We are kind of glad the heat was not honest because it is a principled issue. I remember wrestling over it in the senate g7 television stations is a quaint term anymore when local channels are online just as much as televisions back they are. And most members say they have internet site but nobody tries to restrict their access. In the end that is the debate as i wrestled with it came down if there is a shortage is a best managed by Market Forces or government regulation unfortunately it is a very partisan issue. But i think our chairman has long had a principled position he has been selected as chairman of the fcc and yet he has taken a lot of heat for that. But we were unable to deal with it in congress so it does fall to the fcc and i suspect that will pingpong back and forth as to the right policy until the evidence is in and proven to be a problem that congress can address and come up with a constitutional majority. Host before we get any further into the issues that finger guest into the conversation. Repacking of the tv stations nearly 1000 stations are being repacked congress of 1. 75 billion but that billion dollars but that is not enough money but give us a sense at this point do you Hope Congress comes up with that money sooner than later . We think the sooner the better because it is doing things very fast and this is something that lands in every Congressional Office as they are pushed off the air because they dont have the crews to make the repacking possible. So both with the time and that money allocated they have to be repacked and eventually congress will be very mindful of this because local news and weather and sports and news about them will not be available if they are pushed off the air so we have friends on both ides of the i o that understand we hope sooner or later they will address the whole predicate of the spectrum option was that it was voluntary and those who chose not to so and remain in business would be negatively impacted in terms of the dollars in the ability to serve local communities. They have to get the dollars right and the time right. But this is no easy thing to repack a Television Tower because of weather, labor shortages, tower crews and it is hazardous work. We Hope Congress will address this because my experience my phone never rang more than Television Sets not working. We will get their attention but we hope we are ahead of the problem. They have asked for a safety valve to make sure the stations are held harmless if it happens beyond their control and the sec says we have waivers so a station might not have to be repacked by the deadline. Is that enough . Or do you want something in legislation to make sure they are held harmless xp mike i do trust them they do want free and local television to be available to all american what they dont have necessarily is all the money. There is a lot of people love good faith that broadcasters have no incentive to delay this we would like to do this as fast as we can to move into the future. Tmobile is the largest fitter in the auction and they tried to help them move tmobile back into the spectrum so what is your view on their activities so far . Even trying to get access to a major stations. Anything they can do to help is appreciated we want them to have the spectrum that they bought but we cannot move any faster than dollars permit. Any supplement they can get to facilitate is certainly welcome. There is a related issue that microsoft once the fcc and Public Interest groups to reserve three channels and they have been critical of this to say that spectrum might he needed in another tower. Can you give us a sense why that is critical . I love microsoft and their great product but i will say one of the wealthiest companies in the world they could have participated to buy spectrum for this very thing. We want the broadband but it is not either or but with the spectrum until we know the full consequences intended or unintended the request for spectrum is premature with that policy goal to achieve. Senator smith one of the conversations we have today is infrastructure should rule broadband to be included . Absolutely. It can be when the facts are better known and with the Technology Without receiver standard is deployed on a voluntary basis they are broadcasting and broadband so in the future have a twoway transition for the american viewer so we want broadband as well but we dont want to that at the price of them accompanying too early. As we take this tax reform is moving through congress does that benefit broadcasters . Clearly broadcasters are benefited by something that is not in the tax bill we work very hard with other businesses to keep out of it that is when you go and cut a tax with budget rules are required they are paid for. Advertising deductibility has always been an ordinary and necessary expense. There was some movement or suggestion that should be advertised but when your business is in Radio Television is 80 that poses a very real and present danger to the viability of the broadcast industry so we work very hard and we are thankful to the leadership and the senate so yes we look forward to lower rates but those are the business transactions they have to figure out under the new tax rules. But on balance broadcasters have a lot to be thankful for but broadcasting remains still the best way through advertising. Mentioning the next Generation Television the fcc just recently announced on a voluntary basis with these groups that say once it is deployed can force consumers to get tv sets because what they have now they cannot use it. And they say we talked years down the road what do you say to the criticism . I just bought the iphone i dont think i paid the tax i just wanted the phone and bought it in for the future people see an opportunity to buy a television that has vastly more capacity and options they may do that. But it is voluntary and because of that we will send a signal out on the standard. We have no incentive to do anything then to make sure as many people can see that so our advertisers expect that and we want that. We will not try to degrade the system in any way but offer offering for k pictures and sound and internet with interoperability and mobility you have a dongle to put that into your phone to watch broadcast television for free. This offers so much to the American People i am thankful that this sec one fcc i know samsung and lg will be producing dual receivers but that is in the future most televisions last a decade that new Technology Comes up and they want nothing new. Because the fcc has the courage to say america led from analog to digital now lets provide worldwide leadership with the new standard. That is a wonderful thing they have done. Somebody may be forced to buy a new set x. No. The biggest concern we have is backward compatibility why we have signals with channel sharing but we dont have the spectrum when we went analog to digital. We had extra channels. We dont have that anymore which is why the channel sharing idea will help to facilitate but every broadcaster says we have no reason contractually with advertisers or the Business Model that requires us to get all the content we can on the receiver standards. Apple is one of the makers of the smart phone that hasnt activated the chip they say it is there but not activated. Others say have activated it they say on a voluntary basis they should do that is it is good for consumers can you give a sense if apple might do that . We hope so. Apple is a tough business to get into with their own platform we deeply enjoy their products but we do think it is a great complement to the carriers who have voluntarily activated their fm chip. On these Android Devices you can get over the air radio without using data cap for less battery life so there is a lot of Consumer Protection and efficiency in Public