[Senate Hearing 119-142]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-142
FIELD OF STREAMS: THE NEW CHANNEL GUIDE
FOR SPORTS FANS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 6, 2025
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
61-336 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
TED CRUZ, Texas, Chairman
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,
ROGER WICKER, Mississippi Ranking
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee GARY PETERS, Michigan
TODD YOUNG, Indiana TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
TED BUDD, North Carolina TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
JOHN CURTIS, Utah BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico
BERNIE MORENO, Ohio JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
TIM SHEEHY, Montana JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia ANDY KIM, New Jersey
CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
Brad Grantz, Republican Staff Director
Nicole Christus, Republican Deputy Staff Director
Liam McKenna, General Counsel
Lila Harper Helms, Staff Director
Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director
Jonathan Hale, General Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on May 6, 2025...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Cruz........................................ 1
Statement of Senator Cantwell.................................... 3
Statement of Senator Klobuchar................................... 25
Statement of Senator Blackburn................................... 28
Statement of Senator Lujan....................................... 29
Statement of Senator Schmitt..................................... 32
Statement of Senator Moreno...................................... 36
Statement of Senator Rosen....................................... 39
Statement of Senator Markey...................................... 41
Witnesses
Kenny Gersh, Executive Vice President, Media and Business
Development, Major League Baseball............................. 5
Prepared statement........................................... 7
William Koenig, President, Global Content and Media Distribution,
National Basketball Association................................ 8
Prepared statement........................................... 10
David M. Proper, Senior Executive Vice President, Media and
International Strategy, National Hockey League................. 13
Prepared statement........................................... 14
John Bergmayer, Legal Director, Public Knowledge................. 15
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted to Kenny Gersh by:
Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................ 45
Hon. Eric Schmitt............................................ 46
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 46
Response to written questions submitted to William Koenig by:
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 48
Hon. Amy Klobuchar........................................... 50
Response to written questions submitted to John Bergmayer by:
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 51
Hon. Amy Klobuchar........................................... 54
FIELD OF STREAMS: THE NEW CHANNEL
GUIDE FOR SPORTS FANS
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 6, 2025
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:08 a.m., in
room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Cruz,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Cruz [presiding], Fischer, Blackburn,
Young, Schmitt, Moreno, Cantwell, Klobuchar, Markey, Rosen, and
Lujan.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS
The Chairman. Good morning. The Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation will come to order.
In Texas where everything is bigger we boast some of the
most watched teams in the Nation. Today's hearing about sports
broadcasting is not just a Texas issue. It is a national one.
In an era of deep partisan division, sports might be the
most powerful cultural unifier that we have. Whether on the
couch or in the stands Americans come together to cheer, to
hope, to believe.
But those millions of fans are asking a simple question.
Why does it seem to be getting harder and more expensive to
just watch the game?
For years, fans face some frustrations--regional sports
blackouts, a lack of cable subscription options, and higher
costs for sports packages.
Consider, for example, that all NFL games used to be
broadcast on over-the-air channels until 1987 when the first
NFL game aired on ESPN. Some pundits and analysts at the time
predicted that fans would no longer follow the NFL if they had
to purchase a cable subscription.
How wrong they were. Instead, cable proved to be an
evolution in the market and the NFL's popularity exploded.
Today's shift to Internet streaming could prove to be a similar
evolution.
However, in some ways, rather than simply having more
options, sports viewing has become more splintered, requiring
multiple apps and subscriptions just to watch a single
franchise's entire season.
The app or TV channel that a fan uses one week to watch a
game does not necessarily work the next week. It is frustrating
and it is annoying for the dedicated sports fans.
Such market disruption is not only expected, it can be a
sign of innovation. The key is recognizing that and figuring
out how to adjust as we go. Importantly, we should be cautious
about saddling streaming services with outdated cable era
regulations, something that might do more harm than good.
The shift to streaming is not just frustrating, it can be
expensive. Between league-specific packages and games behind
different streaming pay walls it can cost hundreds of dollars a
year for a hardcore fan wanting to watch all of a league's
games.
If fans want to spend their hard-earned money on sports
streaming I do not blame them. I have shelled out a hell of a
lot of money to see the Houston Rockets and the Astros and the
Texans, and I intend to continue doing so.
But given that sports can get special treatment under the
law, whether it be antitrust protection, nonprofit status, or
taxpayer financing of stadiums, what do fans deserve in return?
This is a particularly important question for this
committee, which has jurisdiction over telecommunications and
broadcasting.
In 1961, Congress enacted the Sports Broadcasting Act to
grant professional leagues antitrust immunity as it relates to
negotiating national broadcast deals on behalf of their teams.
This structure allows leagues to negotiate from centralized
offices in a synchronized manner without violating antitrust
laws.
The SBA was intended to ensure that the needs of all sports
fans were being met. I think it is important to regularly
revisit and consider whether our laws, like the Sports
Broadcasting Act, are actually fulfilling their intended goals,
and if the leagues can show how the SBA continues to benefit
fans today it may be worth exploring whether to give a similar
exemption to college sports whose broadcasting rights have no
antitrust protection.
One growing concern is that the NFL has used its special
exception in the SBA to the frustration of college and high
school football schedulers.
For example, the SBA explicitly excludes antitrust
protection for the NFL if broadcasting a game on Friday night
or a Saturday between mid September and mid December. That is
to protect the interest of high school and college football
and, ultimately, their fans, who are no doubt also followers of
the NFL.
The NFL has tiptoed up to this rule, now putting a game on
streaming on Black Friday afternoon, which used to be reserved
for prominent football rivalries including in some years when I
was a kid Texas versus Texas A&M.
There are millions of sports fans who like being able to
follow high school and college and professional football
without having to choose amongst them. It is partly why
Congress wrote the SBA in the manner it did.
Professional sports holds a unique space in our culture.
They wear our colors, carry our hopes, and represent our cities
and towns.
Sports teams may be run like businesses but to fans they
are sacred institutions. They are public trust and it is why
taxpayers have been willing to shell out their money to build
stadiums and arenas for pro football and baseball and
basketball and hockey.
In exchange, fans are right to ask if these teams have a
civic responsibility to their communities that includes making
games accessible.
I look forward to hearing from each of the sports leagues
today on how the fan experience is changing, how fans are
benefiting from new broadcasting landscapes, and just as
importantly what responsibilities teams have to the public when
taxpayer funding or special legal rights are granted to them.
Streaming may well be the future but it should not sideline
the fans.
I now turn to the Ranking Member for her opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome to
the witnesses this morning here for this hearing.
Before we start on this subject, I want to express my
strong opposition to the efforts by the Trump administration
last week to undermine critical resources for local
broadcasting that is NPR and PBS and to fire three
congressionally appointed board members of the nonpartisan,
nonprofit Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
Every community deserves to have trusted access to local
journalism, particularly when it comes to some of our rural
areas where programming on these individual channels are very
valuable, a quality program for children, certainly emergency
alert information.
So we want every community including our rural and tribal
areas to have access. The President's actions last week will
hit these communities the hardest and deny residents the access
to information that they rely on to keep them safe in
emergencies.
With this hearing today, Mr. Chairman, obviously, we need
to find the sweet spot between consumer choice and consumer
costs. I recognize the challenging issue that we are going to
discuss this morning.
But I think Mr. Bergman--Mr. Bergmayer, I got it right--in
his testimony when he said consumers see that they finally
broke the cable bundle model. He was referring to the fact that
now with streaming and different distribution that you have
more choice, only to watch it reforming again right between
their eyes.
That is the subject of this hearing today, and this
committee has had a long, long history, back to our former
Chairman Senator John McCain, where he advocated in many of
those big cable broadcast wars for a la carte choice consumers.
We now see the same issues coming before us again but in a
different construct. According to Nielsen, the 2024 streaming
numbers were--have accounted for 39 percent of total TV usage
in the United States of America, surpassing cable and broadcast
television, and this surge in streaming viewers is coupled with
a 20 percent drop in cable and satellite subscribers in the
past 15 years.
So as you might imagine, this shift has created some
disruption including in the broadcast sports arena. I am
grateful, again, for our Public Knowledge witness to highlight
how some of these changes really have affected consumers and
particularly the fan experience.
When I am back home I get to turn on the TV and watch the
Seahawks on King 5 or Gonzaga basketball with no subscription
required.
But streaming has put sports content increasingly behind a
paywall so that only the subscribers can access that, and with
the growing number of exclusivity agreements with sports
leagues, the decline of cable bundle, consumers are facing an
impossible choice, missing an important game or managing, as
the Chairman just mentioned, a confusing array of streaming
media subscriptions.
So we are here today to hear what it is this committee can
do about this issue. It is interesting that the NFL signed a
10-year media rights contract agreement in 2023 that makes
Amazon Prime its prime partner for Thursday night football, a
deal worth $10 billion.
Major league soccer's 10-year deal with Apple brought
significant new viewership to sports with the playoff audiences
increasing by 50 percent in a single year.
So all of these issues make us want to ask the questions
about what content we used to get to watch for free that now we
are paying for, and what in a world where streaming becomes
even easier to get us content what are we doing to make that
content more accessible.
During the Paris 2024 Olympics allowed consumers access
across the world for the first time to every event live or on
demand. Previously, these events had been prioritized or
limited because of broadcast channels and now consumers can
watch any sport, any race, any preliminary bout, no matter how
many other events are taking place at the same time.
I like giving consumer choices. Netflix has the rights to
the next Women's World Cup and the WNBA's 2024 season attracted
more than 54 million viewers. There you go for not paying
enough attention to women's basketball in the past, a 170
percent increase over the previous season.
So there is some good news and that is that we can cover
more. We can give consumers more choice. But I, too, would love
to hear from our witnesses how we are making sure that we are
protecting consumers while we do that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you. I would note the Ranking Member
had some comments on the defunding of NPR, and as some might
say there is the rest of the story.
The Communications Act requires public media entities like
NPR to strictly adhere to, quote, ``objectivity and balance''
in all programs or series of programs on a controversial
nature.
Unfortunately, NPR does not. Last Congress I put out a
detailed report how NPR took millions in earmarked donations
from left-wing mega donors for very specific coverage.
After receiving those donations, NPR churned out content
precisely mirroring its donors' agendas. Likewise, the
congressionally chartered Independent Television Service paid
for documentaries like, quote, ``Racist Trees'' to appear on
PBS.
NPR's CEO Katherine Maher continues to deny that NPR has a
story selection problem even when senior editors are resigning
because the bias is so overwhelming.
Yet, NPR continues to have a dedicated news desk for
climate and for race, both of which are propped up by liberal
mega donors.
This is the same woman who in January 2020, months before
the death of George Floyd, tweeted, quote, ``Yes the North. Yes
all of us. Yes America. Yes our original collective sin and
unpaid debt. Yes reparations. Yes on this day.''
I think it is more than time for some accountability at
NPR.
I will now introduce the panel. First, the representatives
from each league will talk about their strategies that they are
pursuing in media rights negotiations as they aim to reach more
fans.
Our first witness is Kenny Gersh, Executive Vice President
of Media and Business Development at Major League Baseball.
Our second witness is Bill Koenig, President of Global
Content and Media Distribution, National Basketball
Association.
Our third witness is David Proper, Senior Executive Vice
President of Media and International Strategy, National Hockey
League.
Our final witness is John Bergmayer, the Legal Director of
Public Knowledge, who will discuss these issues from the public
benefit and fan perspective.
Mr. Gersh, you may begin.
STATEMENT OF KENNY GERSH, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT,
MEDIA AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT, MAJOR LEAGUE
BASEBALL
Mr. Gersh. Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and the
members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me here today
to give MLB's perspective on how the sports media ecosystem is
evolving.
My name is Kenny Gersh and I serve as Executive Vice
President in Media and Business Development for Major League
Baseball. In my role I oversee MLB's relationships with media
rights holders and distribution partners as well as our direct
to consumer product MLB.tv.
Currently, there are three main ways that we make live MLB
games available to fans in the United States: national games,
locally broadcast regular season games, and out of market
regular season games.
Looking to the future, as existing contracts expire we
intend to partner with entities that will make our games
available to the broadest possible audience and to eliminate
territorial restrictions to make our games available to any fan
that wants to watch them, regardless of location.
First, the league itself distributes our Jewel Events
consisting of all postseason games, the All-Star game, and the
Home Run Derby, as well as a package of regular season games
that are distributed nationally, consisting of fewer than 10
percent of the 2,430 regular season games we play each year.
Our most important events, the World Series and All-Star
game, along with a package of regular season games are made
available on Fox, an over-the-air broadcast network.
We also distribute regular season games and the remainder
of our postseason games on TBS and ESPN, two wildly available
linear channels.
Finally, we work with new media entities including Apple
and Roku to make a small selection of regular season games
widely available to our fans.
Second, each club retains the right to distribute their
regular season games within their own home television territory
with the exception of the small amount of games that are chosen
for national broadcasts.
The predominant way that MLB clubs have distributed live
games to fans in their local markets has been through the Pay
TV ecosystem via regional sports networks. The system worked
well for baseball fans for many years when most households
subscribed to a Pay TV service.
However, over the last decade, as more and more
entertainment content began to migrate to streaming services
fewer households subscribed or continued to subscribe to Pay TV
packages.
To make matters worse, as the number of Pay TV subscribers
continues to decline Pay TV distributors have begun to relegate
the RSNs to more expensive tiers or not carry them at all.
As a result, the RSN model has begun to crumble. The lack
of availability of the RSNs on many Pay TV systems or the need
to subscribe to a higher tier to receive them has created what
is known as local blackouts.
Finally, the league itself makes all regular season games
of every club available outside of each club's home television
territory via two subscription products: Extra Innings, which
is sold via Pay TV providers as an add-on service to their
customers, and MLB.tv, which is sold as a direct to consumer
product by the league and available on all internet-connected
devices.
In 2024, MLB.tv streamed over 14 billion minutes of live
game action to our fans and we are on pace to surpass this
record-setting level in 2025.
Overall, the fans' response to MLB.tv has been
overwhelmingly positive. However, historic contractual
arrangements prevented us from making games available in the
club's home television territories, leading to additional fan
frustrations with local blackouts.
The combination of declining affordable access to regional
sports networks via Pay TV and the lack of access to fans' home
teams' games via MLB.tv or other direct to consumer offerings
presents obvious challenges and frustrations for fans.
Commissioner Manfred identified expanding MLB's reach as
one of his top priorities. I am happy to report that thanks to
the commissioner's focus on this issue more MLB games are
available to fans than ever before in the history of our sport.
After the recent launch right here in Washington by MASN of
their own direct to consumer service, for the first time ever
29 of our 30 MLB clubs are now accessible throughout their home
television territory via direct to consumer offerings,
virtually eliminating the problem of local blackouts.
In addition, we have also been experimenting with other
methods of making games more available to fans. For the 2025
season a majority of our clubs now make a package of games
available locally via free over-the-air broadcasts, and on the
national level we make a package of games freely available via
the Roku channel.
Thank you again for inviting me to testify today. I would
be happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gersh follows:]
Prepared Statement of Kenny Gersh, Executive Vice President, Media and
Business Development, Major League Baseball
Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell and the members of the
Committee, thank you for inviting me here today to give MLB's
perspective on how the sports media ecosystem is evolving.
My name is Kenny Gersh, and I serve as Executive Vice President,
Media and Business Development for Major League Baseball. In my role, I
oversee MLB's relationships with media rightsholders and distribution
partners as well as our direct-to-consumer product, MLB.TV.
Currently, there are three main ways that we make live MLB games
available to fans in the United States:
1. National Games: The League itself distributes our Jewel Events
consisting of all postseason games, the All-Star Game and the
Home Run Derby as well as a package of regular season games
that are distributed nationally, consisting of fewer than 10
percent of the 2,430 regular season games we play each year.
2. Local Regular Season Games: Each Club retains the right to
distribute their regular season games within their own home
television territory, with the exception of the small amount of
games that are chosen for national broadcast.
3. Out of Market Regular Season Games: The League itself makes all
regular season games of every Club available outside of each
Club's home television territory via two subscriptions
products--Extra Innings which is sold via Pay TV providers as
an add on service to their customers and MLB.TV which is sold
as a direct to consumer product by the League and available on
all Internet connected devices including Smart TVs, mobile
devices and computers.
Looking to the future, as existing contracts expire, we intend to
partner with entities that will make our games available to the
broadest possible audience and to eliminate territorial restrictions to
make our games available on one or more platforms to any fan that wants
to watch them regardless of location.
At the national level, our most important events, the World Series
and All-Star Game, along with approximately 60 exclusive nationally
broadcast regular season games are made available on FOX, an over the
air broadcast network. Our other primary national broadcast partner,
WBD, makes postseason games available via the widely distributed Pay TV
channel TBS and on their direct-to-consumer service, MAX. We also work
with new media entities, including Apple and Roku, to make a selection
of regular season games available to fans that are outside of the Pay
TV ecosystem.
Since the late 1990s, the predominant way that MLB Clubs have
distributed live games to fans in their local markets has been through
the Pay TV ecosystem. The bulk of each individual Club's regular season
games have traditionally been licensed to Regional Sports Networks
(known as ``RSNs'') which were primarily distributed in each Club's
home television territory via Pay TV systems including cable, satellite
and IPTV providers. This system worked well for baseball fans for many
years. Most homes in the United States subscribed to a pay TV service,
peaking at approximately 105 million households in 2010. An
overwhelming majority of those households subscribed to basic-tier
packages that included access to their local sports teams. However,
over the last decade, as more and more entertainment content began to
migrate to streaming services, fewer households subscribed, or
continued to subscribe, to pay television packages. To make matters
worse, as the number of pay television subscribers continues to
decline, Pay TV distributors have begun to relegate the RSNs to more
expensive tiers or not carry them at all. As a result, the RSN model
has begun to crumble. The lack of availability of the RSNs on many Pay
TV systems, or the need to subscribe to a higher tier to receive them,
has created what is known as ``local blackouts.''
