<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rss [<!ENTITY % HTMLlat1 PUBLIC "-//W3C//ENTITIES Latin 1 for XHTML//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml-lat1.ent">]>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://saveaccess.org">
<channel>
 <title>Save Access - FCC Video Franchise</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17/0</link>
 <description></description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>test</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/robtest</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;just a test&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/52">Net Neutrality</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 15:23:47 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Lawmakers Press FCC On AT$T&#039;s Public Program Offerings</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/2338</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.morningstar.com/newsnet/printNews.aspx?article=/DJ/200809171410DOWJONESDJONLINE000870_univ.xml&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; The Morning Star&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Lawmakers Press FCC On AT&amp;amp;T&#039;s Public Program Offerings&lt;/b&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
9-17-08 2:10 PM EDT&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Members of a powerful House committee are pressing the Federal Communications Commission to put a stop to how AT&amp;amp;T Inc. (T) offers public and educational programming on its fledgling paid TV service.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/53">Cablevision</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/15">FCC</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/13">State Franchises</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/39">Time Warner</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:59:17 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>More Verminators!</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/2337</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.riedelcommunications.blogspot.com/&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Riedel Communications&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;More Verminators!&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the eve of a Congressional hearing regarding what has happened to Public, Educational and Government (PEG) access channels since the passage of statewide or state issued franchise legislation, it is heartening to note that the cable and telecom industries (and the FCC) have severely overplayed their hand. Tomorrow, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government will hear a laundry list of harms done to PEG in what appears to be an industry-wide effort to bury and destroy these local channels. An effort that was spawned by the FCC’s First and Second Report and Order on Video Franchising and the nineteen states that passed the state legislation. These harms come at a time when Congress and the American people are acutely sensitive to media consolidation and the loss of localism.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/53">Cablevision</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/40">Comcast</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/15">FCC</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/13">State Franchises</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/39">Time Warner</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2008 12:56:27 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Potential Reform of FCC Could Go in Many Directions</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/2115</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.multichannel.com/article/CA6525874.html&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; MultiChannel News&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Winds of Change&lt;br /&gt;
Potential Reform of FCC Could Go in Many Directions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
by Ted Hearn -- Multichannel News, 1/28/2008&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The House Energy and Commerce Committee is shining a spotlight on FCC chairman Kevin Martin’s management of the agency. (See “Watching the Martin Watch,” page 18, Jan. 21, 2008).&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/15">FCC</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/16">FCC Media Ownership</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:27:13 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>LOCAL COMMUNITIES PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE FCC&#039;S SECOND CABLE FRANCHISING ORDER</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1983</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt; Note: Thorough background from Miller Van Eaton on the recent FCC rulings effecting PEG&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.millervaneaton.com/content.agent?page_name=HT%3A++FCC+Franchising+Order+2006-12-20&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Miller Van Eaton&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;TABLE CELLPADDING=&#039;0&#039; CELLSPACING=&#039;0&#039; BORDER=&#039;0&#039;&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;strong&gt;LOCAL COMMUNITIES PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE FCC&#039;S SECOND CABLE FRANCHISING ORDER&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;/TABLE&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;&lt;DIV ID=&#039;section&#039;&gt;&lt;TABLE CELLPADDING=&#039;0&#039; CELLSPACING=&#039;0&#039; BORDER=&#039;0&#039;&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/13">State Franchises</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:30:31 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Local Groups Petition FCC to Stay Ruling on Video-Franchise Reform</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1968</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6514926.html?industryid=47170&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Broadcasting and Cable&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Local Groups Petition FCC to Stay Ruling on Video-Franchise Reform&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&quot;Groups say FCC decision will &quot;severely restrict the ability of local governments to protect their citizens, rights-of-way, community channels, and public safety networks.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 15:40:26 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>The FCC’s Second Report and Order on Cable Franchising</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1883</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://ulctlegislative.blogspot.com/2007/11/update-fccs-second-report-and-order-on.html&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Lincoln&#039;s Legislative blog&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Monday, November 26, 2007&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;UPDATE: The FCC’s Second Report and Order on Cable Franchising&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On October 31, 2007, the Federal Communications Commission adopted a Second Report and Order in MB Docket No. 05-311, FCC 07-190, released November 6, 2007, that addressed whether findings and relief for new entrants, promulgated in the Docket’s First Report and Order, also known as the Section 621 Report and Order, should be extended to current cable service providers (“incumbents”). The FCC found the following:&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:48:35 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>F.C.C. Chief Seeks Votes to Tighten Cable Rules</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1881</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/26/business/media/26cable.html?hp&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; NY Times&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;November 26, 2007&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;F.C.C. Chief Seeks Votes to Tighten Cable Rules&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
By STEPHEN LABATON&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WASHINGTON, Nov. 25 — The head of the Federal Communications Commission is struggling to find enough support from a majority of the agency&#039;s commissioners to regulate cable television companies more tightly.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:28:31 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>AT$T: Deregulation Only Applies To Us</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1878</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071121/160426.shtml&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; TechDirt&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div class=&#039;story&#039;&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;AT&amp;#038;T: Deregulation Only Applies To Us&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