Safety that will one day be considered a must to you the story of my friend gary shapiro who runs the Consumer Electronics association he was never for this until he was caught in the sonoma california fires and wrote a marvelous piece about his experience when they lost electricity and power and everything went down, lights, tv, cell phones did not work and he said i just wish i got power but i have no signal i wish it had the fm chip to find out where to go to be safe or be rescued and how to get out of here. He ended up going to his car radio to turn it on to find out what was happening with this calamity in the california valley. So he became a convert to the Public Safety value to have the fm chip. We hope apple sees that as a value one day and add that to the value of their product. Should that be a mandate . Essentially ever since the individual mandate of healthcare that is a tough word on capitol hill. I actually think over time we as a country ought to do what every other country does and they do mandate that. The japanese to know me that was a great lifesaver too many people who were caught up with the Nuclear Challenge because they had radio on their cell phone it was a broadcast receivership not the broadband so there is a case to be made but we decided to make the Business Case to these companies and include the revenue that offsets what they lose by having free radio on the cell phone. If you can get radio on your cell phone through the app that is a Digital Stream going against your data cap eating your battery life and broadcast is more efficient you mentioned apple but also apple tv and amazon how are those competitors fitting into the marketplace . Obviously it is more competitive it is the same between fox and disney for studio. To be in the content production business. Look at google and facebook getting into the content so that has an impact obviously fox has made a decision that disney would be better scaled. Things are shifting in the marketplace. As we referenced earlier what about the lines blurring . It is not the i love lucy era anymore. I know now that chairman pi is taking up the issue of the various markets the association is debating that vigorously how many markets it can cover and this is all debated now. What is one of the issues being debated . The national cap of 39 that what they are debating to come to a unified position some arm 50 some say that there should be no limitation and the fcc has a policy to keep Television Ownership small and to serve other Public Policies but on the one hand they keep us small to prove at t and directv emerging and that makes it difficult for us. Should inquire . We dont take a position on that. They dont do this on the basis of politics but what fits within the rules and guidelines and statutes they have to conclude if this complies with those and if it does they will permit that and and leave that decision to the business people. There was a time when they were pushing for mandate did you get pushback and that is why you said voluntary . Yes. It wasnt that we put in a bill by talking to members would you rather do it to the market for mandate or regulation . I respect that. And we have been successful on the android platform but not the apple. Do you think one of the issues of the fcc if they even have the authority to do that . When republicans voted of the proposed rulemaking do you think the fcc has the authority to remove that cap . The courts have to tell us that. I was a member of the senate when that cap was established as a result of compromise. It is statutory thing that is appended to the quadrennial review so if you give a strict reading they cannot raise the cap as part of the quadrennial review but can they raise it outside of that . I dont know the answer to that. But there are two legitimate legal arguments that will be made but the fcc has to decide they may move or eliminate the cap and let the courts decide if that is a hamstring on their ability or if that is a specific quadrennial review. Talk about newsgathering in times of emergency particularly at the Network Level has come under criticism with President Trump and he is asking the fcc to consider because he doesnt like the reporting from nbc but what do you think of that type of criticism of broadcasters . Criticism between the presidency and media is nothing new it has existed since George Washington although President Trump enjoys it more than most and raises it all the time. So broadcasters think what do we do . Donald trump may get you great ratings but you need to bring up your security but there are no threats on the First Amendment. The fcc is totally committed to the Public Policies of the Communications Act and license so a lot of that is bravado and part of the current political environment. I dont know how constructive it is. You dont have concern that he is asking the regulators of your industry to take an action based on politics and chairman says if not i will not be chairman for long . Im not worried about that. Chairman five is totally committed to the First Amendment and it serves the American People very well. I think the atmosphere is difficult right now that freedoe press freedom of religion still very solid cornerstones. I dont know what trump has read with law cases but most of the issues around this are based around that federal law that the United States approved court is committed to freedom of the press. I chalk that up to a good fight and interesting to watch but i am not worried about licenses with a commitment to the First Amendment. Set a straight with the cable industry at the table we hear about retransmission concern it seems to be a different issue. So with such and such provider dropping a network . First let me say what grades seem i have for my brother who runs the cable association. In the end that is the site of the value of content. That they are engaged with the free market situation so i would note as a matter of record that viewership is much higher for cable they pay those content producers more than they pay us for our highly watched programming so in the end our broadcasters and friends have to come up with a price that is fair and connected to viewership. Looking ahead five or ten years, how will we be watching it tv . Do we still call it tv . The future to my view is very bright for broadcasting because of the new threepoint oh receiver standard that is investing dramatically into our efficiency of our spectrum. It will wake up your phone if there is an emergency in your neighborhood you can be alerted to the broadcast signal. I have already said the tremendous pictures it will provide and the sound capabilities and augment and the broadcast signal is a oneway signal one source any Geographic Area but it will be the interoperable in the future so they come back through the broadcast with the opportunity to have far more engagement with your Television Broadcaster in the political world i wish this existed but it will enable the ability of the broadcaster to provide political advertising just in the districts that they represent. If you go to new york city during the election you will see a lot of ads from new jersey but this gives them the ability to put their ads to the people that vote for them and leave everybody else free from seeing those ads that cannot vote. What about as a consumer . That interoperability should you choose to respond on television than that could be of interest to you but of course everybody doesnt necessarily like the ads but that is how we move commerce. That is a central part of the health of our economy coming in the form of advertising. It will make advertising more meaningful and interesting. I just see the future for broadcast television very brigh bright. Host National Association of broadcasters and the Senior Editor from communications reports. Provider