It looks like Congress may be headed to signing off on a payroll tax extension. Unfortunately for broadband consumers, the package includes allowing the Federal Communications Commission the flexibility to impose on large carriers, such as AT&T and Verizon, conditions designed to ensure competition should carriers win bids for broadcast spectrum.

Allowing larger companies to bid is the appropriate approach this legislation should take. I’m still not comfortable with a regulatory agency creating conditions that ensure competition. If those conditions were to give Sprint and T-Mobile, two companies that have taken mismanagement to a new level, some additional advantage, you may as well keep more efficient and better managed carriers from bidding for spectrum.

The American Cable Association, Free Press, and Time Warner in a letter dated 14 November 2011 gave the Federal Communications Commission an earful about certain practices by local broadcasters intended, allegedly, to skirt the FCC’s ownership rules.

Yes, you heard me. ACA, Free Press, and Time Warner. Talk about the joining of heaven (business and free market warriors) and hell (anti-market whining Free Press) getting together to wage war against broadcasters. Reminds me of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

Anyway, the triumvirate, along with some other side kicks, wanted to make the FCC aware that local broadcasters are entering into shared services and other contractual relationships to share resources, including newsrooms and staff. These actions, according to the triumvirate, have a negative impact on localism, broadcast station competition, and journalistic independence.

As a layman, I never say journalism and broadcast in the same conversation. Newspapers have journalists. Broadcasters have overpaid news readers that get their news from local and national newspapers and wire services.

Yes. Maybe I’m biased, but if the triumvirate and the FCC want to craft policy that addresses localism and journalistic independence, they also have to take into account the current business environment. Newsrooms, whether print or broadcast, are taking a beating.

You see, there is this thing called the Internet. People are adopting broadband so that they can gain quick access to multiple sources of news, local, regional, and national. Broadcast stations are responding to this, especially as online publications go multimedia. Ever read The Wall Street Journal? Their video content is first rate.

Anyway, I hope the FCC takes this into account while listening to the anti-business judgment hen pecking of Free Press and company.

In a letter to the Federal Communications Commission, the Motion Picture Association provided details of an ex-parte conversation between MPA and staff of the FCC’s Media Bureau. Specifically, the MPA is urging the FCC to consider the advantages of the existing closed captioning regime for television when implementing the regime for IP-delivered content.

Charter Communications, Inc., believes the Federal Communications Commission can go it alone when it comes to retransmission rules. In an ex-parte filing yesterday, Charter disclosed that it reiterated to FCC staff that the FCC had ample authority to implement new retransmission consent rules.

The rules, according to Charter, should prohibit retransmission consent leveraging by multiple broadcasters acting in concert. Charter gave examples of such leveraging. One example involves one company controlling multiple “big four stations”, for example, ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox. This could lead to an escalation of retransmission consent fees, according to Charter.

Another example, according to Charter, is where several broadcast stations including at least two of the big four stations, designate one representative to negotiate fees for the block of stations.

Charter’s filing was made in the FCC’s docket addressing media ownership.

I’m all for app development, creativity, and free market capitalism, but this piece in The Wall Street Journal caught me Afro-Carib-Irish eyes this afternoon.

Seems like broadcast and cable channels are considering developing applications for wireless devices that would allow viewers to interact with TV show actors and advertisement.

Just imagine Bobby Bubba sitting on the couch with the iPad on his lap and the 100 inch flat screen in front of him. Also imagine First Lady Michelle Obama having a fit as she tries to convince home slice to get off the couch.

If you work from home and have a couple kids buzzing around, you should be able to deal with the added distraction apps can provide.

I can see a broadcaster leveraging a platform like Twitter or Facebook to deliver content to listeners or viewers wherever they may be, while eliciting their comments. I guess the big difference is that with the app, a broadcaster can engage real time with the viewer while advertisers hawk their products to Bobby Bubba.

I for one don‘t care for the intrusiveness and would rather that businesses that I regularly patronize, like my grocery store, or gas station, offer me a free download of their app. That way I know who is bombarding me with ads, but I wouldn‘t mind so much because I already have a relationship with the advertiser.