In addition to the regular season games that are available via our
national partners and locally via RSNs, Major League Baseball makes all
regular season games available outside of each Club's home television
territory via Extra Innings and MLB.TV. MLB.TV is a direct-to-consumer
service originally launched by Major League Baseball in 2003 to makes
games accessible to the fans that live outside of their favorite team's
home television territory. In 2024, MLB.TV streamed over 14 billion
minutes of live game action to our fans and we are on pace to surpass
this record setting level in 2025. Overall, the fans response to MLB.TV
has been overwhelmingly positive, however, historic contractual
arrangements prevented us from making games available in the Club's
home television territories, leading to additional fan frustration with
local blackouts.
The combination of declining, affordable access to Regional Sports
Networks, and the lack of access to fan's home team games via MLB.TV or
other direct-to-consumer offerings presents obvious challenges.
Commissioner Manfred identified expanding MLB's reach as one of his top
priorities. I am happy to report that, thanks to the Commissioner's
focus on this issue, more MLB games are available to fans than ever
before in the history of our sport.
Faced with the crisis hitting the Regional Sports Network business,
MLB built out the capability to produce and distribute live baseball
games directly. Due to MLB's preparation and efforts, when certain RSNs
shut down or dropped the rights to carry an MLB team, MLB was able to
step in to immediately produce and distribute those games, ensuring
there was no interruption for our fans ability to continue to watch
those games on the same Pay TV systems that had previously carried
them. Each time MLB took over the production and distribution of a
Club's games, we immediately launched local direct-to-consumer
services, expanding the availability of those Club's games to every fan
in their market, many of whom had previously been blacked out due to
their local RSN not being made available on their Pay TV system, if
they subscribed to one at all.
After the recent launch by MASN here in Washington of their own
direct to consumer service, for the first time ever, 29 of our 30 MLB
clubs are now accessible in their home television territory via direct-
to-consumer offerings, virtually eliminating the problem of local
blackout of MLB games in the United States.
In addition to the wide availability of direct-to-consumer options,
we have also been experimenting with other methods of making more games
available to more fans. For the 2025 season, a majority of our Clubs
now make a package of games available locally via free over the air
broadcasts. On the national level, we have experimented with making
games freely available via Internet connected devices, most recently
with a package of games that are freely available via the Roku Channel.
Going forward, we will continue to focus on responding to the
changes in the evolving media environment in a way that increases our
reach and fan access to our games, so that whether a fan is a Pay TV
subscriber or not, there is a frictionless opportunity to watch any
game the fan wants to watch.
Thank you again for inviting me to testify today. I would be happy
to answer any questions you might have.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Koenig.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM KOENIG, PRESIDENT,
GLOBAL CONTENT AND MEDIA DISTRIBUTION,
NATIONAL BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION
Mr. Koenig. Good morning, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member
Cantwell, and members of the Committee.
My name is Bill Koenig and I am the President of Global
Content and Media Distribution for the NBA and responsible for
the NBA's and the WNBA's media arrangements.
I have been with the NBA for 35 years and have focused on
distribution of our content including our live game telecasts
for the majority of that time. Thank you for inviting me to
testify today.
I am especially pleased to testify about the NBA's new
national media agreements with Disney, NBC Universal, and
Amazon. Starting next season our fans will have unprecedented
access to more than 300 nationally televised games, five times
more national game telecasts on free over-the-air networks, and
every national game telecast through broadly distributed
streaming services.
But it was not always that way. In the 1960s our games were
rarely seen on national television, and when they were they
were often relegated to segments on ABC's ``Wide World of
Sports'' rather than a stand alone broadcasts, and into the
1980s our finals games featuring legends such as Larry Bird,
Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and Julius Irving were not
aired live but on tape delay at 11:30 p.m. after the local
news.
We have come a long way. Part of that success comes from a
sustained focus on serving our fans by adapting to
technological advances and evolving media consumption patterns,
which have shifted dramatically over the past decade.
Ten years ago, more than 100 million U.S. households
subscribe to cable, satellite, and telco providers and about 60
million households subscribe to streaming services.
Today, the number of households that subscribe to those Pay
TV providers has declined sharply to about 45 million. That is
about one-third of the households that have access to broadcast
television and one-third of the nearly 120 million that
subscribe to a streaming service.
And some of the leading streaming services like Amazon
Prime Video reach almost twice the number of households than
any cable network.
As a result, far more video is consumed today through
streaming services than through pay television, and this shift
is particularly significant for the NBA which has the youngest
average fan base of any major league.
These trends were top of mind as we negotiated our new
national agreements. One of our top priorities was to ensure
that we serve all fans.
So for those who watch the NBA on traditional television we
sought to significantly increase the number of games made
available nationally on free broadcast television, and for the
growing number of fans who use streaming services and digital
platforms we aim to significantly increase the number of games
made available through those platforms and to provide them with
the many unique benefits that digital distribution enables
including personalized viewing experiences and an array of
interactive video and audio options.
We believe we achieved the right balance. Under these new
agreements we will have more national NBA game telecasts than
ever before, over 300 games.
We will have an unprecedented number of regular season
games on free over-the-air networks--75, which is five times
more than under the current deals--and about two times the
number of playoff games including every game of the NBA finals
will air on free over-the-air networks.
To serve the growing number of fans who prefer digital
platforms, every single national game telecast will also be
available through broadly distributed streaming services, and
while there will be some games exclusively on Prime Video it is
important to note that Prime Video is the most widely available
subscription streaming service in the country and our analysis
shows that nearly 90 percent of our fans watch non-NBA
programming on Prime Video already.
The WNBA also entered into national deals with Disney, NBC
Universal, and Amazon last year. Under those agreements more
WNBA game telecasts will be available nationally on major
television networks and streaming services than at any time in
the league's history, and from a revenue perspective these new
arrangements represent the largest media deal ever in women's
sports.
And there is more to come because the WNBA can do
additional national deals and thereby achieve even greater
exposure in revenue. The popularity of the WNBA has grown
exponentially in recent years and these arrangements will
enable that growth to continue.
My written statement addresses two other topics: first, the
measures we have taken to make our games easier to find and
access and, second, the steps our teams have taken to reach
more fans with their local telecasts.
I do not have time to address those topics in my testimony
today but I am, of course, happy to answer any questions you
may have on those topics.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Koenig follows:]
Prepared Statement of William Koenig, President, Global Content and
Media Distribution, National Basketball Association
Good morning Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of
the Committee. My name is Bill Koenig, and I am the President of Global
Content and Media Distribution for the NBA and am responsible for the
NBA's and WNBA's media arrangements. I have been with the NBA, in
various capacities, for nearly 35 years, focused on media distribution
of our content, including our live game telecasts, for the majority of
that time. Thank you for inviting me to testify about the NBA's
approach to game telecast distribution and about the media issues
facing sports leagues more generally.
I am especially pleased to testify about the NBA's new national
media arrangements with Disney, NBC Universal and Amazon. Starting next
season, our fans will have unprecedented access to (i) more than 300
nationally telecast games, (ii) five-times more national game telecasts
on free over-the-air networks and (iii) every national game telecast
through broadly-distributed streaming services.
Brief NBA Broadcasting History
As brief background, the NBA is made up of 30 teams throughout
North America, 29 in the United States and one in Canada. Our live game
telecasts are available on television and other devices throughout the
United States and over 200 other countries and territories. But it was
not always this way. In the 1960s, our games were rarely available on
national television--and when they were, they were often relegated to
segments on ABC's Wide World of Sports rather than as standalone
broadcasts. And into the 1980s, our Finals games (featuring legends
such as Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Julius
Erving) were not aired live, but on tape delay (at 11:30 p.m. after the
local news). I am pleased to say that we have come a long way, which is
a testament to our teams, players, the appeal of our game and our
efforts to respond to technological advances in media for the benefit
of our fans.
Importance of Serving Our Fans
Part of that success comes from a sustained focus on serving our
fans by studying and adapting to evolving media consumption patterns,
which have shifted dramatically over the past decade. Ten years ago
when we entered into our current national television agreements with
Disney and Turner Broadcasting Systems (now, Warner Bros. Discovery),
more than 100 million U.S. households subscribed to ``pay television''
(i.e., cable, satellite and telco video providers that offer packages
with linear networks like Fox and ESPN), the number of pay television
households was almost 90 percent of the number of broadcast television
households, and about 60 million households subscribed to streaming
services (e.g., Netflix or Amazon Prime Video). Today, the number of
U.S. households that subscribe to pay television has declined sharply
to about 45 million--about one-third of the 126 million households that
have access to broadcast television, and the nearly 120 million that
subscribe to a streaming service. And some of the leading individual
streaming services (e.g., Amazon Prime Video) reach nearly twice the
number of households than any cable network reaches. As a result, far
more video is consumed today through streaming services than through
pay television--and this shift is particularly significant for the NBA
which has the youngest average fan base of any major league (44 years
old), whereas the average age of a cable network viewer during prime
time is over 60 years old.
These trends were top of mind as we negotiated our new national
media agreements, which will begin next season. One of our top
priorities was to ensure that we serve all our fans. So, for those who
engage with the NBA through pay television, we sought to significantly
increase the number of games made available nationally on free
broadcast television. And for the growing number of fans (particularly
younger fans) who consume content predominantly through streaming
services and digital platforms, we sought to significantly increase the
number of games made available through those platforms and are hard at
work with our partners to provide fans with the many benefits that
digital distribution enables, including personalized, communal and
immersive viewing experiences that engage fans with an array of
interactive, fantasy and statistical features, alternative video and
audio options, user-generated content and e-commerce integrations and
much more.
New National Media Deals
We believe we achieved this balance in our new national media deals
with Disney, NBC Universal and Amazon. Under these agreements, starting
next season, more national NBA game telecasts will be available than
ever before (over 300 games). An unprecedented number of regular season
games will be broadcast on free over-the-air networks (ABC and NBC)
each season (75 games--which is five times the number under our current
deals). And approximately two times the number of playoff games,
including every game of the NBA Finals, will be broadcast on free over-
the-air networks each season.
In addition, to serve the growing number of fans who prefer to
engage with the NBA through digital platforms, every single national
game telecast will be available through broadly distributed streaming
services--Amazon Prime Video, Peacock and the ESPN direct-to-consumer
(``DTC'') service set to launch before next season. For many pay
television subscribers (e.g., Charter customers in states such as
Texas, Hawaii, North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin), the ESPN DTC
service and Peacock will be included at no additional cost as part of
their video subscription. And while there will be some games
exclusively available on Amazon Prime Video, it is important to note
that (i) Prime Video is the most widely available streaming service in
the United States, with more than 100 million households that currently
subscribe to it and (ii) our analysis shows that nearly 90 percent of
our U.S. fans already watch non-NBA programming on Prime Video.
Overall, our new national media deals represent a significant step
forward for the NBA and its fans. NBA games will be available
nationally (and routinely) every night of the week in the latter half
of the season: Monday on Peacock, Tuesday on NBC, Wednesday on ESPN,
Thursday and Friday on Amazon Prime Video, Saturday evenings and Sunday
afternoons on ABC and Sunday evenings on NBC. That is unprecedented and
consistent exposure for our league and, most importantly, expanded
access for our fans.
Discoverability and Accessibility
As the NBA negotiated our new national media agreements, we were
mindful of the concerns expressed by some consumers regarding the
fragmentation of telecast outlets for sports (and other) content and
the related concern that, with so many outlets distributing games of a
particular league or sport, it can be difficult for fans to find and
access the content (including game telecasts) that they want to watch.
Cognizant of those concerns, in our national media negotiations, we
took steps to address them. First, although several media and
technology companies sought national NBA telecast distribution rights,
we concluded that having just three national media partners would best
serve the interests of our fans and decided against dividing our
national rights into more packages.
Second, it was important to us, in determining the optimal
combination of partners, that Peacock and the ESPN DTC service are
increasingly being included in video subscriptions offered by many pay
television providers and that Amazon Prime Video is already available
to almost every U.S. television household.
We also sought to make our games easier to find and access in a
number of ways. As described above, we structured our schedule so that
games air on a consistent night of the week for each national partner,
making it easier for our fans to remember, adapt and watch. In
addition, each of our media partners has agreed to allow the NBA App
and other NBA platforms to serve as ``front doors'' to all national
(and virtually all local) game telecasts. When fans want to check a
score, or are unsure where a game is being telecast, all they need to
do is go to the NBA App and be automatically directed to the game
telecast on the relevant digital platform.
Similarly, we are working with a myriad of league and team business
partners to promote game telecasts and provide similar direct access to
live telecasts. For example, if a fan is watching a highlight on a
social media app, we will provide links and other tools endemic to the
platform that will enable that fan to go straight into a game telecast.
These fan-friendly options are only possible because every national
game telecast is available on a digital platform.
Local Game Telecasts
A team's games that are not selected for national telecast by one
of the NBA's three national partners are made available in the team's
local market, typically by a regional sports network (``RSN''). More
than any other participant in the pay television ecosystem, RSNs have
been adversely affected by ``cord-cutting,'' carriage disputes and re-
positioning of networks to more expensive, lesser-penetrated
programming tiers. Pay television subscribers to RSNs have dropped by
nearly 50 percent in just the last five years and continue to decline.
In addition to negatively affecting our teams' ability to reach fans
with game telecasts, team revenues from both RSNs directly and other
business lines, such as merchandise and ticket sales, that depend on
broad telecast exposure have been negatively affected by the decline in
RSN subscribers.
Because reaching fans with game telecasts is so important to the
NBA, our teams continually look to optimize the distribution of their
local telecasts through both traditional linear television channels as
well as streaming services. To that end, a number of teams have shifted
in recent years from RSNs (due to the factors mentioned above) to a
combination of local over-the-air broadcasts and digital DTC
distribution for their game telecasts. In each such case, they have
been able to reach more fans. In fact, this season, there were more
local game telecasts available on free over-the-air stations (570) than
at any time in the last 20 years. Twenty-one of our 29 U.S. teams
distributed games on broadcast stations this season (compared to one
team only three years ago).
Although the NBA for more than a decade has authorized RSNs to
distribute game telecasts through digital means, it has been only in
the last three years that RSNs have begun to do so on a digital direct-
to-consumer (i.e., streaming) basis. Recognizing the importance of
reaching fans (especially young fans) through digital platforms and the
many ways digital distribution can engage fans, teams have encouraged
RSNs to deliver games through digital means and, in some cases, do so
themselves. As a result, whereas no package of a team's games was
available on a digital platform only a few years ago, today, 28 of the
29 domestic teams' games are distributed through digital subscription
offerings.
WNBA
The WNBA also entered into national media agreements with Disney,
NBC Universal and Amazon last year, commencing with the 2026 season.
Under those agreements, more WNBA game telecasts will be available
nationally on broadly distributed national television networks and
streaming services (the ABC and NBC broadcast networks, ESPN and USA
cable networks and the Prime Video, Peacock and ESPN streaming
services) than at any time in the league's history. From a revenue
perspective, these new WNBA arrangements, in the aggregate,
represent the largest media deal ever in women's sports. And there
is more to come. The WNBA has retained the flexibility to do additional
national media deals (and thereby achieve even greater exposure and
revenue), which the league is actively exploring. The popularity of the
WNBA has grown exponentially in recent years, and these arrangements
will enable that growth to continue.
Conclusion
The NBA is committed to providing all fans--whether they subscribe
to pay television, streaming, or both--with access to hundreds of game
telecasts each season. Expanding the reach of, and engagement with, our
game telecasts are the principal objectives underlying our new national
media agreements, our evolving linear and digital distribution approach
to local telecasts and our popular NBA League Pass offering (the NBA's
so-called ``out-of-market'' subscription service that gives fans access
to all non-national game telecasts outside the market in which they
reside, and which is available through both traditional pay television
providers and digital platforms).
By making more games available nationally (including a record
number of games on free broadcast networks) and every national game
telecast available through widely available streaming services, and by
continuing to distribute local and League Pass game telecasts through
both pay television and digital services, we believe that our
arrangements are well positioned to accomplish those objectives. We
also believe the steps we are taking to make our games easier to find
and access will address any fragmentation-related concerns as our
distribution paradigm continues to adapt to changes in the video
consumption habits of our fans. Our goal remains to serve the interests
of our fans, and we will continue to adjust our arrangements and
approach with that goal in mind.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Proper.
STATEMENT OF DAVID M. PROPER, SENIOR EXECUTIVE VICE
PRESIDENT, MEDIA AND INTERNATIONAL STRATEGY,
NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE
Mr. Proper. Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and
members of the Committee, good morning. Thank you for the
opportunity to appear before the Committee today on behalf of
the National Hockey League.
My name is David Proper and I am the Senior Executive Vice
President of Media and International Strategy for the NHL. In
that role I have overseen the NHL's media relationships
worldwide for the past 15 years.
We appreciate your leadership in examining the evolving
sports media landscape and its impact on fans, leagues, teams,
media companies, and communities across the country.
The NHL is a 107-year-old league with deep roots in North
American communities and a strong global presence. In the last
few years alone we have seen record attendance, increased
viewership, and substantial growth in youth participation.
While we are incredibly proud of this momentum, we are also
focused on the continuing responsibility to ensure our games
are available to our fans in a manner that fulfills their
sports viewing preferences.
At the core of our media strategy is a simple idea, meet
the fans where they are. In the United States, our national
media partnerships allow us to deliver NHL games across a wide
array of channels and formats.
Live games air nationally on ESPN, ABC, TNT, TBS, and the
NHL network, and on top streaming platforms including ESPN+,
Hulu, and Max.
