Fixing the Antiquated DMA Rules Last of two parts
by Jerry Gibbs

In my last column I talked about the antiquated FCC rules that govern which cities and towns fall into specific Designated Market Areas (DMAs). Specifically, in our area, Bristol County is in Massachusetts but is part of the Providence DMA. That was not a problem until recently when cable and satellite companies were forced to put only Providence stations on the line-up, denying Massachusetts viewers some, or all, of the Boston affiliates. Now it’s time to talk about solutions.

The first solution is to adjust how ratings affect the map for DMAs. Currently the FCC looks to a private company, Nielsen, to provide ratings for the various television stations in a county. However, instead of taking all of the ratings a TV station gets, Nielsen—for the purposes of defining the DMA—only record over-the-air ratings. If ratings included cable viewership, which of course counts for most of the audience, the ratings would give us a much better picture of overall viewership, and show the strong preference for Boston stations. Relying on over-the-air antenna ratings does not give an accurate representation of demographics. Antenna-only households are typically older adults who don’t watch much television, hurting younger-skewing stations like FOX affiliates.

The second solution is to let viewers have a voice. Right now, the only two entities that can ask the FCC to look at a DMA map change are cable companies and local affiliates. In my research on this, I have talked to the local GMs and the local cable companies and, while both groups were sympathetic to our issues, they didn’t want to rock the boat in Massachusetts because it could affect them elsewhere in the country. That’s fine, but when—by law—they are the only two groups that can request a change in the DMA the viewer is left out in the cold. Viewers, or town or city governments, should be able to vote on which DMA they want to be in, especially when they straddle two metropolitan areas where preference is divided.

The third solution is demanding that all local in-state stations be on the cable or satellite system. This solution is gaining steam with a congressional act called the “Television Freedom Act.” If enacted, it would allow “orphan” counties to receive in-state television stations on cable and satellite. Right now this act has not even had a hearing, but hope is rising that it will be discussed later this year. As it is written right now, cable and satellite companies would have the option to add the in-state signals. We want this to be mandated, and will work on changing the wording.

In this era of high unemployment and our country fighting two wars, this certainly is not an issue that commands a high level of interest. But when you see how easy it would be to resolve it, and give Massachusetts viewers their Massachusetts stations, it is time for lawmakers, cable companies and local affiliates to fix the problem once and for all. Please let me know what you think, email: savebostonchannels@gmail.com.

Jerry Gibbs, a Boston/New England member of the Board of Governors, is an Associate Professor and Co-Chair of the Communication Department at Curry College in Milton, MA. His professional experience includes 20+ years of reporting, anchoring and managing news operations at television stations around southern New England. More recently he served as home page editor/news producer for washingtonpost.com.