Telecommunications firms are pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into states throughout the Great Lakes region to upgrade broadband networks. The investment boom is a direct result of franchise reforms that promote competition in cable TV services.
Unfortunately, Wisconsin has yet to capitalize on reform in large part because special interests are lobbying hard to preserve the status quo. But the only interests that lawmakers ought to protect are those of consumers, who would benefit greatly from competition in video services.
Franchise reforms were approved by a wide margin in the Wisconsin Assembly on May 9, but the legislation has yet to reach the Senate floor. As currently written, the bill would allow video service providers to obtain a statewide franchise to operate from the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions rather than having to negotiate a franchise with each of hundreds of municipalities.
The benefits of a streamlined process are undeniable. Easing market entry promotes competition which, in turn, spurs investment, reins in rates and improves service quality. The need for competition is plain: Since 1999, cable rates have increased 236 percent in Green Bay; 76 percent in Kenosha; 62 percent in Milwaukee; and 61 percent in Madison.
The pending legislation would, if enacted, prohibit municipalities from forcing video service providers to subsidize the production of local programs - the costs of which ultimately are paid by cable subscribers. However, the subsidies would not end abruptly, but instead would be phased out over several years. Video operators would continue to pay franchise fees of up to 5 percent of gross revenues to each municipality as well as to provide channel capacity for public, educational and governmental programming (PEG).
Alarmed by the prospect of reform, the folks who produce PEG programs are employing false claims and twisted facts in their attempt to block the legislation. But lawmakers and citizens must recognize that these PEG subsidies were established when few, if any, alternatives for local programming were available. That's no longer the case.
In the 1970s, when PEG became a standard feature of municipal franchising, video production systems could cost $100,000 or more. Nor was there an Internet on which local programming could be cheaply posted. Today, a high-definition portable camcorder can be had for less than $3,500, and there exist thousands, if not tens of thousands, of Web sites where video can be uploaded and viewed at no cost, as well as an increasing number of distribution alternatives such as iPods and cell phones.
PEG advocates say the subsidies are needed to give local citizens access to the airwaves. In fact, many of the programs aired on PEG channels do not originate locally - when programs air at all. For example, Stevens Point Community Access TV, like many others, simply posts a bulletin board for several hours each day. Wausau Public Access Cable airs several hours of church services daily. Meanwhile, the Alliance for Community Media, a PEG advocacy group, reports that River Falls Community Communications and New London Cable 6 each produce only 10 hours of local original programming each year.
Subsidies for some of the local access programs that do air is tough to justify, such as the Scientology Program on WPAC Channel 10; Unarius ("the physics of reincarnation") on Chippewa Valley Community Television; or, Past Life Therapy on Madison's WYOU Channel 4.
That may explain, in part, why the PEG audience is so small. According to research by cable TV executive Paul Olivier, more than 50 percent of cable viewers never watch PEG channels. Those who do tend to watch only sporadically, and most hardly need subsidized programming. A 2005 survey by the Madison City
Channel found that 82 percent of respondents obtained information about local government from sources other than PEG channels, such as newspapers, radio and the Internet. Moreover, more than 47 percent of viewers earned annual household incomes exceeding $70,000.
The notion that public access groups are starving artists is largely a fiction. The annual budget for Madison City Channel exceeds $529,000; for Western Reserve Cable 9, it's $400,000; and the budget of Milwaukee City Channel is more than $385,000.
If local programming is truly valued by the public, municipal officials can allocate to PEG operations some or all of the considerable revenue generated from franchise fees. PEG advocates could also go directly to voters and ask for additional tax revenue.
But it's long past the time for the PEG hold-up - literal and figurative - to end, and for lawmakers to put consumers' interests first with franchise reform.
Diane Katz is director of science, environment and technology policy with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, and a member of the American Legislative Exchange Council's Telecommunications and Technology Task Force. Prior to joining the Mackinac Center, Katz served for nine years on The Detroit News editorial board, specializing in science and the environment, telecommunications and technology, and the auto industry.




9 Comments
Everyone in this debate agrees that competition is good. We'd all welcome more players in the video market. Even with today's law, though, there's no significant obstacle for AT&T to enter new markets. There are no exclusive cable franchises in Wisconsin, and any newcomer gets the same contract as the incumbent, by law, so AT&T knows what it's in for. While there are about 300 franchise agreements total in Wisconsin, if AT&T negotiated less than a dozen, they'd be able to serve 80% of the market.