Whether on a traditional cable or satellite box, a mobile
device, or a smart TV, fans in the United States can access
live hockey in more ways than ever before.
We are also committed to keeping fans connected to their
hometown teams. NHL games continue to be shown regionally
through local media partners.
While the traditional RSN model has faced recent
disruption, we are actively working to support our teams and
their partners to respond to changes in the evolving media
landscape.
Such responses include restructuring existing, often long
standing RSN arrangements, entering into regional agreements
with broadcast affiliates, and/or launching digital direct to
consumer products both on a subscription fee basis and on a
free to consumer ad-supported basis.
The market, however, is clearly in a state of flux. Every
player in this ecosystem--the leagues, the teams, the
distributors and the platforms--are working to identify the
best ways to serve fans in a rapidly changing environment.
We believe it is important to allow the market to settle
and stabilize so that the long-term sustainable solutions can
emerge.
As our business continues to grow and expand, our ultimate
goal remains the same--to ensure that NHL content remains
accessible and affordable for fans.
But the fan-viewing experience is about more than just
platforms. It is also about production and content.
In that vein, we are embracing media innovations including
nontraditional broadcast formats serving specific demographic
groups such as animated game broadcast for children, data-casts
for avid stat-focused fans, and American Sign Language game
productions for our hearing-impaired fans.
We are also focused on producing real-time data overlays,
nongame programming content, and personalized viewing options,
all of which help us reach broader audiences.
We are committed to serving the full spectrum of our
audience, whether as a child watching their first Cap's playoff
game tonight, a lifelong fan catching a game on their phone
during a commute, or a member of the United States military
stationed overseas looking for a taste of home.
We want the game to be easy to find, easy to follow, and
easily available. At the same time, we understand that the way
fans access our game continues to evolve and vary widely.
Some rely on traditional broadcast systems while others are
embracing new digital platforms. As the media landscape
continues to change we remain focused on ensuring that our
content is as accessible and engaging as possible for all fans,
wherever and however they choose to watch.
For us, this is not a media strategy. Serving our fans is a
mission shared by the entire league. After 107 years, the NHL
is proud to be evolving and proud to be building a future where
hockey reaches more people in more meaningful ways than ever
before.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you
and I look forward to answering any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Proper follows:]
Prepared Statement of David M. Proper, Senior Executive Vice President,
Media and International Strategy, National Hockey League
Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the
Committee:
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the Committee today
on behalf of the National Hockey League. We appreciate your leadership
in examining the evolving sports media landscape and its impact on
fans, leagues, teams, media companies, and communities across the
country.
The NHL is a 107-year-old League with deep roots in North American
communities and a strong global presence. In the last few years alone,
we have seen record attendance, increased viewership, and substantial
growth in youth participation. While we are incredibly proud of this
momentum, we are also focused on the continuing responsibility to
ensure our games are available to our fans in a manner that fulfills
their sports viewing preferences.
At the core of our media strategy is a simple idea: meet fans where
they are. In the United States, our national media partnerships allow
us to deliver NHL games across a wide array of channels and formats.
Live games air nationally on ESPN, ABC, TNT, TBS and NHL Network and
top streaming platforms including ESPN+, Hulu, and Max. Whether on a
traditional cable or satellite box, a mobile device, or a smart TV,
fans in the United States can access live hockey in more ways than ever
before.
We are also committed to keeping fans connected to their hometown
teams. NHL games continue to be shown regionally through local media
partners. While the traditional RSN model has faced recent disruption,
we are actively working to support our teams and their partners to
respond to changes in the evolving media landscape. Such responses
include restructuring existing, often long-standing, RSN arrangements,
entering into regional agreements with broadcast affiliates, and/or
launching digital direct to consumer products, both on a subscription-
fee basis and on a free-to-the-consumer ad-supported basis.
The market, however, is clearly in a state of flux. Every player in
this ecosystem--leagues, teams, distributors, and platforms--is working
to identify the best ways to serve fans in a rapidly changing
environment. We believe it is important to allow the market to settle
and stabilize so that long-term, sustainable solutions can emerge. As
our business continues to grow and expand, our ultimate goal remains
the same: to ensure that NHL content remains accessible and affordable
for fans.
But the fan viewing experience is about more than just platforms--
it's also about production and content. In that vein, we are embracing
media innovations, including non-traditional broadcast formats serving
specific demographic groups, such as animated game broadcasts for
children, data-casts for avid stat-focused fans, and American Sign
Language game productions for our hearing-impaired fans; real-time data
overlays, non-game programming content, and personalized viewing
options--all of which help us reach broader audiences.
We are committed to serving the full spectrum of our audience--
whether it is a child watching their first Stanley Cup Final, a
lifelong fan catching a game on their phone during a commute, or a
member of the United States military stationed overseas looking for a
taste of home. We want the game to be easy to find, easy to follow, and
easily available.
At the same time, we understand that the way fans access our game
continues to evolve and vary widely. Some rely on traditional broadcast
systems, while others are embracing new digital platforms. As the media
landscape continues to change, we remain focused on ensuring that our
content is as accessible and engaging as possible for all fans--
wherever and however they choose to watch.
For us, this is not just a media strategy--serving our fans is a
mission shared by the entire League. After 107 years, the NHL is proud
to be evolving and proud to be building a future where hockey reaches
more people in more meaningful ways than ever before.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you. I look
forward to your questions.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Bergmayer.
STATEMENT OF JOHN BERGMAYER, LEGAL DIRECTOR,
PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE
Mr. Bergmayer. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the
Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today.
Streaming video has benefited viewers in many ways.
Millions of Americans have discovered they can get content more
cheaply and conveniently through streaming services than with
traditional cable or satellite TV.
With online video people can pick and choose services
instead of being forced into bloated cable bundles. They can
watch on different devices inside and outside the home.
Streaming also gives diverse content creators opportunities to
reach audiences in ways not possible before.
For sports specifically streaming has bought benefits, too.
It is easier for fans to watch out-of-market games. Streaming
platforms can integrate sport-specific features not possible on
broadcast or cable, and it is easier to access sports beyond
the major professional leagues.
But the transition to streaming has not been smooth. The
proliferation of services and fragmentation of content means
costs are rising. As the Ranking Member noted, many viewers
feel they finally broke free of the cable bundle only to watch
it reform before their eyes.
Having to manage various accounts, download multiple apps,
and track numerous subscription payments burdens viewers. Apps
can be buggy and inconsistent, and there is simply no one place
to look to figure out where to watch what you want.
To follow their favorite baseball team a fan might need
Apple TV+ for $10 a month, MLB.tv for $150 per season, and a
traditional or virtual MVPD like YouTube TV for about $85 a
month at a minimum, and even then carriage of regional sports
networks or sports channels is far from universal and some
games might fall through the cracks.
Across many sports, fans might try to watch a game and
unexpectedly find it is on a streaming service they do not use.
Confusing blackout rules mean games available online in one
market might not be available in another, with local teams and
playoff games most often affected.
Video quality might be poor due to inadequate broadband and
online streams may lag significantly behind real time. Fan
frustration is acute because many games once available on free
broadcast TV are moving to paid streaming services.
Millions of viewers still mostly watch TV through
broadcast, cable, and satellite, especially older viewers with
lifelong attachments to teams whose games are now difficult to
find.
The current market structure is not a consequence of a free
market. It results from decades of regulatory arbitrage and
market power exploitation.
Regional sports networks emerged not from natural market
evolution, but as a way for cable operators to evade program
access rules.
Sports were a major contributor to inflated cable bills in
many ways. The collapse of this model is tied to the rise of
streaming as viewers cut the cord, cable companies lose
leverage, and leagues can pitch streamers against traditional
distributors.
Let me share a personal example. Two weeks ago, a Cubs-
Phillies game was mistakenly blacked out for me in D.C.
The game was not on broadcast or cable TV locally or
nationally and simply should not have been blacked out. MLB's
in app customer service was unresponsive, eventually resolved
it through social media by providing my IP address and zip code
for a manual override.
This is, clearly, not sustainable. Streaming is no longer
an afterthought. We need to ensure that shifts in media
technology and sports benefit viewers with cheaper and more
convenient options.
Sports have outsized civic, cultural, and economic
importance. Teams receive taxpayer subsidies through stadiums
and special tax deals.
Major leagues enjoy special exemptions from antitrust laws
through the Sports Broadcasting Act and Supreme Court
decisions. Publicly subsidized sports and teams should clearly
communicate to fans where games will be available.
They should commit to making games available free of charge
in their local market, either on broadcast or free streaming.
There is no reason for public money to support private sports
organizations without clear public benefit.
Further, Congress should consider legislation like the Stop
Sports Blackouts Act, which would mandate refunds for channels
lost due to disputes.
Leagues and policymakers must recognize that easy,
affordable access is crucial for the future of sports
viewership. Young people no longer discover sports by flipping
through channels so they need to be accessible in other ways.
Policies prioritizing immediate profits through exclusive
deals and expensive pay walls threaten to alienate existing
fans and lose the next generation.
More broadly, everyone in the streaming market should focus
on providing a good viewer experience rather than customer lock
in. Online video services should recognize that viewers often
mix and match services and facilitate this instead of blocking
it.
Sports in particular show the need for consistency and
predictability. Leagues should avoid abrupt changes to how
people watch games.
They should avoid overly complex licensing that fragments
individual sports across a variety of services and move past
media deals that penalize local market viewers.
Practices that prioritize short-term gain can harm the
long-term sustainability of professional sports because people
have many other things to watch.
MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred said, ``We hate blackouts as
much as fans do'' and that ending local blackouts was
``business objective number one.''
He stated, ``We need to be out of the business of
blackouts, telling people who want to watch games that we will
not sell them to you.''
But this vision has not yet come to pass for any of the
major sports, and fans continue to face an expensive patchwork
of services.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and I
welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bergmayer follows:]
Prepared Statement of John Bergmayer, Legal Director, Public Knowledge
Streaming video has benefited viewers in many ways, and the
prevalence of cord-cutting backs that up. Millions of Americans have
discovered that they can get the content they want more cheaply and
conveniently through streaming services than with traditional
multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDS) like cable and
satellite TV providers.
With online video, people can pick and choose services, instead of
being forced into bloated cable bundles. They can watch video on many
different kinds of device, inside the home and outside of it, instead
of being limited to rented cable set-top boxes. Online video also gives
diverse content creators an opportunity to reach audiences in ways that
were not possible when broadcast and MVPDs were the main source of
video programming.
When it comes to sports, streaming has brought benefits as well.
It's easier for fans to watch out-of-market games, and streaming
platforms can integrate sports-specific features (like MLB's Gameday)
that are not possible on broadcast or cable. It's also easier for
viewers to access sports content outside of the major professional
leagues and collegiate conferences. Major services like ESPN+ carry
sports like Ultimate Frisbee and Lacrosse. Organizations like the
Professional Darts Association provide their own video content online.
Apple distributes Major League Soccer, and Formula One racing is
finding a larger audience in the United States in part due to the
success of ``Drive to Survive'' on Netflix. HBCU Go offers easy access
to collegiate sports from Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
But the transition to streaming hasn't been entirely smooth. The
proliferation of streaming services, and the fragmentation of content
between them, means that the costs of watching streaming video are
rising, and for many people can approach what they were paying on their
cable bill. Some viewers feel like they finally broke free of the cable
bundle only to watch it re-forming between their eyes. New major video
apps are launched, shut down, and rebranded on a regular basis, and
people might sign up to a service to watch particular content only to
have it disappear without warning.
Having to set up and remember various accounts, having to download
and sign in to a proliferation of apps (often from content providers
that have no clear brand identity or specialization), and having to
track a number of monthly subscription payments can be a burden on
viewers. A number of businesses have even sprung up that promise to
help people manage their increasing monthly subscriptions. Streaming
apps can be buggy, and apps from different services might work and be
organized differently from each other. Many apps do not support
``universal search'' features even if they are available, meaning that
users looking for something to watch might spend more time flipping
between apps than people used to spend flipping between channels. There
is simply no one place to look to figure out where to watch what you
want.
Some user experience problems with online video can be quite
pronounced with sports. To watch MLB Baseball, for instance, a fan
might need to subscribe to Apple TV+ and MLB.tv as well as a
traditional cable or satellite multichannel video programming
distributor (MVPD) or a ``virtual'' MVPD (vMVPD) like YouTube TV or
Fubo--and even then, carriage of Regional Sports Networks (RSNs) or
sports channels like the MLB or NHL Network by MVPDs and vMVPDs is far
from universal, and sports-specific channels have frequently vanished
from subscriber's lineups, even mid-season. With traditional TV, even
when games might be on different networks on different days, at least a
fan could simply switch channels. Watching games now requires that a
fan have a compatible device, a fast broadband connection, an account
(free in some cases, not in others) with each service, and the ability
to download and configure an app for each service. All of this might be
fine for the early adopters of online video. But we're well past that
point. Watching sports online has a few other sour points as well.
Confusing and fan-hostile blackout rules mean that games available
online in one market may not be available in another. Due to inadequate
broadband or weak WiFi in the home, video quality might be poor. Online
sports streaming may also be significantly laggy, meaning that viewers
might be watching events that are seconds or minutes behind real time.
In the days of live reactions to games on social media, this means that
a viewer may find out what happens in a game on X or Bluesky before
seeing it on screen.
The rise in streaming and cord-cutting is undoubtedly a cause of
consumer frustrations, even outside of streaming itself. Shifts in the
economics of sports, such as the dispute between Altice-owned Optimum
cable and the MSG Networks channel, are downstream of cord-cutting and
the rise of online video, as the media deals that have been the
backbone of the industry for many years need to be re-thought and
renegotiated. That dispute is now resolved, but the Attorneys General
of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut got involved, with New York
Attorney General Letitia James noting that ``New York sports fans are
being put in the penalty box, forced to shell out their hard-earned
money for television channels they cannot even watch.'' \1\ Fan
frustration in this area is particularly acute because many games that
were once available on free-over-the-air broadcast are moving to paid
streaming services. It should not be lost in this discussion that
millions of viewers still primarily watch TV through broadcast, cable,
and satellite-older viewers in particular, who may have lifelong
attachments to particular teams, whose games are now a puzzle for them
to find. And, even with the rise of streaming, sports like Women's
College Basketball are setting viewership records on traditional pay
TV. These viewers should not be left behind.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Ariel Zilber, NY, NJ, and Connecticut AGs Hit Optimum With
Ultimatum as MSG Blackout Frustrates Customers, NY Post (February 6,
2025), https://nypost.com/2025/02/06/business/new-york-new-jersey-and-
connecticut-ags-demand-optimum-lift-msg-black out.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's also important to understand that the current market structure
is not a consequence of a free market, but rather the result of decades
of regulatory arbitrage and market power exploitation. Regional Sports
Networks (RSNs) emerged not from natural market evolution but as a way
for cable operators to evade program access rules. Comcast created the
first RSN in Philadelphia specifically to exploit the ``terrestrial
loophole'' by delivering programming terrestrially rather than by
satellite, thus avoiding Federal regulations.
The following years saw a series of power plays involving major
cable companies, RSNs, teams, and leagues, where sports programming was
used as a competitive cudgel, and programming that was once available
via broadcast channels shifted increasingly to RSNs. When streaming
services gained sufficient audience share, leagues found they could
leverage new deep-pocketed bidders like Amazon against cable companies,
extracting even higher prices while gaining more flexibility for their
own streaming offerings. This is still going on, but cord-cutting has
significantly reduced the subscribers to, and hence the leverage of,
cable companies, and the cable-based RSN model is collapsing.
Today, rather than streaming providing a pathway for local teams to
reach local fans, it has become part of a system of dueling industries
in which viewers and smaller teams often suffer. Some of this is
growing pains. Streaming still offers more opportunities for business
models and ways of delivering sports programming than broadcast or
cable, and the lack of a natural monopoly on last-mile delivery--
provided broadband ISPs remain open--reduces a major barrier to entry.
But some of the fan frustration, which is so acute as to result in
today's hearing, is the result of a regulatory system that led to cable
bundles and bills to become inflated to the point of unsustainability.
Fan Frustrations
Tracking the issues that consumers face nationally and in specific
local markets, particularly outside of major media markets like New
York and Los Angeles, can be as complex as a multi-year sports media
deal, but an overview might provide a sense of the changing landscape.
Of the major leagues, the NFL long had the most straightforward TV
setup. Most games were free on over-the-air channels on Sunday, with a
few on cable (Monday Night Football). But there have been recent
changes that test viewers' patience. The biggest change came in 2022,
when Thursday Night Football (TNF) moved exclusively to Amazon Prime
Video on a $1 billion/year deal. Suddenly, a game that had been on
network TV (and simulcast in previous years on NFL Network/Amazon) was
now only on a streaming app for most of the country. This caused
massive confusion. Many fans, especially older ones, struggled to
figure out how to watch. Amazon Prime requires either a smart TV app, a
streaming device, or watching on a computer or tablet-like with other
shifts to streaming, potentially requiring new hardware purchases, as
well as signing up for a new service. This year's Steelers/Ravens
playoff game was an Amazon exclusive, and many viewers were simply
unable to figure out how to watch it.
The NFL launched its own service, NFL+ (though limited to mobile
streaming of local games), and in 2023 it moved the NFL Sunday Ticket
out-of-market package from DirecTV satellite to a streaming platform
(YouTube and YouTube TV). This was a huge shift after nearly 30 years
with DirecTV. This required dedicated out-of-market fans to adapt to a
new system in 2024--either subscribing to YouTube TV or buying Sunday
Ticket via YouTube's Primetime Channels, at a hefty price (around $300-
$400 for the season). Some long-time Sunday Ticket subscribers without
robust Internet access were concerned about relying on streaming.
MLB fans have faced significant viewing hurdles in recent years.
