Amicus Curiae Brief — National Association of Broadcasters, et al., Petitioners v. Prometheus Radio Project, et al.

Supreme Court briefMay 22, 2020

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

No. 19-1241

In The

Supreme Court of the United States

--------------------------

---------------------------

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS, ET AL.,

Petitioners,

PROMETHEUS RADIO PROJECT, ET AL.,

Respondents.

--------------------------

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

--------------------------

BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE

THE ABC TELEVISION AFFILIATES ASSOCIATION,

CBS TELEVISION NETWORK AFFILIATES

ASSOCIATION, FBC TELEVISION AFFILIATES

ASSOCIATION, AND NBC TELEVISION

AFFILIATES IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS

--------------------------

Mark J. Prak

Counsel of Record

Julia C. Ambrose

BROOKS, PIERCE, MCLENDON,

HUMPHREY & LEONARD LLP

150 Fayetteville Street

Suite 1700

Raleigh, NC 27601

(919) 839-0300

mprak@brookspierce.com

John Feore

Jason Rademacher

COOLEY LLP

1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Suite 700

Washington, DC 20004

(202) 842-7800

jfeore@cooley.com

Counsel for Amici Curiae

Dated: May 22, 2020

THE LEX GROUPDC

1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 500, #5190 Washington, D.C. 20036

(202) 955-0001 (800) 856-4419 www.thelexgroup.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ......................................iii

INTERESTS OF AMICI CURIAE ............................. 1

INTRODUCTION AND

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT .................................... 2

ARGUMENT ............................................................... 5

I. CONGRESS RECOGNIZED THAT THE

LOCAL VIDEO ECOSYSTEM MUST BE

GOVERNED BY OWNERSHIP RULES

THAT REFLECT THE REALITIES OF

THE MODERN VIDEO MARKETPLACE ..... 5

A. The local video marketplace has

undergone dramatic change in recent

decades, but broadcast programming

remains vital to local communities ............ 5

B. Despite dramatic changes in the video

marketplace, FCC rules governing local

media ownership have not kept pace,

contrary to congressional intent ................ 9

C. Ownership rules that no longer reflect

competitive video marketplace pose

obstacles to the production of local news

programming and even threaten the

viability of local television stations.......... 13

II.

the detrimental effect of its decision on

ownership of broadcast outlets by

women and racial minorities .................... 19

TE REVIEW

IS ESSENTIAL TO ENSURE THAT

OBSOLETE OWNERSHIP CONSTRAINTS

DO NOT IRREPARABLY HARM THE

LOCAL VIDEO ECOSYSTEM ...................... 22

CONCLUSION ......................................................... 24

iii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Page(s)

CASES

Prometheus Radio Project v. FCC,

373 F.3d 372 (3d Cir. 2004) ........................... 10, 21

Sinclair Broad. Grp., Inc. v. FCC,

284 F.3d 148 (D.C. Cir. 2002) ............... 3, 6, 10, 11

STATUTE

Pub. L. No. 104-104, § 202(h),

110 Stat. 56 (1996), as amended ...................... 3, 6, 10

REGULATIONS

47 C.F.R. § 73.622 ..................................................... 10

47 C.F.R. § 73.3555 ................................................... 10

RULES

Sup. Ct. R. 37.2 ........................................................... 1

Sup. Ct. R. 37.6 ........................................................... 1

OTHER AUTHORITIES

2010 Quadrennial Regulatory Review Review

and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section

202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,

MB Docket No. 09-182, Comments of Lin

Television Corporation (July 12, 2010),

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7020522175.pdf .......... 14-15

2018 Quadrennial Regulatory Review: Review

and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section

202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, MB

Docket No. 18-349, Comments of the National

Association of Broadcasters (May 29, 2019),

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10429077016730/2018

%20NAB%20Quadrennial%20Comments%20and

%20Attachments.pdf ................................................ 13

2018 Quadrennial Regulatory Review: Review

of the Commissio

Rules and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to

Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act of

1996, MB Docket No. 18-349, Reply

Comments of TEGNA Inc. (May 29, 2019),

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10529034256265/TE

GNA%202018%20Quadrennial%20Review%20

Reply%20Comments%20(5-29-2019).pdf ........... 14, 16

2018 Quadrennial Regulatory Review: Review

and Other Rules Adopted Pursuant to Section

202 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,

MB Docket No. 18-349, Comments of Gray

Television, Inc. (Apr. 29, 2019)