After all, AT&T isn't rushing into small towns. Here in Jefferson, they still haven't figured out how to deliver DSL in half the city. Katz suggests that competition alone makes rates drop, yet recent studies show they haven't when competitors enter markets. Even AT&T's own vice-president has said they don't plan on competing on price, instead, they'll compete on service and value, and that they intend to only offer their services in neighborhoods where a household could be expected to spend more than $120 on their bundle.
And we do need to talk about AT&T. They're the one hiring 15 lobbyists to push this bill in Madison. They're the ones who paid Diane Katz to write this. They're the ones who paid TV4US to Astroturf. Now TV4US is in the news for lying to legislators to invent support, pulling supporter names out of thin air, claiming that the desire to watch a Packer game is the same as supporting this specific legislation. They're the ones who want to turn over cable oversight to the state department of banking, as opposed to the public service commission. Why? Because DFI knows nothing about cable, of course! This is not the way to fix any problem in the state's oversight of businesses that want to use the public right-of-way to string their wires.
Katz's suggestion that PEG can be replaced by the Internet is silly. We might as well say that all television can be replaced by the Internet, too. YouTube certainly doesn't match television in quality. It certainly doesn't make it possible to post a two-hour video. Watching a YouTube video requires the viewer's investment in computer equipment and a monthly charge for a high-speed Internet connection, on top of their video fee. Producing an Internet video still requires cameras, studios, operators, and editing equipment.
Local programming is valued by the public. There is a value in broadcasting the meetings of our elected officials, there is value in repeated slideshows of community announcements, there is value in allowing the channel to be open as a public soapbox, no matter how crazy those programs may seem. PEG budgets are set by your local Council. So is the franchise fee rate, usually 5% on your bill. You want zero fees, zero PEG? Let your Council decide. Most in Wisconsin spend less than five bucks a year per subscriber on PEG. Why give up this local control? Why give up local control over where these video providers will be digging, stringing wires and placing boxes? This bill zaps that right, too, which is why cities have howled. Local control is the way the state solved this issue decades ago.
Katz suffers a cut-and-paste error from her last lobbying gig; Western Reserve channel 9 is in Ohio, not Wisconsin. Katz exaggerates; "most" people don't watch any specific channel, especially when there's so many. If we only watch a few channels, why isn't Katz pushing for ala carte pricing and programming? I'm sure most of us would love to stop paying for other channels we don't watch.
Katz tells a lie, most PEG stations are funded through franchise fees. Very few in Wisconsin get separate PEG fees, but that does make them dependent on that funding mechanism. And why does this proposed law intend to prevent any city from creating a new public access channel? Who benefits from that?
For the other side of the story, visit www.saveaccesswisconsin.org and www.teletruth.org/Wisconsin.html , or read the July 2 post on BizTimes titled "Competition does reduce cable prices", where another AT&T shill's arguments are refuted.
Clearly we would be better with more competition.
No one watches Public Access TV and it is not needed.
The internet and digital video can already replace public access TV and we would only get to see the exciting inflamatory stuff, not all the boring crap.
I think whichever group pays the legislators the most should win, just like always.
I don't know where Ms. Katz gets her information, but in addition to what John Faust pointed out, this statement is also very much untrue:
"In fact, many of the programs aired on PEG channels do not originate locally - when programs air at all. For example, Stevens Point Community Access TV, like many others, simply posts a bulletin board for several hours each day."
Here at Stevens Point's Community Television, we cablecast approximately 50 hours of locally produced programs weekly - far more than our local network affiliates do, even without counting replays. We also play programs that are not produced locally, but are brought to us by people who live in the community because they care about the information presented in the program.
Yes, we do ALSO play a Community Bulletin Board late at night and on Sundays, but that, too, is locally-produced community information, and there's nothing "simple" about it. Our Bulletin Board is hundreds of pages community resources, community events, government meeting agendas, and other local information - by far the best source of community information available to the thousands of Stevens Point residents who do not surf the web, and even for some who do.
In the midst of all her misinformation, Ms. Katz claims (without citing anything specific) that PEG advocates are employing "false claims and twisted facts."
That's just sad. All she had to do was take the time to contact me or look at the schedule on our web site and she could have presented the truth.
To help justify her position that "subsidies" for PEG channels should be eliminated, Katz states that "According to research by cable TV executive Paul Olivier, more than 50 percent of cable viewers never watch PEG channels."