One major issue is exclusive streaming broadcasts. In 2022, MLB began a
deal with Apple TV+ to stream Friday night games exclusively, with some
Sunday games variously on Peacock, then The Roku Channel. These games
were not shown on local TV or regional sports networks (RSNs). While
Apple initially made some games free, viewers (especially older, less
tech-savvy fans) still struggled with the new setup.
MLB's longstanding local blackout rules continued to frustrate
fans. Subscribers to MLB.TV cannot watch their home team's games live
due to exclusivity deals with RSNs. This leads to absurd scenarios--for
example, parts of North Carolina fall in the Cincinnati Reds' claimed
territory (hundreds of miles away), so fans there are blacked out on
MLB.TV. Commissioner Rob Manfred acknowledged in 2022, ``we hate
blackouts as much as fans do,'' \2\ but said the league's hands were
tied by broadcast contracts. The problem became more glaring as cord-
cutting increased. Several major streaming cable alternatives (YouTube
TV, Hulu + Live, etc.) dropped RSNs like Bally Sports due to high fees,
leaving cord-cutters with no legal way to watch local baseball.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Tim Kelly, Rob Manfred: `We Hate Blackouts As Much as Fans
Do,'' Audacity (June 30, 2022), https://www.audacy.com/1080thefan/
sports/mlb/rob-manfred-we-hate-blackouts-as-much-as-fans-do
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The collapse of the RSN model was dramatically illustrated when
Diamond Sports Group (owner of Bally Sports networks) filed for
bankruptcy. In May 2023, after Bally failed to pay the San Diego
Padres' rights fees, MLB seized control of Padres broadcasts mid-
season. Practically overnight, Padres fans had to switch to new
channels and streaming offerings run by MLB.
Similar brinkmanship occurred elsewhere: the Arizona Diamondbacks
had their Bally Sports contract terminated and moved to an MLB-run
service mid-2023.
MLB's Rob Manfred even cited the Padres situation as proof that
``there were tens of thousands of people who wanted to pay to watch
baseball'' once blackouts were lifted. He has since made ending local
blackouts ``business objective No. 1,'' saying, ``We need to be out of
the business of blackouts. . .telling people who want to watch games
that we won't sell them to you.'' \3\ But this vision has not yet come
to pass, and fans in many markets continue to face a patchwork of
services and even mid-season broadcast shake-ups that make following
their team far more complex than it used to be.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Michael S. Schmidt, A Q&A With Rob Manfred, NY Times (April 6,
2025), https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/06/briefing/rob-manfred-
interview-baseball.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NBA fans encountered many of the same viewing headaches. While the
NBA didn't put regular-season games on new streaming-only platforms at
the national level (its national games stayed on ESPN/ABC and Turner's
TNT), local broadcast issues and RSN fragmentation hit hard. Numerous
NBA teams are shown on Bally Sports RSNs, so when services like YouTube
TV and Hulu Live dropped Bally channels (in 2020-21), those teams
effectively vanished from streaming for many viewers. For example, a
fan of the Phoenix Suns or Miami Heat who cut the cord had no streaming
bundle carrying Bally Sports Arizona or Sun. By 2022, the only option
was often to switch to DirecTV Stream or Fubo (which did carry many
Bally RSNs) or pay for Bally's own standalone app at $20/month: an
expensive ask on top of other services. Many viewers resorted to VPNs
and NBA League Pass (meant for out-of-market games) to bypass local
blackouts. To follow a team fully, an NBA fan might need a pay TV
bundle (for local RSN and national channels), plus NBA League Pass for
out-of-market or if you live away from your team, and even then League
Pass is blacked out for local games and certain national broadcasts.
During the 2023 playoffs, some first-round games aired on NBA TV (a
lesser-distributed channel), with fans without that channel being
caught off guard that a playoff game wasn't available.
The NHL's viewing experience also became more convoluted from 2022
onward, owing to a new TV deal and the same RSN tumult affecting other
leagues. In the 2021-2022 season, the NHL switched its U.S. broadcast
partners to ESPN and Turner Sports, with ESPN+ streaming folded in.
That meant a slate of games each week was exclusive to streaming on
ESPN+ (and Hulu) instead of any TV channel. Fans quickly noticed that
if their team's game was one of those exclusives, a cable subscription
alone was no longer enough: they needed an ESPN+ account and a
compatible smart TV or device. More broadly, regional blackouts
remained a sore point. Even when ESPN+ streams most out-of-market
games, local team games are blacked out on the app to protect RSNs,
unless the game is carried nationally. An NHL fan blog argued in 2023
that ``regional blackouts have crippled the NHL's reach,'' \4\ noting
that the league's national TV ratings dropped in the second year of the
new deal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ An Honest Review of the NHL's Broadcasts in 2023, Stanley Cup
of Chowder (February 3, 2023), https://www.stanleycupofchowder.com/
2023/2/3/23581957/national-hockey-league-broadcasts-boston-bruins-nhl-
ja ck-edwards-nesn-bally-sports-gary-bettman
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basketball and hockey fans in several cities were also caught in
the crossfire of RSN carriage disputes. The most notorious case was in
Denver: from late 2019 until late 2023, Comcast (the area's largest
cable provider) did not carry Altitude Sports, the RSN for the Colorado
Avalanche and Denver Nuggets. This stalemate lasted an astounding 4
plus years, during which most Comcast subscribers simply couldn't watch
the Avalanche (NHL) or Nuggets (NBA) at home. As the Avalanche went on
to win the 2022 Stanley Cup and the Nuggets the 2023 NBA title, a
generation of local fans missed seeing it live on TV. Many resorted to
unconventional streaming services (some likely illegal) to follow their
teams. The impasse eventually ended in October 2023, when Altitude and
Comcast settled.
Outside the ``Big Four'' sports similar broadcasting and streaming
controversies hit American sports. Major League Soccer (MLS) made a
groundbreaking media rights move in 2023, signing a 10-year deal with
Apple TV+ to stream every MLS game via the new MLS Season Pass. This
meant no more local TV broadcasts at all--a fan must use the Apple TV
app (on a smart TV, computer, or device) to watch their team's games,
aside from a few matches simulcast on Fox. On one hand, the MLS/Apple
deal eliminated blackouts and offered a consistent platform. On the
other, it erected a paywall ($99/year, or $79 for Apple+ subscribers)
for a product that many casual fans used to watch for free on local
channels or regional sports networks. The transition was bumpy. Early
on, some long-time fans struggled with the tech, especially if they
didn't own Apple devices. (Notably, the Apple TV app wasn't available
on Android phones until mid-2023, though it did work on non-Apple smart
TVs).
College sports also saw streaming-exclusive games (and realignment
chaos) impact fans. Notre Dame football, for example, put one home game
per year exclusively on Peacock in 2021 and 2022, angering fans
unaccustomed to paying to see Notre Dame play Toledo or UNLV. The Big
Ten's new TV deal in 2023 will likewise send some conference football
games to Peacock-only starting in fall 2024, meaning fans of certain
schools must get Peacock for those contests. Meanwhile, conference
media rights shuffles (like the Pac-12's collapse in 2023) were driven
by TV money and left fans unsure where their team's games would air in
the future.
Personally, I recently faced these frustrations. Two weeks ago, a
Cubs/Phillies game was mistakenly blacked out for me in DC, and for
others as I found out by searching social media. This game was not
carried on broadcast or multichannel TV locally or nationally and
should not have been blacked out, but MLB's customer service was
unresponsive through their app. Eventually, I resolved it via MLB
support on social media, providing them with my IP address and zip code
so they could manually override MLB's mistake. This is clearly not a
sustainable solution. Just last week, more ``correctly'' blacked out
from a Phillies/Nationals game which was available locally--but not on
my multichannel service of choice, YouTube TV, which does not carry
Mid-Atlantic Sports Network (MASN)--I was told by the same MLB customer
service social media account that they would nonetheless lift the
blackout. But after a half hour of trying, and claiming to have lifted
the blackout, they in the end just referred me back to a webpage
outlining MLB blackout policies. At least I was able to listen to the
game on the radio. But even if I had MASN, I'd only have the Nationals'
broadcast. No offense to the Nat's fine broadcast team, the Phillies'
John Kruk is the funniest color commentator in baseball. To be sure,
services like MASN+ and Phillies.TV are a step in the right direction
for giving in-market fans the ability to watch local games without an
MVPD, but they are still geographically limited, and do not provide
access to nationally-carried games, including playoffs, which are still
black out of MLB.TV.
A Path Forward
Sports are an entertainment product, to be sure. But they have
outsized civic, cultural, and economic importance. The role of the NFL
in particular cannot be understated. Every year, 9 of the 10 most
highly-rated TV programs are NFL games, and the Super Bowl is the most
watched event in the United States. Teams are subsidized by taxpayers
through stadiums, special tax districts, and other deals, and major
leagues like the NFL, MLB, NBA, and NHL are given special exemptions
from antitrust laws by the Sports Broadcasting Act--enhancing their
market power, and distorting the market in other ways--for example, by
only applying to the ``Big Four'' sports. Sorry, soccer. Baseball's
antitrust exemption is even broader, and it wasn't even granted by
Congress. The Supreme Court devised it in 1922 in Federal Baseball Club
v. National League, 259 U.S. 200 (1922), and reaffirmed it in Toolson
v. New York Yankees, 346 U.S. 356 (1953), and in Flood v. Kuhn, 407
U.S. 258 (1972). Then-judge Neal Gorsuch described the Court's
treatment of baseball as a ``precedential island[]. . .surrounded by a
sea of contrary law.'' Direct Marketing Ass'n v. Brohl, 814 F. 3d 1129
(10th Cir. 2016). Maybe that is one vote to overturn it at the Supreme
Court.
Streaming is no longer an afterthought, and policymakers, content
creators, tech platforms, and sports leagues need to take steps to
ensure that shifts in the media, technology, and sports landscapes
benefit viewers, and lead to cheaper and more convenient options.
Taxpayer-funded sports and teams should be required to clearly and
consistently communicate to fans, ahead of time, where games will be
available, and commit to making games available free of charge in their
local market-either by continuing on broadcast, or streaming them for
free. There is no reason for public money to go to private sports
organizations unless there is a clear and tangible public benefit.
Free, ad-supported broadcast or streaming of games in local markets
remains a viable business model.
Leagues and policymakers must recognize that easy, affordable
access to sports is crucial for the future of sports viewership.
Policies prioritizing immediate profits through exclusive deals
threaten to alienate existing fans and fail to attract younger viewers
who no longer stumble upon sports while casually flipping through TV
channels, and who often cannot afford the high price that tickets now
command. Instead, leagues should simplify viewing access, eliminate
outdated blackout policies, and offer reasonably priced, easy-to-use
direct-to-consumer streaming options. While these measures may seem
financially risky initially, they can be forward-thinking investments
in the growth and sustainability of fanbases.
This hearing is evidence that the streaming era has introduced
complexity, new costs, and consumer confusion to sports viewing. Yet,
thoughtful policy interventions can create a fair, affordable, and
sustainable environment, benefiting consumers, fans, and sports leagues
alike. Congress should consider legislation like Congressman Ryan and
Senator Murphy's recent Stop Sports Blackouts Act, mandating refunds
for channels lost due to disputes, require taxpayer-funded sports
entities to stream games for free locally, and support initiatives
ending local market blackouts entirely. Other model legislation is the
longstanding FANS Act proposal, championed by Senator Blumenthal and
the late Senator McCain, that would have put public interest
conditions, such as a prohibition on blackouts stemming from
retransmission consent disputes during marquee events, on continuing
sports leagues' antitrust exemption. Senator Baldwin's ``Go Pack Go''
Act is another promising response that would address Wisconsinites'
frustrations with arbitrary market boundaries and confusing media
deals. Colleges and universities should be permitted to negotiate their
own media deals, particularly in their local markets, instead of having
to go through the NCAA. Accessibility of games is also an issue that
could benefit from increased attention from the state and local
policymakers who more directly interact with teams, their owners, and
the leagues.
More broadly, it would benefit everyone in the streaming market to
focus more on providing a good viewer experience, rather than on
customer lock-in. While more competition is good, not every content
producer needs to go direct-to-consumer with yet another video
streaming app, as opposed to licensing content to the services people
already use. Online video services should recognize that viewers often
mix and match services, and work to facilitate instead of blocking
this. While content and programming bundles are not per se bad, they
should offer obvious value to subscribers, instead of being ways to get
them to pay for costly programming they are not interested in. Video
apps should continue to innovate, but services should bear in mind the
advantages of consistency, discoverability, and simplicity across
different apps.
Sports in particular show the need for consistency and
predictability. Leagues should avoid abrupt and radical changes to how
people watch games, and should avoid overly complex licensing that
fragments individual sports and even teams across a variety of
services. While the leagues and teams may balk at what they view as
leaving money on the table, practices that prioritize short-term gain
can end up harming the long-term sustainability of professional sports.
People have other things to watch.
The streaming revolution has fundamentally transformed how we
consume sports content, offering unprecedented flexibility but also
creating new frustrations. As leagues prioritize lucrative exclusive
deals across fragmented platforms, fans face rising costs, technical
hurdles, and confusing blackout restrictions that undermine the very
accessibility streaming promised to deliver. This calls for an approach
where leagues, policymakers, and platforms recognize their
responsibility to fans, particularly given sports' cultural
significance and the public subsidies many teams receive. Without
meaningful reform that prioritizes viewer experience over short-term
profits, including simplified access, reasonable pricing, and
elimination of outdated blackout policies, sports organizations risk
alienating existing fans and failing to cultivate the next generation
of viewers in an increasingly competitive entertainment landscape.
While streaming has unlocked new possibilities for sports fans and
content creators alike, it has also replicated many of the frustrations
of the old cable model--now spread across a maze of apps,
subscriptions, and platforms. As the transition continues,
policymakers, leagues, and platforms must move beyond a mindset of
exclusive deals and revenue maximization and instead prioritize a
future where sports remain widely accessible, locally available, and
simple to find and watch. The public investment in sports demands
public benefit in return. The path forward should be built around
transparency, consistency, and fair access for all fans.
Thank you for inviting me to testify.
The Chairman. Thank you to each of the witnesses. Let me
start with a question to the leagues.
As I mentioned in my opening statement, Congress passed the
Sports Broadcasting Act in 1961 to allow leagues to negotiate
sports media deals on behalf of all teams as opposed to on a
team by team basis.
Congress granted this antitrust exemption with the
intention of benefiting sports fans. How does the SBA actually
benefit fans of your sport, whether it is from greater access
to games or improve revenue sharing, to make for more
competitive balance or something else entirely?
Mr. Gersh. Thank you.
As you stated, Chairman, the SBA allows us to pool
broadcast rights, which has created a fan friendly, market
efficient practice that has resulted in more output of games as
opposed to less.
One concrete example from Major League Baseball's
perspective is this pooling allowed us to create MLB Events
media where all the clubs together pooled their digital media
rights.
That allowed us to innovate and revolutionize the viewing
experience. We were the first league to be able to stream games
at all via the internet, first to computers, then to mobile
devices, eventually right to the TV.
So we think that has been a really big benefit of being
able to take all the resources of the leagues together to
create a product as opposed to each individual club having to
manage apps across multiple operating systems and multiple
devices.
It is a hard thing to do on a small basis. You really need
that economy of scale. So we appreciate the ability to do that.
And while, you know, the sports leagues are each comprised
of 30 or, in some cases, 32 different teams that compete with
each other on the field, it is important that we act as a
single operating entity and that is why you are able to have,
you know, three of us here to have this discussion instead of
not need to.
Thank you.
Mr. Koenig. Chairman, we think that we do honor the
intention of the Sports Broadcasting Act and that there is a
public service in the way we have organized our media rights.
As I mentioned, in our most recent national deals, which is
a product of what the Sports Broadcasting Act was intended to
do on a national basis, we were able to license a record number
of over-the-air telecasts--free over-the-air telecasts.
That benefits all teams in terms of exposure because the
games are available in every market. But it also by able--by
being able to license games on a league wide national basis the
revenue is shared equally by each teams.
So the point you made about revenue sharing, all teams
benefit from those national distribution deals equally.
Also, to echo what Mr. Gersh said, we are able to innovate
by doing things that require scale at the league level.
Our League Pass product, which is our out-of-market
subscription service, offers fans approximately 14 different
feeds of every game--different camera angles, different
languages, different stats feeds for analytics, fantasy feeds,
celebrity co-viewing experiences--and those things are really
only achievable by pooling and doing things on a collective
basis.
Mr. Proper. It is a great question, Senator, and I think
that I would echo much of what Mr. Gersh and Mr. Koenig said.
The one thing that I would add of substance in terms of
what the Sports Broadcasting Act was intended to do was it was
intended to make games available to fans with greater
accessibility at a lesser cost.
That is exactly what it does. If you had, in our case, 32
teams or 25 in the U.S. out there negotiating their own deals
on every television market you would have a complete
fragmentation of their rights.
A fan who wanted to watch all of the games would be buying
from so many different packages, which the costs would be
through the roof.
What this has allowed us to do--the respective leagues--is
to provide the greatest access to fans in the most affordable
way possible and that is, I think, the main intention of the
Broadcast Act, where it has been extremely successful.
The Chairman. So the FCC's cable era regulations set
regulatory conditions including rules around operating within a
designated market area as well as syndicated and exclusivity
rules, which can lead to blackouts.
Streaming platforms are not bound by these rules, but
blackouts still take place on streaming platforms. Why is that
the case and do league specifically require streaming platforms
to blackout games for out-of-market fans?
Mr. Gersh. Thank you.
I think the result of the question you are asking is the
way our rights are currently split up between the league and
the clubs at the current time.
Each club has the right to distribute throughout their
entire home television territory so when they do their deals in
their market they are on cable TV that we, the league, cannot
then offer the games in their own market. So for our streaming
product we blackout in Houston because the Astros are
exploiting the rights there.
