Public service by americas cable and Television Companies and it is brought to you today by your cable and satellite provider. Fcc commissioner michael orielly, as we enter into fall, you have a full complement over at the the, what are some of the agenda items will be being we will be seeing . We are still working on a few items, starting fresh and ready to work this week. We will see how the chairman sets up the agenda for the next couple of months. Issues,a number of infrastructure is high on our priority list and other issues that people have spoken about as well. What is your take on the recent New York Times article linking media ownership rules with sinclair and ajit pai . I completely disagree with the article, i do not find that the arguments presented were valid for my purposes. The items they cite in terms of favorable towards sinclair were generally available to all broadcasters. With the complying statute as written, so when we talk about uhs discounts, that is one of the things they highlighted, it is an issue that i believe that has been talked about a number of times. Our hands are tied by the statute. It is the Previous Commission who i believe, went rogue, and i believe in reinstating the statute. Haschairman has made been an incredible job, and the attacks that have been made, the intent to try and show some correlation between the two, i do not think there are accurate,. I think theyre inappropriate we are trying to do the best work we can and we focus on i have always said it is the law and the record. That is how i approach the job. Will we see media ownership as an agenda this fall . I hope so erect it is something that the Previous Commission ignored. We had a statutory obligation to modernize our media ownership rules to reflect the marketplace. Nobody looks at this today can see that our media rules match what is happening in the media marketplace. So i think it is our obligation and responsibility to do so and hopefully we correct the mistakes of the last commission. Joining us here on the communicators is our guest reporter, with the Financial News started start up. Thank you. I wanted to continue on that, commissioner. Announceda coalition earlier this week representing a lot of Different Industries and also different, political point of views. When a group who often opposes one another comes together like that, how do you feel how do you factor in that sort of unified voice. They have concerns with the sinclair tribune opportunity to have major market power, when you think about that. We have an execution before us, and i was talking generally about the process but your point in a broader sense of the a diversewhen coalition comes forward i certainly Pay Attention to it. What materials have been filed, but everyone has a particular reason why they are coming forward. They have a lot of businessdriven reasons and i want to be mindful of that. When you want to talk about more amazing video will come how do you look at the media market, how is that reflected in the world right now . When you talk to the media market and talk to the average consumer, how they are envisioning media, how they digest content, it is not just a small segment of the old 3 Major Network channels, you have a much wider swath of material palate andards their palette they are digesting much more resources. I think the past commission failed in this respect when they viewed things like radio only competing with radio, and in some sentence is this is it was only fm radio competing with fm radio. Everyone is fighting over the same eyeballs, the same attention, the same advertising dollars to see how the best reflect our rules while doing so in a thoughtful way. Policiesre some of the or rules that you think should be kept in the media space to protect the Public Interest . I am open to considering whatever the public before us. Look atan obligation to all media ownership rules and i think that is were the last commission failed in doing its work. The number of things will get a , we will get aat chance to look at again and i cannot make sure that i cannot say right now there was to eliminate all of them but you would not want every component to be owned within a local a big, necessarily in market, per se but there are certain cases where it makes sense, economically. Especially when have a very diverse definition when you talk about competition, more dollars and investment coming from overthetop layers, it has to be taken into account. So, commissioner oreilly, how do you view the fccs role when it comes to local control of competition . It is an important issue, as we have obligations depending on what is put before us, whether it is through licenses, another addition to the Public Interest standard that we take very seriously. We work through the issues in terms of the filings made by the applicant and in the record that is built by the support or oppose such material. We take that very seriously and local competition is incredibly important. It depends on everyones definition of what is competition and we try to follow precedent as far as possible. Here, depending on the topic that we are talking about i found that the past commission did not live up to obligations as required by the law and have an opportunity to revisit those. So if you change the media rules, there is expected to be quite a bit of consolidation among broadcasters, radio groups, tv and radio broadcasters, content makers, possibly. That sort ofthat consolidation will help the market how do you think that is in the Public Interest . Doneey have been deals when rules havent changed and deals done when the rules do change. The market changes and Companies Fall into favor, there is Good Management and bad management and they make bets on where they think it should go and then the change. You have companies that bought into radio and other companies with different formulations on what will go forward. If we are able to modernize our rules, i think you will see some properties, some assets being transferred to reflect marketplace, that it is not as singular as it once was. You are talking about a very global