I always find it interesting how industry representatives throw this data out whenever they want, but somehow omit to disclose the fact that their own research also shows that about 50 percent of those same cable viewers never watch ESPN, the most expensive basic service channel that all cable subscribers "subsidize," too. The $3.00 per month (or more) per subscriber that cable companies must pay to include ESPN is also passed through to every cable bill -- they just don't list it there, so it doesn't get any negative publicity. $3.00 per month for ESPN (whether you watch it often, sporadically, or NEVER) dwarfs the amount provided to support PEG channels in any community. And that's the rest of the (untold) story....
Ms. Katz really should do her homework before she writes!!
In reference to Ms.Katz comment:
"Meanwhile, the Alliance for Community Media, a PEG advocacy group, reports that River Falls Community Communications and New London Cable 6 each produce only 10 hours of local original programming each year."
I can tell you how out dated her stats are: OVER 7 YEARS OLD!
Our station changed it's call letters from RFCC-TV (River Falls Community Communications TV) to RFC-TV (River Falls Community Television) in Feb of 2000 when I started my position here.
I can also tell you that we average 63 HOURS a WEEK of LOCAL ORIGINAL PROGRAMMING. And we only play an average of 8 hours of outsources programs that are sponsored by a community member or they are Wisconsin Produced programming since we live in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Television Market (we tend to miss out on Wisconsin state events).
Beware of Ms. Katz and her falsehoods!
Dawn Wills
RIVER FALLS COMMUNITY TELEVISION
What an extremely disappointing column from Katz. There have been so many opinion pieces criticizing the proposed "cable competition" legislation, I have to assume this column is an attempt to look balanced, an attempt to take the road less traveled of late in Wisconsin editorials. And since this was probably a large part of Katz's motivation to write the piece, I guess it's no surprise her research feels rushed, outdated, and misguided.
On a side note -- go ahead and take the PEG funding issue out of the equation. At the end of the day, you still have a bill that will not promote any kind significant competition in our local cable TV markets. There aren't enough cable providers in Wisconsin willing to compete on price (AT&T included). Our cable bills will most likely not go down if this legislation passes.
What will happen? This: a negligible fraction of Wisconsin TV viewers will get the option of purchasing AT&T's technologically hobbled U-verse television service.
That just doesn't seem worth the price this proposed legislation would ask us to pay.
I now think Ms. Katz might have gotten the information on which she based her comments about Stevens Point's Community TV Channel from the Alliance for Community Media (which she quoted later in her article), who had some data on their web site that was completely incorrect about Stevens Point and other PEG channels in Wisconsin. I, and several other managers from some of the channels listed there, contacted the ACM today, pointed out how absurdly wrong their information was, and they immediately removed it from their web site.
The ACM's mistake, however, does not in ANY way excuse Ms.Katz from not checking the validity of her information before posting this article. Any rookie news reporter or writer knows to do that. One would think a former member of the Detroit News editorial board would know better.
I kind of hate to pile on, because Ms. Katz' comments have already been pretty thoroughly discredited, but since she took the time to twice specifically mention my organization (Madison City Channel), I'm going to weigh in anyway.
I have had a taste of Ms. Katz' irrational fear and hatred of local access programming before - at the public hearing the State Legislature held on this bill back in March. Many of her claims (which she continues to recycle) were rebutted back then, as dozens of advocates for Wisconsin access television testified to the thousands of Wisconsin residents who greatly value their local PEG channels.
I can't help but wonder if the degree of her fear of local access television is somehow proportionate to the size of the checks she is receiving from AT&T and other proponents of this ill-advised and unnecessary legislation. Ms. Katz, if local programming shakes you up so badly, let me tell you about this new invention - it's called a remote control. Switch the channel, okay?
Ms. Katz claims that the Internet and YouTube and the revolution in television and computer technology have made access television obsolete. Well, I am the manager of the City of Madison's Government access channel, so I am going to limit my comments to Government television. Madison City Channel (MCC-12) already streams and archives virtually all of our coverage of local Madison government on our website at www.mcc12.tv. In our case, we already fully utilize this outlet, as well of course as our channel on the local cable system. We have a professional staff who serves as crew for our coverage of meetings such as Madison Common Council. These folks are professional video producers with full-time permanent union jobs. These jobs would be at risk if the current level of locally-negotiated PEG support were eliminated. How does Ms. Katz think our coverage of local government happens - by magic? No, it takes the efforts of a paid staff - or does she think that volunteers will sit there through a seven hour Plan Commission meeting day after day? So if you want the door to open Madison government which MCC-12 provides to slam shut, adopt this legislation as written.