However, as I mentioned in my testimony, also we now are at
the moment where 29 of our clubs have their own direct to
consumer service.
So you can now in pretty much every territory if you want
to watch the games via streaming you can go buy that service
and if you want to watch all the other games out of market you
can buy MLB.tv and then those two services complement each
other so that it does cover the whole landscape.
So it means less of a legislative issue and just the way
that our rights are currently divided between the league and
the club.
The Chairman. Mr. Koenig.
Mr. Koenig. Similarly with the NBA, we have three different
types of game distribution packages. We have a national
package--national packages, local packages, and out-of-market,
and a fan anywhere in the country can access every game--every
game played by his or her favorite team or any other team in
the league through a subscription to one or more of these
packages.
That is that is--that is the business reality. There is no
mandate that games be blacked out. National games, for example,
are not blacked out.
But a fan in any market, in Houston, for example, can buy
the Rockets games locally from the RSN that is operated by the
Astros and the Rockets collectively, and they can watch games
of the other teams through buying our League Pass out-of-market
package and, obviously, can access the national games.
I would say that on the local front, because of some of the
issues facing cable with cord cutting, the repositioning of
regional sports networks, and just carriage disputes, more and
more of our teams--21 of our 29 domestic teams--have games on
broadcast television. It is almost the reverse.
I remember in 1992 when the Cable Act was passed and there
was a study about migration from broadcast to cable--you
actually referred to that in your opening statement--and now
there seems to be a trend. We had last--this season 570 games
on broadcast television, the most in 20 years.
And so we are very concerned with accessibility. But any
fan can subscribe to services or get them for free in the case
of many local and national telecasts to any game that he or she
wants.
The Chairman. Mr. Proper.
Mr. Proper. The NHL is similarly set up as the other two
leagues. We have local rights, we have national rights, and we
have out-of-market rights.
The local rights in terms of being blacked out is
structured exactly the same and you have to think of it as--and
if you live in the local market you get the benefit of getting
your teams without having to buy the out-of-market package or
anything like that.
You get that benefit usually. Depending on the circumstance
most of the games are available on either broadcast or major
cable television.
That being said, if I am being completely candid, as Mr.
Bergmayer said about Commissioner Manfred everybody is looking
at the future of the models right now.
The models are in a state of flux, and whether streaming
results in blackouts or blackouts not happening in the future
is something that may be addressed by the leagues over the next
five to 10 years.
But it is at this point the current model that has worked
and has worked very well. But as we continue to have flux in
the system we are going to have to continue to evaluate.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Klobuchar.
STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
thanks to Ranking Member Cantwell for putting together this
important hearing.
As some of you know, my dad was a sports writer and a
general columnist, and he wrote 23 books including the
authorized biography of Fran Tarkington. But he wrote one in
1977 that we will never forget because it is relevant today,
and that is ``Will the Vikings Ever Win the Super Bowl?''--that
was the name of it.
But I care a lot about sports. I find it----
The Chairman. And the answer is?
Senator Klobuchar. Of course they will, Senator Cruz.
I care a lot about sports. I care a lot about how sports
brings us together in terms of our local communities. It made a
huge difference for our city, for the City of Minneapolis, in
the last few years after some difficult times.
And so I just wanted to start with this, with the local
broadcasting issue, and I have learned--I have gotten all the
streaming down. I will get the Timberwolves tonight, Mr.
Koenig, whatever they are on.
But I do want to continue to have strong local broadcasting
for many reasons because I think it also brings our communities
together.
And how do you plan--I guess I would start with you, Mr.
Proper, since you had the wherewithal to go to college in
Minnesota--how do you plan on continuing to leverage local
broadcasting to reach NHL fans like wild fans?
Mr. Proper. Thank you, Senator, and thank you for
acknowledging the Minnesota roots. I did not realize it would
work to my benefit.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Proper. So in the NHL we are currently still operating
under the RSN system in many markets. So that is the cable
system where the RSNs, but as everybody is--sorry, regional
sports networks.
But as everybody has talked about, those continue to lose
subs and as a result they are going to a D to C model that
complements their cable distribution.
In addition, our teams have looked carefully, as I
mentioned briefly, at broadcast and a number of our teams are
on full broadcast networks in the local markets. Other teams--
we have one team that has gone on a completely free--actually
two--completely free digital distribution.
So that is basically everybody can get it for free if they
have Internet access, and everybody has some form of D to C,
meaning direct to consumer model that--as a pay model except
the two that have it for free that is available over the
internet.
So what we have done is through our various markets
attempted to try and test and move forward with every different
type of model that currently exists. We expect that we will get
a much better sense of what the future holds and what really
works as we move forward.
But we have teams in every market that are doing different
things as we try to figure out exactly what the future will be.
What I can tell you is, hopefully, what gives you some
comfort is the most important thing to us in any of the leagues
is growth, which is all focused on accessibility and
affordability.
Senator Klobuchar. Mr. Gersh, same question.
Mr. Gersh. Thank you. It is a great question.
We are, obviously, very focused on making sure local fans
can watch their games, and as we have all talked about here
today the Pay TV industry in general and the RSNs in particular
that have traditionally been the way that fans are able to
watch their local games have been suffering massive disruption.
We saw that coming and we wanted to make sure that our fans
never were penalized for what was going on in the marketplace.
So we built up the infrastructure ourselves to be able to
produce and distribute games.
And so for the Twins, for example, when their RSN had
financial difficulties, they were in bankruptcy, they had come
out----
Senator Klobuchar. I remember the whole thing.
Mr. Gersh. So we took over the production and distribution
of those and we essentially follow a three-pronged strategy,
which is, one, to get, you know, as much distribution as we can
still from the Pay TV industry and so those games are now on,
you know, Comcast and DIRECTV.
We also distribute a package of those games of 10 games
over the air so fans can watch some games if they do not want
to subscribe to anything, and it gives fans a promotional
ability to see where the games will be on.
And then we offer the direct to consumer package so anyone
who does want to watch all the games can sign up directly to do
so.
Senator Klobuchar. OK. And I will ask you that question in
writing, Mr. Koenig, because I did want to ask you and I will
follow up on some of these local issues. I just think it is so
important.
Last July, as you noted, WNBA--we love the Lynx--signed
this historic deal $2.2 billion, although we note the men's
deal is $76 billion, and you noted that there could be some
add-ons for more.
Could you talk about that? Just because I think, like, they
are such a fast-moving, popular sport that putting it in one
slice of time for the women seems like, well, this is historic.
What was it like a few years ago, I wonder, just this
change over in the valuation?
Mr. Gersh. The change in--the market, just like the rise in
popularity exploded in the last couple of years, Senator, you
are right.
What I would say is we are mindful of the growing
popularity of the WNBA. So in the three deals that we did last
year, even though they were record numbers in terms of the
finances that you referred to, we put in certain provisions to
provide for upside in those deals.
So, for example, there is a revenue-sharing component that
if advertising revenues exceed a certain level in each of the
deals the WNBA benefits incrementally.
There is also a provision that after 3 years there is
essentially a reset, a relook at the value in those deals
because they are long term, and if the league is continuing to
take off we would like another chance to negotiate.
And the third thing with the other--just to answer your
question, we have other deals that we can do with other
broadcasters and other, you know----
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you for bringing up the local.
Yes, I hope you continue that.
I just want to--I am going to put this on the record,
Chair, because I know we are out of time.
But for you, Mr. Bergmayer, just I think it is important to
focus on, first of all, that fans can get their sports.
But when you look at the cost, say, the NFL Sunday ticket,
YouTube TV, ESPN+, Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, Peacock, a
single season $850 for the 2024 season alone, which is really
hard when it used to be on local broadcast.
And also just some of the Disney, Warner, Fox Sports deal
that was called off due to antitrust concerns and, you know, I
want fans to stream their sports but we also want to make sure
that consumers benefit from low prices and innovation comes
from competition.
So I look forward to getting your answers in writing. I am
sorry. I am out of time. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Blackburn.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE
Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you
to each of you for being here.
In Tennessee we love our sports teams also.
And, Mr. Koenig, I want to come to you because I have
through the years looked at the NBA's relationship with
oppressive regimes around the globe and, of course, you all
have had quite a cozy relationship with the CCP, and we know
how they censor.
And going back to 2019 with Daryl Morey's tweet in support
of the Hong Kong freedom fighters, and that resulted in the
suspension of the NBA broadcast on their state-run media
channels.
And in recent years it appears that you all have patched
that relationship up, which means there had to be some sort of
deal that was there and it must have been quite a deal.
So since we are talking about broadcast rights and what
they are worth, why don't you tell me what the broadcast rights
in China are worth and how much NBA owners have invested in
China?
Mr. Koenig. Thank you, Senator.
The NBA does have a very long history of distributing our
games and content in China for more than 30 years.
Senator Blackburn. No, I am not asking about the length of
time you have been in China. I am asking what are the media
rights worth?
You are the President of Global Content and Media
Distribution. So what are those rights worth and how much have
the NBA owners invested in China?
Mr. Koenig. The NBA does not comment publicly on the
financial terms of our relationships in the U.S. or abroad but
I can comment that you are accurate that in light of the tweet
that Daryl Morey made in 2019----
Senator Blackburn. You had to cut a deal?
Mr. Koenig. No, we did not cut a deal.
Senator Blackburn. Oh, you did not?
Mr. Koenig. No, we did not cut a deal. What happened was
the games were taken off of CCTV. You are right. The games
continued to air on Tencent and other distribution outlets in
China, and then after more than a year----
Senator Blackburn. So did you make any concessions on free
speech?
Mr. Koenig. No. To the contrary----
Senator Blackburn. None at all? Because the estimates are
that these media rights are worth hundreds of millions of
dollars to you all and that NBA team owners have invested as
much as $10 billion, and I think some clarity around those
numbers would be important.
The other thing that we look at is human rights and we look
at how the NBA has punished players who have spoken out against
human rights abusers in China, Enes Kanter Freedom, one
specifically.
So can you commit to me that in every deal the NBA makes
around the globe that the league is upholding human rights and
that the league is upholding freedom of speech and they are
upholding the American ideals of freedom?
Can you make that commitment?
Mr. Koenig. Senator, I can certainly confirm that one of
the NBA's most important values is freedom of speech. In fact,
the example you cited before of Daryl Morey he was not
disciplined or censored in any way in light of the comments
that he made, and that--and you are right that that comment may
have led to the lack of coverage by CCTV and other things.
But no, we very much value freedom of speech and that is
something that I can confirm and it is something that is one of
our----
Senator Blackburn. What about your actions in Rwanda? You
are the global president. We ought to have an answer on that
one.
Mr. Proper, let me come to you, if you do not mind.
One of the things that we are concerned about--and Senator
Klobuchar touched on this--is pirated broadcasts that are
available, and the Predators are mighty popular in Tennessee.
People love going to those games.
And as we were looking at this, I think it is $28 billion
in potential revenue loss that is there from pirated. So tell
me what you are doing to combat the rise of these illegal
sports streaming because, you know, the players are not
benefiting from that?
Mr. Proper. Thank you, Senator. It is a great question and
it is something that everybody struggles with.
The fact of the matter is we have an outside service that
helps us to track pirated broadcasts. We work with our
broadcast partners. We have gotten orders of court that have
allowed us in certain markets to stop these pirated broadcasts.
But at the end of the day, many of them come from foreign
jurisdictions. They are what we affectionately refer to as
whack-a-mole. You knock one down and two more pop up.
But you can rest assure that everybody is trying to do the
best they can worldwide. But any tools that become available to
us we will all use because it is a definite drag on our
industry.
Senator Blackburn. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Lujan.
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Lujan. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
To all of our witnesses that are here, thank you for being
here.
Now, I recognize this hearing was convened to talk about
sports broadcasting and brought the experts together today.
However, I want to ask some specific questions about an
issue that is currently going on, and I just simply cannot
ignore what President Trump's unlawful executive order that
attempts to kneecap the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and
its funding of PBS and NPR.
Now, let me be clear. The President's actions show a
callous disregard for the law. Congress passed a law in 1967
that established the Corporation for Public Broadcasting's
independence.
Here are a couple facts. CPB is a nonprofit private
corporation. Congress formed CPB this way to insulate it from
government control.
The board members are not officers of the United States.
Board members and their decisions cannot be controlled by the
government. Board members do not serve at the pleasure of the
President.
CPB provides critical operational support for nearly 1,500
locally owned and operated public television and radio stations
that reach virtually every household in the country.
In 2024 alone, CPB provided nearly $6 million in total
support to three public TV stations and 12 public stations in
New Mexico alone.
Yet, despite all the facts the President has plowed ahead
with his attacks on the corporation. As a result, he and his
administration have threatened access to local news, children's
educational programming, and emergency alerts that broadcasters
provide to communities.
Now, Mr. Bergmayer, you heard I am concerned about the
Trump administration's attacks on public media and defunding
NPR and PBS. Can you explain why NPR and PBS are important?
Mr. Bergmayer. Yes, Senator. Thanks for the question.
Of course, as we discussed today, people should be able to
access their local teams but, obviously, important local news,
commercial-free children's programming, and emergency alerts
are important, too.
Public broadcasting provides this and CPB funding is
important for stations in rural areas in particular. These
areas typically have less broadband coverage to households and
people can tune into the radio in places where there is no
wireless coverage at all.
And especially as commercial stations are often struggling
as local ad dollars shift to online platforms like Facebook I
think it really underscores the importance of other models to
provide the kinds of information that these stations provide.
Senator Lujan. If Congress allows this to happen are people
going to have the same access to local news, educational
programming, and emergency alerts?
Mr. Bergmayer. I think not. I think in particular there is
going to be many news deserts if these stations shut down.
Senator Lujan. Now, Mr. Bergmayer, the public radio network
reaches about 99 percent of the American population. This makes
it a critical backbone for the Nation's emergency alert system.
The majority of public radio stations in New Mexico receive
CPB grants and support 30 to 50 percent of their budgets. Some
of these are also tribal stations and serve as links to
isolated tribal communities back home.
Now, one of the questions that I have here is, if the Trump
administration is successful in cutting funding to these public
stations will the stations exist?
And I would note that study after study showed New Mexico
and Alaska have something in common in this particular space
with a number of stations that we benefit from with these
repeaters--the investments that are made by these entities.
We just had some of the most horrific fires in New Mexico's
history. As a matter of fact, it was a local station that was
able to partner with some of these. It is an AM radio station.
I appreciate what Chair Cruz is doing to make sure AM radio
is going to stay in every car in America as well because it was
the AM radio that was warning the citizens that they needed to
move.
Signals were down. There was no electricity. Phones were
not working, nothing. The only thing that worked were these
repeaters and what was happening with AM as well. What happens
to the ability for these isolated communities to receive alerts
if all this goes away?
Mr. Bergmayer. Senator, you are right, the coverage of
radio is hard to beat and although funding for public media is
only about .01 percent of Federal spending for particular
stations, particularly in rural areas, it is a significant
portion of their budget.
Senator Lujan. So as my colleagues are looking to identify
funding streams for moving and advancing President Trump's tax
policy, my question comes back to the major league teams in
America.
We are having this discussion about how constituents across
the country can get access to games. There is more and more
deals being put together with streaming where people have to
cough up more bucks out of their pocket to be able to get the
stream.
There is tax policy, if I am not mistaken, that all of you
benefit from from the United States. Am I correct in that, Mr.
Gersh?
Mr. Gersh. I am not sure exactly what tax policy you are
referring to.
Senator Lujan. Mr. Koenig?
Mr. Koenig. Neither am I.
Mr. Proper. I am also not aware.
Senator Lujan. That is good. So to my colleagues, they do
not even know the tax deferment policy that they get advantages
when they are making--when they are investing in stadiums with
the revenue stream for the leagues. There might be another pay
for that you all can find if they do not even know what this
is.
The reason I was asking this question is if that tax policy
is going to continue people should be able to get to watch
games. My constituents and I love our favorite teams and love
enjoying them and watching teams.
I have a buddy now that is collecting cards at an
incredible pace and he has opened up a new business because of
the success of players and the support of them with their
marketing and things of that nature.
I am surprised that you are not familiar with that. I will
do my due diligence to be able to get each of you a report from
the Congressional Research Service that explains the tax policy
that benefits major league sporting teams in America.
I yield, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Schmitt.
STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC SCHMITT,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI
Senator Schmitt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad we are
having this hearing.
So many things that we talk about in Washington back home
nobody cares about. But this one actually people do care about
a lot because they want to be able to watch their favorite
teams.
And I am going to probably limit my questions to Mr. Gersh.
It is too soon, Mr. Proper, to talk about the NHL, given what
happened to the Blues with 1.7 seconds left in Winnipeg in game
seven. It is just too soon so maybe another day.
But as we were talking beforehand, as a Cardinals fan and
somebody who probably has way too much of an emotional reaction
to a blown save in an April day game, this is what I do.
Like, I mean, I cannot live in the political all the time
so baseball--the Cardinals is ultimately my great distraction
and we have been really lucky on the radio side----
The Chairman. And if you are looking to recruit he swings a
bat really well.
Senator Schmitt. Yes. My time has passed, Mr. Chairman, I
believe. But, you know, Harry Carey and Jack Buck and Mike
Shannon, and I still have got the MLB app to just listen to the
radio games when I am barbecuing for my family outside.
I mean, this is just--it is the cadence of the summer. It
is--the rhythm of the game is something that--it is America's
pastime and it is--in St. Louis at least it is almost like, you
know, a civic religion. It is passed down from one generation
to the next.
And I am also--so I am 49 so I am a Gen-Xer, and I feel
like I have seen all of the phases of all this, right? You have
got--when I was a kid growing up in the 1980s the only game--
you know, you could listen on the radio but the only game you
could maybe pick up was the NBC game of the week with, you
know, Vin Scully and St. Louis and Joe Garagiola broadcasting
those games.
