Blame Thrown Both Ways in Sinclair-TWC Dispute
A failed attempt to start arbitration proceedings in retransmission consent negotiations between Sinclair Broadcast Group and Time Warner Cable resulted in both parties pointing fingers and blaming the other for the lack of progress. TWC “effectively refused” to submit to binding arbitration with Sinclair except under onerous conditions, Sinclair said in a press release Thursday. Limitations on the kind of evidence allowed into the arbitration, and restricting the scope to just the stations Sinclair owns that are affiliated with the major 4 broadcast networks were among the conditions, Sinclair said. But TWC said it was Sinclair that ultimately balked at arbitration. “We told Sinclair we would arbitrate, and then yesterday Sinclair declined our consent to arbitrate,” a spokeswoman said. TWC doesn’t believe its customers should have to pay anything for carriage of Sinclair’s CW MyNetworkTV affiliates, and has offered those stations must-carry status on its cable systems, she said.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Also at issue is the fee TWC would pay to the Fox network for access to its programming in the event of a Sinclair blackout. Under TWC’s conditions for arbitration, that fee wouldn’t be allowed into evidence during arbitration, Sinclair said. Part of Fox’s agreement with TWC allows for provision of the network programming via either the local Sinclair station’s, which is much preferred, or through its own feed, a Fox spokesman said. The three goals of that arrangement are to protect Fox viewers from service interruptions, let affiliates continue to reap local ad dollars and let both sides continue retransmission consent negotiations without deadline pressure, the spokesman said. “We also believe that this ‘cooling off’ arrangement provides significant incentive to both sides to come to an agreement that protects consumers,” he said. Sinclair has offered to let TWC carry its Fox stations for the same price TWC would pay the network under that fall-back arrangement, said Sinclair General Counsel Barry Faber.
Sinclair is also looking into whether Fox has the right to deliver network programming to TWC in its markets in the event the retransmission consent negotiations result in signal loss, Faber said. “We're still considering the issue of whether or not Fox really has the right to grant them the stream,” he said. “We may take action with respect to that,” he said. Network-station affiliation agreements sometimes address what rights the network has during disputes. For instance, the affiliation agreement WGNT-TV Portsmouth, Va., filed with the FCC in September about its CW affiliation, which includes a provision that terminates the “grant of network non-duplication rights” 90 days after a broadcaster is unable reach a retransmission consent agreement with a cable system. The Fox spokesman and Faber declined comment on the Fox-Sinclair affiliation agreements. But Fox’s agreement with TWC is “not particularly helpful to our negotiation,” Faber said.
TWC would still like to get a deal done with Sinclair, but considers the Fox arrangement “an insurance feed” to protect consumers in the event Sinclair pulls its signals at the end of the month, a spokeswoman said. “We still think local blackouts are unfair, and we're working hard” to keep the stations on, she said. Sinclair said more than 5 million cable subscribers could be affected by the negotiations. Sinclair hopes the government might put some pressure on TWC to enter arbitration on less onerous terms, Faber said.