*Pages 1--1 from  Microsoft Word - 36926*
 1 
 STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONER  MICHAEL  J.  COPPS 
 APPROVING  IN  PART  AND  DISSENTING  IN  PART 
 RE:  Implementation  of  Section  25  of  the  Cable  Television  Consumer  Protection  and  Competition  Act  f  1992;  Direct  Broadcast  Satellite  Public  Interest  Obligations; 
 Memorandum  Opinion  and  Order  on  Reconsideration  of  the  First  Report  and  Order. 
 I  dissent  in  part  from  this  Order  because  the  majority  concludes  that  important  public  interest  rules  with  which  cable  and  broadcast  operators  must  comply  should  not  be  extended  to 
 direct  broadcast  satellite  operators.  I  highlight  below  two  of  the  issues  that  concern  me  the  most  in  this  Order. 


 First,  the  Order  says  the  rules  on  political  programming  should  be  different  for  DBS.  In  Section  335,  Congress  expressly  directed  that  the  political  broadcasting  requirements  of  sections 
 312(  a)(  7)  and  315  apply  to  DBS.  Yet,  the  Commission  determines  that  it  is  premature  to  adopt  specific  rules  to  implement  this  requirement,  notwithstanding  that  there  are  such  rules  for  cable 
 and  broadcast.  In  the  First  Report  and  Order  this  decision  was  made,  in  part,  because  DBS  operators  were  not  selling  advertising.  But  today  DBS  providers  sell  advertising.  If  DBS 
 companies  are  now  contracting  with  programmers  to  leave  ad  slots  open,  then  are  filling  those  slots  with  advertising  of  their  own  choosing  and  at  their  own  rates,  the  time  is  now  to  roll  up  our 
 sleeves  and  determine  how  to  implement  the  statutory  requirements.  Why  wait  until  problems  arise,  especially  because  they  may  occur  in  the  heat  of  an  election?  Clarity  today  will  increase 
 predictability  and  certainty  for  candidates  for  public  office,  for  DBS  operators,  and  for  the  public.  Additionally,  given  the  national  scope  of  DBS’s  activities,  I  believe  that  we  should  require  DBS 
 operators  to  make  their  public  files  readily  accessible.  Disclosure  is  good  for  everyone. 
 The  Commission  also  decides  not  to  adopt  any  rules  that  protect  against  over-commercialization  of  children’s  programming,  even  though  cable  and  broadcast  television  must 
 comply  with  such  rules.  It  states  that  no  protections  are  needed  because  “most  of  the  programming  offered  by  DBS  is  the  same  programming  delivered  by  cable,  including  local 
 broadcast  programming.”  Given  the  harms  of  over-  commercialization  in  children’s  programming,  I  believe  we  ought  to  apply  commercial  limits  to  DBS  just  as  we  apply  rules  to 
 cable  and  broadcast. 
 I  am  pleased,  however,  that  the  Commission  plans  to  address  these  issues  in  a  sua  sponte  reconsideration  decision. 
1