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10430725728587/Com

ments%20of%20Gray%20Television%20in%2020

19%20Quadrennial%20Review.pdf .......................... 17

2020 Coronavirus Media Usage Study,

https://www.tvb.org/Public/Research/2020Corona

virusMediaUsageStudy.aspx...................................... 9

Alphabet Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year

ended Dec. 31, 2018,

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/165204

4/000165204419000004/goog10-kq42018.htm ........... 7

Over 200 OTT services now

available in U.S. market alone,

Parks Associates (Aug. 13, 2018),

https://www.parksassociates.com/newsletter/

article/ca-aug2018....................................................... 6

Claudia Kienzle, BIA: 2018 TV Station Revenue

to Reach $27.68B, TVTechnology (Apr. 30, 2018),

https://www.tvtechnology.com/news/bia-2018-tvstation-revenue-to-reach-27-68b ................................ 8

Congressional Research Service, How Changes

in the Economics of Broadcast Television Are

Affecting News and Sports Programming and the

Policy Goals of Localism, Diversity of Voices, and

Competition (Oct. 20, 2010),

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20101020_

R41458_6c055f8400515c31a556c677d13466063c

684b24.pdf ............................................................... 7, 8

Edmund Lee, Everyone You Know Just Signed

Up for Netflix, NEW YORK TIMES (Apr. 21, 2020),

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/business/

media/netflix-q1-2020-earnings-nflx.html ................. 6

J.A. Eisenach & K.W. Caves, The Effects of

Regulation on Economies of Scale and Scope in

TV Broadcasting (2011) ............................................ 13

Jessica Bursztynsky, Disney says it now has

54.5 million Disney+ subscribers (May 5, 2020),

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/05/disney-reports33point5-million-disney-plus-subscribers-at-endof-q2.html .................................................................... 6

Lillian Rizzo, Local TV Sees Spike in Viewers,

Drop in Ads in Coronavirus Crisis, THE WALL

STREET JOURNAL (Apr. 3, 2020) .................................. 9

National Association of Broadcasters

Leadership Foundation, Broadcast

Leadership Training Program,

https://www.nabfoundation.org/programs/

broadcast-leadership/ ............................................... 20

National Association of Broadcasters, Television

Financial Report: 2016 Industry Business

Report, Station Revenue, Expenses and Profit

(2016)......................................................................... 15

Nielsen DMA Rankings 2020,

https://mediatracks.com/resources/nielsen-dmarankings-2019/ .......................................................... 15

Ooyala, State of the Broadcast Industry 2019,

(Jan. 2019), http://go.ooyala.com/rs/447-EQK225/images/Ooyala-State-Of-The-BroadcastIndustry-2019.pdf ....................................................... 6

Pappas Arizona License, LLC,

28 FCC Rcd 17048 (2013) ......................................... 19

Pew Research Center Newspapers Fact Sheet,

State of the News Media (June 13, 2018),

https://www.journalism.org/factsheet/newspapers/ ..................................................... 21

vii

US Senate votes financial support for

local newspapers and broadcast outlets,

MERCOPRESS (May 14, 2020),

https://en.mercopress.com/2020/05/14/us-senatevotes-financial-support-for-local-newspapersand-broadcast-outlets ................................................. 9

Withers Broadcasting Co.,

32 FCC Rcd 3179 (2017) ........................................... 19

INTERESTS OF AMICI CURIAE1

Amici Curiae the ABC Television Affiliates

Association, CBS Television Network Affiliates

Association, FBC Television Affiliates Association,

and

non-profit trade associations whose

members consist of local television broadcast stations

throughout the country that are affiliated with each

sion network.

Collectively, the Affiliates Associations represent

more than 600 local television stations in markets

across the United States.

The Associations have a strong interest in the

question presented by the Petition, because their

station-members are subject to the Federal

(

ocal media

ownership rules and significantly impacted by the

requires television broadcasters to structure their

businesses to comply with decades-old ownership

rules that are

notice of the intent of amici curiae to file this brief and have

consented to its filing. Pursuant to Rule 37.6, counsel for amici

curiae confirms that no counsel for any party authored this brief

in whole or in part, and no one other than amici curiae and their

counsel made a monetary contribution to the preparation or

submission of this brief.

