FCC says some broadcasters like U.S. spectrum plan

WASHINGTON Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:30pm EDT

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Some U.S. TV broadcasters have indicated they support a proposal to give up their airwaves to help resolve a shortage of spectrum for advanced mobile phone services, the top communications regulator said.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski said "a number of broadcasters" were open to his plan, which would call for them to give up airwave licenses for auction in exchange for receiving a share of the proceeds.

Some analysts have been skeptical about whether the plan would appeal to broadcasters unless the FCC offers them a very big percentage of the auction proceeds.

"We've certainly heard from a number of broadcasters who have told us that this is a promising direction and (they) are getting ready to roll up their sleeves with us," Genachowski said in an interview on Friday.

He did not name specific broadcasters, nor would he comment on the percentage of proceeds that would go to broadcasters under the plan. Analysts say there could be a public outcry if the FCC gives broadcasters too big a share, since wireless auction proceeds typically go to the U.S. Treasury.

The country's broadcasters -- including General Electric's NBC, News Corp's Fox, Walt Disney's ABC and CBS Corp -- hold spectrum licenses estimated to be worth $50 billion.

Genachowski will unveil on March 16 the National Broadband Plan aimed at promoting U.S. Internet speeds and usage. He promised on Friday that the spectrum plan would be attractive to everybody, including broadcasters and viewers.

"We've developed a plan that is a real win-win for all involved. We've every expectation it will work," he said.

He has said the plan would include a goal of releasing 500 megahertz of spectrum by 2020 for wireless broadband services. This would include any spectrum relinquished by broadcasters.

Genachowski also aims to auction another chunk of wireless airwaves known as the D-Block band, which the FCC had failed to sell in a 2008 auction.

Analysts said operators had previously shied away from bidding on the D-block because it came with many restrictions, such as an obligation to agree on network technologies with public safety groups that would also use the airwaves.

Genachowski vowed that the FCC would not to make the same mistake again.

"One of the core lessons the team has learned was not to replicate what didn't work in the past," he said, adding that the terms would have to be attractive to potential bidders. "There won't be any onerous conditions."

Wireless operators including AT&T Inc and Verizon Wireless, a venture of Verizon Communications Inc and Vodafone Group Plc, are under pressure to increase their network capacity in coming years due to surging demand for mobile Internet.

TO SET SPEED MILESTONES

The national broadband plan also has the goal of providing 100 million U.S. households with broadband connections at speeds of 100 megabits per second by 2020, which would be about 25 times faster than the current average.

Operators including Qwest Communications and AT&T Inc have questioned the viability of the goal, which would require billions of dollars in new investments.

Genachowski said the goal could be reached by degrees, following milestones set for between now and 2020. He said market demand would likely be a big factor in achieving the final goal of helping the United States stay competitive.

"It is both aspirational and achievable. We will have to find a way to get there," he said. "Network innovators in this country will get there. There will be market demand to push them there."

Asked if the broadband plan will help lower prices for consumers, Genachowski said it will take competition among broadband service providers "very seriously" and will commit the agency to an "energetic competition policy."

That would involve providing consumers with tools to inform them of the quality of broadband services. The FCC also plans to collect data and information to measure competitiveness.

(Reporting by Sinead Carew and John Poirier; Editing by Gary Hill, Tiffany Wu and Richard Chang)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
KevinCT wrote:
With the economy dwindling – the big get bigger and more powerful. I would like to call attention to a growing giant that may be a bit outside of scrutiny right now. The wireless voice and wireless data business is more profitable than their “monopolistic” ancestors ever dreamt. As a part of that industry I felt proud to have ushered in the digital age to wireless. But, somewhere along the way, companies like ATT and in particular Verizon, have used airwave license as license to monopolize. I read today that the FCC is looking to grow that industry and pave the way for airwaves that can handle what’s coming. Clearly a necessary move. Statements like that of Chairman Genachowski who said, “to help ensure the U.S. has a world-leading communications infrastructure for the 21st century” by “removing obstacles to 4G deployment.” Are a bit off base though.

Due to the stranglehold wireless companies have on – hardware, software and service – they end up holding us back while they engineer themselves into a piece of every single part of revenue that touches federal airwaves.
If they want more spectrum and license – give up monopoly on handsets and software. They are carriers – not czars – unless we let them.

STOP license expansion until fairness and contractual monopoly at the carrier side is curbed. It’s an industry that will have more combined power than TV, radio, print, Microsoft and the old Ma bell together. They are already in just about everyone’s pockets unfettered. Don’t let it grow unchecked.

Mar 16, 2010 7:23am EDT  --  Report as abuse
MrWillieMatt wrote:
Rational forward thinking from US politicians, why don’t you just ask for fiscal restraint? It might be better to have a second rate wireless infrastructure than to assist in the creation of the monster now being constructed by the so called peoples party.

Mar 16, 2010 10:09am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.