And then--you know, and there was a time where the thinking
was the more games you broadcast maybe people would not
actually go attend the games and, of course, that was not true.
And then you get into the regional sports networks. ESPN
starts broadcasting more games. St. Louis and Kansas City have
some of the highest ratings when the regional sports networks
existed, and now we are in this new phase and I am someone that
would have the MLB app for radio.
I would--only during baseball season when I cut the cord
actually buy the cable subscription, which was really
expensive, just to see the Cardinal games when I was at home
and we gravitated--you know, at first I had Sling because they
carried the Cardinals.
Then it went to YouTube TV because they had the Cardinals
and then they did not have the Cardinals. So it has been a
journey for a lot of fans. So I guess in the time that we have
remaining, I just wanted to ask you where is all this headed?
Because people want to see the games. The demise of, you
know, the regional sports networks you have got now--I can--you
know, I am on Amazon. I can get the Cardinal games on Amazon.
This is the first year you can do that with the Prime package.
Are we headed to a place where the teams have their own
platforms or maybe that does not work because you do not have
the scale. But what is--where is this all headed?
Because it feels like, especially for baseball, it has been
a little bit in flux the last couple of years and this is the
question I get a lot, like, what is going on with all this
stuff?
So in your view, what is happening? Where is this headed?
Mr. Gersh. Sure. It is a great question. First of all,
thank you for your fandom and your continued support. We
certainly appreciate that.
We are at this transitory time in the media ecosystem and
we are at the point now where the Cardinals, like many other
clubs, are on their regional sports network and at least there
is now a direct to consumer service, which in this case is
FanDuel Sports Net, which you can buy directly from them or
through Amazon Prime.
Where this is going is a great question and I think, as the
Commissioner has stated, he is looking to get to a more
national product.
I think we would like to see more of our games available
more broadly, more nationally, and then kind of have one place
where fans know to go to watch their games that are not being
broadcast nationally.
And so as we look to the next couple of years, our main
rights deals come up after the 2028 season. That is what we are
looking to achieve is a place where there is a--whether it is a
national streaming package or MLB network becomes the home of
local baseball but where there is one place that you go to know
where your games are that are not being broadcast nationally.
Senator Schmitt. So that would look like something like the
MLB app. You subscribe and everyone then has access to their
home market games or--and I guess it would not matter if you
are traveling to D.C. and I want to watch the Cardinals I am
not limited by the potential blackout, right?
So it is--there is a one-stop shop that MLB actually owns.
Is that----
Mr. Gersh. Yes. Whether MLB----
Senator Schmitt. I am not trying to ask you to get too far
ahead but just curious.
Mr. Gersh. Yes. That is certainly one potential outcome. It
may be the MLB app. It may be that we partner with an Amazon or
an Apple or a YouTube or one of the other major streaming
services and they become the home of baseball.
But I think the idea is to make it simpler for fans. We do
understand the fan frustration now. We take that very
seriously. There is nothing more important to us than making
sure fans know exactly where to go to watch their game.
Senator Schmitt. One final question while I got you. So
every--I think every sport sort of translates a little bit
differently to television. I mean, football is sort of just
like--it works really well on the screen.
Hockey, I would argue, in person--a playoff hockey game in
person is so fast it is hard to--sometimes it does not--you do
not have to comment--it does not translate on TV. But when you
are there it is incredible. Baseball is kind of this middle
ground.
With younger people now with the scrolling and how the
short YouTube clips and all this stuff, baseball is a longer
form game. I am just curious, how does baseball view appealing
to younger viewers knowing that their viewing habits are a
little different?
Mr. Gersh. Yes, I think that is a lot of the changes that
we have made over the past couple years is to, you know, the
institution: the pitch clock and the restriction on the shift
and the bigger bases, trying to make more action, and I think
we have seen the results of that. Ratings have been up.
Attendance has been up.
I actually think our general fan age is younger than we are
given credit for because we moved a lot of our fans to digital
sort of earlier than others and it got a little bit lost in the
ratings.
But we are definitely focused on that and I think we have
made a lot of improvements to the games over the past couple
years that are now paying dividends.
Senator Schmitt. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Ranking Member Cantwell.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, thank you to the witnesses. I am just trying to
follow up on that last point, particularly about the consumer
experience and what you just mentioned, Mr. Gersh.
So are you saying that you guys track and have metrics on
fan frustration and input from consumers?
Mr. Gersh. Yes, I do not know that it is specific metrics
or data but it is certainly something we hear. I mean, we get--
you know, when a fan has MLB.tv if the game that they are
looking to watch is in their local market and they get blacked
out we hear about that, and so those are things that we are
trying to address.
Senator Cantwell. When you negotiate media rights are you
negotiating both broadcast and streaming rights?
Mr. Gersh. Yes.
Senator Cantwell. OK. And so by doing that you are limiting
competition right there, right? I mean, the old model
broadcasting rights everybody would bid and then you would
decide, and then in the broadcast model you just rented my
eyeballs. That is it.
You made me watch a lot of ads but I did not--you did not
cost me anything, right? So you had a competition. Everybody
bid. You decided what bid you wanted and then basically I got
to watch it for free, although I had to watch some commercials.
Now, because you negotiate and you limit the streaming
rights you are limiting the competition and you are creating
the cost to the consumer and I would say it would be
interesting if you were helping local media out by keeping
broadcast rights with local media so that the team could
negotiate with local syndicate and broadcasters.
But in reality what you are doing is basically you are
using your marketability that we gave you on antitrust to
leverage those broadcast rights and limit the streaming media
rights, which could provide true competition to you.
And so that is what you are hearing from everybody here.
Everybody here has been through this experience. Every--I will
bet you every single member of this committee has been through
this experience where they thought they were going to get
something and they could not get it.
And so the question is whether we should continue to give
you this antitrust exemption if, in fact, you are going to use
your market power on broadcast to also limit market competition
on streaming and not have the old model of broadcast
competition anyway?
So you do not have the broadcast competition. Now you have
this new streaming tool and you are basically clobbering the
consumer, making everything more expensive.
And I will bet you do not have data. So, yes, you get into
a fight with a local broadcaster and then you black out a bunch
of people and they are also mad about that.
But, no, you are not collecting data. You are collecting
checks. That is what you are collecting. You are collecting
revenue.
Mr. Bergmayer, am I saying this correctly about the lack of
competition and why we should reconsider this in the context of
the----
Mr. Bergmayer. Yes, I completely agree with you. I think in
particular in return for the various public benefits that
leagues and teams receive that there should be an obligation to
make sure that the games are widely accessible and competitive.
Senator Cantwell. So I do not think they would police any
of this. So you then--because you control both the streaming
and the broadcast rights then you sell something to somebody.
They do a horrible job of saying whether they really have
the content. They advertise that they have the content and then
you pay and you signed up for 6 months of the subscription.
Yes, how many people have time to get out of that when you
go on and they do not really have the game?
So there is just so much happening here. So what is your
suggestion, Mr. Bergmayer? What would we--what should we do now
to help consumers out since we have too much control here and
not enough focus on the consumer, you know?
I mean, most people would say, I want everybody to watch
this stuff because I believe in the brand. I am pretty sure the
Mariners would want everybody to watch. You know, they like
their players and they would like people to see them. So----
Mr. Bergmayer. I tend to think that the best balance is to
just think about the difference between the local team in a
community and then the out-of-market national type games, and I
think it is a complete reasonable request of policymakers at
the state, local, and Federal level to say in exchange for the
public support you get, in exchange for the unique market power
characteristics that teams have that make them very different
than other entertainment products, that they work to make sure
that games in the local market are available free of charge in
some way, supported by ads like they were for decades.
Senator Cantwell. So you would go that route? You think
that is the most critical aspect of this?
Mr. Bergmayer. I think taking care of the local fans and
local markets is where I would have my first priority.
Senator Cantwell. Well, I mean--and that is music to my
ears because I care about local broadcasting. I do not think--I
think the demise of local broadcasting is a big problem in the
United States of America, and you have to have community and
what better way to build community than around a sports team?
What about this issue of antitrust as it relates to the
fact that these guys, really, they strangled it. For a long
time they strangled streaming because they wanted to control it
too and at the behest of trying to keep cable and keep
broadcast.
But now you are back to--now you are back to they are just
not doing an effective job of monitoring the people they sell
the streaming rights or enable the streaming rights to and
thereby the consumer gets clobbered with a bunch of nonsense
where they cannot access what they really wanted. So what do
you do about that?
Mr. Bergmayer. Yes, I think there are reasons why you want
to have there to be some coordination in the negotiation of
media rights for leagues. So that does make sense.
But it cannot just be for free. I think it needs to be in
exchange for a clear public benefit and I think that benefit
would be availability of games in local markets for free and
working to reduce the confusion and fragmentation of games and
just, like, looking to keep their costs down overall.
Senator Cantwell. Yes. Well, I am thinking about out of
state. I am thinking about out-of-market games, right, or
somebody who wants to follow.
Mr. Bergmayer. Sure. Out of----
Senator Cantwell. So I am saying that is--to me, that is a
little different and I see my time has expired. But if you
could help us for the record on this. I think what we are--
there is just too much here where they can just think about the
dollar instead of thinking about the true consumer experience.
And so I like your suggestion on local broadcasting but I
still think we need something on the streaming media side that
says we have a little bit more responsibility to the consumer
to make sure that the consumer experience is not hijacked
behind 6 months of a larger subscription that may or may not be
related.
But I will write something for the record. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Moreno.
STATEMENT OF HON. BERNIE MORENO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO
Senator Moreno. Well, thank you for being here. Chairman,
thank you for putting on the hearing.
So a question to the three league representatives. What are
your metrics? You have to have metrics, right, in terms of how
many--and you talked about that a little bit in your testimony.
What are your metrics in terms of how you see the amount of
games accessible? Is that something that you track in terms of
being able to make decisions as to what you are doing in terms
of--obviously, there is not really free games, just to be
crystal clear.
There are games that you view with advertising paying for
that privilege. But what are the--I am curious about what your
metrics are? I will start with you, Mr. Gersh.
Mr. Gersh. Sure. If I understand your question, you are
talking about how the games are--the metrics on availability of
the games.
Senator Moreno. Right.
Mr. Gersh. And I think, you know, what we have looked at is
what percentage of the fans in the home television territory
can watch the games and are they available and, you know,
historically they have been on RSNs, on Pay TV, distributed
platforms.
And as I mentioned before, less and less people have been
signing up for Pay TV, and then on the Pay TV systems they have
been either higher tiered or not carried at all.
So we have been concerned where we have had in some cases,
you know, only 35 percent of the fans in our territory could
get access to those games.
So that is why we took a really strong look at this the
past couple years and Commissioner Manfred's, you know, view to
make the games more accessible where we now have direct to
consumer offerings available in 29 territories. So for us, that
covers the whole territory. For $20 a month you can watch----
Senator Moreno. I am talking about that you do not have to
pay a subscription--that you can watch the game with ads. What
is your current metric and where--has that gone down or has
that gone up? Has accessibility increased or decreased?
Mr. Gersh. It has actually--again, since I have been
involved over the past two decades all the games have been on
Pay TV. There were not a lot of freely available broadcast
games for major league baseball.
So it has increased over the past couple years. Now a
majority of our teams do make at least a package of the games
available on free over-the-air TV. You know, whether it is 10
or 20 games they make those available, and at the national
level, you know, we have our World Series and the All-Star
game.
Our biggest events are on Fox Broadcasting, which is a
freely available channel, and then we have been experimenting
with new ways to make games for free. So our partnership with
Roku, the games that we put on Sunday morning are freely
available within----
Senator Moreno. So you do not have a target X percentage of
games are available without paying subscriptions and you are
trying to get that number to increase?
Mr. Gersh. We do not have a particular metric on that.
Senator Moreno. OK. Mr. Koenig.
Mr. Koenig. Thank you, Senator.
Yes. As I said, the availability of games on free over-the-
air television is very important to us. So on the national
level we have 70--in our new deals that will start next year 75
regular season games and almost--depending on how long the
playoff series goes another 40, 50 games available on free
broadcast television, which is the most in NBA history and
second maybe only to the NFL of any league, and it was
something that was a real priority in our negotiations.
In local television, three years ago there was one team
that put its games out on over-the-air television--free over-
the-air television.
This past year we had 21 teams but at least some number of
games available on free over-the-air television, a total of 570
games on free over-the-air television locally, which is the
most in 20 years in the----
Senator Moreno. So you are seeing that number go up?
Mr. Koenig. Absolutely.
Senator Moreno. And you track that and you watch that?
Mr. Koenig. Yes.
Senator Moreno. Mr. Proper.
Mr. Proper. So we totally agree with you, Senator Moreno.
We are looking very extensively in how we can increase our over
the air. Now, on a national basis that is a bit of a
partnership where we have our relationships with ABC, for
example, and it becomes however many games we can get on with
windows. We try to.
But as Mr. Koenig said, at the local level it has really
increased dramatically with the demise of the RSN business and
what we have seen is we now have three teams whose all of their
games are available over the air locally.
We have others who are very much exploring that and then--
at that model and I think others that will adopt it.
We have also had teams adopting or trying out the model of
making it available for free on the Internet so where they
cannot get necessarily over-the-air coverage for all of their
games they are trying to make every game free as an Internet
product, which is a unique model that is just in its infancy.
Senator Moreno. Got you. In my short time remaining I would
just ask you, the three of you, to respond--actually, the four
of you to respond really quickly.
It seems with technology an infinitely solvable problem
because if I am signed up for a streaming service I use some
sort of identity validation of who I am.
Why would you penalize that person and not just make it so
that you sign up in one place with that same credential and
allows you to sign up in all of them and allow, for example--
like, for example, Amazon--well, they know too much about me--
but they know that I am a Max subscriber so they do not charge
me for Max also.
Why do you not look at solutions like that? Because it
seems to me for you, you want to make this easier for your
fans.
Mr. Gersh. We agree with that and, in fact, if you buy
MLB.tv on Amazon you can authenticate and watch it on our
platform. We do not----
Senator Moreno. But not the local piece, though. It should
automatically carry across all platforms in every way possible.
Mr. Gersh. I agree with that completely. It is just an
issue of rights and getting the other side to do that. At MLB
we have long--we have integrated with ESPN and Fox and all our
cable distributors so that people can watch on our platform if
they subscribe through Pay TV. Hundred percent agree with you
that more of that should happen.
Senator Moreno. I am over time but let me just say this, my
two cents. You guys solving this problem and making it more
available, easier, and less friction will be dramatically less
painful than if this institution decides to give you rules and
guardrails.
So option one, you solve it and it is great. Option B, not
so great.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Rosen.
STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Rosen. Thank you, Chairman Cruz. I want to thank
Ranking Member Cantwell, and I am really pleased that you are
holding this hearing on such an important and emerging issue.
Well, because my state, of course, Nevada, but we have Las
Vegas, and Las Vegas the entertainment capital of the world. We
are home to all-star music performances, live shows,
international events.
Over the past several years we have started to become the
sports capital of the world as well, from hosting major UFC
fights to being home of the Formula One Las Vegas Grand Prix,
and we have seen major league sports become a bigger and bigger
part of the Vegas sports and entertainment scene as well.
In fact, our first major professional sports team, the Las
Vegas Golden Knights, established less than a decade ago and,
of course, I am proud to say I think tonight is the first game
of round two in the playoffs.
So I was traveling yesterday so I make sure--I think it is
tonight. So anyway, go Knights. They are in the playoffs.
We are so proud of them and they are beloved in Las Vegas.
They are a tremendous success that they have enjoyed in their
first seven seasons in the NHL. It is unprecedented for an
expansion team.
And the success does not end there. Our Las Vegas Aces won
back to back WNBA championships in 2023. We added an NFL team
when the Raiders opened their brand new state-of-the-art
Allegiant Stadium in 2020 and last year we hosted a fantastic
Super Bowl for the first time, and next up we have the A's
bringing major league baseball to the great state of Nevada in
2028. Someday soon I am hoping that we will add an NBA team as
well.
But just as Nevada's sports environment is changing how
fans watch their team is changing. So Golden Knights, they have
been doing a lot of innovation.
So over the past two NHL seasons, thanks to an agreement
between the Golden Knights and Scripps fans across Nevada are
able to watch the Knights free of charge over the air on local
broadcast television.
The Knights have continued to innovate, creating an app
experience called Knight Time where fans can access all Knights
games live on their devices.
So, Mr. Proper, can you speak to how the NHL views the
ability of teams to make these types of deals and to innovate
with new ways to respond to fan demands and how these
flexibilities really just benefit the fan experience,
especially the local fan base, right?
Mr. Proper. Absolutely, and great point, Senator Rosen.
We have been very, very positive in working with our clubs
to find new models and the Vegas Knights model is an absolutely
outstanding one, we think, for fans across the board.
As you mentioned, every game is over the air for free with
Scripps other than the national games. You also have the
ability to buy the package if you want to buy it as a digital
product.
But what it has also allowed them to do is grow the
business and grow what they are trying to do, grow their fan
base. So what we have seen is that in their first year
switching from the RSN model they had a 700 percent increase in
their ratings.
What they have been able to do in terms of growing the fan
base, particularly for a relatively new team, has been off the
charts of what we have been trying to accomplish with every one
of our teams.
And so what we have seen is this model has completely been
vindicated as both affordable for fans, greater accessibility,
and ultimately growing the fan base for the Knights, which has
been their primary goal in doing these types of deals.
Senator Rosen. Yes, it has been tremendous for Las Vegas
and for them, and so I want to talk about innovation in other
leagues.