Undersigned counsel at Cooley LLP previously represented

and, by default, a Respondent here. CMG did not participate on

the merits below and informed this Court and all counsel of

record that it will not participate in this case. Undersigned

counsel does not currently represent CMG in this case.

media marketplace.

ownership rules place local broadcasters at a decided

disadvantage against other competitors in the

complex, fast-evolving, highly competitive video

marketplace.

The issue is one of national importance, and

prompt relief is critical. The way must be cleared for

the FCC to discharge its statutory responsibility to

modernize its local media ownership rules, without

further delay, in order to allow television stations to

achieve efficiencies and economies of scale made

possible by consolidation.

If it is not, many

broadcasters particularly those in smaller media

markets will be unable to maintain competitively

viable businesses. Many will suffer the same fate as

local newspapers, and the losses will be felt by

viewers in communities across the country who rely

on local television to provide essential news, weather,

sports, public affairs, and emergency programming.

INTRODUCTION AND

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

Local television broadcasters provide a vital public

service in communities across the country. Through

free, over-the-air broadcast signals, viewers in

markets from the largest urban areas to the most

remote rural communities receive national, state, and

local news, weather, public affairs, sports, and

entertainment programming, as well as essential

public health and emergency information.

The

worldwide

coronavirus

pandemic

has

only

accentuated the critical importance of reliable access

to local and national news and emergency information

via local broadcast television.

Television stations cannot fulfill that critical role,

though, if their businesses are unable to survive

-paced, increasingly diverse, and

exceedingly competitive media marketplace. Like

every other business, the survival of local television

depends on economic viability. Stations that cannot

compete cannot survive, and broadcasters today are

competing against far more than the handful of other

local television and radio stations and print

newspapers that populated the competitive landscape

video marketplace is the most competitive the world

has ever seen, and it only grows more competitive by

the day. Competitors to broadcast television are now

too numerous to count: cable programmers, satellite

services, Internet-based programming providers,

and subscription video-on-demand platforms, not to

mention online news publishers, video programming

websites, and many more. And the competitors on

that list share a key attribute: In marked contrast to

television broadcasters, most of those competitors are

largely unregulated, and all operate in local markets

unconstrained by ownership limits implemented by

the FCC.

While the media marketplace has undergone

remarkable, even transformative, change in recent

kept pace.2

The Commission has made repeated

This despite the fact that Congress directed the Commission

to keep pace by enacting Section 202(h) nearly a quarter century

ago and that a federal appellate court found fault with the

See Sinclair

Broad. Grp., Inc. v. FCC, 284 F.3d 148, 171 (D.C. Cir. 2002)

(Sentelle, J., concurring and dissenting in part) (describing

in Section 202(h) as

efforts to update the rules; in fact, the first challenges

tempts to update its local media

ownership rules reached the court system nearly two

decades ago. Since that time, though, the same

divided panel of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals

has retained jurisdiction over all challenges to the

ownership rules and has

rules as Congress directed.

he issue has now

reached a critical juncture. Without

immediate intervention to overcome the Third Circuit

-handed barrier to regulatory relief from

anachronistic ownership restrictions that have not

made sense in the modern media marketplace for

many years, local broadcasters particularly those in

smaller markets face very real threats to their

businesses. And without healthy, economically viable

television stations, there will be no opportunities for

women or racial minorities to own, operate, or invest

in local broadcast businesses at all.

The n

is acute, so that essential broadcast outlets for local

news, weather, sports, public affairs, and emergency

programming are, at least, given relatively equal

footing on which to do business as they work to

marketplace.

-and-see attitude

to justify affirmatively the need for any duopoly rule, with or

without an eight voices

and internal quotation marks omitted)).

ARGUMENT

I. CONGRESS RECOGNIZED THAT THE

LOCAL VIDEO ECOSYSTEM MUST BE

GOVERNED BY OWNERSHIP RULES THAT

REFLECT THE REALITIES OF THE

MODERN VIDEO MARKETPLACE

A. The local video marketplace

has

undergone dramatic change in recent

decades, but broadcast programming

remains vital to local communities.

