For months now, Public Knowledge has been communicating to the FCC the need to place conditions on an approval of the proposed XM/Sirius merger. We would like to think this has been successful, as a draft order recently circulated by Chairman Martin proposed to approve the merger subject to conditions, many of which closely echoed our suggestions. Even more recently, XM/Sirius themselves identified a set of conditions they would voluntarily commit to should the merger be approved. Although we think the language of the merged entity’s proposed voluntary conditions need some work to truly reflect the public interest, this is a definite step in the right direction.
Of course, that assumes that XM/Sirius will ultimately abide by these obligations. After all, a condition is meaningless if it is ignored. And, according to some opponents of the merger, XM and Sirius have habitually ignored their obligations. The example most often presented of the satellite radio companies’ bad faith is the failure to develop and manufacture an interoperable radio. But, concerns have also been raised over the interference caused by XM/Sirius’ terrestrial repeaters and the failure of the companies to address these issues. Currently, the only way for an aggrieved party to seek enforcement of these conditions, or relief for the failure of the merged party to comply with these obligations, is to petition the FCC. Alternatively, the party could wait for the license renewal period and challenge that renewal. Neither option, though, presents a satisfactory solution.
To counter this, Public Knowledge and Media Access Project have noted the importance of the FCC creating some sort of enforcement mechanism to ensure that the merged entity complies with these conditions. The FCC has created robust enforcement mechanisms in the past. An example is the Enforcement Bureau’s Merger Compliance Oversight Team, created to monitor compliance with conditions stemming from several mergers of Bell Operating Companies.
In particular, PK and MAP have suggested that the FCC appoint an independent overseer to ensure enforcement of the XM/Sirius merger conditions. This type of oversight role has appeared in a number of mergers in the past. The Federal Trade Commission reserved the right to appoint a “Monitor Trustee” to monitor compliance with the Order in the AOL/Time Warner merger. The FCC required that AT&T Comcast appoint a “Corporate Compliance Officer” to oversee the merged entity’s compliance with merger conditions and to periodically report back to the Media Bureau. The fact that the overseer in the latter case was selected by the entity being monitored raises questions of undue influence. However, this could be easily remedied in the present case by requiring the FCC, rather than XM/Sirius, appoint an independent observer.
With both Chairman Martin and XM/Sirius demonstrating a willingness to work with the types of conditions we have been calling for, the proposed merger presents a great opportunity to provide for new and diverse programming, innovative devices, and programming choice. It is thus imperative that we not allow these promises to be subsequently ignored and forgotten.
I have been following the
I have been following the debate as an interested party, primarily as an affected stockholder. I have been frustrated at the pace of the negotiations over this merger along with other stockholders and proponents of the Merger.
In my practice as an attorney, I frequently represent parties before administrative bodies and Courts in relation to Land Use issues and other administrative issues. The FCC is not unlike these types of issues, becuase you end up having stakeholders who are interested in the process. However, in this case, we have a technology that is a threat to an older generation of technology— and there is a great fight to protect that. My concern is that there has been great damage and harm done to Satellite radio in order to protect broadcast radio, no matter how much of a dinosaur it has become.
I think that this is a merger that will and must be approved. I support your efforts to ensure that promises made by XM/Sirius will be made and enforceable (quite frankly, interoperable radios will be necessary for financial success of the venture and my radio in my Toyota was available for XM or Sirius so it could have had both). I would hope that you would advocate for conclusion of this matter with the safegaurds that you have outlined.
I have no disclosure other than that I am an average subscriber and sirius and XM stockholder who is tired of seeing this thing drag on. I hope that the FCC and the parties involved do care about us.
Let them do what they want.
Let them do what they want. Satellite radio is NOT a necessity or a monopoly. If the combined sirius/xm company buries themselves by jacking up prices, NOBODY loses, I simply cancel my subscription, and go back to crappy AM/FM radio (which is what they are trying to turn sirius/xm in to.)
If you impose such outlandish conditions on a non-essential pay service, all you are doing is hurting me, the consumer. I don’t want to hear 25% free or minority programming. What is minority programming anyway??? To me, implying that minorities need their own channels suggests segragation in this country.