So, Mr. Gersh and Mr. Koenig, I want to give you the
opportunity as well. How do the MLB and NBA, as well as their
teams, plan to meet the moment here and are there new models
that you can point to in creativity and delivering to consumer
demands?
Mr. Koenig?
Mr. Koenig. Thank you, Senator.
Yes, the example of the Knights and the Aces too, which are
on broadcast television, seems to be a trend.
Senator Rosen. We love our teams in Nevada.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Koenig. As well you should.
And is a trend that we see more and more. In this time of
disruption in the cable universe more and more teams, as I have
mentioned, have returned to broadcast television.
And it is kind of a hybrid approach. For the people who
watch through traditional television more games on free over-
the-air stations is certainly a benefit, and for the people who
are digital natives who maybe never subscribed to pay
television having the games--every game also available through
streaming platforms, which is something that the WNBA and the
NBA teams are increasingly doing, all but one of our teams has
all of their games available on a streaming platform--local
games.
We find that that ladder enables us to do a couple of
things. It allows us to provide a lot more choice and
personalization in different audio-video feeds and fantasy and
things like that.
But what it also enables us to do, which is something that
we have discussed with other senators, is provide access and
discoverability in a world that is more and more fragmented.
That digital--the NBA app and the WNBA app, for example,
can be the entry point. You may not know which channel the Aces
are on if it is not a national game but if you go to the WNBA
app you will be able to click right on the game and go directly
there.
It is on a digital platform. You will be able to access
your games. And we are going to even do that beyond just the
NBA and WNBA apps.
We are going to do that through a number of other partner
and team relationships. You might be able--when you order food
to watch a game you will have an opportunity to click from that
food delivery app directly to a game telecast.
We are working all this out to make it--because one of the
issues that this committee rightfully focused on in calling
this hearing is fragmentation and we think there are a lot of
ways to deal with that, particularly through the digital
distribution.
Senator Rosen. Mr. Gersh, if you go quickly. I am over my
time. We do not want to leave out baseball.
Mr. Gersh. Right. I will say I agree with what both of my
colleagues have said, and with the athletics in particular one
of the other ways we are giving optionality is their direct to
consumer service is both directly--available directly right on
MLB.tv this year if you just want to buy the athletic games.
And then we also let NBC put it on Peacock as an upsell to
Peacock if you want the full RSN. So just continuing to find
ways to give fans more options to watch their games is what we
are focused on. Thank you.
Senator Rosen. Thank you.
The Chairman. I would mention if the NBA could somehow
reduce Steph Curry's shooting percentage that would really help
for my Rockets, who went through a very painful series, and I
would also like to check to see if Mr. Curry is, in fact, a
space alien.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. And with that, I recognize Senator Markey.
STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
Senator Markey. That shooting did ruin this year's bet
between the Chairman and the Senator from Massachusetts. I won
last year's bet on the Dallas-Celtics series and I was hoping,
actually, that Steph Curry's shooting percentage should go
down.
And, by the way, the Celtics shooting percentage should go
up a little bit from last night in three pointers, OK, but--and
I think that will occur.
So we thank you all for being here. As an avid sports fan I
know the frustration of having to keep up and pay for numerous
apps to watch your favorite team.
But today I want to address a related but urgent threat to
public access to media more broadly. Last week President Trump
unleashed a series of attacks on public media and the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting including an executive
order that attempted to force the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting to cease funding for PBS and NPR.
He also proposed to end all funding for the Corporation for
Public Broadcasting in his 2026 budget request. Eliminating the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting would devastate hundreds of
local public media stations that rely on CPB to serve their
communities, especially in rural and low income areas.
From ``Arthur'' to ``PBS NewsHour'' from tornado alerts to
rural states to local debates in city halls, public media has
always been there, not because it turns a profit but because it
serves the public.
These stations connect our country from rural towns to
urban centers and provide news and culture and children's
programming without commercial influence. Cutting off CPB
funding will not hurt elites in Washington. It will hurt
children in underserved classrooms who rely on ``PBS Kids.''
PBS is the children's television network from 6 a.m. in the
morning, and children for generations of all races, all
incomes, have relied upon the Public Broadcasting System to
provide that information.
It will hurt seniors in rural communities who trust their
local public radio stations for news and weather and emergency
information. It will hurt the civic fabric of this Nation at a
time when polarization and division are already corroding our
shared sense of truth.
Mr. Bergmayer, do you agree that public media plays a vital
role in ensuring all Americans, regardless of income or
geography or race, have access to trustworthy information?
Mr. Bergmayer. I do, Senator, and I believe it is
especially important in rural areas throughout the country.
Senator Markey. Do you agree that public media plays an
important role in ensuring that children of all ages and
backgrounds have access to educational and enriching
programming which has served generations of American children?
Mr. Bergmayer. Yes, I do, and as a parent my kids loved PBS
programming. I think noncommercial children's programming is
very important.
Senator Markey. Do you agree that public broadcasters play
a central role in communicating emergency information during
extreme weather or any other emergency?
Mr. Bergmayer. Yes, I do.
Senator Markey. So thank you for that.
OK. We are going to have a major debate here in the
Congress over the role of the Public Broadcasting System, NPR
and PBS and all of those local stations.
This is a debate which we are going to have and I just
think it is very important that everyone understand that the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting represents a promise that
every American, no matter their income or their background or
their zip code, deserves access to free--absolutely free
education, culture, local reporting, and trusted information.
We must reject this attempt to silence the truth and
instead recommit to the public interest, to local storytelling,
and to the democratic values that public broadcasting has
upheld for our generations.
And we must protect the children, especially the poorest
children in our society, who may not have access to all of the
apps that we have been hearing today but do have access for
free to the public broadcasting of their local communities.
The American people are not asking us to defund Big Bird.
They are asking us to defend Big Bird and all that it
represents in our society's history.
So I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Markey.
I want to thank each of the witnesses for your testimony
today. Senators will have until the close of business on
Tuesday, May 13, to submit questions for the record.
Witnesses will have until the end of the day on Tuesday,
May 27, to respond to those questions.
And that concludes today's hearing. The Committee stands
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to
Kenny Gersh
Question 1. AI is playing an increasingly crucial role in the
sports industry, from enhancing player performance and injury
prevention to improving fan engagement and media consumption. For
example, the NHL is using generative AI to bringing in a younger
audience by using NHL EDGE Positional Data to animate the action of
select NHL games for children. While generative AI offers many
benefits, this technology is ripe for abuse as many of these tools
implicate sensitive legal issues such as athlete publicity rights, data
privacy considerations, and copyright protection. What are some of the
ways your leagues are currently using generative AI and how will you
ensure it is used safely in the future?
Answer. MLB is exploring the use of generative AI to bring new
technology to our fans in more efficient ways as we continue to assess
use cases that enhance the fan experience safely and securely. Our
engineers who develop our apps, video games, streaming services and
other digital products employ generative AI to support their work as do
business groups throughout our offices, leveraging enterprise-wide
tools as we work to grow the game for our fans. We are currently
testing the incorporation of generative AI-based services to provide
fans at games with information and assistance within our Ballpark app.
We continue to evaluate ways to bring our fans more tools and features
while prioritizing protecting fans' data, our intellectual property and
the security of our digital products and services.
Question 2. Retransmission consent enables broadcasters to charge
MVPDs a fee for the right to retransmit local signals. Steamers are not
currently subject to MVPD retransmission consent requirements. However,
the FCC has previously considered subjecting streamers to MVPD rules by
reclassifying them as MVPDs. While the FCC did not publish a final
rule, a significant question exists as to whether the FCC has the
statutory authority to do so. If the FCC were to reclassify streaming
platforms as MVPDs for purposes of retransmission consent requirements,
what impact would this have on your respective leagues and fan
experiences? Would this increase the number of potential blackouts?
Answer. As a leader in the online video distribution (``OVD'')
market, we do not believe that such regulation would be beneficial to
our fans. The OVD market is already providing consumers with more
choices than ever before to watch high-quality television programming
on personal computers, tablets, smart phones and other Internet-
connected devices. Imposition of additional regulation may limit,
rather than increase, consumer choice. Further, we do not see how this
regulation would help positively address blackouts for our fans. In our
view, the better course is to continue to let this emerging market of
increased consumer choice develop.
If and to the extent that the Commission determines to implement
new regulations in this area, it should at minimum exclude OVDs that
make available only content that they or their affiliates own or
otherwise have the right to make available.
Question 3. The sports media landscape is experiencing increasing
fragmentation with the rise in streaming services and digital
platforms. We have seen a decline in the traditional modes of
broadcasting. Are you concerned that fans in rural or underserved
broadband areas are being left behind as your leagues transition away
from traditional broadcast to digital platforms? How are your leagues
planning to ensure American consumers, especially older and less tech-
savvy ones, aren't left behind in the shift away from traditional
broadcasting?
Answer. Currently, we view the distribution of our games on digital
media platforms as being complimentary to, not in place of, traditional
methods of distribution. As of today, over 95 percent of our 2,430
regular season games remain available via traditional broadcasting
methods. In addition, our most important events, the World Series and
All-Star Game, along with approximately 60 exclusive nationally
broadcast regular season games continue to be made available on FOX, an
over the air broadcast network.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Eric Schmitt to
Kenny Gersh
Question 1. In your testimony, you describe the decline of the RSN
model and how it's created challenges for fan access. The St. Louis
Cardinals have historically had one of the strongest RSN relationships
in baseball, but recent bankruptcies and consolidations have brought
this relationship into question. How specifically is MLB working with
teams like the Cardinals to ensure fans don't lose access during this
transition period?
Answer. We are very focused on making sure local fans can watch
their games. Faced with the crisis hitting the Regional Sports Network
business, MLB built out the capability to produce and distribute live
baseball games directly. Due to MLB's preparation and efforts, when
certain RSNs shut down or dropped the rights to carry an MLB team, MLB
was able to step in to immediately produce and distribute those games,
ensuring there was no interruption to our fans, who were able to watch
those games on the same Pay TV systems that had previously carried them
as well as via new direct to consumer offerings available to every fan
throughout each team's home television territory. Currently, MLB
produces and distributes games for the San Diego Padres, Arizona
Diamondbacks, Colorado Rockies, Minnesota Twins and Cleveland
Guardians. Should the St. Louis Cardinals or any other MLB team no
longer have a viable third-party option to distribute their games
locally, MLB will have the capability to make sure those games are
produced and distributed with limited or no disruption to their fans as
we have successfully done to date in the markets mentioned above.
Question 2. Both the Cardinals and Kansas City Royals have recently
begun simulcasting some of their games on their RSN as well as on free
over-the-air local broadcast channels. These games have seen record-
high viewership, with a recent Royals game that was simulcast on
broadcast coming in as the most watched Royals game in the last three
years. Given the recent decline in broadcasting revenue under the
restructured RSN deals, how is MLB evaluating the trade-off between
legacy RSN exclusivity and broader fan access?
Answer. Each MLB club continues to evaluate the best method to
distribute games to its fans, which in most cases today includes a
combination of delivery via Pay TV on RSNs, direct to consumer
offerings and over the air broadcasts. As RSN contracts have been
renegotiated or renewed, many Clubs, such as the St. Louis Cardinals
and Kansas City Royals, have negotiated for the right to make a portion
of their games available via over the air broadcasts. For the 2025 MLB
season, a majority of our Clubs make a package of games available via
free over the air television.
Question 3. More specifically, does MLB see hybrid or fully over-
the-air models as a viable long-term solution to ensuring both
financial stability for clubs and accessibility for fans, particularly
in mid-sized markets like St. Louis and Kansas City?
Answer. As stated above, each MLB club continues to evaluate the
best method to distribute games to their fans. While over the air
models provide enhanced reach, the current models are not sufficient to
be viable solutions to ensure financial stability to Clubs, often
bringing in less revenue per game than the cost of production. However,
we presently believe in the value of continuing to offer at least a
portion of games available via over the air broadcast as part of MLB's
overall media strategy. Our most important events, the World Series and
All-Star Game, along with approximately 60 exclusive nationally
broadcast regular season games are today made available on FOX, an over
the air broadcast network, and a majority of our Clubs make a package
of games available via free over the air television, including the five
teams for which MLB handles distribution directly.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Kenny Gersh
Tariffs. On May 5th, President Trump escalated his trade war by
announcing tariffs on foreign-produced media. Markets reacted sharply,
with major media stocks tumbling amid uncertainty over the scope and
impact of the move. Although the President suggested the tariffs may
apply only to films, the vague announcement has left companies bracing
for broader trade penalties.
Major League Baseball has a team based in Canada, plays games
internationally, and is actively promoting American sports to global
audiences.
Question 1. How has the uncertainty about how these tariffs will be
applied impacted your current and future investment and planning
activities?
Answer. To date, uncertainty about how these tariffs will be
applied has not had measurable impact to those activities with respect
to our media business.
Local Broadcasting and Sports Media. A 2023 survey found that 35
percent of respondents found sports video content too expensive, 30
percent said they did not know which channel was broadcasting the event
they were trying to watch, and 28 percent did not know which platform
to watch.
With the growing fragmentation in the media market, fans are no
doubt frustrated with solving the puzzle of how to watch games, what
platform to tune in to, and often realizing on short notice that a game
is unavailable in their market.
Question 1. The National Football League has a policy to ensure
that fans in a team's local market can access the game for free over
the air, regardless of how it is distributed nationally. Have you
considered a similar policy for baseball? If not, why not?
Answer. Unlike the NFL, which manages distribution of all local
rights centrally, at present MLB's local media distribution rights are
not managed by central baseball but by the individual Clubs.
Fan Satisfaction and Experience. Historically speaking, the
evolution of professional sports in the United States has gone hand-in-
hand with the rise of radio and television broadcasting. The first
nationally televised sports broadcast was a college baseball game
between Princeton and Columbia in 1939. A few months later, the NFL's
first televised game was broadcast on NBC.
Today, professional sports boast record-breaking media deals with a
variety of platforms, yet carriage by local broadcasters remains common
among the major leagues.
Question 1. What specific metrics do you track regarding fan
frustration with your current streaming and broadcast arrangements?
Answer. MLB routinely conducts fan research to understand our fans'
viewpoints on a range of issues. In addition, we monitor social media
for fan sentiment and do hear from fans when they are frustrated. As we
have made more and more games available via direct to consumer
offerings, with 29 of our 30 MLB teams now available this way, we have
seen a reduction in fan complaints about local blackouts. We also feel
it is important to experiment with different methods of making our
games available to fans to explore which platforms show the greatest
potential to reach the most fans in the future.
Question 2. Have you researched how many potential viewers you're
losing due to complexity and cost barriers?
Answer. We believe that the steps we have taken to address these
issues have mitigated complexity and cost barriers for our fans and put
our content in more of our fans' hands than ever before. Because we are
presently distributing games through a combination of delivery via Pay
TV, direct to consumer offerings and over the air broadcasts, we
continue to advance our goal of meeting our fans where and how they
want to watch our games. As media consumption has shifted over time, we
have taken steps to address these barriers for our fans in local
markets, for example by expanding the choices available to consumers
who have elected not to subscribe to a Pay TV service as well as in the
wake of the migration by distributors of RSNs to lower-subscribed and
more expensive sports tiers, rather than as part of the expanded basic
packages in which they had historically resided.
The Future of Sports Media. Your testimony at this hearing was
informative and shows that sports programming is thriving in a bustling
media landscape. Clearly, fan demand for sports isn't slowing down any
time soon. But as I highlighted in my opening statement, it is
important to ensure that rising costs for sports content don't come at
the expense of the fan experience.
Question 1. Where do you see the future of sports media going in
the next five years?
Answer. With respect to MLB, as existing contracts expire, we hope
to partner with entities that will make our games available to the
broadest possible audience and continue our efforts to eliminate
territorial restrictions, all toward the goal of making our games
available to any fan who wants to watch them regardless of location.
Question 2. What is your league doing to maximize access to fans
who subscribe to your streaming services?
Answer. With one exception, each of our thirty Clubs now makes
available via streaming all of their locally televised games,
complementing the league's streaming service that makes each locally
broadcast game available outside of the applicable local territory. We
believe it is important to also broadcast some of our games to a
national audience outside of our subscription services on widely
available platforms such as FOX, ESPN and Apple TV. Those national game
broadcasts consist of less than 6 percent of our 2,430 regular season
games.
Sports Broadcasting Act and Antitrust Protections. The Sports
Broadcasting Act of 1961 grants antitrust exemptions to the major
professional leagues, allowing their teams to pool media rights and use
their market power to negotiate broadcasting deals. The leagues have
benefited from this legal exemption, yet as we see more fragmentation
in the media landscape, due in large part to the rise of streaming
platforms, it seems consumers are left behind, whether it's blackouts
in the local market or subscriptions that still don't get you the games
you expect to watch.
Question 1. An antitrust exemption is extremely valuable to the
leagues. Why should the government continue to grant these
extraordinary legal protections to leagues?
Answer. Pooling broadcasting rights is a fan friendly, market
efficient practice that has resulted in a tremendous increase in
output. MLB's pooling of rights in creating MLB Advanced Media allowed
the league to innovate and revolutionize, which resulted in MLB being
the first league to stream live games, beginning with websites and then
to mobile. While MLB is comprised of 30 Clubs competing on the field,
it most effectively and efficiently operates as one entity at times in
order to create the best and most widely accessible entertainment
product for its fans.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
William Koenig
Seattle Supersonics. In 2008, the Sonics left Seattle for Oklahoma
City and broke the hearts of millions of die-hard fans. It's been 17
years, and Seattle is still the largest market in the country without
an NBA team.
Question 1. When will the NBA return to Seattle?
Answer. The league is currently in the early stages of evaluating
the potential for future expansion. Beyond that, we have no further
information at this time, including any timetable or comment on any
possible location for expansion.
