleague.  We  asked  to  see  the  public  files  and  after  a  half-  hour  wan  we  were  welcomed  to  the  station  and  directed  to  the  file  cabinets. 
 Here  are  our  observations. 
 In  reviewing  the  files  relating  to  childrens  programming  and  in  comparing  data  from  1994  and  1999,  we  noticed  that  all  of  the  childrens  programming  in  1999  was  generated  by  the  network 
 or  syndicated.  In  1994  some  of  the  childrens  programming  was  locally  produced  including  a  half-  hour  show  News  for  Kids  -  Chicago  Style.  We  would  like  to  see  more  locally  produced 
 programming  for  children  on  all  local  broadcast  stations.  We  also  noticed  that  the  1994  file  included  an  FCC  Childrens  Report  -  Commercial  Limits  and  that  there  was  no  such 
 document  in  the  1999  file. 
 The  station  program  director  provided  us  with  an  impressive  publication,  Creating  Critical  Viewers,  but  we  received  no  additional  information  about  distribution  and  impact  of  the 
 publication.  We  noted  that  the  logos  of  all  the  media  partners  were  included  on  the  cover,  but  that  no  local  or  national  organizations  or  experts  on  childrens  television  viewing  were 
 mentioned. 
 The  station  included  a  list  of  local  PSAs  on  childrens  issues  that  were  run  between  January  and  March  1999  in  their  childrens  hle.  There  were  169  PSAs  listed. 


 l  Out  of  the  169  PSAs,  143  announcements  (85%)  were  generated  by  NBC,  WMAQ,  or  the 
 National  Academy  of  Television  Arts  and  Sciences.  While  these  messages  may  have  a  public  service  component,  it  appears  that  the  station  is  using  them  as  a  vehicle  for  self- 


 promotion.  Any  public  service  message  would  be  more  credible  coming  from  a  reputable  local  nonprofit  organization. 


 o  In  this  entire  three-  month  period,  only  4  announcements  featured  local  nonprofit  organizations:  3  were  for  the  Harold  Washington  library  and  1  was  for  the  Salvation  hy. 
 In  a  city  with  so  many  vibrant  nonprofit  organizations  serving  children,  including  Working  in  the  Schools,  it  is  disappointing  to  see  that  virtually  none  are  included  in  the  public  senice 
 announcements  carried  by  WMAQ. 
299
 Working  In  The  Schools  -  page  two 
 .  Finally,  all  of  the  PSAs  were  nm  on  Saturday  morning.  There  were  no  after-  school 
 programs  or  messages  for  children. 


 It  is  time-  consuming  and  expensive  (downtown  parking  is  $14  per  hour)  to  visit  local  broadcast  affiliates  and  review  their  public  files.  We  encourage  the  FCC  to  require  stations  to  post  reports 
 about  their  childrens  programming,  public  service  announcements,  and  public  affairs  programming  on  the  Internet.  This  would  make  it  much  easier  for  the  public  to  review  and 
 comment  on  station  activities  at  WMAQ  and  the  other  local  broadcast  affiliates. 
 We  join  with  People  for  Better  TV  in  calling  on  the  FCC  to  hold  public  hearings  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters. 
 In  exchange  for  their  free  use  of  the  public  airwaves,  broadcasters  should  be  more  responsive  to  the  needs  of  local  children,  citizens  and  nonprofit 


 organizations. 


 Sincerely, 


 Mary  Ellen  Guest  Executive  Director 
300
 8765  W.  Higgins,  Suite  450,  Chicago,  Illinois  60631 
 www.  ChildServ.  org 
 773.693.0300  FAX  773.693.0322 


 March  13,200O 
 RE:  Docket  #  99-  360 
 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 12*  Street  SW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard, 
 As  an  organization  that  cares  about  children,  we  feel  it  is  very  important  to 
 respond  to  the  FCCs  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 Television  carries  a  great  influence  with  our  children  and  as  such,  our 
 organization  and  many  like  it  were  glad  when  the  Childrens  Television  Act  was  given 
 some  teeth  several  years  ago.  The  requirement  that  stations  air  three  hours  of  educational  and  informational  programs  each  week  was  a  great  step  forward.  What  a  great  tool  for 


 parents  and  caregivers  who  are  looking  for  good  solid  programming  for  children. 
 But  while  the  idea  is  sound,  its  execution  has  not  been.  I  was  dismayed  to  see  the 
 list  of  shows  that  broadcasters  actually  believe  qualify  for  E/  I  designation.  Not  only 
 are  the  designations  of  E/  I  programming  hard  to  find  if  you  are  planning  ahead  because 
 most  newspapers  do  not  carry  the  listing,  but  you  must  be  quick  and  on  time  to  find  the 
 designation  as  the  show  begins  since  the  E/  I  logo  appears  only  briefly  on  screen.  And 
 once  you  find  them,  I  fail  to  see  how  some  of  these  shows  can  be  deemed  educational  or 
 informational.  For  that  matter,  even  if  the  E  stands  for  entertainment,  I  fail  to  see  how 
 some  of  these  shows  make  that  grade  either. 


 Much  of  the  programming  is  clustered  in  early  morning  hours  and  is  scattered 
 with  other  programs  that  are  not  E/  I.  Take  for  example,  the  programming  last 
 Saturday,  which  is  supposed  to  be  the  time  that  children  are  drawn  to  television.  On  a 
 recent  episode  of  CBS  the  Rescue  Heroes,  which  airs  at  10  a.  m.  on  Saturday  we  learned 
 that  you  never  get  in  your  car  in  the  face  of  a  flash  flood  and  you  always  go  to  higher 
 ground.  Great  lessons.  Except  the  cartoon  heroes  literally  delivered  them  to  stranded  and 
 desperate  people  before  they  rescued  them;  stopping  to  scold  them  before  they  would 
 allow  them  to  be  safe.  This  show  also  taught  children  that  being  a  teacher  is  not  as 
 worthwhile  as  rescuing  people. 


 HELPING  CHILDREK  BUILD  BETTER  LIVES  SINCE  1894 
 ..-_.~-  I-.  ..-.-_;-.-..-..----~  - 
301
 And  if  we  examine  the  other  not-  as-  direct  but  not-  subtle  messages  of  the  show, 
 we  see  that  if  you  want  to  be  a  hero,  you  must  have  a  body  that  is  out  of  proportion  with 
 all  natural  human  beings.  The  men  looked  disproportionately  muscular  as  though  on 
 steroids. 


 This  show  was  followed  by  Flying  Rhino  Junior  High  which  is  also  supposed  to  be  an  E/  I  show  and  I  could  little  see  what  lesson  we  learned  other  than  adults  are 
 buffoons. 
 The  programming  on  the  other  two  network  affiliates  was  just  as  disturbing. 
 ABC-  Channel  7  runs  Disney  cartoons  in  a  Saturday  morning  block  from  7:  30  to  9:  30 
 a.  m.  and  while  the  shows  Recess  and  Science  Court  in  SquiggZevision  are  exceptions,  the 
 majority  of  the  shows  teach  children  that  it  is  vital  to  be  cool,  outsiders  will  always  be 
 treated  poorly  and  although  being  yourself  is  very  important,  you  had  better  be  good 
 looking,  good  at  sports  or  well-  dressed  because  brains  work  against  you.  These  lessons 
 we  learned  from  Pepper  Ann,  Sabrina,  the  Animated  Series  and  the  short  educational 
 films  in  the  morning  block. 


 NBC-  Channel  5  has  dedicated  its  entire  Saturday  morning  programming  to  half- 
 hour  teenage  dramas/  comedies  like  City  Guys,  Hang  Time  and  One  World.  The  theme 
 last  Saturday  was  Just  Say  No  to  Drugs.  And  while  the  programming  has  teenage  stars, 
 its  safe  to  assume  it  was  watched  by  many  who  are  pre-  teens  and  younger,  just  as  the 
 teenage  singing  stars  draw  from  a  much  younger  crowd  for  their  fan-  base  since  younger 
 children  look  to  older  ones  as  their  role  models.  I  know  these  programs  have  been  touted 
 as  top-  quality  educational  shows  but  I  found  the  messages,  the  characters  and  the  plots 
 very  simplistic  in  addressing  complex  issues.  I  would  much  rather  see  a  group  of 
 thoughtful,  real  children  discussing  the  problem  of  drugs.  Also,  the  commercials  on  this 
 block  of  programs  bothered  me.  They  were  pushing  some  of  the  stations  adult 
 programs,  one  in  particular  about  a  serial  killer  on  the  show,  The  Others. 


 These  shows  smacked  of  the  ones  that  were  broadcast  the  first  season  the  E/  I 
 requirements  were  in  place.  At  that  time,  industry  executives  said,  Just  give  us  time  and 
 we  will  develop  quality  childrens  programming.  Enough  time  has  past  and  I  have  not 
 seen  a  proliferation  of  Magic  School  Bus  or  Bill  Nye  the  Science  Guy  but  rather  shows 
 having  no  educational  merit  beyond  the  networks  designation. 


 I  realize  that  television  is  an  industry.  I  realize  it  must  make  a  profit  to  survive. 
 But  the  television  industry  is  profiting  greatly  from  the  public  -  control  of  the  new  digital 
 stations  -  so  it  is  reasonable  that  we  the  public  must  ask  for  accountability.  The  only  way 
 to  do  that  is  to  hold  public  hearings  where  people  can  air  their  concerns  for  our  children 
 and  their  future. 
302
 LOCAL  46 
 SEllU  Leading  the  Way  Re:  NOI  99-  060 


 JARVIS  WILLIAMS 
 Pr:  dent 


 CYNTHIA  RODRIGUEZ 
 Treasurer 


 SERVICE  EMPLOYEES  /  ii  /L&  J  -  1  e2  s 
 INTERNATIO  NAL  UNION 
 \FL-  CIO.  CLC  R&  a&  o  ioza  Assistant  to  the  Pre  :nt 


 1  February  29,200O 
 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communication  Commission 
 12th  Street,  SW 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard; 
 This  is  a  formal  compliant  in  response  to  your  Notice  of  Inquiry  #  99-  360. 
 On  February  4,  2000,  Ms.  Margie  Nicholson  and  I  visited  our  local 
 broadcaster,  WLS-  TV  Channel  7,  at  their  Chicago  offices,  at  approximately 
 1l:  OO  A.  M.  During  our  visit,  we  stopped  at  the  front  desk  and  informed 
 Officer  Donaldson  we  wanted  to  see  the  public  files.  We  were  instructed,  that 
 we  could  not  see  anyone  without  an  appointment.  I  asked  if  I  could  use  the 
 phone  to  contact  someone,  he  stated  no.  I  then  asked  what  number  can  I  call 
 (I  was  going  to  use  my  cell  phone),  and  he  told  me  to  contact  the  phone 
 company  and  refused  to  give  me  any  number.  We  adjourned  our  visit  without 
 any  public  information. 


 This  is  an  example  of  the  lack  of  cooperation,  a  major  broadcaster  is 
 exhibiting  through  their  agents.  How  can  you  and  the  Federal  Communication 
 Commission  expect  citizens  to  examine  the  public  files  and  comment  in  the 
 public  interest  obligations  for  our  local  broadcasters  if  they  will  not  ever 
 allow  us  to  review  the  files? 


 I  urge  you  and  the  Commissioners  to  consider  our  objection  to  the  disregard 
 of  the  law  and  hold  public  hearings,  to  find  out  what  the  public  thinks  about 
 television  and  the  responsibility  of  broadcasters. 


 If  you  have  any  questions,  please  contact  me  at  (3  12)  64  1  -  15  16. 


 Sincerely, 
 F---  Y 


 309  W  Washington  Street  j  / 
 Suite  250 
 Chicago,  IL  60606  ~  cc:  J.  Williams 
 312641  1516  M  Nicholson 
 Fax  312641  0773 
 @  ,..,    &,  958 
303
 City  of  Chicago  Richard  M.  Daley,  Mayor 
 Department  of  Public  Health 
 Sheila  Lyne,  RSM 
 Commissioner 


 333  South  State  Street 
 Chicago,  Illinois  60604  (312)  747-  9884 


 (3  12)  747-  9888  (24  hours) 
 (3  12)  744-  2960  (TTY) 


 http://  www.  ci.  chi.  il.  us 


 March  21,200O 
 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 12th  Street,  SW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard, 
 For  nearly  three  years,  the  Chicago  Department  of  Public  Health  has  been 
 overseeing  an  effort  to  prevent  violence  in  Chicago  by  bringing  together  key 
 people  from  city,  state  and  federal  government  as  well  as  academics, 
 agencies,  advocates  and  business  leaders.  The  result  was  a  massive  citywide 
 plan  that  we  are  now  engaged  in  implementing  under  the  umbrella  of  Prevent 
 Violence!  Chicago. 


 Part  of  what  we  looked  at  included  what  roles  the  public,  newspapers, 
 television  and  radio  have  played  in  helping  to  make  violence  an  integral  part 
 of  the  fabric  of  our  society.  And  when  we  pulled  together  the  experts 
 statistics  it  was  startling  how  much  television  we  watch  and  what  we  see. 


 l  By  the  time  an  average  child  completes  elementary  school,  he  or  she 
 has  typically  been  exposed  to  100,000  acts  of  violence,  including 
 8,000  murders,  according  to  TV-  Free  America. 
 l  Of  nearly  2,700  television  shows  viewed  in  one  year,  57  percent  of 


 them  contained  some  violent  content  and  in  73  percent  of  all  violent 
 scenes,  the  perpetrator  went  unpunished,  according  to  the  National 
 Television  Violence  Study 
 l  Half  of  the  violent  acts  identified  in  that  study  occurred  in  childrens 


 cartoons  were  violence  was  mostly  depicted  as  humorous. 


 Given  this  and  many  other  studies,  we  dedicated  one  whole  implementation 
 committee  to  the  media.  This  team  is  charged  with  finding  a  way  to 
 successfully  deliver  the  message  that  violence  is  a  public  health  issue  and  we 
 are  in  the  midst  of  an  epidemic.  Further,  the  committee  wants  to  ensure  the 
 media  stay  a  vibrant  part  of  Chicago  by  accurately  reflecting  peoples 
 concerns.  That  can  happen  only  when  the  public  becomes  educated  and 
 discerning  consumers. 


 So,  we  looked  at  the  stations  in  Chicago.  In  fact,  in  accordance  with  FCC 
 requirements,  we  went  to  inspect  each  of  the  major  stations  files  and  see  if 
 they  had  received  any  letters  or  public  comments  on  violent  programming 
304
 March  21,200O 
 Chairman  Kennard 
 Page  2 


 content  or  coverage  of  violence.  Attached  is  a  summary  of  what  we  found 
 during  those  visits. 


 Our  findings  show  people  are  concerned.  It  also  shows  people  dont 
 understand  they  have  a  voice  in  local  programming.  Indeed,  that  they  have  a 
 responsibility  to  use  that  voice  if  we  want  the  airwaves  kept  pertinent  to  this 
 community. 


 This  is  why  with  all  we  know  and  we  have  learned,  we  believe  it  is  vital  the 
 FCC  hold  public  hearings.  We  urge  you  to  do  so  since  there  will  be  double 
 the  stations  on  the  dial  with  digital  expansion  looming  in  the  near  future.  We 
 need  to  ensure  that  television  stations  and  the  public  develop  a  discourse  that 
 keeps  the  public  involved  in  a  stations  public  affairs  and  the  stations 
 involved  with  the  publics  concerns. 


 We  hope  you  agree  and  we  look  forward  to  your  response. 
 Sincerely, 


   Commissioner 
 cc  Monroe  Anderson,  WBBM-  TV  Channel  2 
 Bill  Campbell,  WLS-  TV  Channel  7 
 Merri  Dee,  WGN-  TV  Channel  9 
 Joanie  Bayhack,  WTTW-  TV  Channel  11 
 Delores  Mebain,  WMAQ-  TV  Channel  5 
 Wanda  Wells,  WFLD-  TV  Channel  32 
305
 PREVENT  VIOLENCE!  CHICAGO  MEDIA  IMPLEMENTATION  TEAM 
 LOCAL  TELEVISION  STATION  VISITS 
 SUMMARY 


 Five  local  television  stations  were  visited  during  the  first  week  of  March,  2000.  In 
 every  case,  employees  were  welcoming,  cooperative  and  helpful.  And  at  every  station  the 
 materials  found  in  the  public  files  were  similar:  considerable  viewer  mail  regarding 
 station  programming  and  program  line-  ups,  and  little  to  no  viewer  mail  in  the  area  of 
 violence  on  television  or  related  issues. 


 The  introductory  letter  sent  by  Commissioner  Lyne  requesting  a  meeting  and 
 connecting  the  visit  to  the  Chicago  Violence  Prevention  Strategic  Plan,  proved  helpful  in 
 nearly  every  case.  All  stations  returned  follow-  up  phone  calls  promptly,  all  put  me  in 
 touch  with  the  appropriate  person  to  meet,  and  all  (except  one)  set  up  a  specific  time  for 
 file  review.  (Only  one  stated  that  just  dropping  by  would  be  fine,  and  that  was  accurate.) 


 Despite  the  introductory  letter  and  a  copy  of  the  Executive  Summary  of  the  Plan, 
 no  one  had  heard  of  Prevent  Violence!  Chicago  -  not  even  the  community  affairs 
 directors.  Neither  did  anyone  seem  particularly  concerned  or  engaged  about  the  topic  of 
 violence  on  television  and  its  effect  on  viewers. 


 That  response  mirrored  the  public  files.  There  were  countless  file  drawers,  some 
 stuffed,  with  viewer  mail  about  everything  from  Howard  Sterns  persona  to  the  quality  of 
 weather  reporting,  but  almost  nothing  about  violence  on  the  airwaves. 


 All  stations  reported  keeping  their  mail  for  a  minimum  of  three  years.  One  stated 
 that  they  need  to  keep  it  until  their  FCC  license  renewal,  now  every  10  years. 


 At  three  out  of  five  stations,  all  mail  was  placed  together,  no  matter  what  the  topic 
 was.  At  two  stations,  there  were  specific  violence  files  and  one  station,  WGN  which 
 was  visited  first,  kept  the  violence  files  separate,  stating  they  were  mandated  to  do  so  by 
 the  FCC.  No  other  station  had  known  about  that  mandate. 


 At  one  station,  for  example,  there  was  a  large  four-  drawer  filing  cabinet  filled 
 with  several  years  of  letters.  From  what  I  saw,  there  were  only  a  couple  of  folders,  like 
 4th  quarter,  1999  Programming  Violence  Viewer  Mail,  which  had  a  total  of  five  letters. 
 Only  some  of  the  five  seemed  loosely  connected  to  the  issue  of  violence. 


 The  majority  of  violence  letters  echoed  the  same  concerns:  too  much  sexual 
 content,  to  much  explicit  and  degrading  language,  to  many  tasteless  and  demeaning 
 programs  that  were  inappropriate  for  family  television. 


 Page  1  of  4 
306
 A  small  number  of  letters  made  a  connection  between  violence  on  television  and 
 violence  in  society.  Some  suggested  there  be  more  of  a  connection  made  for  viewers 
 between  violent  acts  and  real  life  consequences.  Several  letters  expressed  concern  about 
 the  responsibility  of  the  industry  to  provide  viable  viewable  material  for  the  majority  of 
 families. 


 In  addition  to  the  viewer  mail  each  station  kept  quarterly  reports  sent  to  the  FCC 
 about  what  public  affairs  programming  had  been  aired  and  what  the  content  of  the  show, 
 news  report  or  PSA  was.  Again,  very  little  dealt  explicitly  with  the  issue  of  violence. 
 Instead,  there  were  categories  that  covered  issues  like  race  relations,  government,  the 
 environment  and  health. 


 Finally,  a  couple  of  stations  expressed  an  interest  in  the  Media  Committees  goals, 
 the  outcome  of  this  investigation  and  the  implementation  of  the  Plan.  Some 
 recommended  having  people  from  the  media  serve  on  the  committee,  and  others  invited 
 us  back  to  share  our  findings  and  perhaps  work  participate  on  some  public  affairs 
 programming  in  the  future. 


 WGN  TV  -  Channel  9 
 Helen  Hoffman,  Assistant  to  General  Manager 


 This  station  kept  their  records  in  a  separate  room,  in  a  large  four  drawer  filing  cabinet. 
 All  viewer  mail  was  kept  in  expandable  file  folders,  categorized  by  quarter  and  year. 
 WGN  was  one  of  only  two  stations  that  had  separate  files  called  Programming,  Violence 
 -  Viewer  Mail  Many  station  letters  began  we  like  WGN  and  are  loyal  viewers  but  were 
 concerned  about  a  specific  show.  Other  comments  included:  l 
 That  was  an  undesirable  show  with  crude  sex  scenes  with  repulsive  and 
 degrading  moments..  .  it  takes  good  taste  not  violence  to  capture  viewers. 
 0  There  is  too  much  violence  on  TV  and  I  believe  it  fosters  violence  in 


 people  who  watch  it.  Please  consider  not  showing  reports  like  these. 
 0  Kids  and  youth  are  bombarded  with  tasteless,  violence  and  demeaning 


 programs  and  are  greatly  influenced  by  such  broadcasts.  I  believe  that  the 
 recent  acts  of  high  school  violence  are  connected  to  television 
 programming. 


 But  the  vast  majority  of  letters  were  concerned  the  Cubs  games,  Bozo  Circus, 
 Honeymooner  reruns,  millennium  coverage,  and  the  Walter  Payton  memorial.  Comments 
 about  weather,  local  crime  reports  and  late  night  movies  also  bulked  up  the  files. 


 Page  2  of  4 
 ._  ._  ___-_  __._..  ^  ,_--_-_  I__  xx  .,-.  -.---- 
 -- 
307
 WMAO  TV  -  Channel  5 
 Sharon  Pierson  McNeal,  Station  Relations  Director 


 This  station  kept  much  of  the  viewer  mail.  divided  into  FCC  Childrens  Reports,  Political 
 Mail,  and  local  mail  by  category.  For  example,  there  seemed  to  be  a  considerable  amount 
 of  requests  and  acknowledgments:  0 
 Thanks  for  covering  principals  day  l 
 Please  put  more  coverage  re:  mental  health  issues  on  the  air 
 .  Thanks  for  coordinating  the  coverage  of  xxx  event,  and  bringing  us 


 visibility  during  our  big  day. 


 The  station  also  kept  extensive  files  with  Email  correspondence,  responding  to  a  range  of 
 issues  from  too  many  commercial  interruptions,  to  disappointment  with  the 
 fundamentally  disgusting  journalism.  The  station  also  kept  quarterly  reports  on  Issues 
 Programming  including  Americas  Black  Forum,  Religion,  Foreign  Affairs, 
 Governmental  Concerns,  etc. 


 WFLD  TV  -  Channel  32 
 Wanda  Wells,  Public  Affairs  Director 


 This  station  had  one  folder  called  Viewer  Mail  Regarding  Violence  1992  -  1999.  In  it 
 were  a  total  of  25  letters,  some  discussing  violence  towards  gays  and  other  stereotyping, 
 but  the  majority  dealing  with  Jerry  Springer  and  his  staged  violence  scenes. 


 Several  letters  were  kept  from  the  Turn  off  TV  for  a  Day  campaign  in  1992,  but  those 
 and  others  seemed  somewhat  randomly  incorporated  into  the  violence  folder. 