To say that the modern video marketplace is

dynamic, diverse, and highly competitive is an

little if anything like it did when the 1996

statutory obligation to ensure that its rules governing

ownership of local media outlets are periodically

amended or eliminated to reflect the realities of the

competitive marketplace. Since then, not only have

the number and variety of sources of video

programming, including news and information

programming, expanded exponentially; so too have

the platforms and devices available to viewers for

accessing the vast array of video programming options.

No longer must viewers gather around the living

room television set at a predetermined hour to watch

the local evening news. Digital technologies have

transformed the ways in which television stations

deliver, and viewers consume, video content (and the

ways in which advertisers reach audiences). Today,

numerous sources provide a wealth of video

programming, including abundant non-broadcast

content. These programming choices are available to

viewers not only on traditional over-the-air broadcast

television stations but also via cable and satellite

providers, telcos, social media sites, direct-toconsumer subscription platforms, and a rapidly

growing number of online video services and so-called

virtual multichannel video programming distributors.3

Subscription service Netflix has more than 180

million subscribers4; Hulu has more than 32 million;

and Disney+ has over 54 million.5 And viewers can

watch that programming anywhere on traditional

television sets and so-called smart TVs, via Internet-

By 2018, more than 200 over-themedia services that offer programming to subscribers over

the Internet were available in the United States.

See

Over 200 OTT services now available in

U.S. market alone, Parks Associates (Aug. 13, 2018),

https://www.parksassociates.com/newsletter/article/ca-aug2018;

see also, e.g., Ooyala, State of the Broadcast Industry 2019, at 4

(Jan. 2019), http://go.ooyala.com/rs/447-EQK-225/images/OoyalaState-Of-The-Broadcast-Industry-2019.pdf

(observing

that

and ad-supported OTT services are steadily

video programming has there been such rich and abundant

competition. And none of those OTT competitors even existed in

1996 at which point Congress already had concluded that the

reviewed regularly to determine whether they remained

Sinclair Broad. Grp., 284 F.3d at 154 (quoting Section 202(h)).

4 See Edmund Lee, Everyone You Know Just Signed Up

for

Netflix,

NEW YORK TIMES

(Apr.

21,

2020),

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/21/business/media/netflix-q12020-earnings-nflx.html.

See Jessica Bursztynsky, Disney says it now has

54.5

million

Disney+

subscribers

(May

2020),

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/05/disney-reports-33point5-milliondisney-plus-subscribers-at-end-of-q2.html.

connected devices (like Roku and Apple TV), and on

smartphones, tablets, computers, and more.

marketplace can choose from an almost unlimited

universe of live and on-demand video content, made

available by a vast array of service providers and

platforms, and they can access that content any time

they wish to watch it on any number of devices of their

choosing. This is not the video marketplace of 1996

or 2006. Or, frankly, 2016.

The advertising marketplace has evolved in

tandem. Advertising has long provided a primary,

essential revenue stream for local broadcasters,

which is used to fund the production of locally-focused

programming.6 But here too, the last twenty-five

years have brought remarkable changes, and the

increasingly complex and competitive video landscape

has taken a toll on local television stations. Among

other things, the growing prominence of digital

platforms has prompted advertisers to shift dollars

away from traditional broadcast television to cable

and satellite providers, Internet-based digital

platforms, and mobile outlets.7 As a result, local

A 2010 Report prepared by the Congressional Research

Congressional Research Service, How Changes in the Economics

of Broadcast Television Are Affecting News and Sports

Programming and the Policy Goals of Localism, Diversity of

Voices, and Competition

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20101020_R41458_6c055f

8400515c31a556c677d13466063c684b24.pdf.

As one example, in 2018, Google earned $116.3 billion in

advertising revenues. See Alphabet Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal

year ended Dec. 31, 2018, p. 27, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/

edgar/data/1652044/000165204419000004/goog10-kq42018.htm.

before.

Marketplace changes and increased competition

have placed enormous financial and operational

pressure on local broadcasters, but they have not

lessened the value and importance of local broadcast

television.8 Broadcasters supply unique, locallyfocused news, weather, public affairs, sports, and

emergency programming targeted toward their local

communities that no other video programming

providers replicate. Netflix and Hulu may offer

abundant libraries of on-demand content and

increasing amounts of original programming; but a

Birmingham resident who seeks live, local weather

coverage about approaching tornados or a viewer in

candidates will turn to his or her local broadcast

station for that information.

