NAB’s planned new headquarters on Washington’s Capital Waterfront in southeast could cost more than $36 million, according to rough estimates from commercial real estate brokers. The planned 120,000 square foot structure will be located on what's considered increasingly desirable real estate, said CBRE Executive Vice President Manny Fitzgerald, who's involved with the transaction. The area around the future HQ is transitioning to a “24/7 neighborhood” with a mix of retail, residential and commercial uses and easy access to Capitol Hill, Fitzgerald said.
Monty Tayloe
Monty Tayloe, Associate Editor, covers broadcasting and the Federal Communications Commission for Communications Daily. He joined Warren Communications News in 2013, after spending 10 years covering crime and local politics for Virginia regional newspapers and a turn in television as a communications assistant for the PBS NewsHour. He’s a Virginia native who graduated Fork Union Military Academy and the College of William and Mary. You can follow Tayloe on Twitter: @MontyTayloe .
NAB will build a new 10-story headquarters in Washington's Capitol Riverfront area and move in by fall 2018, the association said. It said the new building's price is expected to be financed by the sale of NAB's current Dupont Circle headquarters. The new HQ is a mile from the Capitol and less than two miles from the FCC, making it much more accessible for legislators than the current building, an NAB spokesman told us. The new headquarters would likely cost about $300-$350 per square foot to build -- excluding the ground cost -- in the location named by NAB, a commercial real estate industry official said.
Pay-TV services, online video distributors (OVDs) and programmers don’t agree on whether an FCC proposal to adjust the meaning of the term multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD) to include over-the-top (OTT) video providers is good for online video, according to reply comments filed Wednesday in docket 14-261. “No commenter has identified any evidence of a problem in the OTT ecosystem that could warrant regulatory intervention now,” said AT&T, echoing Amazon and MLB Advanced Media. Extending MVPD status to OVDs would “facilitate online providers’ ability to gain access to video programming and enable the Commission to address practices by programmers that stymie greater video competition,” countered Verizon, echoed by online TV service FilmOn and the Tennis Channel.
Charter Communications is buying Bright House Networks in a $10.4 billion deal that's contingent on the approval of the Comcast/Time Warner Cable deal being approved, Charter said in a news release Tuesday. The deal will add 2 million video subscribers and some contiguous markets to Charter’s footprint, and solve an “attribution problem” involving Bright House in the Comcast deal, Charter CEO Tom Rutledge said on a press call after the announcement. Despite the sale’s dependency on the Comcast/TWC transaction, it isn't expected to have much of an effect on that deal’s approval, several communications attorneys told us.
Cable companies’ retransmission consent negotiating positions would be improved by a proposed FCC rule change making it a “rebuttable presumption” that all cable companies face effective competition, said Womble Carlyle cable attorney Mark Palchick and American Cable Association President Matt Polka in interviews Monday. Palchick and Polka agreed with broadcast industry officials (see 1503270047) that because rules requiring local broadcast stations to be offered on the basic tier are tied to rate regulation, and cable companies ruled to face effective competition don’t face rate regulation, the basic tier requirement therefore wouldn’t apply if the FCC approves the rule change proposed in its recent NPRM (see 1503260037). Polka and the ACA lobbied for the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act Reauthorization provision that triggered the FCC NPRM, and Palchick represented cable companies challenging the commission’s retransmission consent rules in 2010.
Instituting a rebuttable presumption that all cable companies face effective competition could have consequences for what's offered on cable’s basic tier and goes beyond congressional intent in the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act Reauthorization, broadcast industry officials and public interest group Public Knowledge told us. The proposal was put forward by the FCC in an NPRM last week (see 1503260037). “While Congress’s directive is limited, procedural in nature and focused specifically on small cable operators, the Commission’s NPRM is wide-ranging and has the potential to have a seismic impact on consumers throughout the country,” said Public Knowledge and NAB in a filing asking the FCC for more time to comment on the NPRM.
The FCC unanimously approved a notice of proposed rulemaking Thursday seeking comment on allowing broadcast designated market areas (DMAs) to be modified “to enable satellite subscribers to gain access to in-state news and other programming that they currently are unable to receive,” a commission news release said. The NPRM was triggered by Section 102 of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act Reauthorization, and though the NPRM merely seeks comment on how the rule should be implemented, STELAR requires the FCC to approve final rules by September, FCC officials said. Since a similar rule already exists for cable, the rule change is designed to create "regulatory parity between satellite and cable television providers,” the FCC release said.
Disagreement over whether a future downloadable security platform should account for over-the-top (OTT) content, use CableCARD as a baseline, or take the form of an app dominated the second meeting of the congressionally mandated Downloadable Security Technical Advisory Committee (DSTAC) Tuesday. Formed under a provision of the Satellite Television Extension and Localism Act Reauthorization, the committee of representatives from companies, trade groups and public interest organizations appeared to be divided along lines going back to the CableCARD regime they're trying to replace.
Broadcasters overwhelmingly support a rule change letting contest rules be disclosed online instead of on-air, but want flexibility over how often the online location should be broadcast and how specific the announcement of the Web address should be, according to replies in docket 14-226. Only iHeartMedia, the state broadcast associations of North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia and Clarke Broadcasting replied. “Announcement of a short, branded home page URL address makes more sense than announcement of a lengthy URL address containing backslashes and potentially unusual characters because the short home page address is almost always more memorable and understandable,” said the broadcast associations, echoed by iHeartMedia. Requiring stations to recite long, specific Web addresses on air is “unnecessary given consumers’ familiarity with website addresses and how to enter them into their browsers,” iHeartMedia said. Stations should be able to decide how often to mention the Web address, commenters agreed. “It would be bad programming to follow each 'mention' of one of these contests with an announcement that the contest terms are available on our website,” said Clarke. “The announcement itself would disrupt the normal programming flow and quickly begin to irritate our listeners, who are very familiar with these long-running contests.” Broadcasters were similarly supportive in initial comments, with several referring to the change as a rare FCC action where everyone agrees (see 1502200035).
The FCC proposed a fine of $325,000 -- the maximum allowed -- against Schurz Communications-owned WDBJ Roanoke, Virginia, for broadcasting explicit video from an adult film website on a news broadcast, said a notice of apparent liability (NAL) released Monday. It's “self-evident” that “the stroking of an erect penis on a broadcast program is shocking,” said the NAL. “Our action here sends a clear signal that there are severe consequences for TV stations that air sexually explicit images when children are likely to be watching,” said Enforcement Bureau Chief Travis LeBlanc in a statement. The offending images' inclusion in the broadcast was “purely unintentional” and was visible only on some televisions for less than three seconds, said WDBJ in a statement. The station plans to oppose the fine, it said.