 WBBM  TV  -  Channel  2 
 Monroe  Anderson,  Community  Affairs 


 Most  viewer  mail  and  related  material  came  in  electronically  and  was  kept  on  disc.  It 
 was  an  option  to  either  review  materials  on  disc,  in  someones  office,  or  to  go  into  a  small 
 separate  room  to  see  what  material  had  come  in  through  the  local  mail.  I  chose  the  latter. 
 And  while  mail  was  kept  for  approximately  five  years,  the  vast  majority  of  it  dealt  with 
 Howard  Stern  and  his  annoying  antics. 


 Page  3  of  4 
308
 WLS  TV  -  Channel  7 
 Bill  Campbell,  Community  Contact 


 This  station  kept  three  separate  years  of  letters  in  a  violence  file,  which  includes  1997  - 
 about  20  letters,  1998  -  four  letters  and  1999  -  no  letters.  Some  of  the  general  mail  was 
 from  disgruntled  viewers  complaining  about  body  bag  journalism  and  black  on  white 
 racism  and  visa  versa.  There  was  also  several  letters  concerning  hate  crimes  in  Chicago, 
 and  violence  programming  being  shown  during  the  daytime  and  family  viewing  hours. 


 Page  4  of  4 
309
 H  Illinois  PEG  Illinois  Public  Interest  Research  Group  180  W.  Washington  St.,  5th  Fir.,  Chicago,  IL  60602  (312)  364-  0096  http://  u,  ww.  pirg.  org/  illinoispirg 
 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 12th  Street,  SW 
 Washington.  DC  20554 


 March  1,  2000 
 Dear  Chairman  Kennard, 
 On  behalf  of  the  Illinois  PIRG  Education  Fund,  I  am  responding  to  the  Notice  of 
 Inquiry  Docket  #99-  360.  As  a  statewide  public  interest  research  and  public  education 
 organization  with  20,000  members  in  Illinois,  we  are  concerned  that  broadcasters 
 have  public  interest  obligations  that  are  not  being  met.  Now  that  broadcasters  are 
 using  the  digital  spectrum,  the  issue  becomes  even  more  pertinent. 


 In  this  letter,  I  would  like  to  reference  the  frequency  that  broadcasters  air  public 
 service  announcements  (PSAs).  Public  service  announcements  are  a  way  for  stations 
 to  give  back  to  the  community  in  which  they  broadcast.  If  public  service 
 announcements  are  aired  at  all,  they  are  aired  when  most  viewers  are  asleep.  We 
 received  a  Video  Release  Usage  Report  from  the  Nielsen  Sigma  Service  to  monitor 
 how  often  a  particular  PSA  was  played.  The  PSA  that  we  monitored  was  produced  by 
 the  Environmental  Protection  Agency  {EPA)  on  the  dangers  of  second  hand  smoke. 
 The  results  were  disappointing.  Over  200  radio  and  television  stations  received  the 
 PSA,  but  only  20  aired  the  PSA  at  all.  Unfortunatel.  y,  the  PSA  was  never  aired  during 
 prime  air  time  when  most  viewers  would  benefit.  For  example,  one  television  station  in 
 Chicago  aired  the  PSA  41  times  from  the  end  of  June  to  the  end  of  August,  but  most 
 frequently  aired  the  PSA  from  the  hours  of  2:  00  a.  m.-  5:  00  a.  m.  In  the  two  month 
 period,  the  PSA  only  aired  once  at  9:  30  a.  m.,  lo:  30  a.  m.,  1l:  OO  a.  m.  and  12:  30  p.  m. 
 when  more  viewers  would  watch  television.  Again,  we  are  grateful  the  PSA  was  aired, 
 but  believe  it  is  in  the  publics  best  interest  to  have  PSAs  aired  during  primetime. 


 We  are  asking  the  FCC  to  set  a  date  to  establish  clear  guidelines  for  the  many 
 public  interest  obligations  that  broadcasters  owe  the-  public.  Thank  you  for  this 
 opportunity  to  participate  in  the  inquiry  regarding  the  public  interest  obligations  of 
 broadcasters. 


 Gai  I  Parson 
 Consumer  Associate 


 printed  on  recycled  papec 
310
 IXELSEH  SIGMA  SERVICE  VXDEO  RELEASE  USAGE  UPORT  -  HALF  HOUR  S-  y 
 MAY  LO,  1999  -  NOVEMBER  14,  1999 


 CLIENT  ID  :  TlOZ  vmo  RELEASE:  EPA  sworn  HAND  WOKE 
 R&  E&  St  TYPE  :  PSA 


 DAY  t0CAL  am  STA-  DATE  OF  DAY-  lt/  2HR 
 RAMR  WMGNATED  PWWET  AlW  TIOI  AFFL  AIRED  w#  PART  AXRED  VtRSlON 
 2  Lus  ANGELES  KDOC  IWI)  06OCT99  WE  Vl' 
 08OCT99  FR  bT  030CT99  SA  LE 


 12OCT99  IV  PT  14ocT99  TH  DT 
 16OCT99  SA  EM 


 180CT99  Ho  ki  22OCT99  FB  DT 
 230CT99  SA  EM  2SUCT99 
 MU  Le  280CT99  211  Ln 


 OlNOV99  HO  DT  O#  OV99  9'8  DT 
 06WOV99  SA  IIW  LZHO~  99  FR  LH 
 3V99  SA  LE 
 z;;  g  z 
 m99  PR  EM  m99  su  m 


 m99Tu  Lw  moo  SA  DT 


 i%~  z  MO9  mz  WI 
 JN99TH  LB  m99  WE  EM 
 24m93  TH  EM  OlJuL99 
 TH  EM  03JUL99  SA  EM 


 04JUL99  SU  EM 
 OmL99  MO  2  xom99  SA  DT 
 llJt&  99  su  EH  12JtJL99  MO  M 


 13JUL99  TIJ  iii  win99  wt  EM 
 17JU.  99  SA  &U 


 3:  SOP  60  10:  30A  60 
 12:  30A  60  ,8:  3UP  60 


 3:  30A  30  5:  OOA  30 
 4:  30A  30 


 4:  30r  30 


 3:  OOA  30  5:  3OA  30 
 5;  OOA  3EI  6:  30A  30 


 LF  *  4PM-  8PM  m  *  BPr-  1OP 
311
 VIIIEO  RELEASE  WAG&  REPORT  -  IiAW  WUR  twm~~  x  MAY  10,  1999  -  #ovtMEER  14,  1999 
 HET  STA-  DATE  if  DAY-  %i  RARK  DESIGNATED  MARRET  AREA  TION  AWL  AIRED  UK  PART  AIRED  VERSXOW 
 3  CHICAGO  ucxu  rl!  m  19JuL99  830  La  2oJuL99  Tu  CM 
 2IJUI.  99  WE  BI  22Jvi99  TH  EM 
 26JUL99  SA  EM  25.  M.  99  SU  X? 
 275n99  Tu  LN  28JuL99  WE  LN 
 29YtK99  n  LM  31mL99  SA  EM 
 04AUG99  WE  EM  OSAUC99  TM  EM 
 07AUG99  $A  EM  08AUG99  SU  EM 


 09AUG99  HO  iii  12AUC99  TH  EM 
 lbAUG99  SA  DT  16AUG99  MO  LN 


 19AUC99  TH  #?  f  22AtJG99  SU  EM 
 23AUC99  MO  B'4 
 24huG99  111  ii 


 2SAUG99  WE  En  2bAUC99  SA  EM 
 3UUG99  TV  EM  02SCP99  m  EM 
 036EP99  FR  EM 
 07SEP99  Tu  LY4  08SEPP9  WE  LN 


 11SEP99  SA  EM  32SkP99  su  tt 


 ,13SEP99  MO  ii  14SEP99  TV  LR 
 026CT99  SA  eM 
 EM=  SAM-  3AH  DT  =  9M-  4PM  EF  =  4PM-  8PM  PT  LE  =  LOPH-  u  LN=  lAF-  sAt 


 a;  WA  30 
 5:  OOA  30 
 S:  OOA  30  5:  OOA  30 


 6:  30A  30  5:  OOA  30 
 4:  00A  30  2:  00A  30 
 4:  3bA  30  6:  OOA  30 
 5:  36A  30 
 5:  OOA  xl  6:  30A  30 


 8:  30&  b  30 


 1:  OOA  30  3:  bOA  30 


 12:  30A  30 
 s  8PklOP 
 COPYRIGHT  1999  NtE&  b;  CN  kl23DIA  RESEARCH  -  BRLTHTED  IN  THE  U.  S:  A. 


 -------  .__)  _  -- 
312
 CLmrs  ID  :  no1  VIDEO  RELEASE:  EPA  acorn  HAND  sMOlce 
 3mEASE  TYPE  :  Pfu 


 nm  um  DESXCUATED  MAIREET  AREA  DAY  LOCAL  STA-  DATE  OP  DAY-,  1/  2HR  TION  AWL  AIRED  WK  PA&  T  AIaD  WRSION 
 3  cFacAcu  WPLD  FOX  2OAUG99  FR  DT 
 22AUC99  su  ifi 
 23AUG99  HO  ii  24AUC99  TU  DT 


 28AUG99  SA  E  30AUG99  MO  LZ! 
 3lAuc99  Tit  LE  0181P99  WE  la 
 OZSEP99  TH  DT  03lLP99  PB  L# 
 05SEP99  su  LN  OSSEP99MO  LN 
 07SEP9.9  zu  Lx4  08sEp99  'WE  LH 
 lOSEP99  FR  u  128EP99  su  Lw 
 13stP99  no  LN  14SEP99  Tu  Ia 
 03OCT99  SU  LN  OSUCT99  Ma  IdI? 
 OSOCT99  TU  LR  U8OCT99  FR  CN 
 09OCI99  SA  LN  lSOCT99  PR  LR 
 16OCT99  SA  LU  190CT99  IU  W 
 2OOCX99  WE  LU  220CT99  FR  Lx 
 250CT99  ?fO  LU  290CT99  I#  Lu 
 04NOV99~  m  la  otmv99  uu  LB 
 U8mv99  MO  I#  13UOV99  SA  EM 


 WJYS  ZND  26JUL99  FR  k:  13sEP99  MO  PT 
 WPWR  XND  11JUN99  FR  DT 


 _: 
 .  .__,._.  ... 
 _---  .  ..1  -.  I  .--.  -,.-~  .  .  .._.-___  - 
313
 CLIEEOT  Xb  ;  TlOl  wDIDsFsLgE:  EPA  SECOND  ?tum  SMOKE 
 :  PSI 


 3  CHICAGO  WPVR  IND  llm99  9%  DT 
 16JuN99  WE  Lu 


 17JuN99  TH  EM 
 18Jm99  PR  EM 
 19m99  SA  EM 
 2oJusl99  su  EM 
 LB 
 LN 
 21JUN99  MO  EM 


 LN 
 22m99  Tu  EM 


 23JuN99  WE  EM 


 lwUL99  MO 


 26MY99  War  ufaY99  m 


 3;  ooA  6300  12:  30A  30  2:  30A  it 
 4:  OOA  !1: 
 6:  OOA  ft: 
 3:  30A  fi 
 6:  OOA  it 
 6:  0th  it 
 1:  30A  66: 
 g:  30p  2 


 3:  3OP  30  4:  OOP  30 


 PT  =  IPM-  LOP 
 IN  THE  U.  S.  A. 


 I  .  --  -.---.  ..--.----.  1-  ..-L  _  -  --.-,  -- 
314
 Ol&&  bSER  PIwm  3%  6V11;% 
 VIDEO  RELEASE  VSACE  REPOT  -  HALF  HOUR  sutmmy  MAY  LO,  1999  -  NOVEMBER  14,  1999 


 CLIENT  ID  :  Tl.  01  VXDEO  RGLEWE:  CPA  SLCCIIJB  HAMI  SMOKE 
 RELEASE  TYPE  :  PSA 


 DAY  LOCAL  STA-  DATE  OF  DAY-  r/  zwi 
 TXON  APFL  AXRED  WK  PART  AIRED  VERSION 


 82 
 13 


 PoRTtlwD-  AmuRN 
 FT.  HYERS*  NAPLEb 
 UCSH  N3C  07m7v  UPHE  IND  07NOV 
 UFTX  POX  18Oc.  r  WI~  ~3s  23acT 
 2SOCT 


 '9  SU  LN  '9  su  LE 
 'PM0  EM  9  6A  EM 
 9MO  XJU 


 2 
 3 


 i 
 t  C~~  JWPAICN&  GPRNGF~~)-  DECA~  WfCD  #IBC  0 
 0 


 26OCT99  TU  LN 
 IOCT  DOCT 
 .OCT  !NW 
 iNof  iNW 
 !NOV  INW 
 iSEP  SEP 


 '9  FR  '9  $A 
 '9  au 
 1.9  TtJ  ,9  PR 


 '9  M 
 tz  9  su 
 9n 
 llsEP99  $A  13SW99  MO 
 26SEP99  TH  17SEP99  FR 
 22SEP99  we  276LP99  MO 


 286EP99  TU  29SEP99  WE 
 04OCTV9  MO 


 WO,  CT99  Tu  is  O6OcT99  UE  LP 
 15ocr99  PR  pi  cHA?  mICN&  SP%  NoFLD-  PECATW  WTCD  NBC  oww99  Mb  L# 
 07Nuv99  su  LE  09NOV99  2%  EP 


 LN 


 Ets  n  SAM-  Vu4  =  gE-  zE  87  f  4FM-  8rn  PT  =  8PU-  1OP  LE  =  lOPM=  u  i!  i  - 
 CQPYRIGHT  1999  YtMLSLN  MEDIA  IWEAIKH  -  PRINTED  IN  THE  USeA. 
315
 NIELSEN  6IW  6mmx  VIDEO  BE&  EASE  UIAGt  IWOIRT  -  HALF  HO&  IsAg  10,  1999  lfovamm  14,  s~@$~  lkY'  - 
 1999 


 twuN99  Tu  LN  x2m99  SA  LN 
 wuz?  99  Tu  p1  16JuN99  WE  EM 
 l7bnm99m  GM  mluw99  FR  EM 
 24JUN99  TM  EM 
 2bJuN99  MO  EM 


 29JUN99  Tu  ii 
 3OJWN99  WE  %$  I  OlJuL99  TH  LB 
 02JuL99  FR  EM  03JuL99  SA  LN 
 04JUL99  6U  WI  OJJUL99  MO  LN 
 Mm99  Tu  LN  08JUL99  TX  EM 
 lOJIJL99  8A  EM 
 12YUL99  MO  LB 


 :~~;  o9  ii  iit  16JUL99  FR  U 
 17JUL99  6A  LN 
 18d.  n.  99  SU  DT  2WUL99  TU  LN 


 22JuL99  ln  M  23JuL99  Fit  EM 


 24JUL99  SA  LN  3onJL99  PR  EM 
 3uuL99  SA  EM 
 OlAUG99  su  EM  02rrUG99  HO  LN 
 WAUG99  Fit  EM  07AUC99  SA  DT 


 EM  x  sAM*  ws  ifs  =  9At+  QPM  SF  =  4P?+  SPM  PT  =  8Prf-  1UP  Ia  =  WPM-  u  =  LAM-  SAM 
 COPYRXGHT  1999  IUELSW  !  EDU  RESISARCW  -  PRZNTED  IN  THE  U.  S..  A. 


 ._-  l~  l_ 
 .__  __..._.  ._-_  ...-  .-.--  -.--- 
316
 CLItNT  XD  3  not  VIDCO  lLEL?  ust:  #PA  SEGOND  wm  SMOKE 
 Rt&  tAsK  mm!  :  PSA 


 Mm  MNX  DESIWATED  MRKET  AREA  DAY  LOCAL  STA-  DATE  OF  DAY-  1/  2HR  TION  AFFL  AIRED  WK  PART  ATMD  VERsiON 
 159  ABILM'E~  b;  YnTVATtR  KTXS  AX  02OCT99  91  DT 
 03ocT99  su  E 
 FE  040CT99  MO  DT 
 LN  omcT99  N  DT 


 omcT99  wt  is 
 070CT99  TH  2 
 080CT99  FR  ki  09OCT99  SA  LE 
 lOOcT99  SW  en  120CT99  TtJ  DT 
 13ocT99'wE  DT  161  QCNCY  *HANNIBAL-  KEOKUK  KHQA  CBS  18OCI99  HO  tbl 
 22WT99  3%  I.  4  23OCT99  SA  IX 
 LN  ZbOCT99  Tu  LN 
 3ooGI99  SA  UJJ  31ecx99  su  EM 


 WiEltMAN-  ADA 
 03NOV  04mJQV 
 03NOV  06IWV 


 071i  08N 
 1ON 
 %  XXX1  CBS  07J 
 OW  t9J 


 20J  2l.  J 
 22J 


 19  lit  19  n 
 19  3%  9  SA 


 CVPIYXYCHZ  2999  #~~  LstiiV  MEDIA  -cH  -  PRINTED 


 2:  OOA  60  12t30A 
 60 


 PT  =  BFM-  10P 
 IN  THS  U  s.  A* 
317
 ,zxm  IO  :  no1 
 rXDt0  RtLWSL:  IPA  StCQUD  HA&  m  $MOKt 
 RELEASt  TYPE  :  P&  A 


 QUIUCY  -HANNIB&-  KEOKWK 
 LOCAL  STh-  DATE  i?  DAY-  1/  2HR 
 TIba  AFFL  AXam  UK  PART  AIRED  VERSION 
 KJtrI  CB8  26JVL99  SA  LU  t5JuLvv  SW  1D3 
 LE 
 26JUL99  MO  ii  &I 


 KHQA  CBS  y4&  g  ; 
 2WUNV9  SU  WI  223tm99  Tu  Lu 
 OkTuL99  su  EP 
 1um99  8A  LN  2SJutOV  SU  DT 


 31YuL99  SA  E!! 
 04AUCV9  WE  z  07AUGV9  &A  DT 


 16AWG99  5A  it 
 27AUG99  FR  LR  fdAUC99  i'I0  Lt6 
 02SEP99  TH  LN  06SEP99  MO  LU 
 11'SGP99  PR  LH  28sEP99  SA  DT 
 246LP99  FR  EM  bloCT99  P'R  LN 
 U4OGT99  MO  LN  160CT99  6A  Pi?  4 


 KTXS  ABC  200CT99  WE  ,  llOCT99  SU  -EM 
 4AM-  94AM  roan-  u  =  94w-  4PH  BP  =  bP&  BPH  PT  =  8PM-  1OP  tG  z  &&  f-  5&  4  -. 
318
 HIELSEar  SIGMA  SERVICE  VIDCO  RELEASE  USAGE  ItEPfXtT  -  ii&  l  HOUR  GIlMARY 
 MAY  10,  1999  -  !NWHB~  R  14,  1999 


 DAY  LQCAL  MKT 
 STA-  DATE  OF  DAY-  l/  ZHR  RANK  PESZ[  ZHATED  MARKET  AREA  TION  AFFL  AIRED  WK  PART  ATReP  VERSIfJN 


 3  awACO  /  UCIU  IND  020CT99  SA  LB  030CT99  SU  ta 
 LN 
 3:  OOA  30 


 OCQCT99  WE  LN  07acT99  TM  LN 
 080m99  F-  R  LN 
 090CT99  SA  en  12ocT99  Tu  LW 


 PT  16OcT99  IsA  m 
 18OCT99  MO  I&  J  190CT99  TU  LN 
 2oucT99  WE  LN 
 27QCT99  WE  EF  30OOT99  6A  DT 


 U3wvYY  WE  LN  (I6NOV99  SA  ad 
 WNuv99  MO  LN 
 09NOV99  TtJ  IAN 
 lZNoY99  FR  en  l3NOVPP  6A  PT 


 UFUI  FOX  lOJuN99  TH  ki  llJuN99  PR  CM 


 12Jur799  SA  iiii 
 14m99  Pm  La  l!  uuN99  Tu  L# 


 lwuNP9  m  &lN  17JoN99  m  LN 
 18JUN99  FR  PI 
 213uH99  MO  ii  22JUN99  I'0  LN 
 23Jwl99  we  LN  24JtmP  TH  LN 


 25Jw99  FE  EM  27m99  su  LN 


 2:  3c)  A  30 
 2:  30A  30 


 3:  3OA  30  3:  OOA  30 
 3:  30A  30  f:;  wi  3; 


 JiOOA  30  4:  WA  so 
 4:  ObA  30  4:  OOA  30 
 6:  ooA  30 
 5:  WA  fU 
 f!  3OA  30 


 .  -.  .-.^.  .-  _..,..-  -_.-~  .  _~-.-(  -. 
319
 EC  Thursday  March  2,  2000 
 Kartemquin  Films  Ltd. 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard, 
 We  are  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of 
 broadcasters. 


 Our  government  has  a  tradition  of  giving  away  our  publicly  owned  resources  to  a  wealthy 
 elite  and  asking  for  very  little  or  nothing  in  return.  Broadcasters  are  already  licensed  with 
 exclusive  use  of  the  airwaves  for  free  and  have  made  billions  selling  those  airwaves  for 
 advertising.  Now  the  government  has  given  broadcasters  another  $70  billion  worth  of 
 airwaves  for  digital  use,  while  doing  little  or  nothing  to  ensure  that  these  broadcasters 
 serve  the  public  interest. 


 We  spoke  to  the  Director  of  Station  Services  and  Community  Affairs  at  WBBM  - 
 Channel  2  here  in  Chicago  and  asked  him  about  the  public  affairs  programming  the 
 station  provides.  None,  he  said.  We  dont  have  any.  He  made  it  clear  that  public 
 affairs  programming  is  not  part  of  WBBMs  future  plans.  Were  going  in  the  opposite 
 direction,  he  explained.  With  the  FCC  de-  regulation  things  have  changed. 


 The  public  needs  to  be  a  part  of  the  discussion  concerning  methods  to  keep  these 
 broadcasters  accountable.  Hearings  should  be  held  as  a  first  step  towards  giving  the 
 public  a  chance  to  decided  its  own  interests.  Decisions  of  public  interest  should  no 
 longer  be  made  in  the  back  rooms  of  Congress  or  the  boardrooms  of  big  business. 


 A  free  market  can  create  many  wonderful  opportunities  and  shows,  but  the  government 
 giving  away  $70  billion  dollars  of  public  resources  to  the  most  powerful  players  does  not 
 stimulate  a  free  market.  The  synergy  between  the  public  and  private  sector  is  at  the  root 
 of  our  dynamic  economy  and  this  is  evident  in  the  broadcast  industry.  The  multi-  billion 
 dollar  infotainment  industry  began  right  here  in  Chicago  with  Siskel  and  Ebert,  which 
 was  originally  a  public  television  program.  Our  own  film,  Hoop  Dreams,  got  its  initial 
 funding  from  the  Illinois  Arts  Council  and  the  Corporation  for  Public  Broadcasting  which 
 enabled  it  to  go  on  to  become  a  huge  commercial  and  critical  success. 


 Thank  you  for  considering  our  position. 