The global coronavirus pandemic has underscored

the importance of broadcast television and the trust

viewers place in their local stations. Viewers across

the country have tuned in to local broadcast stations

in even greater numbers than usual for timely,

reliable, and fact-based news and information about

For that same time period, the broadcast industry as a whole

expected to earn just a fraction of that amount $19.3 billion in

over-the-air advertising and digital revenues. See Claudia

Kienzle, BIA: 2018 TV Station Revenue to Reach $27.68B,

TVTechnology (Apr. 30, 2018), https://www.tvtechnology.com/

news/bia-2018-tv-station-revenue-to-reach-27-68b.

television news programming continue[d] to decline, Americans

still rel[ied] more on broadcast television than any other media

at 5-6 (footnotes omitted).

the COVID-19 crisis specific to their communities.

Recent viewership data confirms the point: In March

2020, viewership of live, local news increased

significantly over the same time period in prior years.9

The importance of local broadcast programming is

indisputable, and it is particularly acute in times of

crisis regardless of whether the crisis deals with

public safety (e.g., a tornado, hurricane, or mass

shooting) or, as recent events highlight, public health.10

B. Despite dramatic changes in the video

marketplace, FCC rules governing local

media ownership have not kept pace,

contrary to congressional intent.

Even though the modern video marketplace looks

nothing like the marketplace of the late 1990s, the

9 See Lillian Rizzo, Local TV Sees Spike in Viewers, Drop

in Ads in Coronavirus Crisis, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

(Apr. 3, 2020); see also https://www.tvb.org/Public/Research/

2020CoronavirusMediaUsageStudy.aspx

[l]ocal

broadcast TV is #1 f

and

felt that broadcast TV news gave them

At the same time, the pandemic has created severe

financial challenges for local broadcasters. Like virtually

every business in local markets across the country, local

television broadcasters have felt the economic impact of

the coronavirus crisis. Local advertising is the lifeblood of

the local television business, but as local economies have been

devastated by the pandemic, those advertising revenues

have dwindled. See, e.g., US Senate votes financial support for

local newspapers and broadcast outlets, MERCOPRESS (May 14,

2020),

https://en.mercopress.com/2020/05/14/us-senate-votesfinancial-support-for-local-newspapers-and-broadcast-outlets

some local broadcasters have reported as much as

a 90% loss in advertising revenues. This year, NAB estimates

advertising losses for local TV and radio broadcasters will reach

rules that govern ownership of local television outlets

have not been modernized to reflect marketplace

changes. The FCC rules currently in place that limit

ownership of media outlets in local markets television

stations, radio stations, and newspapers and cap the

number of stations a broadcaster can own in a single

market date back decades. The current Local

Television Ownership Rule11 is more than twenty years

old, and the Newspaper/Broadcast Cross-Ownership

Rule12 was enacted in 1975, decades before anyone

had ever heard of Google, Facebook, or Netflix.

The Local Television Ownership Rule permits an entity

to own up to two television stations in a single Designated

contours of the stations (as determined by Section 73.622(e) of

application to acquire or construct the station(s) is filed, at least

one of the two stations is not ranked among the top four stations

in the market, based on the most recent all-day (9 a.m. to

midnight) audience share, as measured by Nielsen Media

Research or by any comparable professional, accepted audience

ratings service; and (ii) at least eight independently owned and

operating, full-power commercial and noncommercial TV

stations would remain post-merger in the DMA. See 47 C.F.R.

§ 73.3555(b). The D.C. Circuit found the rule arbitrary and

capricious in 2002. See Sinclair Broad. Grp., 284 F.3d at 165

(concluding that

its exclusion of non-broadcast media from the eight voices

Generally, the Newspaper/Broadcast Cross-Ownership

Rule prohibits the owner of television broadcast station from

directly or indirectly owning, operating, or controlling a daily

newspaper in the same community. See 47 CFR § 73.3555(d).

The Third Circuit found the rule to be unnecessary in 2004. See

Prometheus Radio Project v. FCC, 373 F.3d 372, 397-400 (3d Cir.

2004).

Broadcasters have long recognized that the

outlets are ill-suited to the modern media marketplace.

In regulatory (and judicial) proceedings over nearly

two decades, broadcasters have pressed for sorely

needed updates to those rules. See Sinclair Broad.

