PLANNING FOR GROWTH IN YEARS OF RESTRICTED RESOURCES

ESSAYTHE MAN IN THE MIDDLE:EDDIE FRITTS IS AT ODDS WITH THENETWORK AFFILIATES HE REPRESENTSHarry A. Jessell, Broadcasting & Cablehjessell@reedbusiness.comReprinted with permission from Harry A. Jessell and Broadcasting & Cable magazine.The commentary appeared in the July 28, 2003 issue.I’m curious to see what happens to Eddie Fritts this week. Today, the president of theNational Association of Broadcasters is to preside over a special meeting of his board ofdirectors in Washington. The stated purpose is to figure out what the NAB should donext on media-ownership reform, an issue that has riven broadcasters and theassociation itself. Unofficially, the purpose is to get Fritts and the TV board on thesame page.Right now, Fritts has a problem. He is where no trade association executive ought tobe: out of sync with his TV board, a large number of the folks who pay his salary.The basic rub is that Fritts is not as gung ho about preserving the 35% audiencereachcap on TV-station ownership as the affiliate station group heads who dominatethe TV board, most notably Hearst-Argyle’s David Barrett, Cox’s Andy Fisher and Post-Newsweek’s Alan Frank.For the affiliates, no regulatory issue is more important than that 35% cap, whichhas come to symbolize the deep enmity between the affiliates and the networks.Without the 35% cap, the affiliates fear they will continue to lose market power andleverage in dealing with the networks. It’s a legitimate fear.On the other hand, the networks want to raise the cap so they can own morestations, where they make all of their money. Owning stations is also the best way toensure that all network programming is cleared without complaint and without havingto pay compensation to stations.A few years ago, over the vehement objections of the networks, the affiliates madepreservation of the 35% cap NAB policy. One by one, the networks quit.Here’s where it gets sticky for Fritts. The affiliates appear content to have the NABall to themselves. Fritts believes in unity. He wants an association that represents allbroadcasters—network affiliates as well as the networks and O&Os. This is a matter ofpride. He doesn’t want to be remembered as the NAB president who lost the networks.It’s also a practical matter: The NAB is stronger with the networks on board. Andarguing for the 35% cap is inconsistent with NAB’s call for deregulation almosteverywhere else. Believe it or not, consistency does matter in Washington.On June 2, the FCC raised the cap to 45%—a blow to the affiliates. Some grumbledthat had the NAB believed in 35% more and sold it harder, the FCC might not haveraised it.61Feedback September 2003 (Vol. 44, No. 4)