 1901  West  Wellington,  Chicago,  Illinois  60657 
 Telephone  773-  472-  4366  Fax  773-  472-  3348  E-  Mail:  Kartemquin@  aol.  com 
320
 Michigan  Tab  D-  3b 
 Anthony  Abernathy 
 Michigan  Institute  for  Nonviolence  Education 
 3/?/  00 


 Lynne  W.  Boyle 
 The  Christian  Communication  Council  of  Metropolitan  Detroit  Churches 
 Detroit,  MI 
 3/  6/  00 


 Richard  Gamber,  Jr. 
 Michigan  Consumer  Federation 
 Lansing,  MI 
 3122100 


 Susan  Hiltz  Grover 
 Prevention  Coalition  of  Southeast  Michigan  (PREVCO) 
 Southfield,  MI 
 3120100 


 Peggy  K.  Goodwin 
 The  Youth  Connection 
 Detroit,  MI 
 319100 


 Benjamin  A.  Jones 
 National  Council  on  Alcoholism  and  Drug  Dependence 
 Detroit,  MI 
 3/  7/  00 


 Gene  and  Mariamr  McCornack 
 Michigan 
 3122100 


 Dr.  Frederic  S.  Pearson 
 Wayne  State  University 
 Detroit,  MI 
 3/  6/  00 


 The  Rev.  Richard  0.  Singleton 
 The  Metropolitan  Christian  Council:  Detroit-  Windsor 
 Detroit,  MI 
 no  date 
321
 People  For  Better  TV  Review  of  Public  Records  ANTHONY  ABERNATHY 
 MICHIGAN  INSTITUTE  FORNONVIOLENCE  EDUCATION 


 Over  the  last  three  months,  Ive  had  the  opportunity  to  visit  two  local  TV  stations. 
 Summary 
 I  spent  about  two  hours  in  reviewing  the  public  files  of  both  Channels  2  and  7  TV  stations  in  the  Metro 
 Detroit  viewing  area. 
 Generally  the  Public  Record  is  adjacent  to  the  Public  Relations  Department 


 My  major  focus  was  on  community  concerns,  community  ascertainment  reports,  summaries  of  the  stations 
 monthly  and  quarterly  programming  reports  (with  particular  emphasis  on  violence  and  balancing  in 
 programming.) 
 Ascertainmentfiles  are  a  composite  of  research  done  by  the  TVstation  public  relation  department  where 
 they  actually  go  out  onto  the  community  and  conduct  surveys  by  use  of  questionnaires  to  determine  what 
 types  ofprogramming  the  viewing  audience  would  be  interested  in  seeing. 


 My  first  visit  was  to  Channel  2  TV 
 The  person  responsible  for  the  public  files  was  a  part  time  employee  who  wasnt  which  working  the  day  I 
 dropped  in  on  the  station. 
 Channel  2  Public  files  were  in  a  small  6x10  room 
 I  started  by  reviewing  the  monthly  and  quarterly  progr  amming  reports,  which  covered  a  wide  range  of 
 topics 
 Reviewing  the  community  concerns  for  the  years  of  1997  through  1999,  there  were  only  two  letters  from 
 the  viewing  public,  expressing  their  concerns  about  violence  or  any  matter  in  the  Channel  2  TV  tiles. 
 The  files  appeared  to  be  well  organized;  written  information  was  somewhat  limited  but  with  a  need  to 
 schedule  an  appointment  for  resource  person  availability 


 My  second  visit  was  to  Channel  7TV 
 Channel  7  appears  to  have  a  much  larger  budget  for  service  staff 
 Channel  7  Public  tiles  were  in  a  10x24  room 
 I  started  with  the  files  on  community  concerns,  reviewing  the  files  from  1996  through  1999. 
 I  found  an  average  of  18  written  letters  per  year  along  with  e-  mail  logs,    attached  to  the  correspondence 
 were  copies  of  the  reply  letters. 
 The  letters  in  the  public  file  address  program  content,  offensive  language  and  programming  attitude  not 
 being  reflective  of  the  community  served 
 The  second  area  of  review,  were  the  Ascertainment  files  which  were  quite  extensive 
 My  research  also  included  a  review  of  the  monthly  and  quarterly  programming  reports. 
 The  programming  reports  that  are  forwarded  to  the  FCC  were  consistent  with  the  Ascertainment  reports 


 I  ended  my  visit  by  meeting  with  a  Community  Relations  person,  who  informed  me  that  the  stations  tries  to  balance  any  short-  coming  in  their  News  reporting  through  having  their  reporters  participate  in  noteworthy 
 community  activities. 


 Tools  for  Evaluations 
 Ascertainment  files  are  reflective  of  the  community  interest,  community  concerns  denote  dislikes  which 
 should  lead  to  the  stations  programming  also  keeping  in  mind  First  andforemost  TV  Stations  are  profit 
 driven 
322
 March  6,  2000 
 Chairman  William  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  SW  Washington,  D.  C.  20551 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 I'm  a  member  of  PEOPLE  FOR  BETTER  TELEVISION  -Detroit  Metro  Area.  My  committee  assignment  was  to  monitor  Childrens'  Sat- 


 urday  programming  on  WXYZ-  TV,  Channel  7,  Detroit  -  the  ABC  station.  As  Channel  7  is  being  fed  by  a  Disney  owned  source, 
 the  Children's  programs  are  from  Disney.  I  watched  WXYZ-  TV  from  7:  00  a.  m.  -  12:  OO  Noon  of  Saturday,  February  12,  2000. 
 The  programs  were  "gentle"  and  non-  violent  and  identified  for  the  appropriate  age  groups  -  with  the  exception  of  Sabrina  at 
 lo:  30  a.  m.  and  Buqs  Bunny  at  11:  00  a.  m.  (which  were  not  age  identified).  I  therefore,  applaud  WXYZ-  TV  for  their  Satur- 
 day  morning  Childrens'  line  up. 
 However,  I  have  two  concerns  focusing  on  the  Sunday  line  up.  On  Sunday,  only  three  stations  air  any  Childrens'  programs: 
 UPN  Channel  50  -  9:  00  a.  m.  and  10:  00  a.  m.  PBS  Channel  56  -8:  OO,  8:  30,  9:  00  a.  m. 
 CBS  Channel  62  -  7:  00  and  7:  30  a.  m. 
 Secondly,  the  number  of  commercials  that  are  crammed  into  each  Childrens'  show!  On  Channel  7,  the  Saturday  shows,  beginning 
 at  10:  00  a.  m.,  are  almost  back-  to-  back  commercials. 
 Major  broadcasters  should  not  depend  on  the  Cable  stations  to  supply  Childrens'  programs  in  their  market  during  the  week.  I 
 understand  that  morning  hours  might  not  be  the  best,  but  4  -  6  (after  school  hours)  would  be  an  excellent  time  slot  for  edu- 
 cational  programs  such  as  Field  Trip  and  Jack  Hanna. 
 Television  plays  an  important  and  powerful  role  in  the  lives  of  our  children  and  I  am  concerned  about  the  about  of  sex  and 
 violence  on  television.  Also,  the  number  of  commercials  during  childrens'  programs. 


 Sincerely, 
 Media  Unit  of  the  Council  1300  Mutual  Building  (28  West  Adams)  l  Detroit,  Michigan  48226 
 Phone.  (3131  962-  0340  l  Fax:  (313)  962-  9044  l  E-  mail:  councllwebQaol.  com  l  Web  Site:  http://  users.  aol.  com/  councilweb/  lndex.  htm 
 Created  ml919,  the  Counol  now  serves  2000  Cathok.  Orthodox  and  Protestant  congregations  in  SE  Mrchigan  and  SW  Ontano 


 -..-  11  -  .-  ._._-.  __,.-___-  _-.  _.  _-.---  l_---- 
323
 A  SURVEY  OF  CHILDRENSC  TELEVISION  PROGRAMS  ON  CHANNEL  7,  WXY'ZI 
 Saturdrry,  Feb.  12.  2000 
 7:  00  a.  m.  -  FIELD  TRIP.  Program  identified  for  children  7  and  over. 
 Prior  to  start  01:  program,  the  following  was  announced:  "Specifically  to  educate  and  inform 


 chilareri."  Program  was  high  tech,  space  travel  in-  volved,  C'ast  featured  human  young  girl  and  two  "Alf" 
 like  puppets.  Puppet6  are  loot  in  a  desert  and  end 
 up  touring  an  ice  cceam  factory.  At  end  of  program 
 many  8ource6  for  rnQFe  information  about  ice  cream  weto  given.  Informative  and  non-  violent. 


 7:  30  a.  m.  -  JACK  H&  NNA.  Program  identified  for  a~  1  audiences. 
 Should  be  aired  when  more  children  are  up.  It  is  a  wonderful  program  taped  at  Busch  Gagdens.  This 


 edition  featured  many  injured  onimatlo  that  are  taken 
 to  the  Busch  Gardens  Animal  Hospital. 


 8100  a.  m.  ..  PJ!  p'R  ANN.  Program  identified  for  children  of  all 
 ages.  Produced  by  Disney.  Don't  know  why  it  is 
 li+  tcU  Wparately  from  ONE  SATURDAY  MORNING  when  it  airs  under  that  listing  at  10100  a.  m.  It  is  a 


 cartoon  feature.  This  ahov  focused  on  how  rumors 
 ot8rt  and  what  happen6  when  we  tell  lies.  There  wa6  anti  commcrcirl  which  featured  how  to  order 
 a  CD  of  100  childrens'  eonge, 


 8830  a.  m.  -  Ol;  Je  SATURDAY  MORNING.  Program  listed  for  children 
 of  all  ages.  A  teen-  ago  girl  ond  a  talking  elephant 
 host  the-  show  from  various  venuis.  First  segment 
 featured  a  cartoon  named  DOUG.  Segment  had  three  commercials  and  one  PSA.  The  commercials  were  appro- 


 priate  for  young  audiences.  T  felt  the  topic  of  ahow  vas  confusing  for  children,  it  dralt  with  con- 
 fuoion  surrounding  getting  married. 
 DOUO  we6  followsc  hy  RECESS.  Everything  aince  8~  00  has 
 been  under  thw  Disney  banne+...  and  appears  to  be  a  network  food,  rather  chain  loo&  A&  y  selected. 


 RECESS  is  alao  a  cartoon  with  Valentinse'  Day  as  its  subject.  The  moral  WED  "don't  toy  with  peoples' 
 foelingrlt  -  it  will  back  fire  on  you..  Five  commsr- 
 cials  were  featured.  1  !SXJ  Mutusf  Building  C2@  WQJt  Adorns)  l  Detroit,  Michitpn  46226 


 hole.  (31%  692  03AO  9  Pmt*  (31%  fM3BW  l  &mdl.  c~~  uncilwohqhrol  MW~  T  l  \Abh  Site  htlo  //  u~  orr  WI  cur~,,  u,~  unuilwul/~  noox  htm 
324
 10:  00  a.  m.  -  PEP'R  ANN.  Still  under  the,  gNE  SATURPAY  MORNING 
 heading.  This  segment  was  not  a'cartoon,  rather,  it  dealt  with  vantriloquiam  and  dumcnioc;  that  had 


 bits  of  PEP'R  ANN  acting  a~  host.  The  comnerciels  were  really  heavy  in  this  segment: 
 Juikoy  Fruit  Gum,  Tangt  Game  Boy,  Skittles,  Tarzan. 
 Each  ran  more  than  once  -  before,  during  and  bftar  PEP'R 


 ANN. 
 SABRINA  vas  insrrtod  into  the  line-  up  at  10130  a.  m.  and  BUGS 
 BUNNY?  at  1l:  OO  a.  m.  Neither  wae  rated.  We  vent  back  to  a 
 show  rated  for  children  of  all  ago6  at  llr30  a.  m. 


 11:  30  a.  m.  -  WINNIE.  program  rated  for  children  of  all  ages. 
 This  show  had  the  traditional  cart  of  Pooh,  Piglet,  Robin,  Tigger,  etc.  Fluffy  Rabbit  ham  invented  a 


 machine  to  scare  crows  out  of  his  garden.  Appeared  to  be  non-  violent  even  though  th+  crows  were  really 
 frightened!  Many  commercials:  Barbie,  tshe  movie  "Snow  Day'",  Pillsbury,  various  videos,  etc. 


 A  wcrago  wintea  with  voice  over  stated  that  educational  shous  and  reports  of  such  are  available  for  the  public  at  the  abrtiob 
 during  regular  bumhess  hours.  I  have  never  6een  that  boforo, 
 On  Sundaya,  only  three  stations  air  any  childrons'  p*  ogramo:  Ch.  50,  Ch.  56  and  Ch.  62. 


 9:  QO  arm*  -  DOUG,  Channel  50  10:  00  a.  m.  -  PEP'R  ANN,  Channel  50 
 8109  a.  m.  -  bAEDAL  DOORS,  Channel  56  8:  30 
 a.  m.  -  WISH,  Channel  56  9rOO  a.  m.  -  ARTHUR,  Channel  56 


 7~  00  a.  m.  -  TALES,  Chaentl  62  7~  30 
 a.  m.  -  MYTHIC,  Channel  62 


 Reviewed  by  Lynn6  W.  Boyle,  ED.  D 


 1300  Mutual  Building  I26  Werl  Adams)  .  bstfoit.  Miohiqan  48228  I)  hme.  r313)  fM52-  0340  l  Far:  1373)  sci~  d#  tlM  l  E-  mail,  cauncilweb&  ol.  corr  l  Web  Site!  http//  u$  ors  JOI  cnm/  councilweMnder.  hh 
 __  I_.---._  I-  I-  ~-.  -..-  ..-  ^..  II  .  .  .._..  1  ,.,_  -..  ____-- 
325
 115  W.  Allegan  Street  l  Suite  240 
 Lansing,  Michigan  48933 
 5  171482-  6262  l  Fax  5  171482-  4  142 
 I  r  l--,  -umer 


 Dation  Richard  D.  Gamber  Jr.,  Executive  Director 
 March  22,200O 
 The  Honorable  William  E.  Kennard 
 Chairman 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  SW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 
 Re:  MM  Docket  No.  99-  360 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 The  Michigan  Consumer  Federation,  representing  over  400,000  Michigan  residents,  wishes  to 
 express  its  support  for  the  comments  and  recommendations  of  People  for  Better  TV  which  will 
 be  filed  in  response  to  this  docket.  In  addition,  we  will  be  filing  separate  comments  to  the 
 Commission. 


 We  applaud  the  Commission  for  issuing  this  Notice  of  Inquiry.  The  advent  of  digital 
 broadcasting,  we  believe,  presents  many  new  opportunities.  We  fear,  however,  that  without 
 guidance  from  the  Commission,  these  opportunities  will  be  lost. 


 As  a  case  in  point,  we  point  out  the  situation  that  exists  in  metropolitan  Detroit  with  broadcast 
 station  WWJ,  Channel  62.  This  is  a  CBS  owned  and  operated  affiliate.  As  such,  we  would 
 expect  it  to  be  the  leader  in  meeting  public  interest  obligations  -  a  standard  to  which  other 
 stations  would  aspire.  Sadly,  it  isnt. 


 Here  in  Detroit,  one  of  the  largest  media  markets  in  the  nation,  the  CBS  owned  and  operated 
 affiliate  doesnt  even  offer  a  local  news  broadcast.  CBS  should  be  ashamed.  And  those  who 
 advocate  voluntary  standards  should  explain  why  this  is  acceptable.  It  may  be  grudgingly 
 acceptable  if  it  was  a  new  independent  station,  but  for  the  affiliate  of  CBS  located  in  a  large 
 market  to  ignore  local  news  is  unfathomable. 


 If  a  CBS  owned  and  operated  affiliate  can  get  away  with  it  in  Detroit,  what  stops  other  stations 
 from  following  suit  ?  If  the  pride  and  reputation  of  CBS  is  not  sufficient  motivation,  what  is? 
 CBS  has  chosen  to  lower  the  bar  and  we  urge  the  Commission  to  not  only  correct  this 
 egregious  situation,  but  to  insure  that  others  dont  use  CBS  as  the  excuse  for  further  degradation 
 of  public  interest  obligations. 
326
 With  the  extensive  costs  associated  with  building  digital  broadcast  studios,  will  this  be  the  trend? 
 We  trust  that  the  Commission  will  take  a  stand  and  ensure  that  the  opportunities  of  digital 
 broadcasting  expand,  rather  than  contract,  the  vital  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 The  recommendations  of  People  for  Better  TV,  in  our  view,  represent  the  best  hope  for  ensuring 
 that  the  public  airwaves  are  used  to  further  the  public  interest.  Lets  work  together  to  make  the 
 digital  age  one  that  enhances  not  only  the  quality  of  the  television  picture,  but  the  minds  and 
 lives  of  all  Americans. 


 Richard  D.  Gamber  Jr. 
 Executive  Director 
327
 March  20,200O 
 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  1  Zth  Street,  NW 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 


 RE:  FCC  Notice  Doc#  99360 
 Enclosed  for  your  review  is  some  information  about  our  organization,  Prevention  Coalition  of 
 Southeast  Michigan.  Our  organization  has  worked  with  the  local  television  stations  in  the 
 Detroit  media  market  for  the  past  ten  years.  We  collaborate  with  our  local  stations  to  air  public 
 service  announcements  that  promote  prevention  messages  about  alcohol,  tobacco  and  other 
 drug  abuse. 


 Over  the  past  five  years,  we  have  seen  a  dramatic  decrease  in  the  actual  amount  of  airtime  that 
 is  devoted  to  PSAs.  Previously,  we  were  able  to  consecutively  air  60  spots.  Currently,  we  are 
 confined  to  :30  or  :  15  spots.  The  seriousness  of  these  community  health  issues  has  not 
 decreased.  Unfortunately,  the  available  airtime  has  decreased  by  up  to  50%. 


 It  is  our  hope  that  with  the  introduction  of  broadcast  digital  television  signals,  this  downward 
 trend  will  be  reversed.  This  will  not  happen  without  the  input  of  the  public  and  enforceable 
 guidelines  that  will  hold  broadcasters  responsible.  At  this  pivotal  crossroad,  the  television 
 industry  has  a  tremendous  opportunity  to  have  a  positive  impact  on  our  communities.  The 
 current  stream  of  gratuitous  sex  and  violence,  lack  of  local  programming  and  advertising-  packed 
 childrens  programming  has  an  increasingly  negative  impact  our  community. 


 On  behalf  of  the  children  and  concerned  citizens  of  Southeast  Michigan,  we  encourage  you  to 
 make  a  change.  As  a  member  of  People  for  Better  N-  Southeast  Michigan,  we  urge  you  hold 
 local  hearings,  solicit  input  from  the  public  and  consider  the  PBTV  guidelines  as  a  place  to  start. 
 Nothing  less  than  the  future  of  our  children  and  the  future  of  America  is  at  stake. 


 SuGn  Hiltz  Grover 
 Executive  Director 
328
 4 
 The  Youth 
 Connection 
 \ 
 funded  by  the 
 Robert  Wood  Johnson  Foundation 


 -1 


 Suite1  500:  333  West  Fort  St.  Detroit,  Michigan  48226-  3156 
 (313)  9634990  l  (313)  963-  4668  (FAX) 


 lead  agency 
 Greater  Detroit  Area  Health  Council,  Inc. 


 March  9,2OOO 
 Chairman  William  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12&  street,  NW 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 RE:  DOCKET  #  99-  360  FCC  NOTICE  OF  INQUIRY 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 With  the  advent  of  digital  television,  and  the  ever-  increasing  amount  of  violence,  sex  and  substance  abuse  we  are  all  exposed  to  on  television,  I  am  writing  to  ask  for  better  quality 
 educational  programming  especially  targeting  youth  lo-  17  years  old.  While  our  local  network  affiliates  are  doing  a  good  job  of  bringing  educational  programs  to  children  (5-  IO),  there  is  a  lack 
 of  quality,  educational  programs  for  older  youth.  The  Youth  Connection  is  working  to  create  systemic  change  to  prevent  youth  violence,  substance  abuse  and  early  sexual  activity  --  a  difftcult 
 task  given  the  fact  that  young  people  are  growing  up  viewing  instant  gratification  on  their  television  sets  and  computers  and  see  very  few  consequences  for  violence,  substance  abuse  or 
 sexual  activity  in  most  television  programs. 
 We  are  also  interested  in  positive  and  accurate  portrayal  of  youth  in  the  media.  Both  local  and  national  newscasts  have  brought  the  unspeakable  --  children  killing  children  --  into  our  homes  on 
 far  too  many  occasions  recently.  Once  these  horrific  acts  are  committed,  both  local  and  national  newscasts  turn  them  into  television  shows  with  music  beds,  etc.,  and  we  watch  the  horrifying 
 incident  over  and  over  again.  We  do  not  deny  that  problems  exist,  but  we  do  ask  for  responsibie  programming.  In  the  Detroit  market,  WDIV-  NBC  4  and  WXYZ-  ABC  7  are  doing  especially 
 good  jobs  with  local,  educational  programming.  But  there  is  room  for  improvement  on  other  network  affiliates.  I  am  especially  concerned  about  the  number  one  rated  station  targeting  12-  l  7 
 year  olds.  While  I  know  they  do  their  share  for  the  community,  many  of  the  cartoons  and  commercials  I  have  viewed  on  Saturday  mornings  are  very  dark  and  violent.  Imagine  if  kids  are 
 starting  their  days  watching  such  negative,  violent  situations  what  is  on  their  minds  the  rest  of  the  day? 


 We  appreciate  you  helping  us  keep  the  airwaves  a  public  trust  and  not  soleiy  a  commercial  enterprise  for  the  network  corporate  owners. 
 !3Bq3rely, 


 Marketing  Director 
329
 Board  of  Directors 
 Mr.  James  Fleming 
 Char 
 Hon.  Edna  Talbert-  Bell 
 Fir.  0  wee-  Chair 
 Hon.  Martha  G.  Scott 
 Second  Ike-  Chair 
 Dr.  Roman  Frankel 
 Ti-&  ZYUW? 


 Mr.  Ralph  R.  Rayner 
 Secrera~ 
 Mr.  Thomas  J.  Adams 
 Dr.  Salma  M.  Ajo 
 Hon.  Marylin  E.  Atkins 
 Mr.  Alec  Berry 
 Dr.  Lynne  Boyle 
 Ms.  Margaret  Bursie 
 Ms.  Mary  E.  Duncan 
 Mr.  Samuel  Ellis 
 Mr.  Michael  Fisher 
 Ms.  Kameel  Gibson 
 Hon.  Harold  Hood 
 Mr.  Harry  Hunter,  Jr. 
 Mr.  Darryl  Jordan 
 Hon.  Fred  Mester 
 Dr.  Robert  Niven 
 Mr.  Samuel  Parham,  Sr. 
 Mr.  Ted  Phillips 
 Mr.  Malloy  L.  Sanders,  Jr. 
 Hon.  Alberta  Tinsley-  Talabi 
 Ms.  Joann  Watson 
 Ms.  Na  Yang 


 Benjamin  A.  Jones  MSW,  CSW 
 PresrdtwKEO 


 Rev.  Dr.  Lottie  Jones-  Hood 
 Pres~  lenr  Emeritus 
 Mr.  Stratford  Hilliard 
 Board  Member  Emerirur 


 ADMINISTRATION 
 16647  Wyoming 
 Detroit,  Michigan  48221 
 313.341.9891 
 313.861.0413  Fax 
 800.3X8.9891  Toll  Free 


 FAMILY  PLUS  r~  arhers  And  Morhrrr  h  Lmpue  wizh  Youthi 


 18954  James  Couzens 
 Detroit,  Michigan  48235 
 313.345.9403 
 313.345.9017  Far. 


 VANTAGE  POINT 
 16647  Wyoming 
 Detroit.  Michigan  48221 
 313.342.3606 
 313.861.0413  Fax 


 VANTAGE  POINT  EAST 
 @  Renaissance  Hospital  & 
 Medical  Centers  East  Clinic 
 8300  Mack  Avenue 
 Detrtoit,  Michigan  48214 
 313.579.9133 
 313.579.9411  Fax 


 ~NCAD  NATIONAL  COUNCIL  ON  ALCOHOLISM  AND  DRUG  DEPENDENCE  Greater  Detroit  Area 
 March  7,200O 
 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 FCC 
 445  12*  St.  N.  W. 
 Washington  D.  C.  20554 


 Re:  Public  Hearings  ----  Docket  #  99360 
 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 The  National  Council  on  Alcoholism  and  Drug  Dependence,  Greater 
 Detroit  Area  is  pleased  to  add  our  voice  to  the  chorus  of  community 
 groups  and  concerned  individuals  who  are  calling  for  the  FCC  to  hold 
 public  hearings. 