Further, the entire share of the local PEG fee that Madison City Channel receives - about $250,000 - is less than $5 per Madison cable subscriber PER YEAR, or less than what each sub in Madison is paying for just TWO MONTHS of ESPN (whether they watch it or not). (And before you challenge my math, the rest of our approximately $500,000 annual budget is comprised of our share of the City's general fund.)
It is also interesting that Ms. Katz - a "to the death" opponent of local access programming - would cite viewership surveys that buttress the value of MCC-12's programming. If Mr. Olivier's figures are correct (and since he is a spokesperson for the cable industry, his "facts" should be taken with a giant grain of salt), by his own calculations nearly 50% of cable subscribers DO watch local access programming. How many other channels on your local cable systems can you guarantee are watched by nearly half of total subscribers?
Ms. Katz also points out that, according to our 2005 study, 82% of respondents get information about local government from sources other than MCC-12. Fair enough. Of course, you must then acknowledge that at least 18% - or nearly a fifth of Madison cable subscribers - rely on Madison City Channel as their PRIMARY source of information about local Madison government. In this era of an explosion of information sources, I'll live with that! With her seemingly unintentional efforts at making the case FOR local access programming, I can't help but wonder if Ms. Katz is actually, deep down, a closet fan of Madison City Channel?
Finally, I will point out that the American Legislative Exchange Council - or ALEC - is simply a right-wing "bill mill" that drafted the original template for statewide franchise legislation and has since been peddling it to legislators around the country (and boy, did Rep. Phil Montgomery, the sponsor of this legislation in the Wisconsin Assembly, swallow it hook, line, and sinker). So Ms. Katz is hardly a disinterested, neutral champion of the interests of Wisconsin consumers.
If you want to pass statewide franchising legislation, go ahead - but do it with your eyes wide open, knowing that in state after state, from Texas to Virginia to North Carolina, the promised benefits of turning a state's broadband future over to private corporations such as AT&T have NOT materialized. NO reduction in cable rates; NO improvements in service; NO explosion of new jobs or broadband deployment, especially in rural areas. And, do it knowing that, from Texas in 2005 to Illinois this spring, legislation that has passed has preserved dedicated funding for Access Television. If there is a case that Wisconsin is somehow different, and should settle for less than what AT&T has agreed to in these other states, I have certainly yet to see it.
Brad Clark
Station Manager
Madison City Channel
I am the staff person in the Alliance for Community Media responsible for posting on our website the inaccurate information used by Ms. Katz, and I am the person who took it down. An explanation is in order.
When the ACM surveyed US PEG access channels in 2004, some reported their programming hours per year, while others reported their programming hours per week. When the survey was compiled and published, this substantial difference in reporting periods was not taken into account. Further, there was possibly spotty proofing of the data at the time it was reported, as well as at the time it was compiled. (Also, as Dawn Wills usefully points out, some of the 2004 data had been carried over from a 2000 survey - a survey process which could well have had similar data proofing issues.)
I had posted the programming hours information to our website because, while *some* of it was clearly wrong, it seemed some information was better than none. Now that Ms. Katz has seized upon and is publicizing these innacurate numbers in her attempt to make a policy argument, on behalf of those organizations being mischaracterized, and to guard against bad policy being based upon bad data, I have removed the information.
With the assistance of many leaders within the ACM I have designed a new survey of US PEG access channels. We launched this survey last week, and I hope to have some updated information to report before the end of the summer. We have taken great care to ask the questions in a clear and precise manner, and we will do our best to conform and proof the data before we publish it.
I do not expect our release of improved and updated information will be of any concern to Ms. Katz. I understand she testified to an Ohio House committee this spring that PEG access channels' routine coverage of municipal meetings doesn't count as original programming. However, many others will find this information useful - not least those cities and towns who were unfairly tarred by her use of our flawed data.
I apologize for having contributed to this confusion. I am eagerly looking forward to publishing soon the best data that's ever been collected on the vitality, diversity, and value of US PEG access channels. Thank you for your kind attention.
Rob McCausland
Director of Information and Organizing Services
Alliance for Community Media
http://ourchannels.org
202-393-2650