STATEMENT OF 
COMMISSIONER MICHAEL J. COPPS
Re: Review of the Commission’s Program Access Rules and Examination of 
Programming Tying Arrangements, MB Docket No. 07-198 
Drilled down to its core, the purpose of this item is to minimize unfair behavior in
such a way to benefit consumers through more competition.  When it comes to 
competition and diversity in video programming distribution, it is essential for the FCC to 
determine how unfair behavior short-changes consumers by stifling competition.  I 
believe the Program Access Order before us today can go a long way toward giving 
consumers the benefits of some additional competition.
Congress gave us more-than-adequate authority in Section 628 of the 
Communications Act to prohibit unfair acts by cable operators that significantly hinder or 
prevent competitors from providing programming to consumers.   The record developed 
in response to the Commission’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking looked at whether to 
extend the program access rules to terrestrially-delivered programming.  That record 
makes clear that lack of program access is a serious concern precisely because it limits 
competition. Today’s action by the Commission addresses these concerns in what I 
believe is a balanced, consumer-friendly way.
The item deals in a significant way with the Regional Sports Networks that have 
been used as a wedge by companies to deny non-replicable programming to interested 
consumers.   With the advent of HD, the sports viewing experience—and the 
expectations for that experience—have changed.  This is must-have programming in 
standard definition; it is also must-have programming in high definition.  Today we 
determine for good reason that withholding an HD feed is withholding a separate 
channel, even where a standard definition version of the network is available.   
A more difficult issue is how to treat news programming.  It will come as no 
surprise to anyone that I consider news to be critically-important programming.  Getting 
it from a diversity of sources is what enhances our civic dialogue, so the scales tip, in my 
mind, against mandating access to one local news show and in favor incentivizing the 
production of diverse news programming.  That’s what localism and diversity are all 
about.
Today’s Order adopts rules for complainants to pursue program access claims and 
addresses the fact that some players in these disputes will be larger and more powerful 
than others and that it is imperative to have a process that is reasonably accessible to all.  
For this reason I am pleased that language is included to indicate that factual evidence, 
and not just time-consuming and expensive analyses, can be the basis for a showing of 
harm by potential complainants.  By the same token, the inclusion of a standstill to 
continue service during disputes, along with the inclusion of good faith language, should 
assist in preventing the process from being unduly lengthy and expensive.  Protracted, 
expensive and unnecessary procedures too often translate into consumer harm.  
2
I thank the Chairman and colleagues for working to more fully realize the 
potential of the draft Order.  This item has been awaiting action for years and today, 
thanks to the Chairman’s leadership; it’s action that we get.  And good action, too.    
Thanks also to the Media Bureau staff as well as the Office of General Counsel for their 
extraordinary efforts to address the challenging, and often deep-in-the-weeds, issues 
related to program access in a way that will undoubtedly benefit consumers.