 Along  with  the  plethora  of  issues  and  concerns  presented  by  the  coalition 
 led  by  People  for  Better  TV,  this  Council  believes  that  it  is  imperative  that 
 we  ask  media  outlets  to  list  in  their  public  file  the  date,  time  and  type  of 
 public  service  announcements  they  air.  To  our  knowledge  if  this 
 information  is  kept  it  is  not  made  available  for  public  viewing.  As  you 
 know  public  service  announcements  are  essential  to  drug  abuse  prevention 
 and  treatment  efforts. 


 Since  1947  the  NCADD-  GDA  has  provided  advocacy,  treatment,  and 
 prevention  services  to  the  greater  Detroit  Community.  Our  programs  and 
 projects  provide  hope  and  help  to  adolescents,  adults,  and  families.  Lead 
 by  a  volunteer  board  of  directors  who  are  civic  and  business  leaders, 
 politicians,  and  agency  executives  we  recognize  environmental  change  as 
 an  appropriate  method  to  prevent  and  treat  substance  abuse  problems. 


 Adolescent  &  Adub  Counseling  l  Alcohol  Highway  Safety  Classes  l  Education,  Inform&  ion  &Referrals 
 FAMILY  Plus  l  FAMlLYfor  Teen  Moms  l  Free  4  the  Weekend  l  Individual,  Family  &Group  Therapy  l 
 Intensive  Outpatient  l  REACH  Prevention  l  SAAM  l  Screening&  Assessments 
330
 -2- 
 Therefore,  we  strongly  support  your  efforts  to  encourage  the  FCC  to  hold  public  hearings  on  the 
 many  issues  related  to  the  media  and  its  method  of  operation.  If  you  require  any  additional 
 information  from  this  organization  please  contact  me  during  regular  business  hours  at  the 
 number  provided. 


 Benyamin  A.  Jon& 
 President/  CEO 
331
 People  for  Better  TV  Attn:  Mark  Lloyd 
 818  18th  Streer,  NW,  Suite  505  Washington,  DC.  20006 


 March  22,  2000 


 Dear  Mark  Lloyd,  l  am  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  Docket  Number  99-  360  dealing  with 
 the  public  interest  obligations  of  our  local  broadcasters.  My  husband  is  a  retired 
 clergyman  and  I  am  a  retired  public  school  teacher.  We  have  monitored  the  11  P.  M. 
 local  news  broadcasts  of  NBC  Channel  4  and  on  March  6,  2000  we  visited  the 
 Channel  4  studio  and  asked  to  see  the  public  record  files.  The  personnel  were  very 
 polite  and  helpful  to  us. 
 The  local  news  was  primarily  about  fires,  robbery,  people  killed  and  other 
 disasters.  Except  for  Lilas  health  news  there  was  very  little  uplifting  reports  or  news  of 
 personal  interest  to  me.  Specifically  in  30  minutes  the  news  was: 
 night  1  night  2  Local  News  ----------  4I  ye  ~.~~__~~~.~~~~~  19.3%  Not  every  second 


 &mfnercials  ----  ---  I  5.70/  ______  -  _____  29%  is  accounted  for 
 Weather  _______-______  14.3%  _____________  20.  fjyo  but  it  is  a  close  Health  &  Safety-------  O%-------------  1  0.1%  approximation. 


 Spo&  -~~~~~-~~--~-~~-----  8%  ~~~~~-~~~~~~~~-~~  6.1  o)& 
 National  News  --------  8%  ____  m___-  m----_--  6.6% 


 Teasers  __---------------  7%----  m--  _------  1.6%  Fluff  New+------------  f,  6/  0-.----------  2.5% 


 Chat  &  Filler  _---___  j-  4%-  ------  -2%  I  was  especially  interested  in  the  childrens  television  broadcasting.  I  looked  at 


 a  first  quarter  1998  and  a  last  quarter  1999  report.  I  thought  it  was  significant  that  all  of 
 the  shows  listed  were  targeted  for  an  audience  between  13  -16  years  of  age.  Why  not 
 air  something  for  elementary  aged  children?  In  the  l/  3  to  3/  8  1998  time  period  they 
 aired  a  good  show  on  Peer  Pressure,  but  it  was  aired  from  6:  00  A.  M.  to  6:  30  A.  M.  on 
 Saturday  morning.  I  doubt  if  many  people  in  the  targeted  audience  were  awake  at  that 
 hour  to  view  it.  I  was  pleased  to  see  that  they  reported  broadcasting  numerous  public 
 service  announcements  designed  for  children  that  ran  in  rotation  in  all  day  parts. 
 l  am  glad  that  Channel  4  has  continued  to  air  our  locally  produced  Open  Doors 


 program  that  the  Christian  Communication  Council  sponsors,  but  over  the  years  we 
 have  been  moved  from  a  more  favorable  8  A.  M.  Sunday  morning  time  slot  to  6.  A.  M. 
 I  hope  that  a  public  hearing  will  help  to  develop  some  mutually  agreeable 
 guidelines  to  benefit  our  viewing  audience,  especially  the  younger  children. 


 Mariann  McComack,  Supporter  of  People  for  Better  TV 
332
 WAYNE  STATE  UNIVERSITY  --_____.  --...  .-._--._  COLLEGE  OF  URBAN.  LABOR  ?a  METROPOLITAN  AFFAIRS 
 March  6,  2000 
 Chairman  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,,  DC 
 Dear  Chairman  Kennard. 
 1  am  joining  members  of  my  staff  in  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  for  Docket  #  99-  360  on  broadcasters  public  interest  obligations. 


 We  do  a  great  deal  of  work  on  the  management  of  conflict  and  violence  particularly  among  youth,  and  are  very  concerned  at  the  crucial  role  of  broadcast  media  regarding  this 
 problem,  as  well  as  reflecting  diversity  issues  in  society.  There  are  two  particular  aspects  of  this  problem:  (1)  news  coverage,  and  (2)  entertainment  programming  related  to  the 
 topic 
 Local  broadcasters  particularly  bear  a  signiAcant  responsibility,  since  they  often  indulge  in  sensational  coverage  of  crime  and  violence  as  leads  to  their  news  coverage.  Social 
 violence  should  not  be  treated  as  a  commercial  attractiun  for  ratings  or  sponsorship.  In  order  to  build  greater  sensitivity  and  professionalism,  local  broadcasters  should  be 
 required  to  diversify  their  work  forces,  increase  the  time  allocated  to  public  affairs  and  educational  programming,  limit  commercials,  and  consult  with  academic  and 
 professional  groups  for  greater  input  and  expertise  regarding  news  coverage. 
 The  content  of  entertainment  programming  is,  of  course,  controversial,  and  one  wants  to  respect  creative  freedom.  However,  again  it  is  important  for  programs  to  reflect  cultural 
 awareness,  avoid  stereotypes,  and  treat  violence  and  adult  themes  with  care,  sensitivity  and  in  a  fkily  explained  c,  ontext.  Programs  should  be  accurately  labeled  for  content,  and 
 offered  at  appropriates  time  slots.  Again  it  is  important  to  employ  stair  both  on  and  off  air,  reflecting  all  aspects  of  diversity  including  disabilities,  gender  issues,  and  ethnicity, 
 and  management  and  St&    should  receive  diversity  training. 
 T  urge  your  ofEce  to  set  clear  guidelines  in  this  respect  as  soop  as  possible.  Thanks  very  much  for  your  consideration. 


 .*.*. 
 --  --..  .__._  -.  _-  ___  _  I  r--.  .  ..-  .^_._  _.._  ,.  .  ..~--_  I-.-  ------_..  _-._ 
333
 The  Metropolitan  Christian  Council:  Detroit-  Windsor  The  Rev.  Richard  0.  Singleton,  Executive  Director 
 28  West  Adams,  1300  Mutural  Building 
 Detroit,  Michigan  48226 
 Phone  313-  962-  0340,  Fax  313-  962-  9044,  E-  mail  Councilweb@  aol.  com 


 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  St. 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard, 
 Attached  to  this  letter  is  a  letter  of  inquiry  that  was  sent  to  local  broadcast  stations  indicated  in  the  lower 
 left  hand  corner.  None  of  these  stations  responded  in  any  way  to  my  request.  One  would  think  that  at 
 least  I  should  have  received  a  phone  call.  We  are  sincerely  interested  in  advancing  the  quality  of 
 programming  in  our  area  and  improving  the  values  of  community  media. 


 Also,  I  should  report  to  you  that  since  deregulation  of  the  stations  by  the  FCC  we  have  had  our  time 
 reduced  by  the  local  TV  and  Radio  stations  from  3  l/  2  program  hours  a  week,  to  one  half  hour  program 
 on  WDIV  TV  (Open  Doors)  at  6  am.  on  Sunday  morning,  and  one  half  hour  program  on  PBS,  WTVS 
 (Daedal  Doors)  at  8  am.  on  Sunday  morning,  and  to  2  minutes  on  the  radio  on  WWJ  950  which  is 
 sometimes  preempted  by  some  weekend  news...  usually  sports  or  repeated  weather  and  traffic  bulletins 
 every  10  minutes  (we  used  to  have  an  half  hour  program  on  the  radio,  and  5  minutes  of  news  weekly  at  a 
 prime  time  slot). 


 It  is  clear  to  us  that  the  local  radio  and  TV  stations  do  not  care  in  any  way  to  serve  the  needs  of  the  local 
 community  nor  do  they  care  to  be  used  in  any  way  as  a  public  service.  There  is  a  need  to  again  bring 
 some  regulation  into  the  situation.  Ground  lost  may  never  be  regained. 


 The  Rev.  Richard  0.  Singleton  / 
 CC.  Commissioner  Gloria  Tristani 
 Commissioner  Susan  Ness 
 Commissioner  Michael  Powell 
 Commissioner  Harold  Furchtgott-  Roth 
 Congressman  Conyers  Senator  Carl  Levin 
334
 The  Metropolitan  Christian  Council:  Detroit-  Windsor 
 (Formerly  thechristian  Communication  Council 
 of  Metropolitan  Detroit  Churches) 
 The  Rev.  Richard  0.  Singleton  1300  Mutual  Building  -  28  W.  Adams  -  Detroit,  MI  48226 


 Phone  313-  962-  0340  -  Fax  313-  962-  9044  -  Email  counciiweb@  aol.  com 


 February  07,200O 
 Station  Manager 
 Detroit  -Windsor  Broadcast  Area 
 Detroit,  Michigan 


 Dear  Station  Manager, 
 As  you  can  see  from  the  letterhead  I  am  the  Executive  Director  of  the  Metropolitan  Christian 
 Council:  Detroit-  Windsor.  Our  council  represents  over  50  denominations  (Protestant,  Catholic  and  Orthodox 
 Churches  ,  appproximately  2000  churches)  in  the  greater  metropolitan  area  of  Detroit  and  Windsor.  We  have 
 church  memberships  in  seven  counties  in  Southeastern  Michigan  and  Southwestern  Ontario.  We  also  produce  two 
 television  programs  and  one  radio  program  of  our  own. 


 We  are  very  concerned  about  the  way  in  which  broadcast  television  has  eroded  its  public  service  spectrum  over  the 
 last  ten  years.  We  are  also  very  concerned  about  the  nature  of  childrens  programming,  and  the  amount  and  kind  of 
 advertising  associated  with  it.  We  are  also  concerned  with  the  nature  of  news  broadcasting,  both  its  content  and 
 manner. 


 We  have  been  working  with  a  nationwide  movement  called  People  for  Better  TV,  who  share  many  of  our  concerns  in 
 these  areas  of  public  service  and  programming,  especially  for  children.  We  all  know  that  the  values  that  television 
 has  represented  have  changed;  sexual  mores,  excessive  violence,  and  interpersonal  relationships  are  reflected  much 
 differently  now  than  in  recent  decades. 


 Would  you  therefore  do  something  for  us?  Would  you  write  us  and  give  us  a  listing  of  your  childrens  programs;  the 
 time  they  air>  and  a  brief  description  of  their  content.  9  Would  you  also  give  us  a  listing  of  the  public  service 
 announcements  that  you  have  made  in  the  last  week  (the  week  of  February  7th  would  be  fine).?  We  would  greatly 
 appreciate  hearing  from  you  as  soon  as  possible. 


 We  are  sincerely  yours  in  the  public  interest, 


 The  Rev.  Richard  0.  Singleton  l 
335

336
 SOUTHWEST 
 Texas 
 Carlos  Calbillo 
 Talent0  Bilingue  de  Houston) 
 Houston,  TX 
 2125/  oa 


 David  Donnelly,  Ph.  D. 
 University  of  Houston  (School  of  Communication) 
 Houston,  TX 
 2/  28/  00 


 Karen  Kapusta-  Pofahl 
 Denton,  TX 
 l/  30/  00 


 Johnny  N.  Mata 
 League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens 
 Houston,  TX 
 312100 


 Arizona 


 Tab  D-  4a 
 Tab  D-  4b 
 Phyllis  Rowe 
 Arizona  Consumers  Council 
 Phoenix,  AZ 
 2/  27/  00 


 Julia  Zozaya 
 Phoenix,  AZ 
 3/  l/  00 
337
 From:  Carlos  Calbillo,  Director  of  Video/  Film  Program,  Talent0  Bilingue  de  Houston 
 Date:  2/  25/  00 
 Re:  Comments  for  the  FCC 
 I  believe  that  Mary  Lampe  of  SWAMP  here  in  Houston  has  sent  you  a  report  on  our  visits  to  2  local  stations,  those  being  the  ABC  and  FOX  affiliates. 


 The  licensees  are  mandated  to  serve  the  public  interest  by  determining  the  needs,  problems  and  issues  in  their  local  communities  and  then  to  produce  programming  to 
 meet  and  address  those  local  issues  and  needs. 
 The  stations  here  in  Houston  as  elsewhere  have  eliminated  or  drastically  reduced  their  public  affairs  and  community  relations  functions,  during  a  period  in  the  U.  S.  broadcast 
 and  cablecast  industry  of  unprecedented  growth  of  their  revenues.  In  the  1970s,  these  areas  within  a  station  were  almost  exclusively  where  minorities  and  women  were 
 employed,  and  gave  the  stations  a  place  to  point  to  when  cultural  and  ethnic  diversity  in 
 employment  began  to  command  importance  in  their  local  communities.  Currently, 
 almost  all  of  the  stations  in  Houston  with  news  operations  claim  to  meet  their  FCC  requirements  through  programming  offered  by  the  regular  news  department  operations. 


 The  news  operation,  being  the  foremost  revenue  generating  system  within  a  station,  does  not  have  meeting  the  needs  or  addressing  the  problems  of  a  community,  as  its 
 foremost  or  even  significant  interest.  African  American  and  Latin0  communities  specifically  are  underserved  by  this  process.  A  stations  news  organization,  given  the 
 cut-  throat  nature  of  the  ratings  wars  which  lead  to  increasing  sensationalistic  local  community  coverage,  are  simply  unable  to  deal  in  a  rational  or  realistic  way  with  local 
 community  problems  and  needs.  There  are  relatively  few  stories  on  the  positive  aspects  of  a  community,  individual,  or  organization  that  is  working  to  make  a  difference  in  the 
 direction  of  that  community.  This  type  of  coverage  isn  t  sexy,  in  the  newsroom  vernacular,  drivebys  and  convenience  store  holdups  are.  My  argument  is  verified  by 
 the  public  file,  where  one  can  see  that  the  station  will  state  that  they  have  addressed  the  issue  of  crime  by  a  6pm  sensationalistic  news  segment  on  carjacking,  or  that  a  1  Opm 
 news  blurb  on  back  alley  abortions  satisfies  their  covering  BOTH  a  unwed  mothers  and  a  crime,  and  youth  requirement. 


 I  further  disagree  with  the  process  by  which  the  stations  ascertain  the  problems  of  their 
 local  communities.  The  stations  organize  quarterly  ascertainment  meetings  at  which  the  public  affairs  officer  at  a  particular  station  invites  a  group  of  individuals  who  are 


 supposed  to  represent  their  communities.  In  Houston,  this  cattle  call  results  in  each  individuals  given  fifteen  minutes  before  this  audience  of  public  affairs  officers  and  the 
 person  is  asked  to  state  what  the  issues  are  for  their  community.  There  is  no  effort  to  document  or  to  catalog  the  responses.  This  raw  data  is  sometimes  place  in  the  stations 
 public  file,  sometimes  not.  The  station  and/  or  their  legal  representative  will  make  this 
 call. 


 -.  -  -~--_  I___ 
 ----- 
338
 People  For  Better  TV  Visits  to  Stations  by  Cartes  Calbillo  and  Mary  Lampe 
 January  282000 
 KTRK-  TV,  Channel  13,  ABC 
 (Arrived  at  1O:  lO  a.  m.;  admitted  lo:  18  a.  m.;  assisted  by  Terry  Carter) 


 General  Observations:  Files  neatly  organized,  readily  accessible,  friendly/  helpful  staff 


 Files  Reviewed:  1,  Ascwtainments,  January  -December  1999:  Note:  records  of  interviews  with 
 public  by  staff  regarding  community  concerns,  forums  held  monthly@  public  attends  by  invitation 


 A.)  1  st  quarter  (13  interviews):  issues-  welfare;  race  relations  +  crime;  summer  jobs;  child  abuse;  welfare  to  work;  law  income  housing;  lawsuit  abuse;  families  and  violence; 
 helmet  laws;  pollution  and  erosion;  infant  mortality;  juvenile  crime;  8.  )  2nd  quarter  (1  interview):  issue-  low  income  femilies 


 C.)  3rd  quarter  (17  interviews):  issues-  lack  of  child  care;  lack  of  human  interest  stories  in  media;  job  training;  special  needs  of  hearing  impaired;  drugs;  hate  crimes  +  gayi; 
 violence  in  schools;  arts  for  children  in  scheels;  health  care  and  insurance  for  elderly,  immigrant  families;  gangs;  homelessness;  child  fatality;  environment 


 D.)  4th  quarter  (7  interviews):  issues-  downtown  parking  and  traffic;  public  transportation;  low  secondary  school  standards;  abandoned  children  and  teen  mothers; 
 pollution;  hunger-  shelters;  child  poverty;  affordable  houseing;  public  school;  economic  issues  and  empowerment  for  girts 


 2.  kssues  and  Problem8  Report,  lOW99-  12/  31/  99  (flied  l/  10/  2000) 
 October  1  through  December  31,1999,  KIRK-  TV  broadcast  3  %  hours  weekly  local  public  affairs  programs. 
 A)  ABC/  l  3  Community  Closeup  (Saturdays,  wkdays,  12-  l  :00  p.  m.):   
 Includes  several  programs  (rotated  during  time  slot):  Issue  Forums  (political  concerns 
 of  community);  County  Line  (various  interests);  Visions  (Asian  interests);  Viva  Houston  (Hispanic);  Crossroads  (African  American);  and  Debra  Duncan  show, 


 Monday  thru  Friday. 


 ...[  the]  following  issues  that  were  important  to  the  community  in  the  4th  quarter  of  1999 
 1.  Hunger  (4  shows,  3  for  45  minutes  total  and  a  Food  Drive,  3  hours  long)  2.  Nov.  Election  (4  shows,  1:  42) 
 3.  Y2K  (1  hour,  2  programs) 
339
 4.  Breast  Cancer  awareness  (1  show,  30  minutes)  5.  Children  First  (1  show,  30  min) 
 6.  Boot  camps  (1  show,  30  mln)  Then  KTRK-  TV  News  programs  (listed) 


 General  Observations:  It  would  have  been  diicuit  to  determine  what  all  programs  were  developed  relating  to  the  Ascertainment  issues;  or,  how  programs  listed  related  to 
 specific  Houston  community.  Overall,  it  doesnt  seem  like  much  community  programming  for  four  month  period.  Query:  does  a  food  drive  really  cover  the  issues  of 
 hunger; 
 3.  Petitfan  to  Deny,  dated  1993,  by  Houston  resident  Gloria  Trevino  Turner,  concerning  injustice  to  minorities  (petition  to  deny  was  denied) 


 4.  Files  of  %sues  and  Problems  of  Cor~  cem,~  a  master  list,  not  in  order  of 
 importance  and  based  on  compilation  of  phone  calls  and  ascertainments  (last  update  1993) 


 6.  %hlldrens  Programming  Report,  10/  l/  99-  12/  31199,  filed  l/  10/  00) 
 FCC  396  Submission  Results  Disneys  Pepper  Ann;  Disneys  Doug;  Sabrina,  the  Animated  Series;  Bugs  Bunny; 
 Winnie  the  Pooh;  Squigglevision;  ABC  Kids  Matinee 
 Number  of  Network  Commercial  Minutes  :  11  minutes  on  Saturdays,  between  630 
 a.  m.  and  8100  a.  m.  (430  for  local  commericals).  Format  allows  for  3-  I:  34  station  breaks,  of  which  1:  30  only  for  each  may  be  used  for  local  commerical  matter  Format 


 allows  2-  l  94  station  breaks,  of  which  1:  OO  only  for  each  may  be  used  for  local  commericai  matter  (Note:  #  commercials  at  other  times  were  not  indicated,  or  at  least, 


 apparW 
 6.  Viewer  Letter-  a  (Note:  ail  actual  communications  in  files) 


 7.  Wnnual  Employment  Report  (Note:  1997  in  files,  98  missing,  99  not  available  until  March  200&  a  copy  of  98  will  be  sent  to  Carlos  Calbillo) 


 KRWIV,  Channel  26,  FOX 
 (Arrived  at  2:  10,  got  in  at  2:  30  p.  m.,  Assisted  by  Lisa  Whitlock  and  Cindy?) 


 General  Observations:  Files  located  in  a  locked  room  in  locked  cabinets;  accompanied 
 at  all  times  by  staff;  staff  was  helpful:  Lisa  Whitlock  said  she  was  a  department  of  one,  shes  in  charge  of  community  programs  including  doing  the  ascertainments  and  some 


 production. 
340
 Files:  1.  A8cmtalnments,  4th  quarter,  1999 
 Observations:  Organized  differently  than  previous  station,  categories  such  as  Family,  Local  GovernmeM,  TransportationITrafW,  Prejudice/  Racism  etc.  Each  section  had 
 a  page  for  each  program  or  piece  that  related  to  that  category.  National  pieces  were  included  with  local  and  mixed  together.  Few  seemed  to  actually  be  local  productions. 
 Noticed  that  there  were  often  duplications  of  programming  listed  in  different  categories,  eg,  piece  on  2000  Countdown  was  included  in  categories  Local  Government  and  in 
 Family;  another  piece  on  Texas  Veterans  Scam  listed  as  Local  Govt  and  Famiif;  High  School  Kid  Sh&  story  repeated  in  Prejudice/  Racism  and  Family,  Survivors  of 
 School  Violence  program  repeated  in  Random  violence  and  in  Family  section  (more  examples  available) 


 Actual  ascertainment  forms  were  not  available. 
 2.  Issues/  Problems  FTla 
 Observation:  contained  daily  FCC  Content  Log  Report  e.  g.,  Friday,  U/  31/  99  contained  3:  31:  00  of  commercials:  29:  40  of  PSAs;  and  4030  of  promotional  materials. 


