Bounty offered:

Measuring cable penetration in the US is critical to a wide range of communications policymaking, from broadband deployment strategies, to  public access TV requirements, to the contentious conversation around ‘a la carte’ cable—the debundling of programming.  In the fall of 2007, it became apparent that the FCC had no good way to measure cable penetration in the United States.  FCC conversations about its regulatory role with respect to cable were blocked for lack of good data. As a result, the FCC placed a new emphasis on gathering accurate data and will seek comment on appropriate methodologies.  How was it possible for the FCC to err so badly?  What standards should the FCC adopt going forward?  The Media Access Project seeks a collaborator who can provide an account of this process and help develop an effective strategy for FCC data collection on cable penetration.

To provide a better basis for discussions about the role of cable as a primary provider of media and information services.

Because cable is one of the primary pipes for media and telecommunications services in US households, measuring cable penetration in the US is critical to a wide range of communications policymaking.  In the fall of 2007, it became apparent that the FCC had no good way to measure cable penetration in the United States, despite being required by Congress to provide such a report since 1992.  This became decisive during FCC Chairman Martin’s effort to invoke the congressionally-mandated ‘70/70’ rule as a basis for discussing FCC regulation of cable operators—i.e. 70% coverage of the US population and 70% adoption within that group.  Martin’s plans ran up against industry claims that the threshold had not been met, and cited 54% as the most recent figure.  There is good reason to doubt this claim: the numbers come from proprietary industry data, which the industry has not allowed the FCC (or other observers) to scrutinize.  More importantly, there are no public or independent alternatives, leaving a large blind spot in the FCC’s view of the media landscape.  As a result of the controversy, the FCC has pledged to determine for itself the extent of cable penetration by requiring reports from cable operators, but has not clarified what information it will request.

The immediate stakes of the debate include the wide range of possible public-interest regulation of the cable industry—from public access requirements to must-carry provisions for local stations requirements—as well as the more general and contentious conversation around ‘a la carte’ cable.

This situation raises two questions: (1) how was it possible for the FCC to err so badly (so future mistakes can be avoided)?  (2) What standards should the FCC adopt going forward?

The Media Access Project suggests that a wide array of public-interest media policy goals would benefit from an account of this process and the development of an effective strategy for data collection on cable penetration moving forward.  MAP would be a primary user of this research in its engagement with the FCC, but the work would clearly have wider applicability.

A communications or law journal article and comments for the Federal Communications Commission would be appropriate outputs.  It is also important to provide one or more short-form versions that can be circulated in different policy contexts.

Harold Feld at MAP has the outlines of this story and would be the primary liaison.

The deadline is relatively short due to the impending FCC proceeding, is estimated at approximately 4-6 months: July-September 2008.  This may vary depending on when the FCC releases it’s proposed Order and the deadline given for comments.  Interested parties should contact Harold Feld at Media Access Project (after March 1): 202-454-5684

The research will require access to proprietary information, as well as investment of time.