Exclusive: Video programmers will meet with lawmakers on retransmission consent

The video programmers also sent a letter to Congress on Thursday, signed by the Outdoor Channel, Starz, Africa Channel, Retirement Living TV and the Gospel Music Channel. Si TV wrote to members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to say that the system is broken.

The signatories are concerned that retransmission consent payments will not come from consumers, but from their own non-broadcast-affiliated networks.

“This ‘take from the poor and give to the rich’ tactic … constitutes a direct assault on the independent programmers who play an indispensable role in meeting the public’s interest in being able to choose from among a ‘diversity of voices,’ ” they wrote to Judiciary and Commerce leaders in both chambers.

Retransmission consent rules have “strayed from their original purposes,” the letter says, by suggesting that independent programmers should “fund their broadcast network competitors.”

“Yet, today, the national networks are taking control of local station’s [sic] retransmission consent rights and it is independent, non-broadcast affiliated programmers that are harmed,” it continues.

Still, the push to get Congress to pressure the FCC on retransmission consent has been slow to gain ground on Capitol Hill so far.

Reps. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) and Pete King (R-N.Y.) circulated a “Dear Colleague” letter in July promoting changes to retransmission consent rules. Only 13 members of Congress signed on, and King was the only Republican on the letter.

Reps. Gene Green (D-Texas) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) also circulated a “Dear colleague” on the issue, arguing that retransmission consent is simply a business-to-business issue and a major overhaul is unnecessary.

An example of negotiations gone awry: Cablevision and Disney fought over fees around the retransmission of ABC shows, causing programming to go down before the Oscars in March.