 Observation:  in  4th  Quarter  1999  1  O/  8/  99  to  12/  18/  99,17  PSAs  were  aired  (not  local) 
 3.  Employment  Log  1999 


 --  11  -.  ._  I..  -.--..  I  .._.  ,.....  -  _  __  _.___  ___  __-^  l_-._-  .  . 
341
 Peb(  uary  28,  !I000 
 C-  o!:*;  r;  is~  ionct  William  Kcnnard 
 F::  I$-::  11  Communications  Commission 
 445  :  giCh  Slrcct,  NW  W.  I:~!~~  qton,  D.  C.  2fJ554 


 1  1  +!;!,  Y  Ii  ke  to  commend  the  Federal  Communicafions  Cobmissioi  for  in)  tiaGng  a  Notice  of  Iwiry  info 
 &c+&  r  and  obligations  that  wc?  uld  accompany  the  transition  to  digital  te?  evision  ad  strongly  urgej&  &I> 
 t;&  c  :!  G  next  step  by  opening  a  Notice  of  Inquiry  and  Prdpdsed  R&  making.  l%  e  transition  affecting  the 
 IX~~  LVII  of  nlcvislon  that  has  already  been  set  in  motion  by  regulafm  and  the  private  sector  should  ; 
 ir+~:~  x  more  than  just  the  technology  of  television.  Ihe  .Fotivariqrp  driving  such  a  transition  ! 
 s!!:  j?  i!  li  ga  well  beyond  creating  an  environment  which  incre&  ccs~  t~  potefitial  proftt  margins  of  priv,  irr 
 r&  i.!  ~onglomeratc~.  This  is  an  unprecedcntc.  d  opportunity  to  imp&  e  the  overall  quality  oftcfcvisic~  n. 


 RL~  Q!:!(  IVS  are  fawd  with  the  chance  to  establish  new  gt&  nd  ru)&  for  theemerging  m&  ia  environ&:!. 
 TM  IXX  can  now  clarify  the  ambiguities  in  the  phrase  &  public  h$  er&,  convenience  and  nec&$* 
 \%;)  li2r  h:)  ve  made  the  definition  and  enforcement  of  public$  tereit  &ligat;  ons  djffcult.  +Ib  agenby  cgn 
 rr:.:;::  i  i  rtsclf  as  an  empowered  puhli~  trustee.  The  Commjssion  n+  ds  to  tiork  with  private  industry.  hu: 
 YV  R  r.  tjL*  cr  to  the  whims  and  desires  of&  e  private  sector,  n$  r  buyinto:  the  rhetoric  that  the  market@+  cscr  rf:::,~  ;3ll  problems, 
 A  previous  FCC  Commissioner  duririg  the  tie&  n  qhninistration  allegedly  at&  Cd 
 !b.:!  2  I&  vision  is  nothing  more  than  a  toaster  with  piCNr&.  Thij  &&  m&  t  is  not  only  misleading,  6,:  p~~::!::  i:  Gly  dangerous.    Both  are  electridal  appliances,  but  the  differ&  s  fat  outweigh  the  aimilari&.  The 


 nc;,  xi~  x*  or  posidve  social  impact  of  a  toaster  is  inconse&  ntial,  the  imp&  tolteJevision  is  immeaeoah!  c. 
 It>  ii@!  of  rhe  recent  growth  of  media  conglomerates  and  t@  inht@  nt  power  reflected  in  the  sheers&  of 
 QICS  ;?  rtitirs.  the  needs  of  the  American  public  have  to  be  balanced  a&  ainsj  @e  insatiable  desire  for  profi:~ 
 fl&.  h  xrc  Iwo  apas  in  particular  that  cannot  he  left  to  thefroe  m&  t  regulation.  While  orher  natiohs 
 h::\!:  cnac~  ed  sttong  profecrions  guarding  their  children  a$  nst  con&  nerci$~  sm,  the  US  has  enacted  I  :~+  xntiveIy  minimal  safeguards.  I  er~  courage  the  FCC  b  revisit@  mandates  of  the  Childrens  ,,  I 


 T&  Y  L;  i~  ri  Act  of  19%  and  to  further  d&  fine  and  bolster  t&  hourly  qucarional  programming  fequiretihlr 
 iK  ii<!:!  af  the  increnscd  spectrum  given  to  broadcasters.  With  tht  ~lbbali~,  ati&  of  media  ownership.  IOMI 
 ~i;~~  r~;  Illt\  ing  may  become  an  increasingly  lower  priority.  1  am  ojQehou@  'to  remember  the  days  wfien 
 ~!~  r:??  ri:&  ons  provided  public  affairs  pro~  amrning,  and  I  Gave  wjt(  c$  sed  i  &eady  decline  over  the  paH  1ca 
 ~!:;  y.:;!;-$.  Today,  most  stations  providelocal  news,  which  is  bcirig  w,  btc@  l  down  by  insipid  stories  a&  l 
 II:;,~.;:~;!  ~rqram  prmt&  vw,  and  not  much  else  in  this  are.  As  tiany  cities  have  only  one  major  daif? 
 Il~-;..:~;,  r,~  r,  local  station  coverage  of  events  and  important  $omm&  it$  is&  3  is  even  more  critical.  .; 
 l:  nf;:<!  llntilely,  such  material  may  not  generate  high  rating&  and  &S  8  resu<&  it  may  go  uncovered  leaYl?  nz  I* 
 ~i;!;;  ic  IJ!  linformed,  Broadcasters  have  an  obligation  to  the  public  rhich  @list  ~!  ot  take  the  back  seaI  !o 
 rl:  rir  $Iigarions  to  their  investors  and  the  stakeholders.  Te  only  Chy  fo  tiuly  &sure  that  broadcastqrc 
 r.:$  t.  wh  a  responsibility  is  to  enforce  buch  an  obligation  @rough  tiles.  Television  viewers  are  Wt,,  Ody 
 c!:%  g+:  ern,  hut  they  are  also  citizens.  To  ensure  that  our  demociadyrempips  sttong  and  vital,  we  trW!  p;.,$?  c  the  information  infrastructure  &d  free  flow  of  informatiodnkcded  to  cultivate  a  well  inform@ 


 p  q%  l$  C. 
342
 As  i  &uncral  rule,  like  MO84  Americans  I  am  oppostd  tq  cjverly  nhctlvc  governmenral  regulations  q+!  f  t  ;rtn  qrinst  Ihe  unnecessary  Intrusjon  of  government  agericics  in  rhepri&  e  scdtors.  The  media  &  &;.~  a 
 W?  I~~  C  the  pubjic  requires  the  guitanci  end  the  protections  that  a&  qtablidhed  in  enfw-  blc  rulei  &&  by 
 $Grnmcnt  agencies.  The  h-  ansition  to  digital  television  is  exciti,  ng.  and  the  FCC  has  the  opportti&  1.0  , 
 pr;~~:  c  the  Anierlcan  public  by  helping  to  implcmcnt  n&  s  which  wBuld)  trve  to  minimim  the  negaiivc 
 i~%$.  t,.~  of  the  m&  urn  of  television  while  concutrcr$  ly  sti:  mulating  ihe  piosocial  impact 
 I>?  *>:\  l  of  the  MOSI  ~OWX~  UI  cultural  forces  of  our  day. 


 .r  , 


 ,.. 


 _  _.__  I  ,    .-.-..  n--.~-  -,..__  ^  .,,, 
343
 From:  kkap&  zta@  hotmail.  com 
 Subject:  People  for  Better  TV  Date:  30  Jan  2000 


 Karen  Kapusta-  Pofahl  500  Audra  Lane  Apt.  C 
 Denton,  TX  7620  l-  6495 
 ,Chairman  William  E.  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  SW  Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 I  believe  the  airwaves  are  a  public  trust  and  I  want  to  know  that  the  .public  has  been  consulted  before  those  airwaves  are  given  away.  No  one  has 
 *asked  me  how  TV  can  better  serve  me  or  my  family. 
 I  understand  that  television  broadcasters  in  major  cities  across  the  United  States  will  begin  using  additional  public  airwaves  to  broadcast 
 digital  television  signals  on  May  1,  1999.  I  am  sure  that  digital  broadcasting  will  offer  many  opportunities,  but  I  want  to  know  what 
 responsibilities  broadcasters  will  perform  in  exchange  for  the  free  use  of  the  airwaves. 


 Please  begin  a  proceeding  immediately  to  consider  what  people  like  me  can  expect  in  return  for  giving  away  such  valuable  public  resources  to  the 
 ,broadcasters. 
 Television  plays  an  important  and  powerful  role  in  my  community,  and  like  many  Americans  I  am  concerned  about  the  amount  of  sex  and  violence  on 
 television,  the  number  of  commercials  during  childrens  programming,  the  lack  of  local  programming  addressing  the  needs  of  my  community,  and  the 
 lack  of  programming  accessible  to  the  disabled. 
 Sincerely, 
 Karen  Kapusta-  Pofahl 


 cc:  Representative  William  M.  (Mac)  Thomberry 
 Senator  Kay  Bailey  Hutchison  Senator  Phil  Gramm 
344
 + 
 $  9  League  of  United  Latin  American  Citiiens  LULAC  District  XVIII 


 3522  Polk  Street,  Houston,  Texas  77003  Phone  (713)  ZU-  8522 


 March  2,  ZOOO 
 Mr.  Marco  Grimal&  People  for  Better  TV 
 818  18*  St.  NW  Suite  505  Washington  D.  C.  20006 


 Dear  Mr.  Glimaldo, 
 In  1983  the  League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens  National  Office  (LULAC)  had  an  audit  conducted  of  network  television  by  Public  Advocates,  Inc.  According  to  the  audit 
 Hispanics  had  virtually  been  excluded  from  the  major  networks.  It  is  very  evidence  today  that  Hispanics  are  still  underrepresented  in  the  major  networks. 


 In  the  Houston  area  there  appears  that  a  decline  on  public  service  programs  by  the  television  stations  has  occuned.  KHOU-  TV  Channel  11  (CBS)  had 
 a  weekly  Hispanic  program  entiied  Ola  Amigos  from  about  1971  to  1995.  Hispanics  protected  and  were 


 outraged  that  the  station  was  canceling  the  Program.  Belo  Corporation  officials  met  on  or  about  1992  with  community  leaders  to  inform  the  community  about  a  new  program 
 called  First  Sunday.  First  Sunday  included  the  total  minor&  y  community,  which  resulted  with  a  once  a  month  minority  program.  First  Sunday  aired  until  about  1996.  No  other 
 public  service  program  exists  since  then  other  then  a  Sat.  morning  news  program.  The  program  something  carries  small  segments  of  community  activities.  There  was  a 
 Community  Affairs  Department  with  two  people  up  till  March  1999;  One  person  remained  to  carry  out  the  Community  Affairs  function.  On  or  about  June  of  1999,  Community 
 Affairs  was  merged  under  Marketing  and  Promotions  thereby  deleting  community  affairs. 
 KTRH  TV  Channel  13  (ABC)  On  are  about  September  1999  KTRH-  TV  Channel  13  under  went  Public  Service 
 program  reorganization  and  began  Community  Close  Up,  which  consist  of  viva  Houston,  Cross  roads,  Vision-  Asian,  County  Line  and  Issues.  Viva  Houston  was  a  Hispanic  Thirty 
 minute  once  a  week  program  as  was  Cross  Road  an  African-  American  program.  The  station  continues  to  maintain  a  three  person  Community  Relations  Office,  but 
 programming  of  Cross  Roads  and  Viva  Houston  programs  has  been  reduced  drastically. 
345
 KPRC-  TV  Channel  2  (NBC)  also  had  a  Hispanic  Public  Service  Program  several  years  back  that  no  longer  is  on  the  air.  We  have  not  touched  on  the  other  stations  due  to  the 
 availability  of  tie. 
 Hispanics  and  other  persons  of  color  and  groups  in  Houston  and  surrounding  areas  as  well  as  on  the  national  level  would  greatly  benefit  by  the  Federal  Communications 
 Commission  continued  work  in  assuring  that  the  television  and  radio  industry  through  their  programming  be  more  responsive  to  our  communities.  LUIAC  will  continue  to 
 monitor  television  programs  with  the  help  of  organizations  such  as  People  for  Setter  TV 
 and  others  to  ensure  progress  in  this  area,  thank  you  for  work  assistance. 


 Sincerely, 


 Johnny  N.  Mata  Media  Relations  and  Communications 
346
 Board  of  Ditwtofa 
 prmddt3ti  Phyllis  Rowe 


 Mce  Pmidents:  Senator  Manuel  Llto  Pena 
 Al  Sterman 
 Recording  Secretary 
 Vacant 


 Treawrer: 
 Steve  Freehill 


 hafdMe/  n&  efs: 
 Kathi  Barber  Frederic  Bellamy 


 David  Braun  Cloves  Campbell 
 Rosalie  Crowe  Eugene  Gavigan 
 Charles  Hadd,  Sr.  Tim  Hogan 
 Coleen  Langewisch  Joe  Montoya 
 Edward  Neman  Joe  Urshan 
 Mike  Vespoli  Rev.  Henry  Wasielewskl 
 Marsha  Weeks  Lee  Wolfson 


 a-  88:  P.  O.  Box1288 
 Phoenix,  AZ  S!  XOl  602-  2S59625  voice 
 602-  26&  7465  fax  e-  mail:  proweg)  primenet.  com 
 Tucson:  520327-  0241  V&  e 


 February  27,200O 
 People  for  Better  TV 


 The  Arizona  Consumers  Council  receives  consumer  complaints  and  also  questions  from  consumers  in  our  state.  A  number  of  calls  are 
 related  to  Television  programming. 
 Consumers  believe  that  there  are  too  many  commercials  during  many  programs.  Sometimes  three  in  succession  and  they  are  repeating 
 commercials  that  are  shorter  again  during  a  program.  In  some  cases  there  is  almost  more  commercial  time  than  program  time  The  television 
 channels  are  being  given  to  broadcasters  without  any  restrictions  as  to  commercials. 


 There  are  not  enough  local  programs  dealing  with  important  local  issues.  Local  elections  had  very  little  public  programming  on  local 
 transportation  or  initiative  issues  or  information  about  what  is  happening  in  our  state  legislature.  There  is  a  city  channel,  but  seldom  is  any  of  this 
 -often  important  information-  broadcast  on  other  channels.  Many  people 
 do  not  constantly  watch  the  city  channel  and  miss  this  information. 


 As  newspaper  readership  is  diminishing,  television  is  relied  upon,  more  and  more,  for  all  of  the  information  that  people  receive  on  local  issues 
 and  these  are  often  not  addressed. 
 We  believe  that  there  needs  to  be  hearings  on  oversight  and  rules  that  will  benefit  the  public. 


 Sincerely, 


 Phyllis  Rowe  President 
347
 March  I,  2000 
 To  whom  it  may  concern: 
 I  am  writing  to  express  my  views  concerning  the  responsibilities  of  digital  broadcasters.  I 
 am  concerned  that  television  broadcasters  do  not  serve  everyone  equally.  I  live  in  the 
 Phoenix  area.  I  am  blind  and  I  am  hearing  impaired.  Currently,  the  only  station  which  I  know  of  that  is  offering  video  descriptive  services  is  channel  eight,  the  local  public 


 broadcast  station.  This  means  that  I  cannot  enjoy  the  local  news,  weather,  or  any  of  the  community  or  public  affairs  programming  which  are  offered  by  the  other  stations. 


 New  technologies  offer  many  promises,  but  may  also  pose  some  serious  problems.  As  an  example,  I  should  say  that  I  am  looking  forward  to  my  birthday  gift  this  year  which  will 
 be  an  attachment  to  my  television  which  will  allow  me  to  receive  the  video  descriptive  signals  from  channel  eight.  This  device  is  expensive  and  for  many  who  are  blind,  the 
 added  cost  would  be  prohibitive.  I  have  to  wonder  if  given  changes  in  technology,  I  will 
 have  to  buy  another  device  in  the  future.  I  have  heard  that  we  will  need  to  buy  new  television  sets  to  receive  digital  signals  and  I  would  like  to  be  sure  that  you  fully  consider 


 how  this  will  impact  persons  with  disabilities.  I  want  to  be  sure  that  the  technology, 
 including  both  software  and  hardware  will  be  standardized  and  accessible  to  all. 


 I  am  very  involved  in  my  community  and  I  value  the  role  that  television  plays  in 
 educating  the  public.  I  am  a  member  of  the  League  of  United  Latin  American  Citizens 
 (LULAC),  and  I  formerly  served  as  LULAC  National  Vice-  president  for  Women.  I  am 
 concerned  that  the  broadcasters  in  my  area  do  not  fairly  represent  Latinos  or  women  on 
 television.  I  believe  that  broadcasters  should  do  more  to  reach  out  to  diverse 
 populations  as  a  way  to  better  serve  the  communities  which  they  are  licensed  to  serve.  I 
 think  that  this  would  help  in  getting  out  the  real  story  about  the  good  things  which  happen  in  our  neighborhoods.  As  it  is,  I  think  broadcasters  pay  too  much  attention  to  car 


 accidents,  crimes  and  disasters  and  too  little  attention  to  the  good  work  which  goes  on  day  to  day.  I  am  also  concerned  that  broadcasters  reach  Indian  reservations  and  other 
 rural  communities  which  would  otherwise  be  left  out  of  public  debate  and  community 
 information. 


 I  previously  owned  a  radio  station  and  we  made  special  efforts  to  reach  out  to  diverse 
 communities.  I  do  not  see  television  stations  making  an  effort  to  provide  real  community  programming  responsive  to  the  day-  to-  day  realities  in  our  neighborhoods. 


 I  understand  that  Congress  gave  away  the  use  of  the  public  airwaves  to  broadcasters  for  the  transmission  of  digital  signals.  I  believe  that  broadcasters  stand  to  make  a  great 
 deal  of  money  as  a  result  of  this  new  capacity  and  I  would  like  to  know  what  I  as  a 
 citizen  can  expect  in  exchange  for  this  give  away. 


 Julia  Zozaya 
 4548  West  Osborn  Phoenix,  AZ  85031 
348
 c 
349
 CALIFORNIA 
 Los  Aweles 
 Xandra  Kayden 
 League  of  Woman  Voters  -  Los  Angeles 
 Los  Angeles,  CA 
 3/  6/  00 


 Bong  Hwan  Kim 
 MultiCultural  Collaborative 
 Los  Angeles,  CA 
 3/  7100 


 Alicia  Maldonado 
 Mexican  American  Legal  Defense  and  Educational  Fund 
 Los  Angeles,  CA 
 3/  6/  00 


 Cher  McIntyre 
 Consumer  Action 
 Los  Angeles,  CA 
 2/  25/  00 


 Peter  T.  Morgan 
 Los  Angeles,  CA 
 3/  9/  00 


 Laurie  Trotta 
 Mediascope 
 Studio  City,  CA 
 3/  8/  00 


 Tab  D-  5a 


 _-..  _  __...  ~--.  _.  _^__-_..  l.---.  l_  l.  l.. 
350
 THE  LEAGUE  OF  WOMEN  VOTERS 
 OF  LOS  ANGELES 


 March  6,200O 
 The  Honorable  William  Kennard,  Chairman  Federal  Communications  Commission 


 445  12thstreet,  S.  W.  Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard: 
 I  am  writing  on  behalf  of  the  League  of  Women  Voters  of  Los  Angeles  in  response  to  your  Notice  of  Inquiry  regarding  public  interest  obligations  of  TV 
 broadcast  licensees.  We  have  been  conozned  aboul  local  television  coverage  for  some  time  and  undertook  a  study  last  fall  --  following  a  rather  dismal  experience  of 
 trying  to  get  local  stations  to  cover  the  charter  reform  campaign  last  spring.  I  am  enclosing  a  copy  of  our  effort. 


 I  woukl  like  to  take  this  opportunity,  however,  to  explain  why  I  think  local  television  coverage  of  local  public  afi%  rs  is  so  important.  I  am  a  political  scientist 
 who  teaches  urban  politics  at  UCLA.  Political  science  these  days  is  more  engaged  in  what  is  called  rational  choice  theory  than  politics  and  government,  and, 
 therefore,  such  courses  as  mine  are  rarely  taught.  Since  they  arent  taught  at  the  college  level,  civics  is  not  taught  in  the  schools.  My  students,  for  instance,  have 
 never  had  a  course,  or  even  a  segment  of  a  course,  on  local  government.  If  you  add  to  the  lack  of  education,  the  fact  that  so  many  of  our  residents  are  immigrants 
 f?  om  countries  where  participation  in  Iocal  government  is  tantamount  to  being  a  criminal  --  and  that  the  political  party  machines  that  welcomed  immigrants  into  the 
 political  system  in  the  last  round  of  immigration  at  the  turn  of  the  last  century  no  longer  exist  at  the  local  level  --  it  is  easy  to  see  why  there  is  so  little  interest  in 
 public  affairs  at  every  level  of  government.  There  is  a  correlation  between  knowledge  and  engagement,  and  another  between  engagement  and  confidence  in 
 the  political  system 
 If  70  percent  of  Americans  get  their  news  from  television  -  and  local  television  is  devoted  to  personal  tragedies,  natural  disasters  and  consumer  news  -- 
 it  is  not  difficult  to  explain  the  decline  in  atEliation  with  our  political  system.  Local  television  news  is  not  the  cause,  but  requiring  some  measure  of  public  service  in 
 return  for  a  license  is  not  asking  very  much  for  the  use  ofpublic  air  waves.  And  if  no  local  station  can  be  expected  to  change  on  its  own,  the  answer  must  come  from 
 re-  regulation  of  the  licenses  you  issue. 


 bQ90  WILSHIRE  BOULEVARD,  SUITE  301  l  LOS  ANGELES,  CA90036  .  TEL:  (213)  Q3QCiS6  FAX:  (213)  939-  0285  E-  MAIL  0  ba062@&  h.  oq 
 ._  -._--.--  -  I_.  -..-  -.  I-.  .--  -  ._~_  -..  -  -.----.--. 
351
 Other  Leagues  of  Women  Voters  around  the  country  have  expressed  interest  in  our  project  and  I  expect  that  we  WilI  watch  this  issue  with  great  interest, 
 given  our  mission  of  fbstering  an  educated  electorate.  wiIhpss  to  tackle  this  very  serious 
 problem.  Thank  you  for  your 


 Sincerely, 
 ><  cR-  I  Al.%-  l&+  g--..- 


 Xandra  Kayden  President 


 Encl. 
352
 THE  LEAGUE  OF  WOMEN  VOTERS 
 OF  LOS  ANGELES 


 MEDLQ  WATCH 
 What  We  Learned 
 Forty-  five  members  of  the  Los  Angeles  League  of  Women  Voters  watched  local  television  news  during  the  week  of  October  26  and  logged  the  stories  they  aired  and  they  time  allocated  to  them. 
 As  a  volunteer  effort,  it  was  not  uniform.  And  it  certainly  was  not  easy.  We  did  not  cover  every  news  show  and  every  reviewer  did  not  record  stories  the  same  way. 
 We  did,  however,  learn  enough  to  draw  some  conclusions,  although  it  would  be  an  exaggeration  to  say  they  were 


 especially  startling  conclusions. 
 The  big  stories  of  the  week  were  the  developing  school  hoard  crisis  locally  --  which  also  became  a  national  story  as  the  week  progressed;  and  the  downing  at  the  end  of  the  week  of 
 Egyptian  Air  Flight  990.  There  were  other  activities  going  on  in  the  world  --  including  the  closing  days  of  elections  in  many  communities  around  the  State  and  the  country. 
 The  Governor  was  traveling  abroad.  And  the  presidential  contenders  in  both  the  Democratic  and  Republican  parties 


 held  their  first  natiomtlly-  televised  encounters  in  the  town  halls  in  New  Hampshire.  The  WorM  Series  was  concluded,  and  golfer  Payne  Stewart  was  killed  in  a  strange  plane  crash  that  occupied 
 ,  the  hearts  and  minds  of  thousands  as  the  clearly-  unpiloted  plane  wended  its  way  across  the  country  before  running  out  of  gas. 