from the &lt;i&gt;hypocrites&lt;/i&gt; dept&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;AT&amp;#038;T has spent a lot of money in the last few years lobbying against government regulation. They pushed hard to dismantle the Clinton-era DSL unbundling rules. They&amp;#39;ve &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061221/080344.shtml&quot;&gt;lobbied against&lt;/a&gt; having to negotiate thousands of franchise agreements with municipalities around the country before they could offer TV service. And, of course, they&amp;#39;ve lobbied hard against network neutrality regulations. In all cases, their argument was the same: market forces can protect consumers better than FCC meddling. And I&amp;#39;ve often been &lt;a href=&quot;http://showmeinstitute.org/publication/id.31/pub_detail.asp&quot;&gt;sympathetic&lt;/a&gt; to those arguments in cases where they&amp;#39;ve faced real competition. However, James Gattuso points out that for all their bluster about free markets, AT&amp;#038;T &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.techliberation.com/archives/043040.php&quot;&gt;only favors deregulation for themselves.&lt;/a&gt; In a recent letter to the FCC, AT&amp;#038;T threw its weight behind FCC chairman Kevin Martin&amp;#39;s proposal to &lt;a href=&quot;http://techdirt.com/articles/20071112/021817.shtml&quot;&gt;impose new regulations on the cable industry&lt;/a&gt; under &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.techliberation.com/archives/043014.php&quot;&gt;an obscure provision of the 1984 Cable Communications Policy Act.&lt;/a&gt; It&amp;#39;s awfully hard to take AT&amp;#038;T&amp;#39;s position here seriously. If, as they&amp;#39;ve been arguing for the last three years, the cable market is competitive enough that the franchise system should be liberalized, then it&amp;#39;s &lt;em&gt;certainly&lt;/em&gt; competitive enough not to need new regulations. Conversely, if new regulations of the cable industry are needed, why should AT&amp;#038;T be excused from complying with the rules the same rules as the cable industry? As James points out, these kinds of flip-flops completely undermine AT&amp;#038;T&amp;#39;s credibility, and are likely to hurt them in the long run. If they leap at every opportunity to impose new regulations on their competitors, who&amp;#39;s going to take them seriously when they advocate deregulation for themselves?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/9">AT&amp;T</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 21:08:43 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>IL: New FCC rule could mean less franchise fee revenue for Peoria</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1860</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://peoriachronicle.com/2007/11/16/new-fcc-rule-could-mean-less-franchise-fee-revenue-for-peoria/&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Peoria Chronicle&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
New FCC rule could mean less franchise fee revenue for Peoria&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
I’ve been trying to keep up on how cable franchise negotiations are going. You may recall that the city’s franchise agreement with Insight expired in April 2006. After several months, the city finally signed a temporary extension with Insight/Comcast through January 1, 2008. That’s not very far away now, and there’s still no permanent franchise agreement.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/24">ILLINOIS</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:18:40 -0500</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Threats to public access?</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1796</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://vermontcam.org/blog/2007/11/02/threats-to-public-access/&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; VCAM Blog&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Threats to public access?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On October 31st, the FCC made some decisions concerning media ownership and franchising rules that could adversely affect public, educational and government access centers nationwide. It’s one more push towards a cliff that PEG centers have been inching closer to over the last several years. Basically, the FCC is attempting to remove rules that permit local franchising authorities (in this case, the Vermont Public Service Board) from requiring cable companies to set aside funds for PEG services.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/13">State Franchises</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2007 11:32:10 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>I Want My Community TV: Public Access Television Faces Threats </title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1795</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1163/1/&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Toward Freedom&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;I Want My Community TV: Public Access Television Faces Threats &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Written by Megan Tady&lt;br /&gt;
Tuesday, 30 October 2007&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Imagine you know a thief is going to pilfer your television in the middle of the night? Most likely, you would take action to stop it – lock your doors, hide your TV, or in one last ditch effort for revenge, at least hide your remote. Imagine you knew that in the broadest of daylight, corporations and government were going to pinch not your television, but the only TV channels that give you, the citizen, a voice and a hand in local programming? Well grab your bat, because there’s someone at your door.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/12">Telcos</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/3">HR.5252 COPE</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/13">State Franchises</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2007 11:30:17 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>FCC Bans Exclusive Cable Deals at Apartment Complexes</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1792</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/money/20071101/fcc01.art.htm&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; USa Today&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FCC Bans Exclusive Cable Deals at Apartment Complexes&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;November 1, 2007&lt;br /&gt;
By David Lieberman&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Trying to promote pay-TV competition and keep prices in check, the Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously Wednesday to wipe out deals giving cable operators exclusive access to apartments, condos and other centrally managed real estate developments.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <pubDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2007 11:24:01 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>FCC’s New Cable Rules — One Step Forward, One Step Back?</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1787</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.lasarletter.net/drupal/node/495&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Lasar&#039;s Letter&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FCC’s New Cable Rules — One Step Forward, One Step Back?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From Lasar’s Letter, November 1, 2007&lt;br /&gt;
By Matthew Lasar&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Media reform groups offered mixed reviews at best to the Federal Communications Commission’s latest moves on cable competition and video franchise authority.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:29:25 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
 <title>FCC’s Three-Ring Hearing</title>
 <link>http://saveaccess.org/node/1786</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071101/BUSINESS/111010018/1006&quot; target=&quot;blank&quot;&gt; Washington Times&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;FCC’s Three-Ring Hearing&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;November 1, 2007&lt;br /&gt;
By Kara Rowland&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The nation’s media regulator wants to relax limits on ownership of radio, television and newspaper outlets, but the Republican-led Federal Communications Commission was greeted yesterday by a gale of testimony overwhelmingly opposed to the idea.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/16">FCC Media Ownership</category>
 <category domain="http://saveaccess.org/taxonomy/term/17">FCC Video Franchise</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:26:55 -0400</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
