NAB NOT LIKELY TO TAKE SIDES IN NASA-TV NETWORKS DISPUTE AT FCC
Contentious issue for NAB is charge at FCC by Network Affiliate Stations Alliance (NASA) that TV networks are engaged in “unlawful tactics and practices” (CD March 9 p2) and issue is receiving wide discussion in industry circles. And, while subject isn’t on agenda for Wed. telephone conference of NAB TV board, question whether Assn. should file comments at FCC in support of NASA will be argued, we're told. “That’s the scuttlebutt going around at Monterey” last week during NAB Futures Summit, said TV dir. who attended Cal. sessions.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Wed. meeting was called to discuss particulars of joint comments NAB plans to file May 7 at U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., in support of retaining 35% TV station ownership cap. TV networks have appealed FCC cap, and NAB’s support of cap was major reason cited by Fox and NBC TV Networks when they separately withdrew membership in Assn. more than year ago. TV board now is split on becoming involved in NASA petition, with NAB TV Chmn. Ben Tucker of Fisher Bcstg. very much opposed.
Affiliates’ relations with their networks shouldn’t be NAB issue, he told us, with hundreds of other TV stations that aren’t NASA members to be considered: “But, having said that, I personally agree with the NASA position.” He said NASA should seek antitrust exemption so affiliates of ABC, NBC and CBS could deal as one with networks. (Note: Tucker played major role in NASA’s formation in 1982 as chmn. of CBS TV affiliates.)
TV Vice Chmn. Paul Karpowicz of LIN Bcst. and others said that TV board couldn’t act alone to endorse NASA position, that any position taken by NAB would have to be joint board action to include radio. Karpowicz also said it was appropriate issue for TV board consideration. TV board member Andrew Fisher of Cox, outspoken advocate of NASA charges, said of Wed. conference: “It’s always good to hear what others have to say” as he put emphasis on “broadcasters… not syndicators” in NAB’s name. “A lot of informal discussions are going on, but there’s nothing formal in the works for an NAB vote on the issue,” another TV dir. told us.
“We have not formally brought this up yet seeking support from NAB… but that could happen soon,” still another TV dir. said. However, no vote will be called for at Wed. meeting, he said: “We do not want to cause a war.”
Preston Padden, ABC’s representative on TV board, never has been reluctant to speak out (CD March 28 p7) -- nor was he on NASA filing. “Some day this fight will be over and it would be a shame if we destroy the NAB in the process,” he told us. “There is absolutely no reason to drag the NAB into this. A trade association shouldn’t eat its own members.”