 The  news  shows  watched  included  the  following: 
 CBS  /Channel  2  (5:  00,6:  00,  1  l:  OO);  NBC/  Channel  4  (5:  00  and  1  T:  OO); 
 KTLA/  cbaMel5  (1O:  OO);  ABC/  Channel  7  (5:  OO  and  11  :OO); 
 KcAL/  channel9  (2:  OO);  KCOP/  Cbannell3  (1O:  OO). 


 We  did  not  cover  cable  news,  news  magazine,  or  Public  Television. 


 What  We  Saw  in  Los  Angeles 
 Stories  feil  into  the  following  categories: 
 *  car  chases  --  there  werent  many  by  our  standards  *  murcler/  crirnq  --  the  majority  of  the  stories  were  local,  but  the  network  afhliates,  particularly 
 were  able  to  borrow  mayhem  tim  elsewhere  and  6ll  in  interesting  stories  tiom 
 elsewhere  about  20  to  25  percent  of  the  time  in  this  category. 


 9030  WILSHIRE  BOULEVARD,  SUITE  301  l  LOS  ANGELES,  CA  90036  l  TEL:  (213)  939-  3535  FAX:  (213)  999-  0285  E-  MAIL  W  bd)=@  hfn.  q  _-- 
 2____  .ll.  l_.  -...  ^.  ..  __  I  ..-  -..  ^  _....  ..- 
353
 *  disaster  --  a  popular  subject,  helped  along  by  the  air  plane  crashes,  but  some  channels  spent 
 more  time  on  dbsters  than  any  other  category.  *  business  -  ahhough  this  is  a  growing  topic  elsewhere  on  television  (particularly  for  specialized 


 cable  channels  such  as  CNBC  and  CNN&,  which  is  trying  to  catch  up),  it  was  not  a  high  priority  for  local  news 
 *  human  interest  -  rankiug  right  up  there  with  disaster  and  sports 
   medti4  --  this  included  movie  and  book  reviews,  generally  not  given  as  much  time  as  one  might  have  thought  given  that  Los  Angeles  is  the  center  of  the  entertainment  industry. 


 *  trafhc  -  relatively  low  in  priority,  sometimes  not  covered  at  ah.  +  health  --  received  relatively  little  coverage 
 *  science  --  dii  better  than  health  *  wea@  --  an  important  part  of  local  news,  akhougb  not  in  the  top  3  for  the  most  part. 
 *  international  news  --  more  likely  to  be  carried  by  the  major  network  afliliatcs  than  the  local  independents 


 About  half  of  all  time  on  all  channels  was  devoted  to  ads  and  promotions  for  stories  coming  later 
 in  the  new  and  other  shows  on  the  station.  Whether  this  is  more  than  a  television  drama,  or  a  game  show  we  dont  know  at  this  point,  but  it  is  clear  that  local  news  lends  itself  to  frequent 


 interruptions  because  of  the  length  of  the  stories:  generally  ranging  between  30  seconds  to  1  l/  2  or  2  l/  Z  minutes.  Stud&  of  the  media  have  shown  a  marked  decline  in  the  time  allotted  each 
 story  over  the  years. 


 Preliminary  Observations 
 :  Order  of  pritwity  accotding  to  time  allotted 
 w:  disaster,  human  in&  rest,  sports,  murder/  crime,  weather,  science,  health,  local  government  &  politics, 
 entertainment.,  national  government  &  politics,  business,  car  chases,  state  Politics 


 NBC:  human  interest,  murder/  crime,  weather,  sports,  disaster,  heahh,  international/  business  (tie),  national  government/  poJitics  entertainment,  local  governmen  t/  politics,  science,  tmfiic 


 KTLA:  crime/  murder/  car,  human  interest,  disaster,  national  government  &  politics,  :  entertainment/  international  (tied),  health,  sporls,  weather,  local  government  &  politics,  science, 
 business 
 murder/  crime,  human  interest,  weather,  local  government  &  politics,  disaster,  national  ABC:  government  &  politics,  entertainment,  health,  science,  business 


 ,KCAL:  murder/  crime,  local  government  d  politics,  human  interest,  enterGnment,  health,  .weather,  disaster,  sports,  national  government  &  politicsrbusiness  (tied),  science 
 sports,  weather,  disaster,  human  interest,  murder/  crime,  Iocal  government  &  politics,  KCOP: 
 business,  science,  heaIth,  car  chase,  entertainment,  national  government  &  politics 


 ..-  Y-  1 
 _.  _.-----  -. 
354
 These  ranking  reflect  the  minutes  our  loggers  assigned  to  stories,  but  they  do  not  suggest  the  magnitude  of  the  ciif&  rences  between  them,  which  can  be  sign&  ant.  We  havent  given  the 
 numbers  themselves  because  the  hours  watched  varied.  So,  for  instance,  while  KCOP  devoted  36  minutes  to  sports,  and  4  minutes  to  entertainment,  we  are  reflecting  a  one  hour  news  show.  CBS, 
 for  which  we  have  2  and  l/  2  hours  logged,  devoted  74  minutes  to  disaster,  and  5  minutes  to  car  chases  over  the  course  of  the  week. 


 Looking  at  the  numbers,  however,  suggested  some  variations  between  stations  --  other  than  that  shown  by  the  ranking  of  story  minutes  in  the  section  above. 
 CBS:  Covered  crime  and  human  interest  about  equalIy,  and  also  gave  equal  time  to  sports  and  the  weather.  Disasters  topped  the  list  because  of  the  particular  nature  of  the  news  that  week  of 
 the  Egyptian  Air  crash.  But  the  LAUSD  notwithstanding,  they  gave  very  little  time  to  local  government  and  politics. 


 NBC:  Devoted  about  equal  time  to  crime,  disaster,  and  human  interest,  but  were  heavier  on  sports  at  1190  and  on  weather  at  NO. 
 KIT.&  Devoted  more  time  to  government  and  politics  than  any  other  channel  with  approximately  three  times  as  much  nationid  as  local  news  coverage. 
 ABC:.  Crime  and  disaster  got  the  most  coverage,  with  a  lot  also  devoted  to  we-  a&  x  a&  sports. 
 KCAL:  Similar  to  CBS. 


 &COP:  Much  more  even  coverage  between  topics,  with  a  lot  of  ads. 
355
 MultiCultural 
 Collaborative  1010  lo.  flower  It. 


 Room  304  10s  Angeler  CA 
 9  0  0  1  5 
 213-  748-  2105  f:  213-  748-  3143 


 BOARD  OF  DIRECTORS: 
 Frank  Acosta 
 CA  Wellness  Foundation 
 Larry  Aubry 
 Deborah  Ching 
 Chinatown  Sewice  Cntr 
 Bill  Drake 
 Western  Justice  Cntr  Foundation 
 Warren  Furutani 
 Asian  American  Affairs  Office 
 Gary  Greenebaum  American  Jewish  CommiWa 


 Genethia  Hayes  SCLC 
 Joe  Hicks 
 LA  Cl  Human  Relations  Cmssn 
 Dewayne  Holmes 
 Senator  Tom  Haydens  Ofliw 
 Stewart  Kwoh 
 Asii  Pacific  Afmlican  Legal  ctr 
 Rub&  Lizard0 
 Community  Development  Tech  Ctr 
 John  Mack 
 LA  urban  League 
 Torie  Osborn 
 Liberty  Hill  Foundation 


 Jaime  Regalado 
 Pat  Brown  Institute 


 Connie  Rice 
 Ths  Advancement  Project 
 Angela  Sanbrano  Central  American  Resource  Cntr 


 Noemi  Soto 
 Paul  Vandeventer  Community  Partners 


 Atturo  Vargas 
 NAlEO 
 Ron  Wakabayashi 
 LA  Cnty  Human  Reiatiins  Cnmn 
 Luke  Williams  CHlRL.  4 


 March  7,200O 
 Honorable  Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 Washington,  DC 


 Dear  Mr.  Kennard: 
 The  organization  that  I  represent,  the  MultiCultural  Collaborative  was  created  in  the 
 aftermath  of  the  civil  unrest  of  1992  in  Los  Angeles.  Founded  by  a  multi-  ethnic 
 cross-  section  of  community-  based  service  and  advocacy  organizations,  MCC  serves 
 the  African  American,  Asian  Pacific  Islander  and  Latin0  communities  of  the  greater 
 Los  Angeles  area.  Seeking  long-  term  solutions  to  racial  and  ethnic  conflict,  MCCs 
 mission  is  to  identify,  support  and  evaluate  creative  models  of  inter-  group 
 collaboration  that  advance  the  causes  of  justice,  equity  and  community  in  Los 
 Angeles. 


 Television  has  the  tremendous  power  to  help  shape  images  and  perceptions  of  who 
 we  are  as  a  people  and  as  a  society.  It  also  has  profound  implications  for  race 
 relations  in  Los  Angeles  and  the  rest  of  the  nation.  The  lack  of  diversity  among 
 personnel  both  in  front  of  and  behind  the  camera  has  attracted  the  attention  of 
 national  advocacy  groups  such  as  the  NAACP,  which  has  called  upon  the  broadcast 
 industry  to  reflect  the  diverse  demographics  of  our  country. 


 Recent  studies  have  shown  that  the  broadcast  industry  is  further  segregating  our 
 society  by  developing  shows  targeted  at  specific  racial  audiences.  For  example, 
 African  American  actors  are  over-  represented  in  shows  that  cater  directly  to  the 
 African  American  viewing  audience;  mainstream  productions  with  mostly  white 
 casts  serve  mostly  white  viewers.  These  types  of  niche-  market  development  trends 
 run  contrary  to  building  a  truly  diverse  and  multicultural  society.  Television  must 
 not  only  look  like  America  but  also  represent  its  highest  ideals  and  motivate  us  to 
 reach  our  highest  aspirations  as  a  people. 


 Los  Angeles  is  the  media  capital  of  the  world,  and  it  has  bequeathed  the  world  the 
 best  and  worst  that  media  can  offer  society.  On  the  negative  side,  local  broadcast 
 news,  rather  than  provide  the  service  of  public  information,  often  denies  the 
 viewing  public  the  kind  of  information  that  is  critical  to  a  sustained  dialogue  on 
 issues  of  true  social  import.  For  example,  one  recent  evening,  all  of  L.  A.  s  local 
 stations  featured  at  the  top  of  their  broadcasts  stories  of  celebrity  intrigue  (Sharon 
 Stones  maid  arrested  on  charges  of  burglary;  Hallee  Berrys  hit-  and-  run  accident 
 scandal).  This,  at  a  time  when  working  class  ethnic  communities  in  Los  Angeles  are 
 reeling  from  shocking  revelations  of  systemic  abuse  perpetrated  by  the  Los  Angeles 
 Police  Department.  A  majority  of  the  local  news,  which  can  qualify  as  public  affairs 
 programming,  consists  of  crime  and  disaster  coverage.  In  Los  Angeles  the  amount 
 of  coverage  on  crime  is  disproportionate  to  the  actual  crime  rate.  Live  coverage  of 


 organizations  listed  for 
 indentification  purposes  only 
356
 car  chases  as  well  as  homicides  are  the  broadcasters  favorite  mode  of  reporting 
 what  happens  on  the  city  streets  of  Los  Angeles.  These  stories  are  centered  in  the 
 poor  neighborhoods  of  color  across  Los  Angeles,  making  it  no  surprise  that  most 
 Angelinos,  as  well  as  Americans,  wrongly  believe  that  Blacks  and  Latinos  are 
 responsible  for  committing  the  majority  of  crime.  As  MCC  deals  with  issues  of  race 
 relations  in  one  of  the  most  diverse  cities  in  the  country,  I  feel  that  it  is  critical  to 
 address  local  news  coverage  as  a  means  to  which  all  communities  in  Los  Angeles 
 come  to  understand  themselves  and  one  another.  If  an  informed  public  is  essential 
 to  democracy,  our  broadcast  industry  is  among  our  most  anti-  democratic 
 institutions. 


 As  MCC  deals  with  issues  of  race  relations  in  one  of  the  most  diverse  cities  in  the 
 country,  it  is  clear  that  the  public  interest  is  not  being  served  by  local  news  alone. 
 We  recommend  that  digital  broadcasters  be  required  to  consult  witn  a  broad  range 
 of  local  leaders  about  the  important  issues  facing  our  community,  and  devote  at 
 least  an  hour  a  day  to  a  discussion  of  those  issues.  I  feel  that  this  requirement  is 
 critical  if  television  is  to  act  as  a  means  by  which  all  communities  in  Los  Angeles 
 can  come  to  understand  themselves  and  one  another.  If  an  informed  public  is 
 essential  to  democracy,  our  broadcast  industry,  our  main  source  of  information, 
 must  not  continue  to  be  our  among  our  most  anti-  democratic  institutions. 


 It  is  imperative  for  the  broadcast  industry  to  meet  its  public  interest  obligations  and 
 become  a  socially  responsible  vehicle  that  helps  to  shape  an  American  culture  that 
 represents  the  interests  of  all  Americans.  This  can  be  achieved  only  through 
 stronger  regulations,  standards,  and  accountability,  since  the  industry  has  proven 
 itself  unfit  to  monitor  itself.  Likewise,  the  Federal  Communications  Commission, 
 the  agency  charged  with  overseeing  the  industry,  has  a  responsibility  to  formulate 
 policy  guidelines  that  insure  that  the  media  is  accountable  to  the  public. 


 We  applaud  the  FCCs  move  towards  a  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  issue  of  digital 
 television  and  the  formulation  of  a  new  set  of  standards  for  the  Digital  Age.  This  is 
 a  priceless  opportunity,  perhaps  our  only  opportunity  to  make  media  accountable  to 
 the  communities  that  organizations  such  as  MCC  represent.  We  therefore  ask  that 
 you  and  the  Commission  move  forward  to  a  Notice  of  Proposed  Rule-  Making  that 
 will  begin  to  address  the  tremendous  opportunities--  and  pitfails--  of  the  Digital  Age. 


 Thanking  you  for  your  time  and  attention. 


 Executive  Director 
357
 March  6,200O 
 William  Kennard 
 Chail-  lMIl 
 Federal  Communications  Commission  445  12*  Street,  S.  W. 


 Washington,  D.  C,  20554 
 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 I  am  writing  on  behalf  of  the  Mexican  American  Legal  Defense  and  Educational 
 Fund  (MALDEF)  to  respond  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest 
 obligations  of  broadcasters.  As  one  of  the  nations  leading  civil  rights  organization 
 that  works  on  behalf  of  Latinos  and  other  under  served  groups,  we  urge  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  (FCC)  to  set  a  date  to  establish  clear 


 guidelines  to  guide  broadcasters  during  this  digital  age. 
 MALDEF  is  concerned  over  the  exclusion  of  certain  groups  within  the  broadcast 
 television  industry,  including  the  dearth  in  station  ownership  by  Latinos  and  their 
 scarcity  in  management  ranks  at  these  stations.  We  also  are  troubled  by  the 
 continual  negative  portrayals  of  Latinos  in  network  and  local  television  news  and 
 their  invisibility  in  other  programming, 


 In  research  conducted  for  MALDEF  in  October  1997,  the  findings  showed  that  while  50%  of  non-  Hispanic  whites  felt  somewhat  positively  towards  Latinos  in 
 1990,  that  number  had  dropped  to  46%  by  1997.  The  respondents  told  researchers  that,  except  for  an  occasional  co-  worker  or  neighbor,  the  only  contact  they  had 
 with  Latinos  was  through  the  media,  and  most  often,  through  television  news  or  prime  time  programs.  They  also  pointed  out  that  most  of  the  images  they  saw  were 
 negative  and  suggested  that  media  could,  and  should,  play  a  role  in  reversing  those 
 misperceptions 


 In  monitoring  local  television  news  for  one  week  last  month,  I  was  inundated  with 
 auto  accidents,  homicides,  fves,  gambling  on  line,  drug  use  and  assaults  by 
 athletes  during  the  sports  segment  --  and  of  course,  frequent  coverage  of  the  multi- 
 millionaire  controversy.    Coverage  of  local  primary  races,  controversy  over  the 
 building  and  construction  of  schools  in  Los  Angeles,  and  meetings  of  local 
 government  were  missing,  yet  these  issues  directly  affect  the  daily  lives  of 
 television  viewers.  I  was  frankly  surprised  that  not  one  story  covered  the  activities  of  the  city  council  or  board  of  supervisors.  Only  three  stories  in  five  newscasts 
358
 carried  stories  of  any  real  substance:  a  brief  money  report,  the  luxury  car  division  of  the  Ford  Motor  Company  moving  to  Irvine  meaning  more  jobs  for  the  area,  and 
 soaring  gas  prices.  There  also  were  helpful  weather  tips  during  the  rainy  weather 
 that  occurred  during  this  time. 


 Clearly,  local  broadcasters  should  be  required  to  provide  news  and  information  programming  that  better  serves  the  needs  of  its  viewers  in  line  with  the  spirit  of  the 
 public  interest  obligations  long  followed  by  broadcasters.  And  just  as  clearly, 
 television  stations  are  not  now  meeting  that  responsibility. 


 Again,  I  urge  you  to  take  a  positive  step  and  set  clear  guidelines  as  soon  as 
 possible.  Thank  you  for  this  opportunity  to  participate  in  the  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 Sincerely, 


 Alicia  Maldonado 
 Senior  Director  of  Communications  and  Public  Policy 


 ---  -_  I 
359
 Cakumer  Action  717  Market  Street,  Suite  310  San  Francisco,  CA  94103 
 (415)  777-  9648 
 -  Southern  California  Office  523  West  Sixth  Street,  Suite  1105 
 Los  Angeles,  CA  90014 
 (213)  624-  4631 


 25  February  2000 
 William  E.  Kennard,  Chairman 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  S.  W.,  Room  TW13204 
 Washington,  D.  C.  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 Consumer  Action,  a  statewide  non-  profit  consumer  education  and 
 advocacy  organization  serving  consumers  since  1971,  is  hereby 
 responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  regarding  the  public  interest 
 obligations  of  broadcasters.  We  appreciate  your  commitment  to 
 fairness  as  evidenced  by  your  willingness  to  receive  these  comments 
 from  concerned  community  representatives. 


 Consumer  Action  believes,  in  the  interest  of  fairness,  that  since 
 broadcasters  in  the  nations  top  ten  television  markets  have  been 
 using  digital  TV  since  May  of  1999,  those  same  broadcasters  should 
 be  held  to  a  public  standard  in  their  programming--  the  least  they 
 could  do  for  the  public  in  return  for  the  $70  billion  worth  of  public 
 airwaves  theyve  received,  gratis. 


 As  to  community  considerations,  local  broadcasters  should  be  bound 
 by  specific  operating  requirements,  including,  but  not  limited  to, 
 workforce  diversity,  local  public  affairs  programming,  educational 
 programming  for  children  and  adults,  provide  datacasting  services  to 
 non-  profit  and  educational  outlets,  enhance  services  such  as  closed- 
 captioning  and  video  description  for  the  disabled  and  conduct 
 genuine  ascertations  (not  the  pro  forma  kind  that  end  up  in  file 
 drawers  without  so  much  as  a  backward  glance)  community-  wide  to 
 determine  the  needs  of  the  community  they  claim  they  want  to 
 serve.  This  approach  would  go  a  long  way  toward  satisfying  their 
 obligation  to  return  to  the  community  the  resources  it  so  generously 
 provided  without  prior  claim  or  standards. 


 Uc,  ard  Members:  Gene  Coleman,  President;  Laurel  Palkxk,  Vice  President;  Molly  Hopp,  Treasurer;  Ken  McEldowney,  Secretary;  Chris  Djorklund;  Kent  Brunette;  Jim  Conran;  Pastor  Herrera,  Jr;  Sue  Hestor;  Helen  Nelson;  Kay  Pachtner;  Patricia  Sturdevant. 
360
 It  is  also  of  concern  that,  heretofore,  local  stations  were  required  to 
 procure  ascertainments  from  their  respective  immediate 
 communities  as  to  notable  community  issues  that  would  benefit  from 
 network  programming.  However,  in  light  of  the  fact  that  such 
 ascertainments  are  no  longer  required,  coupled  with  the  fact  that 
 local  Los  Angeles  stations  (ex.  CBS-  KNXT-  LA)  have  elected  to 
 eliminate  Community  Relations  Departments  altogether,  thereby 
 stemming  any  communitys  ability  to  actively  participate  in  the 
 programming  process,  it  is  obvious  that  community  programming  is 
 being  overlooked  or  ignored  altogether.  This  speaks  volumes  to  the 
 concern  these  stations  have  for  issues  of  public  interest  to  local 
 communities,  a  situation  which  should  not  exist  considering  the  real 
 source  of  their  access  to  those  communities. 


 Finally,  we  continue  to  believe  that  the  FCC  should  schedule  public 
 hearings  on  the  public  interest  obligations  of  these  large  broadcasting 
 companies  in  light  of  the  $70  billion  windfall  they  have  received  in 
 publicly  owned  air  rights.  It  is  the  only  fair  thing  to  do  on  behalf  of 
 local  communities  who  are  entitled  to  access  the  airwaves  they  own 
 on  behalf  of  local  concerns  and  programs. 


 Thank  you  for  your  consideration. 


 Cher  McIntyre 
 Director  of  Advoca 


 CLM/  dt 


 --  ---  i_..-..--  __--.  --,.  __..  .~ 
361
 Date:  Thu,  9  Mar  2000  From:  peter  morgan  <peterthomas@  excite.  com> 
 Honorable  Commissioners, 
 Consider  me  one  of  those  Americans  who  is  appalled  with  the  condition  of 
 broadcasting  throughout  this  country--  broadcasts  invading  homes,  and  while 
 not  as  physically  abusive  as  an  uncontrollable  cigarette  addiction,  perhaps 
 more  offensive  to  the  communal  body  and  mind. 
 I  have  no  doubt  that  in  ten  or  twenty  years,  if  an  independently  minded  populace  stills  exists,  the  society-  wide  destruction  commercial  broadcasters 


 facilitate  via  manipulative  advertisers  will  be  investigated  as  fervently  as 
 tobacco  manufacturers  were  vilified  in  the  90s. 
 While  it  should  be  an  individuals  right  to  decide  what  is  placed  in 
 ones  body,  it  is  only  reasonable  to  know  the  contents  of  the  material 
 ingested.  The  Surgeon  General  could  author  a  report  on  the  carcinogenic 
 quality  of  local  newscasts.  Following  is  ammunition  to  instigate  such  a 
 review...... 