Grp., 284 F.3d at 165. And to its credit, over those

years, the Commission has made efforts to identify

and modify outdated ownership restrictions that no

longer reflect the competitive realities of the media

marketplace, as Congress directed. See Pet. 8-12.

In its most recent Order seeking to modernize

the local multiple ownership rules, the FCC once

consolidate, share costs, and achieve economies of

scale can mean the difference between economically

sustainable local-news-producing broadcast operations

and wholly unworkable newsrooms, particularly in

smaller markets:

[T]he Eight-Voices Test denies the public

interest benefits produced by common

ownership

without

any

evidence

countervailing benefits to competition from

preserving the requirement. Furthermore,

these markets including many small and

mid-sized markets that have less advertising

revenue to fund local programming are the

places where the efficiencies of common

ownership can often yield the greatest benefits.

Our action in repealing the Eight-Voices Test

will enable local television broadcasters to

realize these benefits and better serve their

local markets.

In particular, the record

suggests that local news programming is

typically one of the largest operational costs for

broadcasters; accordingly, stations may find

that common ownership enables them to

provide more high-quality local programming,

especially in revenue-scarce small and midsized markets.13

Several years now have passed since that

acknowledgement, yet many of the same rules the

Commission found outdated in 2017 (and, indeed, in

2002 and 2006) remain in place, because at every

turn, a single panel of the Third Circuit Court of

attempts to

modernize the media ownership rules and has

foreclosed any other federal appellate court from

rulemaking.

limits on ownership that originated years before the

Internet became widely available, before Facebook,

YouTube, and Netflix formed part of the media

millions of viewers to access video programming on

demand on handheld screens.

The incongruity

betw

envisioned by the ownership rules in 1975, 1999, or

even 2006 is staggering, and the consequences of that

discrepancy will prove dire for local television

broadcasters if the path is not cleared for the FCC to

make much-needed updates to its ownership rules.

Pet. App. 152a-153a (footnote omitted). At the same time,

and for many of the same reasons, the Commission modified the

do not present public interest harms or that offer potential public

interest benefits that outweigh any

particularly in smaller markets. Id. at 156a.

C. Ownership rules that no longer reflect the

-competitive

video marketplace pose obstacles to the

production of local news programming

and even threaten the viability of local

television stations.

Broadcast television stations are businesses, and

like any other business, their continued operation

depends on economic viability. Simply put, local

television broadcasters cannot remain in business if

they cannot compete in an increasingly crowded and

fast-growing marketplace that offers viewers a

multitude of sources of news, information, and

entertainment programming. They certainly cannot

compete in an environment where the outdated local

media ownership rules put back in place by the Third

one hand tied behind their back, as rival video content

and distribution services grow their businesses

without regulatory constraints on the size and reach

of their market presence.

environment, economies of scale and

scope are more important than ever to the viability of

local television stations.14 If not for the regulatory

restrictions on ownership of multiple media outlets in

a single market, broadcasters could address financial

See 2018 Quadrennial Regulatory Review: Review of the

Adopted Pursuant to Section 202 of the Telecommunications Act

of 1996, MB Docket No. 18-349, Comments of the National

Association of Broadcasters (May 29, 2019) at 60-61 & n.237

(citing J.A. Eisenach & K.W. Caves, The Effects of Regulation on

Economies of Scale and Scope in TV Broadcasting, at 1-2 (2011)),

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10429077016730/2018%20NAB%20Q

uadrennial%20Comments%20and%20Attachments.pdf.

and operational challenges and generate efficiencies

and cost savings through, for example, common

ownership of more than a single top-four-rated

television station in a given market. Combined

ownership of multiple television stations, like

television-newspaper combinations, can facilitate

investment in and upgrades of newsgathering

operation, can allow the production or expansion of

local news and information programming, and can

support faster and more accurate reporting on

breaking news and more in-depth reporting on

significant public events and issues, among other

savings and efficiencies.

Those latter points are critical. Local news and

information programming is the backbone of local

expensive to produce.15 It requires news directors,

See Pet. App. 152a-153a (

typically one of the largest operational costs for broadcasters;

accordingly, stations may find that common ownership enables

them to provide more high-quality local programming, especially

in revenue-scarce small and mid-sized m