marketplace with a lot of new players that have not been taken into account. What are the potential acts in terms of Net Neutrality. We are continuing to get comments on our proceeding. That timeframe will conclude, the chairman extended for an additional two weeks, opry much at the end of august we conclude the process. Then will digest the record, analyzing to determine what arguments were made, what is the just once were made, how they match up with the questions raised in nprm. A proposed rulemaking that was what out by the commission and we will see how it matches up and see what direction we should go. I have my views on the topic but im waiting to see if something on the record changes my mind. What you think it would take to change your mind . I testify before congress on two parts and i think there is a third, to articulate it further there are two major categories, one is real harm to consumers a month not hypothetical harm. s economic analysis, substantive data points that we can look at verses again, this hypothetical scenario. Third is our president and secretary obligation and reversal that we made a couple of years ago in the existing completeich was a 180 degree direction from where we of been in the past couple of tickets. Couple of decades. We are waiting to see anyone makes a compelling case. You worked in congress for a number of years before the fcc, what do you think would satisfy these different concerns on Net Neutrality . I want to be careful about my experience on capitol hill, they do not appreciate too much advice on unsolicited advice if se, but i do not know, they were asking my opinion, i do not know that they are too far from where we are, or per se per se. I have particular the reasons why i think i have articulated the reasons why a couple of hours things should not going to legislation, and not, therehey will are a couple of things which i think could make it, it depends to me it is more important havingrecise drafting, congress in their great wisdom decide what it should look like, and how precise they can be, the better the more precise they can be. Anything any way they determine we should go is my calling card so i am completely comfortable with whatever they decide. But like i say, the more precise, the better. The statutes that i worked on when i spent my time at capitol hill, i found that over the years, the less precise i was, they always through it in my face. So, commissioner riley when you talk about precise that doesis that indicate the need to an update to the 96 act or the 1994 act, whichever one is the chief regulator at this point . We are still governed by the 34 act and amendments to it. There are still some pieces outside but to your point, it is something for congress to decide, certainly. They have previously wanted to do that and made a couple of runs at trying to modernize the statute and update the 96 act or the 34 act. I was there in 2004 and 2005, and the last congress did not make it out of committee. If they can succeed, it is for the members to decide. As a regulator, from your perspective can it be confusing at times . I have given an example and testifies to the fact that depending on the underlying technology, you can be governed as a broadband provider in a number of ways. If you are wireless, youre covered under title iii, if you are satellite you are covered under a different way, different ways because of our statute and because of our rules and i do not think that is appropriate. On policy and Foreign Investment in the u. S. , last year you spearheaded an effort to streamline the Telecom Process and you also called for congress to clarify that. Do you have any chance of that happening in this congressional session . I am externally disappointed it did not happen in the last congress i think it was a mistake by some the leadership and elsewhere that it did not happen. We were, one week from being done on this entire issue and they pulled the plug them will the rug out from under my feet. I am disappointed. I think that one issue that the administration, i do not give them any advice that you know, they need more people in charge, and more people to get confirmed. More people in leadership so that they can make some decisions then we can approach the issue. Parts,peful that both that we can modernize our rules at the commission and we can codify those provisions in the statute is Congress Sees fit. Is there some inertia in the rulemaking in congress in the rulemaking pipeline right now . Absolutely i thought we were ready to be done with the issue, and now there is lots of confrontation, lots of consultation we would like to have with the new administration and there are not enough there are good people within the administration but they may be at a lower level than they need. They need guidance, but someone was waiting to be confirmed for whatever reason you mentioned, we saw david radel nominated to the ncaa, but his the nc but his approval do not go through. Ia, how has his nomination impacted the issues you are working on . David is a good friend but i leave the process to the senate to determine the nominations. Whatever they decide to do, we will figure out how best to approach the nomination in due time. But to your point, i think that there are a number of the, both the ntia eight which would be helpful to have. Seats are currently unfilled and they make it difficult to have a formulation policy and a unified front as we approach other nations in the global community. As mentioned at the beginning, you have five. What can you do with five that you cannot do with three . I am happy to have my two extra colleagues. We have had a good run with three of us and to more voices will add a new voice into the organization which is helpful. To your question, it allows one more procedural tool to be used, which is basically that if three members of the commissioners vote for an item, it is a set timeclock for disposing of an item. Without that, when there is only three members am a one member can withhold the approval languishes. There is that part of it, and again, the important thing is for this new