 I  visited  Los  Angeles  television  station  KCBS  on  the  afternoon  of  Friday  February  11,200O  to  inspect  the  public  file.  While  the  paperwork  looked  in 
 order,  the  public  comments  eerily  echoed  my  own  disgust. 
 The  visit  was  conducted  11  days  after  the  Alaskan  Air  disaster  just  off  the  California  coast.  Based  on  ample  experience,  I  sparingly  viewed  the 


 suffocating  news  coverage,  but  below  are  quotes  from  KCBS  viewers: 
 .  ..  too  much  speculation  on  crash; 
 .  ..  coverage  totally  ridiculous..; 
 .  ..  appalled  at  Ann  Martins  horrible  reporting  of  261 
 tragedy.....  1  will  NEVER  again  watch  my  local  CBS  newscast.; 
 .  ..  public  is  turned  off  by  your  attempts  to  dramatize  such 
 tragedies...; 
 .  .  .  .  babbling  .  .  .  .  . 
 This  is  the  same  as  watching  a  stupid  car  chase...  is  that  really 
 necessary?; 
 ;..  viewers  may  find  these  images  disturbing  &  offensive...; 
 .  ..  you  cannot  know  how  much  your  news  programming 
362
 irritates...;  Comments  went  further,  recounting  the  on-  air  description  of  the  graphic 
 damage  inflicted  on  the  human  body  during  impact.  And  the  media  sensationalizes  the  desensitizing  effects  of  violent  video  games? 


 ln  Los  Angeles,  we  get  a  story  about  cheap  gas  pump  promotional  prices 
 in  Cleveland,  rather  than  a  discussion  of  the  causes  of  the  gas  rise,  and 
 community  transportation  improvements  which  might  reduce  future 
 non-  renewable  energy  dependence. 
 The  examples  could  go  on  forever,  and  living  in  LA,  this  type  of  anemic 
 coverage  is  the  status  quo....  at  KCBS,  perhaps  the  lower  end.  The  situation  is  so  poor,  a  local  alternative  publication,  the  LA  Weekly,  ran  a  cover 


 story  titled  Low  Definition  TV,  Steven  Mikulan  on  LAs  Bad 
 News;  in  December  of  1999.  This  chronicle  on  the  embarrassing  state 
 of  local  TV  news  generated  a  litany  of  comments  in  the  following 
 weeks  letters  to  the  editor,  .  .  .  Not  only  did  the  anchorpeople 
 appear  downright  stupid,  they  mispronounced  basic  words,  and  read 
 grammatically  incorrect  copy.  Also,  the  stories  were  straight  out  of  the  tabloids...  .  It  has  reached  the  point  in  my  house  that  I 


 leave  the  room  when  the  news  comes  on.  You  forgot  to 
 mention  how  the  presentation  of  news  by  anchors  has  also  been  dumbed  down  to  a  series  of  twitches  and  nods,  like  that  of  a  first  grade  teacher.; 


 The  entertainment  developed  in  this  city  influences  the  world;  consider  the 
 manner  such  a  media  environment  incubates  the  citys  creative  minds. 


 On  the  other  hand,  the  beneficial  power  television  promises  was  also  seen 
 during  the  station  visit.  A  health  story  regarding  an  Alzheimers 
 treatment  was  lauded,  and  numerous  individuals  wrote  in  to  ask  for  more 
 information.  The  unfilled  potential  which  could,  and  should  be  provided  by 
 local  broadcasters  is  obvious. 


 Given  the  fact  that  broadcasters  utilize  the  publics  airwaves,  and 
 quite  profitably,  despite  pleas  to  the  contrary,  the  community  deserves  some 
 engaging  and  unifying  public  service.  In  this  case,  heres  a 
 recommendation  for  a  new  hourly  requirement  of  substantive  professional  local  journalism  every  evening,  perhaps  one  judged  through  peer  review,  on 


 an  agreed  upon  set  of  standards.  An  hour  to  consider  such  monumental,  but 
 nearly  invisible,  debates  running  from  city-  wide  secession  movements,  to  the  state  of  city  policing,  or  the  evaluation  of  the  school  district. 


 There  is  an  understood  viewer  desire  for  programming  which  contains 
 reality  video,  running  from  car  chases,  to  near-  death  survival.  But  shouldnt  we  create  a  child  safe  environment  where 


 either  through  use  of  V-  chips  or  broadcaster  agreement,  violently  visual  and 
 disturbing  news  stories  would  not  seep  into  our  childrens  viewing 


 experience? 
363
 The  examples  could  go  on  forever,  but,  if  this  irresponsible  commercial  use 
 of  the  publics  airwaves  continues...  we  will  jump  from  a  vast 
 wasteland,  into  a  socially  corrosive  quicksand. 


 Sincerely, 


 Peter  T.  Morgan  Help  Preserve  Los  Angeles  Open  Space! 
364
 iZ71i  Ventura  Roulevar~-  l,  Studio  City,  CA  91604  Tel:  818/  508-  2080  Fax:  818/  508-  2088  www.  mediascc,  pe.  org 
 March  8,  2000 
 Chairman  William  Kennard 
 Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12*  Street  S.  W. 
 Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 I  am  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  regarding  the  Public  Interest  Obligations  of 
 broadcasters  as  they  transition  to  digital  transmission,  and  urge  the  FCC  to  create  a 
 strong,  clear  and  enforceable  set  of  guidelines  that  broadcasters  must  follow  as  they 
 reap  the  profits  of  this  new  technology. 


 As  you  know,  the  history  of  broadcasting  can  be  viewed  as  an  ongoing  battle  between 
 the  public  and  big  business  interests.  This  applies  as  far  back  as  the  early  days  of 
 radio,  when  education,  civic  and  religious  groups  that  originally  had  equal  access  to 
 broadcast  licenses  were  out-  muscled  by  wealthier  commercial  stations,  leaving  room  for 
 mass  commercialization  of  all  electronic  media.  In  response,  the  government  outlined  a 
 spectrum  of  Public  Interest  Obligations  that  today  remain,  albeit  in  different  forms,  the 
 publics  only  response  to  the  chorus  of  network  signals  broadcast  out  to  us  24  hours 
 daily. 


 Spurred  by  Public  Interest  mandates,  broadcasters  have  created  insightful  public  issue 
 forums  crucial  to  the  democratic  process,  as  well  as  educational  programming  for 
 children.  Public  Interest  Obligations  have  provided  concerned  citizens  with 
 informational  files  delineating  their  local  broadcasters  employee  policies  and  have 
 allowed  for  the  airing  of  Public  Service  Announcements  (now  almost  defunct),  wherein 
 smaller,  poorer  organizations  can  gain  access  to  the  airwaves.  However,  todays  Public 
 Interest  Obligations  are  not  strong  enough.  Much  more  can  and  should  be  done  in  the 
 future,  especially  at  this  pivotal  moment  in  history. 


 It  appears  that  the  Public  Interest  Obligations  are  weakening  even  now  within  the  realm 
 of  Analog  TV.  For  example,  when  representatives  from  the  nonprofit  People  for  Better 
 TV  (PBTV)  asked  a  local  broadcaster  to  view  its  records  on  public  service 
 announcements  (PSAs),  the  request  was  denied.  The  station  cited  a  loosening  of  the  FCC  requirement  in  this  area.  At  another  station,  CBS-  LA,  PBTV  found  that  the 


 Community  Relations  Department  had  been  entirely  eliminated,  and  its  once-  thriving 
 community  service  programs  --  mentoring,  scholarships  etc.  --  had  been  simply 
 abolished.  Further,  PBTV  discovered  that  some  stations  hired  outside  contractors  to 
 respond  to  community  letters,  and  that  most  complainants  received  the  same  generic 
 letter  back  from  this  consultant. 


 In  my  book,  Building  Blocks:  A  Guide  for  Creating  Childrens  Educational  Television, 
 the  entertainment  community  came  together  with  education  and  health  officials  to 
 create  guidelines  for  responsible  educational  programming.  In  the  book,  the  creative 
 community  agreed  to  supply  documents  for  the  Public  Files  that  outline  the  educational 
 aspects  of  a  certain  show  for  any  interested  party.  Parents  are  directed  in  the  book  to 
365
 MediascopeL  Trotta  Page  2  of  2 
 March  8,200O 
 inspect  these  same  Public  Files  at  their  local  TV  station.  PBTV  reports  that  several  Los 
 Angeles-  based  stations  keep  their  public  files  in  storage  rooms  and  closet  spaces  that 
 are  nearly  impossible  to  reach.  These  reports  are  worrisome,  to  say  the  least,  in  that 
 broadcasters  do  not  appear  to  be  taking  their  obligations  to  the  public  seriously.  This  is 
 a  sign  that  stations  are  not  aware  of  the  importance  of  these  files,  and  the  FCC  needs  to 
 be  vigilant  about  their  maintenance  in  the  digital  age. 


 Today,  vital  new  chapters  are  being  written  in  this  conversation  between  entertainment 
 megaliths,  the  public,  and  the  governments  role  between  the  two.  As  interactivity, 
 universal  access  and  other  key  issues  converge  at  the  crossroads  of  digital  technology,  let 
 us  use  history  as  our  guide,  and  learn  from  it  rather  than  repeat  past  errors. 


 I  urge  you  to  create  a  digital  television  landscape  where  there  is  truly  equal  and 
 universal  access  to  all;  where  the  publics  right  to  be  served  by  local  broadcasters  is 
 absolute;  and  where  media  is  used  not  only  to  sell,  not  only  to  entertain,  but  to  create  a 
 dialogue  of  diverse  social,  political  and  religious  issues  that  remains  uncensored  and 
 free.  Following  are  my  specific  recommendations: 


 1.)  Particular  emphasis  must  be  placed  on  the  needs  of  children  in  the  new 
 environment.  One  hour  of  educational  and  informational  programming  per  day, 
 based  on  the  definitions  outlined  by  the  FCCs  Childrens  Television  Rules  of  1996, 
 is  an  essential  component  to  ensuring  that  this  new  technology  serves  the  nations 
 youth. 
 2.)  It  is  clear  that  the  public  interest  is  not  being  served  by  local  news  alone.  If  an 
 informed  public  is  essential  to  democracy,  digital  broadcasters  must  be  required  to 
 consult  with  a  broad  range  of  local  leaders  about  the  important  issues  facing  our 
 communities,  and  to  devote  at  least  one  hour  a  day  to  a  discussion  of  those  issues. 
 3.)  Digital  broadcasters  must  maintain  Public  Files  and  open  lines  of  communication 
 with  the  community  it  serves.  Public  Files  must  be  located  in  an  accessible  area, 
 and  an  ongoing  dialogue  with  public  officials  should  be  encouraged. 
 4.)  A  systematic  effort  to  complement  the  dominant  commercial  content  providers  with 
 noncommercial  content  in  the  digital  domain  needs  to  be  carefully  developed  and 
 supported  by  the  government. 
 5.)  An  open,  democratic  broadband  infrastructure  will  allow  all  organizations  -- 
 regardless  of  size  and  economics  --  a  voice  in  the  new  digital  environment  and  will 
 ensure  an  even  playing  field  and  competition.  This  should  be  an  imperative  that  is 
 totally  ensured  by  the  FCC. 


 The  detriments  to  the  country  if  the  FCC  does  not  take  measured  steps  to  ensure 
 diversity  in  the  digital  broadband  are  plentiful.  Again,  I  urge  you  to  set  clear  guidelines 
 as  soon  as  possible.  With  every  new  medium  comes  the  potential  for  great  change,  to 
 perform  great  service,  and  to  do  great  harm.  It  is  your  choice;  the  future  is  in  your 
 hands. 


 Laurie  Trotta 
 Executive  Director 


 Mediascope  Studio  City,  California 
366
 San  Francisco 
 KPIX-  TV 
 Quarterly  Report 
 San  Francisco,  CA 


 Sandy  Close  and  Emil  Guilliermo 
 New  California  Media 
 San  Francisco,  CA 
 3/  l  3100 


 Ken  Elks 
 Deaf  Entertainment  Foundation  and  Guild 
 San  Francisco,  CA 
 3/  17/  00 


 Helen  Grieco 
 California  -  National  Organization  for  Woman 
 Sacramento,  CA 
 3112lOO 


 Tab  D-  5b 


 _.  _  -_--  .  ._  I  .^^.~  .-  1.  x  --  1.--._.  I_____-  .._-. 
367
 KPIx=  ry  SAN  FRmcIsco,  CAL~  ORNIA 
 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 CBS  BROADCASTING  INC. 
 THIRD  QUARTER  JULY  -  AUGUST  -  SEPTEMBER  1999 
368
 QUAIXTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 KPEK-  TV  San  Francisco,  CA 
 CBS  .Broadcastig  Inc.  3rd  Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 


 CERTIFICATWN 
 :On  behaW  of  KPIX-  TV,  I  certify  that  a  copy  of  the  Quarterly  Significant  Programs  Report  for  KPIX-  TV  licensed  to  CBS 
 Broadcasting  Inc.  was  placed  in  the  stations  Public  Inspection  File  on  October  10,1999. 


 Rosemary  Roach  ProgFam  Director 
369
 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 KPIX-  TV  San  Francisco,  CA 
 CBS  Broadcasting  Inc.  3rd  Quarter,  My  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 


 PROGRAMMING  STATEMENT 
 Station  KPIX-  TV,  licensed  to  CBS  Broadcasting  Inc,  deals  with  and  is  responsive  to  the  principal  issues  in  its  community  of  license,  San  Francisco,  Cabfornia,  and  to  the  San 
 Francisco-  Oakland-  San  Jose  t$  evision  market  on  a  continuing  basis.  A  variety  of,  program  efemeuts  including  regularly  sch$@  d  nq  and  public  affairs  programming  reports  on 
 lpyki~  g  news  eventq  documentark&  specfa@,  and  @blic  sii;  iiicc  ~tiiiienl!  of  .concern  to  the  comxunnity  are  included  within  our  regular  programming  service.  KPIX- 
 TVs  coverage  of  news  stories,  our  employees  participation  in  community  affaip,  and  regular  interviow~  WhcomWu5itykideqi  have  led  to  the  determination  that  the  issue 
 listed  are  on&  of  importance  to  the  San  Francisco-  Oakland-  San  Jose  community.  Our  most  significant  programming  which  dealt  with  current  community  issues  during  the 
 preceding  three  month  period  is  set  forth  in  this  report.  In  addition  to  the  programming  set  forth  in  this  report,  during  this  period  the  station  also  broadcast  CBS  Television 
 Network  programs  including  Face  The  Nation  ,60  Minutes,  60  Minutes  TI  and  48  Hours,  which  also  addressed  issues  of  concern  to  our  viewers.  Significant  programming 
 specifically  directed  to  the  needs  of  the  children  of  our  community  is  broken  out  in  the  childrens  programming  section  of  this  report. 
370
 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 KPIX-  TV  San  Francisco,  CA 
 CBS  Broadcasting  Inc.  3d  Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 


 PROGRAM  INDEX 
 5.  REPORTS  -  Reguiariy  scheduled  investigative  reports  that  cover  a  wide  range  of  local 
 issues  including  affordable  housing,  health  care,  crime,  education,  traffic,  welfare,  childcare,  domestic  violence,  and  immigration.  Broadcast  daiIy,  Monday-  Friday,  during 


 the  6:  30  PM  and  1X  PM  newscast.  (TBT:  3:  00) 
 5  REPORTS  SUNDAY  l  KPM  News  Anchor  Dana  King  hosts  this  weekly,  half  hour 
 program  that  features  comprehensive  reports  on  the  weeks  top  local  stories.  Broadcast  on  Sundays  at  6~  30  PM. 


 &y  SUNDAY  -  Regularly  scheduled,  half  hour  studio  talk  show  that  focuses  ou  local 
 ~SSWS.  The  program  also  examines  issues  that  impact  specific  ethuic  minorities  or  other 
 groups,  e.  g.,  Asian,  Latizro,  African  American,  Native  American,  gay  and  lesbian  and  physically  challenged,  etc.  Broadcast  weekly,  on  Sundays,  at  6:  30  AM. 


 9  JlmsKJJ)  S  -  KPIX  meteorologist  Brian  Sussman  hosts  ,&  is  regularly  scheduled  weekly 
 feature.  Each  week  Brian  Sussman  proNes  a  child  in  need  of  an  adoptive  home.  The  program  enjoys  a  95%  success  rate  in  placing  the  children  with  families.  Xn  addition,  other 


 segments  of  Brians  Kids  e  xamines  the  need  for  more  foster  parents  and  the  problems  of 
 finding  homes  for  older  children,  teens  and  minorities.  Broadcast  Wednesdays,  on  the  5  PM  newsc+.  (TRT,:  1:  30) 


 .--  ,.-..,..  ..  P.  .  .--..---  .  ..--.-...  I  -.._. 
 -  -  -  .  .  _,- 


 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  RElPORT 
371
 CBS  Broadcasting  Inc.  3rd  Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,199Y 
 SPECIALS: 


 - 
 ,_.._  _I_-_.._.-____  _I-_  xli  -_---- 
372
 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 San  Francisco,  CA  CBS  Broadcasting  Inc. 
 3rd  Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 


 7/  l/  99,  Eyewitness  News,  Five  Reports,  6;  30  pm:  Traf6c  &  Commadi~~  Nighamares.  If  the  number  one 
 issueintheBayAnathesedaysisaaffic,  thermmberonetwublespotisthe8ayBridgt,  an4~  y,  tbcmfmvqy~  thuconstractionofanewspan  KPIXanchorHank?  lantetxamiws  the  pofitics 


 behindthedday. 
 7/  6/  99,  Eyewbris  Nm,  Fivt  Raports,  6:  30  pm:  Central  Freeway,  Its  been  ten  years  since  the  Loma 
 Prie?  aearthqnake&  ntagcdtheWF~.  In1997,  votcrstoidthecitywm~  dthespan.  But,  lastytar,  asecoodiniriarivesaidtearitdown,  aodrep~  eitwitha~~-  tevel~~~.  Nowtbeon- 


 again,  &again  battle  ofthe  CcntmI  Freeway  goes  up  before  the  voters  a  third  time. 
 7/  8/  W,  Eycmitness  News,  Five  &pons,  I1  pmz  Workers  Camp.  As  manz  aud  man  employees  are 


 7/  23/  99,  Ea  News,  Five  Reports,  6:  30  pm;  Overcharged  Co-  /scanncrError.  oncin 
 *pmz;  m*  w  meaIling  that  scanner  ems  cost  ctxutnners  a  tsaupated  two  and  8  halfbillion 


 7/  2$/  99,  Eyewitness  New,  Five  Reports,  11  p  Non-  Wt  lkdorsc?  ments.  There  are  lots  of  pain 
 remecliesontheshelvestheseda~,  axtdwhenaproductcarriesareputableIlamc,  snchasthe~  cancer  Socie~  or  the  Amaiciut  Lung  Asraciation,  that  often  spells  confclence  to  consumers.  channels 


 ilmstigaced  non-  profit  endorsements. 
373
 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 San  Francisco,  CA  CBS  IBroadcasting  Inc. 
 3rd  Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 
 COMMUNlTY  (con&  ted): 
 8/  l/  99,  Bay  Sunday,  6;  30  am:  John  F.  Kennedy,  Jr.  Package  about  mC;  Jr.,  his  famiIys  legacy,  the 
 auegedKelmedycnrse,  andthcgcncral~  queandadmilationsurronndinpthe~  cian. 


 &  2/  99,  Eyewitlle-  ssNews,  FiReports,  Ilpm:  BallastWatcr.  AnewspeciesmakesitshmeintbtBay 
 cvay14wctks,  aod~  athirdofthosearriveintheballastwaterof~  ships.  Theseforeign  ilsvaderscan~  havoccmtlativemarinc  life.  Iahupesofflushingouttheinvadenbeforetheyget 


 htre,  thePortof~  has~~  anordinancereqniringcargoshipstodumptheirbellastwarerat  sea;  oppmeMswmythatcargoshipsmaytakctheitbusimsselsew~. 


 &X/  99,  Eyewitness  News,  Five  Reports,  6130  pm  Torah  to  RuMa.  When  the  Jewish  population  in  the  RnssiantownafBomcrichibtgantobeintimidattdbyanti6~  caationalistgtoups,  theitsiotet 
 coagregatioa  at  Tcntple  Beth  Torah  in  Fremont  started  a  letter-  writing  campaign  Since  then,  the  town 
 hasCZ&  lXidown~  theIU!  iOYlalk&  andgiVUtthCJewishCOmItUUIl  tyspaceforthcirhmqaagogucin 
 decades.  Tuuple  ttmnbesjonmeyed  from  Fremoni  to  Borovichi  to  present  the  Jews  there  with  a  Toa 
 to  be  used  in  their  new  temple. 


 8&  3/  99,  Eyewitness  News,  5  pm  Shop  Black  Week  Every  year,  Afxican-  Amekan  consumers  spend  $520  bilIi0.  u  in  this  coumy.  Only  5%  of  that,  however,  is  spe&  atblack-  ownedestablishmmts,  whichis 
 why  African-  m  ttmdmts  in  Oakhnd  came  up  with  the  idea,  Shop  Black  Week 
 8/  27/  99,  Byewiw  News,  Five  Ekporfs,  1  I  pm;  Kitchen  Wisdom.  Grace  Young  and  her  parents  have  strongties  to  San  Franciscos  Chimtown  But  when  Grace  decided  to  ime&  igate  her  cultural  heritage 
 andhmorheranc&  tm,  herjotuneydidnrbq$  ninChinamwn,  orevcnChina:  Itbeganinhert&  ni@  s  kiw  wlacrc  Grace  clismmd  ancient  traditioxtaI  recipes  that  had  been  used  for  gcncmtions. 


 .  .^...  .  _  ,.  -  ---  - 
374
 QUARTERLY  SIGWICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 San  Francisco,  CA  CBS  Broadcasting  Inc. 
 3rd  Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 
 SAFETY: 
 7/  u/  99,  m  News,  Five  Reports,  11  pm:  FIammable  Fur&  ore.  Two  people  a  day  die  from  5res 
 tractdbackto-  ftmtiturcc.  Its  a  hazard  most  consumers  dont  even  know  is  real. 


 7/  27/  99,  Eyewiw  News,  Fii  Reports,  1530  pm;  Daycare  Safety.  Advice  from  the  experts  on  how  to  checkomadaycarefkility. 


 8/  29/  99,  B&  ySamday,  6:  3Oaux  RoadRage.  KPManchorKenBastidahostedaC!  HPof5certia 
 g/  19/  99,  Bay  Sunday,  6~  30  am:  Kops  and  Kids.  A  Peninsala  event  feawing  40  law  mforcement 
 agencies  and  design&  to  target  kids:  topics  included  child  emergency  safety  procedures,  such  as  what  to 
 doinafiteandhowtocaU911, 
375
 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 Kl?  Ix-  TV  San  Francisco,  CA 
 CBS  Broadcasting  Inc.  3(    Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 


 CEULDRENS  PROGRAMMING  LIAISON 


 Lena  Sullivan,  KPlXs  Public  Affairs  Director,  is  the  Childrens  Programming  Liaison  for  KPIX  Television. 
 Any  comments  regarding  KPIX  Televisions  Chtidrens  Programming  should  be  directed  to  Ms.  Sullivan. 


 Ms.  Lena  Sullivan  Public  Affairs  Director 
 KPIX  Television 
 855  Battery  Street  San  Francisco,  CA  94111 


 415-  765-  8835 
376
 QUARLIERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT  CHiLDRENS  REPORT 
 KPIX-  TV  San  E  rancisco,  CA 
 CI3S  Broadcasting  Inc.  3rd  Quarter,  July  1,1999-  September  30,  lPPP 


 PfT8UC  SERVICE  ANNOUNCIZmNTS 
 Brondcnat  Monday  -  Sunday  SAM-  1lPM  684TotaI  Public  Service  Announcementi  Broadcast  The  Third  Quarter  of  1999 


 lWlZNTS  San  Francbco  Performnucea 
 Sand  Hill  Challenge  San  JoseWliaa  Festival 
 Walk  tocure  Diabetes  Stride  for  Life 
 O&  laud  Chinatown  Festival  Chiuec  Dragon  Boat  Racing 
 Cable  .Car  3elMinging  Mariachi  Concert 
 Enmanji  Obon  Festival  San  JosqDiscovery  Museum 


 Mask  Project/  AIDS  Awareness  Nat1  Kidney  Foundation  Authors  Luncheon 
 MiUbrae  Art  and  WI,  ne  Festival  Celebration  of  Alohs 
 Oaklaud  Italian  Festival  Souoma  Auction 
 Celebrity  High  School  FootbalI  Fundraiser  Nihonmachi  Streetfair. 
 The  Reiay  Race  The  Techgizmo  Auction 
 Juvenile  Diabetes  Luncheon 


 Where  Gtibrge  Belongs  Monterey  Bay  The  Garden  Project  National  Treasures 
 Boy  Scouts,  Recycle  Get  Connected  to  NASA 
 m-  sM~  G~]  BUG  -WIQN  Davy  &  Glitch  Dont  Do  Drugs 
 Show  &I  rfell  Bet-  lB#  lli  RappingSmokey  Light  Bulb 
 Second  Hand  Smoke  Chuck  D  Be  Cooi,  Dont  Smoke  Too  Smart  To  Start 
377
 QUARTEFKLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT  CHiLDREN9S  REPORT 
 KPIX-  TV  San  Francisco,  CA 
 CBS  Broadcasting  Inc.  3    Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 


 PUBLIC  SERVICE  ANNOUNCEMENTS 
 Broadcast  Monday  -  Sunday  SAM-  11PM  684  Total  Public  Service  Announcements  Broadcast  The  Third  Quarter  of  1999 


 EDUCATION 
 CSAA  Commute  Map 
 Oakland  Zoo  History  Museum 


 Mr.  Rogers  Exhibit  Tech  Museum 
 Juvenile  Diabetes  Foundation  stay  In  School 


 Nntiond  Gumrd 
 San  Jose  Discovery  Museum 


 Summer  Reading  KXSF-  AIDS  Sampler 
 Oakland  Dog  Haus  Museum  Other  CuItures  (Islamic  Community) 
 Kidney  Foundation  Bugs  Exhibit 
 Robot  Zoo  CmIitomia  5  A  Day  (Fruit  Servings) 


 Tech  Challenge 


 HIV/  kUDS/~  can  Amexican  Women  Peer  Educator/  Safe  Sex  Breast  Cancer  Awareness  Prostate  Caucer  Awareness 
 Parl6nsous  Disease  San  Francisco  Food  Bank  Veterans  Stand  Down  2000  Communication 
 Gofer  Cakes  Shmqs  Secret  Frequent  Numbers  Special  Olympics 
 Boys  and  Gi&  Club  Santa  Clara  Boy  Scouts 
 SAFETY  Earthquake  Preparedness 
 Bmin  Raiders  Pedestrian  Safety 


 NB~  esponsibility  Dont  Talk  to  Strangers 


 Battered  Womens  Altem@  ive  Stimulant 
 Crawl  Low  Under  Smoke  Earthquake/  Bed 
 Stop,  Drop,  Roll/  Fire  Safety 
378
 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 Kl?  Ix-  TV  San  Francisco,  CA 
 CBS  Broadcasting  Inc.  3rd  Quarter,  July  1,1999  A  September  30,1999 


 EDUCATION: 


 7/  13/  99,  Eycwitatss  News,  Five  Reports,  11  pm;  Fkcn-  ed  Cigarmcs  for  Kids.  They  come  in  such  tiers 
 asFxuachvanilla,  smooth&%&  te,  andstrawbenitsandcream  Itsanewbrandofcigaretks,  calIed 
 Bidis,  andteensarehookcd.  BccauseBidisreleasttwotothreetimts~  retarandnicofinctbanttgular 
 cigarettes,  doctorsmtzaUingthemadangmJusncwtrcnd. 


 7/  20/  99,  Eyeavitness  News,  Five  Reports,  6~  30  pm:  Space  Camp  for  Kids.  At  the  NASA  Ames  Space  CampinM~  Vitw,  kidslcarnwhata~  to~~  raspact~~ 


 s/  8/  99,  Bay  smday,  6:  30  am:  Black  Tar  Heroin  Steve  okazaki  ilunxiucc5  his  new  HBO  docummtary 
 OllkidSitlSanFtanc;  isco  and  their  addiction  to  Black  Tar  Heroin-  what  it  is,  w&  t  the  problem  is,  what  liTaiM  are  asmihble.  Repeat;  OAD,  4/  l  l/  99. 


 8/  U/  99,  Five  Rqnxts  on  Sunday,  6:  30  pm:  project  Rebound.  A  Bay  Area  programs  pnqares  students  fur 
 the  transition  from  jail  to  univeniv. 


 8/  20/  99,  Fiyedaa  News,  Five  Reports,  I1  pm:  Too  Much  Homewok  How  much  is  too  much?  Some  BayAreaschoolshavoereatcdparmt-  teschercommittMstostndytbequestion,  andhomewo;  tkc~  to 
 hclpseethatitgetsdone. 
 9/  U/  99,  Byewitness  News,  Five  Reports,  6:  30  pm:  Hate  O&  e,  when  swadcas  and  other  symbols  of 
 racir;  mreachywrchildwerthe~~  parentsmnfi~  backwith~  software~~ 
 ~~  toblockhatesites. 


 9/  26/  99,  B9y  Snnday,  6:  30  aax  The  Colorado  School  Shooting:  Could  It  Happen  Here?  Ciy  Supervisor 
 L.&  d  Yee  ad  RUX  l&  all&  ofthe  SE  CCIIW  of  Juvenile  and  Crimi;  rutl  Jut&  e  discuss  tlzt  Colorado 


 school  &&  g,  and  what  is  b&  g  done  to  prevent  something  like  it  tirn  hamg  in  SF.  Repeat,  OAD  4/  25/  99. 
379
 QUARTERLY  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  REPORT 
 Kmx-  TV  San  Francisco,  CA 
 CBS  Broadcasting  Inc.  3rd  Quarter,  July  1,1999  -  September  30,1999 


 7/  4/  99,5  Rapoats  on  Sunday,  6~  30  pm:  Toxic  Shock,  New  feminine  lXdUUSClaiI?  ltO~  WOmen  agaiusttoxicshock  C.  luu&  5Ncwsinv&  igatcdrheclaims, 
 l/  12/  99,  Eycwitnes  News,  Five  Repor&  11  pan:  Washing  Away  Germs.  We  qect  washing  m&&  es  to  getiidofdirtandpms.  Newtesearch,  however,  tindsrhatqularbn&  yd@  rgentdoeatkill 
 baaeriaorviluses. 


 #3/  99,  Byewlma  Naq  Five  Reports,  11  pm:  Conwlliog  &cc  The  number  of  kids  coolimitting  violcntactshasinmcasdatadisarrbingra(  ein~  years.  StanfoniUnivc&  tysAngaManagcment 
 Programklpsvio~  cnce-~-  recbanntl  tbirf~  ling$ 


 8/  l  l/  99,  Eyewim  News,  Five  R~  KIRK  11  pm:  Sjogtens  Syndnme.  A  growing  number  of  men  and  womcnanbbg&  gnoscdwithamysbiousdiscakqbelkvedtobeanauto  -immuue  disorder,  that 
 citusesfatigueand~&  yuessofthecgcs&  momh. 
 &W99,  Eyewitness  News,  Five  Reports,  6130  pm:  Multiple  CZlur@  l  Scpsitivity  (MCS).  Its  said  drat 
 wellave  htoourmodemIives,  andthatabwtrthirdofthege~  p  .  cbnxalsincvuydqdoscs.  Untnzatcd,  MCShasbeenknowntoca~ 


 asthma,  hcadachqsevcrefbti@  e,  andandpprobfems. 
380
 d  mQCommitree  on0 
 Eunice  Az4-  u 
 Chamber  d  Commerce 


 EddloVVhkekad 
 KPST.  N6b 


 Mary  Bitzcmun  KQ.  ED 


 Phil  Brsnstin 
 San  FtanclM  Ewnlner 


 Mervin  Field 
 Field  Rcrearth  lm. 


 F&  x  Gudemz 
 Freedom  Forum 


 Jay  Harrlr 
 San  Jce  tlcw~  ty  News 


 scca  G.  Haugt 
 Small  &rincss  Network 


 Charles  Jackson 
 3akhnd  Tribune 


 Tim  Ia 
 Sq  TW  Daily 


 Bill  tee 
 City  Adminlnntor 


 David  Lee 
 CAVK 


 Mbruo  C.  L~  nno 
 La  oplnih 


 JamesV.  Rirrcr 
 Kni&  Mlowstt+ 
 bnfwd  Unirerrig 


 Oeilk  Phell 
 UC-  B  Sthml  d)  oumrlism 


 Dan  Sokm 
 S&  m  h  Are&  scs 


 Lawwua  Wilkinson 
 oxygen  Media 


 Manx  kaYuchmpo  Filipirur  Plqainc 


 the  New  c 
 &  Oc  $ 


 A  Cobboration  Between  California  Ethnic  Media 
 and  Pacific  News  Service 


 Feb.  27,200O 
 Chairman  William  E.  Kennard  Federal  Communications  Commission 
 445  12th  Street,  SW.,  Room  TW  13204  Washington,  DC  20554 


 Dear  Chairman  Kennard, 
 Pacific  News  Service  and  the  New  California  Media  urge  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  to  set  clear  guidelines  for  all  local  broadcasters 
 to  operate  in  the  interests  of  all  members  of  the  public  they  are  licensed  to  serve. 


 There  are  numerous  examples  of  how  local  broadcasters  give  short  shrift  to  the  concerns  of  the  multi-  racial,  multi-  ethnic  communities  that  now  comprise  the 
 San  Francisco  Bay  Area. 
 For  much  of  1999,  local  broadcasters  reported  on  the  case  of  the  China  spy  (referring  to  the  Los  Alamos  scientist  Wen  Ho  Lee),  long  before  he  was 
 formally  charged  with  any  wrong  doing.  They  seemed  oblivious  to  the  fact  that  Chinese  Americans  saw  both  the  accusations  against  Lee  and  the  media 
 coverage  of  his  case  as  blatant  examples  of  rackal  profiling.  (In  the  words  of  one  Chinese  businessman  from  Silicon  Valley,  You  dont  have  to  be  puJled  over 
 to  the  side  of  the  road  to  be  a  target  of  racial  profiling.)  OrJy  after  we  convinced  the  PBS  News  Hour  with  Jim  Lehrer  to  cover  the  deep  anger  over 
 the  Wen  Ho  Lee  case  in  the  Chinese  community  did  mainstream  as  well  as  local  broadcasters  begin  to  access  voices  from  the  Chinese  American 
 community, 


 This  year,  with  elections  dominating  the  news,  one  looks  in  vain  for  daily  coverage  of  ethnic  voting  trends  by  local  broadcasters.  When  and  if  local 
 stations  explore  the  ethnic  angle  in  depth,  invariably  it  is  because  they  have  decided  to  produce  a  special  --  as  in  KRONs  award  winning  series  on  race  in 
 1999.  They  have  yet  to  acknowledge  that  focusing  on  the  ethnic  stories  should. 


 660  Market  Street,  Suite  2  IO  -  San  Francisco.  California  94  IO4 
 phone:  4  15-  438-  4755  fax:  4  15-  438-  4935  e-  mail:  ncm@  pacificnews.  org 
381
 be  business  as  usual  rather  than  an  affirmative  action  concession  --  a  footnote  to  the  main  event. 
 Candidates  debates  broadcast  over  the  network  local  affiiiates  are  routinely  conducted  by  representatives  from  mainstream  TV  and  print  media  - 
 invariably  people  who  are  out  of  touch  with  the  concerns  of  major  commurtities  of  color.  Yet  the  nightly  news  anchors  of  Spanish,  Mandarin, 
 Cantonese  and  Korean  language  television  stations  in  the  Bay  Area  command  large  audiences  and  are  exactly  the  people  who  should  be  fielding  questions  to 
 candidates. 
 Local  broadcasters  have  extraordinary  access  to  the  booming  dot.  com  economy  of  Silicon  Valley,  Ict  alone  San  Franciscos  multi-  media  south  of  market  world. 
 Rarely  does  their  coverage  portray  this  as  anything  but  an  all-  white  world,  despite  the  fact  that  Chinese,  Indians  and  Vietnamese  are  at  the  forefront  of  the 
 boom. 
 Perhaps  the  recent  growth  of  m-  language  ethnic  media  has  convinced  local  broadcasters  they  no  longer  have  to  provide  the  ethnic  angle  to  the  news  of 
 the  day.  Too  bad  that  they  havent  realized  that  the  ethnic  broadcasters,  like  the  ethnic  press,  represent  a  tremendous  opporhmity  for  collaboration.  To  access 
 the  headline  stories  and  reporters  of  the  Chinese  language  press,  the  Korean-  language  TV  news  broadcasts,  the  Spanish  language  radio,  the  black  weeklies, 
 for  example,  would  help  them  turn  local  broadcast  news  into  a  more  truly  inclusionary  public  forum. 


 By  failing  to  reflect  the  wealth  of  diverse  cultures  in  the  Bay  Area,  local  TV  broadcasters  forfeit  any  claim  to  representing  a  true  picture  of  who  we  are  and 
 who  we  are  becoming  as  a  metropolis.  At  a  time  when  the  mainstream  no  longer  exists,  local  TV  broadcasters  -  both  commercial  AND  public  --  might 
 best  be  described  as  the  Bay  Areas  white  ethnic  TV  media. 


 NewrChfornia  Media 
 Pacific  News  Service 


 _.,  __  ._  .  .  .  .  -I.  ----  111 
382
 Date:  Fri,  17  Mar  2000 
 Subject:  Letter  to  Chairman  Kennard 


 March  17,200O 
 Dear  Chairman  Kennard: 
 Deaf  Entertainment  Foundation  (DEF)  is  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  on 
 the  public  interest  obligations  of  broadcasters. 


 We  at  DEF  urge  the  FCC  to  set  a  date  to  establish  clear  guidelines, 
 broadcasters  in  our  community  are  sending  digital  signals  and  we  have  a  right 
 to  know  what  their  obligations  are  to  serve  our  deaf  and  hard  of  hearing 
 community. 


 We  at  DEF  think  local  broadcasters  should  be  required  to  do  the  following: 
 employ  a  diverse  workforce;  put  an  hour  a  day  of  local  public  affairs 
 programs  on  all  of  the  channels  they  broadcast;  put  an  hour  a  day  of 
 educational  programs  for  children  on  all  the  channels  they  broadcast;  provide 
 datacasting  services  to  non-  profit  and  educational  institutions  in  the  local 
 community;  provide  enhanced  closed-  captioning  or  video  description  services 
 for  persons  with  disabilities  (especially  emergency  and  non-  emergency  news 
 broadcast);  and  ascertain  the  needs  of  all  the  segments  of  their  community 
 and  air  programs  accordingly. 


 Broadcasters  may  claim  to  be  addressing  the  need,  which  the  above 
 recommendation  will  fill.  However,  it  has  come  to  our  attention  that  their 
 claim  to  have  addressed  (diversity;  service  to  persons  with  disabilities; 


 public  affairs  programs  addressing  the  needs;  educational  childrens 
 programs;  etc)  is  far  from  true.  We  therefore  express  our  disappointment  and 
 concern. 


 Closed-  captioning  is  of  vital  importance  to  our  deaf  and  hard  of  hearing 
 community,  as  our  children  are  in  need  of  equal  access  to  education  and 
 general  information  as  provided  to  the  public.  Furthermore,  the  deaf  and 
 hard  of  hearing  community  need  to  know  immediately  when  there  is  an  emergency 


 j/.  .___  ,_  ..-,_  .__.__  --.-I  _-  -_  1_ 
383
 of  natural  or  any  other  type  of  disaster  (such  as  earthquake,  tornado  or 
 airplane  crash,  etc.)  so  they  can  prepare  to  save  lives  or  spread  public 
 awareness.  If  a  program  is  not  captioned,  i.  e.,  emergency  or  non-  emergency, 
 via  local  or  national  broadcast,  could  be  perceived  as  a  form  of 
 discrimination  against  one  segment  of  a  society.  If  your  local  station  aims 
 to  serve  the  public,  it  should  aim  to  serve  all  of  the  public,  not  just 
 parts.  No  minority  or  persons  with  disabilities  should  be  overlooked  when  it 
 comes  to  broadcasting  an  important  message  to  them. 


 Much  more  can  and  should  be  done  in  the  future.  Again,  we  urge  you  to  set 
 clear  guidelines  as  soon  as  possible.  Thank  you  for  this  opportunity  to 
 participate  in  the  Inquiry  into  the  public  interest  obligations  of 
 broadcasters. 


 Sincerely, 
 Ken  Elks 
 Executive  Director  /  CEO 
 Deaf  Entertainment  Foundation  and  Guild 


 ICE/&  n 
 Cc:  the  Executive  Board  of  Directors  at  DEF 
 Cc:  Ofelia  Cuevas,  People  for  Better  TV 
384
 Helerr  Grieco,  P-  t  California  Nafionai  Organization  for  Women  926JStlWtSUit9820 
 saaaynento,  CA  95814  916  442  3414 


 I 
 I 


 February  28,200O 
 GM  Chairman  Kennard, 
 NOW  ir  responding  to  the  Notice  of  Inquiry  on  the  public  interest  obligatkms  ofbmadcasters. 


 We  urge  the  f  CC  to  8et  a  date  to  establish  dear  f#  deiine8,  broadcwters  in  my  czommunity  are  llrerrdi  diiital  signals  and  I  have  a 
 fight  to  know  vbtwat  their  obligations  8fe  to  serve  our  community. 
 NOWthinkskxaI  brosdcprterr,  should  be  required  to  employ  a  diverse  wrkfow. 
 We  are  outraged  at  the  pos8ibiiity  that  the  FCC  would  drop  lmmwtive  adion8  guidelines.  We  also  think  broadcaster8  should 


 provide:  l  at  leaat  an  hour  a  day  of  public  affairs  prqams,  educational 


 l  provide  da&  casting  sewices  to  non-  profits  and  educational 
 inatittians  l  ched  captioning  and  video  deucriptiun  for  the  disabled 


 l  do  community  outreach  to  find  out  what  the  programming 
 needs  are 


 Some  bmadca8tef8  may  claim  to  be  addressing  the  need8  tfrat  ~8  ju8t  outtined  kw@  ver  our  station  visits  put  this  in  question.  Eartier  this  . 
 month  I  vbited  two  stations,  KIVU  and  KRON.  l#  hile  the-  station8  pf0vide  a  stimdad  list  of  community  Mues,  it  is  clear  from  the 
 progmm  mpt~  that  this  list  isnt  w&  h  the  paper  its  printed  on.  Not  Mly  are  their  lists  so  generic  as  to  be  unhelpful,  its  clear  that  they 
 dont  change  from  quarter  to  quarter  (unlike  the  challenges  in  our  v8fy  divewe  community).  Both  of  them  channels  mly  heavily  on  local  new8 
 RS  a  means  of  satisfying  their  obligation  to  provide  for  discussion  sf  important  issues.  One  took  at  the  newa  makes  it  dear  that  as  good  a8 
 it  may  be  in  providing  headlinecr,  sound  bites  from  mainly  white  maieS  ore  not  Q  valid  substiiute  for  discussion  Fran  a  range  of  pM8peCtiVea. 


 Here  are  the  results  from  my  two  stat&  n  visit8.  KWU  FOX  n0tvmR  in  O&  lend  California 
 The  personnel  wBre  very  helpful.  The  files  we  wry  o&  fly  end  wcesaible.  I  w8s  permitted  to  view  the  files  ahne. 


 .  ):  I  !  I  ,.  !.    (  ;  :  j 
 w  ;.;,;:  1 
385
 !  ~lnthefiks: 
 F!  A  spy  of  the  EEO  requirements.  I  did  not  we  the  annual  employment 


 therequitpwnents.  .  AmmcmBbckFcmm 
 B8)  fAfUMB@  CkROWS  iuwningson2 
 FamiIy  2  Family 
 Chiidmnr  Pfogfmming  Theycbangoodjobhem. 
 They  have  chiIdrens  programs  Nbnday  -  Friday  from  24  pm  Satwdayfrwn6Mtonoon 
 Sundeyfiom  6AMtolOAM  i  did  not  890  Ihe  reports  on  advertising  limits-  that  may  be  my  error. 


 KRON  NBC  San  Francisco  J&  w  VaIenCia  vvho  hetped  me  do  the  site  visit  ww  very  helpful.  The 
 fiiewwwh)  ordef.  IINesnotpwmittedtobe8ionehehadto8tayto  watch  me  throughout  the  Wit.  1  hsd  to  fill  out  a  r9queSt  to  view  the 
 files.  ~$~  ondidnotoOreeto$  ignanew~  withNBCarrthe  nehnwk  vm8  ding  10  rnillii  to  c8ny  syndicated  programs.  Javier 
 tddmsthlta~  yoPnbodrNBCpaid~~  7milliontoavry 
 progrwnr,  7hs  resdution  to  this  ccwlflict  wilt  h  monk4  by  strrti~~  rwtion-  Mde. 


 In  the  fib:  t  did  m  the  annual  empioyee  reqM!~  but  no  EEO  requirm  in 
 file.  I  did  not  see  any  files  on  CitiuM  #JEW. 
 ThepotitiaWdfiieswereinwder. 


 2 
386
 They  make  ONLY  the  minimal  commitment  to  childrens  programming.  3to3.6houfsperIMoekNo~  8dutingthe~  onweelreml 
 theydo7AMto8AMlOAMtollAMaml3to4:  30QM.  H~~,  theirone&  wFltiCutiu 


 veryrn~ 
 ThdfShOWWWl8~  lMdtOme%  t  community  issue8  again  88  w#  l 
 KMJarenlostlynewsshQws:  Day  Bteek-  new 


 wDrry--  r#  ws  B8yAmaBackRoads 
 They  have  THREE  religious  show 


 Comploink:  Many  complaints  about  showing  viol-  in  the  news-  too  graphii.  Many  complaints  about  how  difficult  it  ~188  to  get  their  signal 
 along  the  cast.  Complainb  about  the  cl089  captiofwd  -not  in  qfnc  and  loosing  8ome  translation.  Complainta  about  sexual  8tereoQping  in 
 adwtlting.  The  news  crews  were  not  always  pMe88i0nal-  to  casual  when  reporting  wrious  issues.  Compleint8  aboua  reQorter0  simplifying 
 categoriesofracanotbeingpraci~~  wwugh.  Praise:  Awiecrtheydid  on  race  in  America.  Many  raquests  for  c0piOS.  Praiu,  ffom  many  nor+ 
 profitsfQrhelpfrwlthea8tiiforthehQmetess  community.  Letters  from  poliw  to  ttrank  the  tiation  for  helpir?  g  to  bring  in  leads  on  c~  be8 
 involving  kidnapping.  Also  for  holding  back  information  and  not  seruetianalizing  infofmatlon. 


 All  in  all  t  HAu  very  diwppointod  that  such  a  valuable  n98ouw  -the  publicly  owned  airwavw--  are  being  80  underutilized  in  our 
 communtties.  Clearly  w  can  and  must  do  more  to  ensure  the  bfwdc&  w  (l;  ro  not  jut  meeting  these  minimal  requirements  but  are 
 c~  mmithd  by  law  to  truly  give  mmthirrg  back  far  the  70  billion  dollar  give  My  of  diiital  f@  a&  um! 


 We  are  very  axxerned  about  the  violencq  stereotyping,  sexual  expkMaUon  and  lack  af  social  responsibility  in  our  media.  We  UQP  you 
 to  raise  the  bar  on  broadcasting  stand8rds  for  our  cititens,  our  chrldterr 


 3 
387