commission compares to the past, in my opinion, the chairman is running a much Better Process. Not only because i am in the majority, to be clear i have the same concerns, certain processes i would like us to fix in the commission. Is running apai Better Process than the last commission. It is more open, more friendly, the tension in the air is reduced and i think we are getting along better. Hopefully my new colleagues will also get along better. Does it help but that the help that both of the new ones have cast sec experience . Cc definite have past f experience . Yes, it definitely does. When they have experience it is easier. When i came, it was harder because i hadnt been in the commission before. I was not as experienced as they are in terms of knowing things. Obviously, commissioner wrote did the job for i got there and i think will be an easy transition for them. You have actually worked with the commissioner a little bit on other issues at another she is what do you expect some of those policy issues to be, do you plan to continue working with her on them or have the dynamic changed in the time the road since she was in the time since she was there . We are looking forward to tackling all of the issues we have not come to that it yet. I look forward to the opportunity. There are things like spectrum, spent quite awe great deal of time on together and it is something that is till out there. The decision needs to be made at some point and im hopeful that the commission will do so. I think it is a great opportunity to continue our advocacy and move forward on the issue. Do you have any sense of how the new administration might take a different approach on as opposed the Obama Administration . Issue, the. 9 spectrum of that has been allocated, automobile safety systems, and what we are examining at the commission is whether we can also allow that spectrum to be used for and licensed for licensing purposes. Consumers may see it currently referred to as wifi. Automobile Safety Service systems and wifi operating within the same spectrum i believe we can. We are running tests at the commission right now, to determine if the system scan interoperate and not cause each other harmful interference that hopefully will prove my case and the reason to do so is because the band that is five. Nine is sitting next to a number of bands that are already allocated for licensed use. Therefore to expand the reach of wifi networks, it will make them stronger and more capable than they are today. When it comes to the spectrum auctions, how soon will that sector the online . It depends on the particular item. We are still trying to figure out the timing, it is the chairmans call. We have a number of options scheduled as it relates to our universal service found, reverse auctions and getting money allocated is taking some time. We have some broadcast licenses that also have to be auctioned that does not require a lot of time and were also trying to figure out how we get to the millimeter wave band direct their also other things will what is the pipeline going forward, twitter still a lot of time between identification, clearing, and auctioning going forward, that there is still a lot of time between identification, clearing, and auctioning. Not too long ago, earlier this year, it has played into how much spectrum is available in marketplace today, in the secondary market, the number of bands available. Some folks have something colons holdings and well see what they plan to do with them. Whether they meet our obligations or whether we decided to auction them off. That of course government feeds into one of the Trump Administration policies of infrastructure improvement. How do you view the secs role fccs role . He there are some people who were not interested in the internet, and im not interested in forcing them to have it those people that would like, ubiquitous broadband, i would like to provide this. Issuesworking on those come i spent a great deal of my time working through our universal service fund issues, our high cost issues to provide a season mechanism were the market may not make a complete case for bill out for Broadband Services, whether it be wireless, or wireline. We are trying to figure out those issues and trying to provide the best mechanism to get service to those customers. Priority,edibly high i think we need a uniform agreement among my colleagues among we certainly had it and we testified in front of the house commerce committee. So we agree on the need to focus on the issue and were spending a great deal of time on it for my first active. Perspective. How are you waiting the concerns between industry who wants to describe small cells are more cable fiber and their concerns with speed and costs and concerns with localities and local governments who are concerned about aesthetic ,ontrol, or other public areas and their need to control for safety or for their own costs . There is an important balance. Consumers are really clamoring for these services. When i have traveled around the United States and listens to consumers struggle with their lack of broadband that they have today and explain to them, your local government doesnt want this to happen, because they do not like the aesthetics of the tower that we place on a small situation, in a small cell situation, they get pretty irate as i do as well. So it is a balance of the situation. Have a number of states that have taken this action on themselves, trying to do it on a state basis which is more beneficial and helpful, i think. But there are going to be some bad actors and that happened in my time working on these issues, who takealways some the process and uses it to their advantage, slowing it down, or economic extract at the aspect from consumers and they are contributed to the biggest problems you are facing. It is timing and it is money. If you think about the moneys out of the equation, some counties are trying to oppose impose a fee for microtower by the revenue is completely different. To expect the same amount of financial return from a small cell is not logical, it just delays the entire process. The whi