Tariffs. On May 5th, President Trump escalated his trade war by
announcing tariffs on foreign-produced media. Markets reacted sharply,
with major media stocks tumbling amid uncertainty over the scope and
impact of the move. Although the President suggested the tariffs may
apply only to films, the vague announcement has left companies bracing
for broader trade penalties.
The NBA has a team based in Canada, plays games internationally,
and is actively promoting American sports to global audiences.
Question 1. How has the uncertainty about how these tariffs will be
applied impacted your current and future investment and planning
activities?
Answer. Like every other global business, we are monitoring
developments in this area closely and we remain in ongoing dialogue
with our partners around the world on this topic.
Local Broadcasting and Sports Media. A 2023 survey found that 35
percent of respondents found sports video content too expensive, 30
percent said they did not know which channel was broadcasting the event
they were trying to watch, and 28 percent did not know which platform
to watch.
With the growing fragmentation in the media market, fans are no
doubt frustrated with solving the puzzle of how to watch games, what
platform to tune in to, and often realizing on short notice that a game
is unavailable in their market.
Question 1. The National Football League has a policy to ensure
that fans in a team's local market can access the game for free over
the air, regardless of how it is distributed nationally. Have you
considered a similar policy for the NBA? If not, why not?
Answer. We evaluate all distribution strategies with the goal of
maximizing access to our games and providing consumers with flexibility
in how they watch. This work has included analyzing the approaches
taken by other leagues in distributing their games, and the extent to
which potential distribution options are able to accommodate a full
schedule of game telecasts.
Fan Satisfaction and Experience. Historically speaking, the
evolution of professional sports in the United States has gone hand-in-
hand with the rise of radio and television broadcasting. The first
nationally televised sports broadcast was a college baseball game
between Princeton and Columbia in 1939. A few months later, the NFL's
first televised game was broadcast on NBC.
Today, professional sports boast record-breaking media deals with a
variety of platforms, yet carriage by local broadcasters remains common
among the major leagues.
Question 1. What specific metrics do you track regarding fan
frustration with your current streaming and broadcast arrangements?
Answer. The NBA fan experience is a critical area of focus for us,
and that focus is reflected in our ongoing data collection and analysis
relating to our game telecasts. For example, we measure viewership and
engagement for each game telecast (and for each stream available to our
fans), including in-depth assessments that help us determine which
aspects of telecasts engage viewers most effectively. We also monitor
social media and e-mail feedback from fans on an ongoing basis to
measure fan sentiment about the game viewing experience. In addition to
these ongoing monitoring efforts, we periodically conduct surveys to
measure fans' engagement with NBA telecasts across platforms--including
what they do and do not like about the viewing experience.
Question 2. Have you researched how many potential viewers you're
losing due to complexity and cost barriers?
Answer. We regularly monitor the consumer media landscape to
understand how our fans consume content, including which platforms and
distributors they have access to and use regularly. We use this and
other data to inform our approach to bringing live game content to our
fans as effectively and as broadly as possible. For example, the
negotiations of our new national media agreements were informed by this
research.
Supporting Women's Sports. 2024 was a banner year for women's
sports, as viewership increased by 131 percent. In particular, the WNBA
saw its most-watched regular season ever, with game telecasts averaging
at least one million viewers each. Building off this momentum, the WNBA
signed a massive $2.2 billion media rights deal with Disney, Amazon
Prime, and NBCUniversal.
Question 1. Mr. Koenig, I understand that the NBA helps broker
these media contracts for the WNBA and that you were a part of
negotiations. How is the WNBA capitalizing on the growing interest and
fan following when looking to the future of the sport?
Answer. Last season was a record-breaking year for the WNBA by any
measure, and the league is well positioned to continue its growth this
season and beyond. In the wake of the new national media deals that
were announced last year, the WNBA has retained the right to license
national game rights to additional partners starting in 2026 and has
already seen significant interest from market players. The league is
also continuing to expand its footprint, with new teams coming aboard
in the Bay Area, Toronto, and Portland.
As previously announced, the WNBA is also making certain changes to
the playoff format beginning this season. The WNBA Finals will be
changed from a best-of-five series to a best-of-seven series, and the
first round of the playoffs will be changed from a best-of-three series
with the first two games played in one location to a 1-1-1 format that
will ensure each participating team will get to play at least one
playoff game on its home court in front of its hometown fans.
Question 2. How are media deals like the one the WNBA just secured
creating opportunities to reinvest in the sport and build the next
generation of athletes?
Answer. By maximizing the value of our content and generating fair
market value for WNBA rights, we are able to generate the resources
necessary to reinvest and grow the WNBA.
The Future of Sports Media. Your testimony at this hearing was
informative and shows that sports programming is thriving in a bustling
media landscape. Clearly, fan demand for sports isn't slowing down any
time soon. But as I highlighted in my opening statement, it is
important to ensure that rising costs for sports content don't come at
the expense of the fan experience.
Question 1. Where do you see the future of sports media going in
the next five years?
Answer. The media industry is undergoing one of the most dynamic
periods of change in recent memory, driven largely by technological
innovation and changing viewing habits. Over the next five years, we
expect this pace to continue--and potentially accelerate--as emerging
technologies such as artificial intelligence and virtual reality
reshape how content is created, distributed, and discovered. These
forces will introduce new opportunities for personalization,
interactivity, and engagement, but they also make the broader landscape
harder to predict.
Our new national media arrangements establish an 11-year hybrid
distribution model involving Disney, NBC Universal, and Amazon. These
agreements span over-the-air broadcasting, pay television, and
streaming, striking a balance between serving existing traditional TV
audiences and reaching digital-native viewers who primarily consume
content via streaming. This multi-platform strategy ensures broad
access today while positioning us to adapt as consumption habits
continue to evolve.
Question 2. What is your league doing to maximize access to fans
who subscribe to your streaming services?
Answer. To maximize access for streaming subscribers, every
nationally televised NBA game will be available on broadly distributed
platforms: Amazon Prime Video, Peacock, and ESPN's forthcoming direct-
to-consumer service. For example, Prime Video--our sole streaming-only
partner--already reaches over 100 million U.S. households (almost two-
times the number of any cable network) and nearly 90 percent of NBA
fans already view non-NBA programming on Prime Video.
Beyond availability, streaming offers consumers enhanced viewing
experiences. Fans will have greater access to personalized features
such as advanced statistics, immersive camera angles, and customizable
audio or language options, which provide greater control over how they
watch NBA games.
To improve discoverability, we are working with all our media
partners to enable the NBA App and other league and team platforms to
serve as universal entry points for national and local game telecasts.
Whether checking scores or trying to locate a telecast, fans can open
the NBA App and be directed to the appropriate streaming platform
seamlessly.
Sports Broadcasting Act and Antitrust Protections. The Sports
Broadcasting Act of 1961 grants antitrust exemptions to the major
professional leagues, allowing their teams to pool media rights and use
their market power to negotiate broadcasting deals. The leagues have
benefited from this legal exemption, yet as we see more fragmentation
in the media landscape, due in large part to the rise of streaming
platforms, it seems consumers are left behind, whether it's blackouts
in the local market or subscriptions that still don't get you the games
you expect to watch.
Question 1. An antitrust exemption is extremely valuable to the
leagues. Why should the government continue to grant these
extraordinary legal protections to leagues?
Answer. Consumers benefit in a variety of ways when a sports league
negotiates for the nationwide distribution of game telecasts pursuant
to the SBA. Among other things, such agreements promote the
availability of some of the league's most attractive games to the
widest possible audience, incentivize innovative and high-quality
telecasts, and help build and maintain nationwide fan interest for the
league. In addition, because the revenue from the league's sale of
nationwide rights is divided equally among all the league's teams, a
league's ability to negotiate national agreements promotes competitive
balance and the existence of a more entertaining, fan-friendly product.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
William Koenig
Topic: Local Broadcasters
Local broadcasters are trusted community members that can help
reach, build, and sustain a fanbase. In turn, the revenues from marquee
sporting events allow broadcasters to continue to invest in local
newsrooms and their communities. But streaming risks upending this
relationship.
How do you plan on continuing to leverage local broadcasting
to reach NBA and WNBA fans?
Answer. Bringing game telecasts to our fans is of critical
importance to the NBA and WNBA. Our teams continually seek to optimize
the distribution of their local telecasts, through both traditional
linear television (including broadcast) channels and streaming
services.
In recent years, teams with games telecast on RSNs have been
significantly adversely affected by ``cord cutting,'' carriage
disputes, and repositioning of RSNs to more expensive, lesser-
penetrated programming tiers. In response, a number of teams have
shifted from RSNs to a combination of local over-the-air broadcasts and
digital direct-to-consumer distribution for their game telecasts. In
each such case, teams have been able to reach more fans. In fact, this
season there were more local game telecasts available on free over-the-
air stations (570) than at any time in the last 20 years. Twenty-one of
our 29 domestic teams distributed games on broadcast stations this
season (compared to just one team only three years ago). Additionally,
next season the number of nationally televised games on free, over-the-
air broadcast networks will increase fivefold, from 15 to 75. The
number of playoff games on broadcast will also double, including every
game of the NBA Finals.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
John Bergmayer
Public Media. As I mentioned in my opening statement, while the
topic of this hearing is sports broadcasting, I would be remiss if I
did not use this opportunity to draw attention to the illegal attacks
the week of April 28th by the current Administration on local public
broadcast stations across this country.
Public broadcasting and the non-partisan, non-profit Corporation
for Public Broadcasting serve a critical role by supporting local
newsrooms, developing children's and educational programming, and
keeping Americans safe with emergency alerts.
On May 1, the President signed an Executive Order to defund
National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service. But the
actions targeting the Corporation for Public Broadcasting that the
Administration intends to use to inflict pain on NPR and PBS harm the
local broadcast stations that partner with these organizations. The
community service grants issued by CPB to the individual public
stations can account for 30 to 70 percent of a station's operating
budget.
Question 1. Mr. Bergmayer, how will the Administration's actions
harm public television and radio stations across the country?
Answer. The fact is, most of the funds from CPB don't go to NPR and
PBS's national organization, but to over a thousand locally-owned
stations. The cut in funding directly impedes journalists' ability to
serve the public interest, whether through reporting on local news, or
sharing public safety information.
Question 2. What will be the impact on the public, particularly in
rural regions?
Answer. The local news crisis continues to worsen, and the harms
are even more pronounced in rural areas of America. Cutting this
funding will expand news deserts, impeding access to crucial
information, especially as a stopgap or fail-safe for emergency
broadcasts. It also means cutting free educational programs for young
kids, like Reading Rainbow. Such an educational program is especially
important for children in rural and underserved communities, where
alternative educational resources are scarce.
Public broadcasting stations contribute to local economies by not
only employing local journalists and support staff, but also by
supporting local businesses through content production and features.
Without funding, many local stations will downsize or shutter,
threatening livelihoods of its staff.
Public Media and Local Journalism. Grants from CPB support nearly
400 public radio stations across the country, which employ nearly 9,800
people, including 3,000 local journalists, editors, and producers. With
their signal reach, particularly in rural areas, public radio stations
can help to slow the spread of ``news deserts,'' or areas that have no
source of local news.
Of the 204 ``news desert'' counties identified by the State of
Local News Project, 67 are served by local public radio signals.
Newsrooms have lost over 60 percent of their newsroom employees over
the last two decades. Meanwhile, public radio has added 900 local
newsroom employees since 2012.
Question 1. How does public media enhance local journalism?
Answer. With the rapid decline in number of U.S. newspapers, public
media fills some important gaps in providing essential coverage,
particularly for local issues. Public radio and television stations
anchor communities, delivering reporting on local government, schools,
public healthy, housing policy, and more. Local journalism is also
crucial for the democratic process, providing integral information for
communities to participate in elections.
Because public media do not need to rely on advertising or rapid
story turnarounds for funding, they can invest time in long-form
journalism, documentaries, and investigations, bringing to light
systemic issues, like broadband inequality or voting access.
Question 2. What role do local public broadcasters play in
informing their communities?
Answer. Local public broadcasters provide critical coverage of
local events, government proceedings, and emergency alerts. Stations
rely on CPB funds not only for news reporting, but also for emergency
alert infrastructure. Without CPB funding, Americans in underserved
areas may lack access to these essential services, leaving communities
without timely and reliable information during emergencies, especially
natural disasters.
Local Broadcast. It's no secret that local broadcasters are
struggling in the changing marketplace. This means fewer resources for
local content, including vital sources of local journalism. This is
partly due to less advertising revenue for local stations. Sports are
often the most attractive programming for advertisers.
Question 1. If more sports were added to broadcast TV, wouldn't
that lead to more revenue for other important functions that local
broadcast serves?
Answer. Yes, that is likely correct. Often, popular content such as
local sports generates ad revenue for broadcasters that can be used to
support vital services such as local journalism, and emergency alerts.
Viewers tuning in to local broadcasters for sports are also more likely
to view this content more.
Rising Costs to Consumers. We've seen media consumption trends
shift over the past decade-plus towards streaming, with more and more
households cutting the cord in favor of online platforms. Sports is no
exception: a report released recently finds that 58 percent of viewers
report watching sports on the go via streaming.
A survey from 2024 also found that younger viewers are more likely
to pay to access content from their favorite teams or leagues. Yet the
deals these professional leagues have signed often require two, three,
or sometimes four separate subscriptions to access games either
exclusively online or out-of-market.
Question 1. Has the variety of streaming services driven up costs
for consumers?
Answer. The advantage of streaming is that viewers can pick and
choose what services they subscribe to, and can more easily subscribe
and unsubscribe to services based on the availability of content than
they could, for instance, drop or re-subscribe to a premium cable
channel. This is a major advantage over one-size-fits-all cable
bundles.
However, as the number of services has risen, and the cost of
subscriptions for each service has trended upward, some viewers may not
be saving money, especially if they are attempting to have access to
the same array of content they might have had access to via a cable or
satellite subscription.
According to data from Leichtman, the average number of SVoD/DTC
services per household has risen to 4.1 (up from 2.9 in 2020), with
younger adults aged 18-44 subscribing to 5.1 services on average,
compared to 3.7 for those aged 45-64 and 2.2 for those 65 and older.\1\
Deloitte has found that ``US households are spending more on streaming
video subscriptions, but they may be reaching their limits. On average,
U.S. subscribing households spend US$61 per month on four SVOD
services. Additionally, 68 percent of consumers surveyed pay for either
a TV subscription or live streaming TV to not only access content not
available on streaming video, but also streamline billing for both
broadband and TV and access SVOD through their pay TV service. For many
U.S. households, it may be getting more expensive to watch TV and films
at home.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Research: 83 percent U.S. Homes Have 'Big 3' SVoD, Advanced
Television (Aug. 10, 2023), https://www.advanc Streaming video at a
crossroads: Redesign yesterday's models or reinvent for tomorrow?,
Deloitte (March 20, 2024), https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/
industry/technology/digital-media-trends-consumption-habits-survey/
2024/customization-and-personalization-lead-the-svod-revolution.htmled-
television.com/2023/08/10/research-83-us-homes-have-big-3-svod/
\2\ Deloitte, Streaming video at a crossroads: Redesign yesterday's
models or reinvent fortomorrow? (March 20, 2024),https://
www.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/technology/digital-media-
trends-consumptionhabits-survey/2024/customization-and-personalization-
lead-the-svod-revolution.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While an abundance of choice is not a bad thing, viewers might
object especially when content that used to be available on one service
migrates to a new one, especially when they now have to subscribe to
multiple services just to keep accessing the same things.
This is especially notable with sports. Most people want to watch a
particular team, and a particular sport, not ``sports'' in general.
When a sport, and a team's games, are split across multiple services,
sports fans are more likely to have to subscribe to multiple services
to avoid missing games. (And as games are time sensitive, people
sometimes find out they can't access a particular game right as it's
about to air.) Finally, with sports, viewers are more likely to
subscribe to a comparatively expensive vMVPD or MVPD service (starting
at around $90/month).
Of course, all categories of programming are split across different
services. But the situation with sports is like if most episodes of a
popular TV show were carried exclusively on Paramount+, with a few
``very special'' episodes on Netflix with the season finale on HBO Max.
In addition to being costly, it's annoying.
Question 2. Are there benefits for consumers that are looking for
more a la carte or individualized sports packages that streaming can
offer?
Answer. Yes, the flexibility that streaming allows allows for
offerings that were not possible before-unlike with cable or satellite,
the primary bottlenecks are economic, as there are no last-mile
bandwidth limitations.
Fans of niche sports, and fans of out-of-market teams, in
particular have more access than they did before streaming.
Sports Broadcasting Act and Antitrust Protections. The Sports
Broadcasting Act of 1961 grants antitrust exemptions to the major
professional leagues, allowing their teams to pool media rights and use
their market power to negotiate broadcasting deals. The leagues have
benefited from this legal exemption, yet as we see more fragmentation
in the media landscape, due in large part to the rise of streaming
platforms, it seems consumers are left behind, whether it's blackouts
in the local market or subscriptions that still don't get you the games
you expect to watch.
Question 1. What impact does the Sports Broadcasting Act have on
out-of-market viewership?
Answer. By allowing teams to pool broadcast rights, we see less
innovation and experimentation in how sports programming is offered-and
establishes patterns that are followed with streaming deals. For
example, out-of-market MLB games are available through services from
MLB itself: teams that offer their own streaming packages or add-ons
generally restrict them to their home market.
Question 2. Should Congress consider policies to improve access for
consumers in light of increased streaming competition?
Answer. I think the best place for policymakers to focus is to make
sure that viewers can access in-market games for free (and supported by
ads) over local broadcast, or via streaming services limited to their
own market. This is a fair tradeoff for the antitrust exemptions and
stadium and tax deals sports benefits from, and strengthens a team's
ties to its local community. With respect to the question about out-of-
market fans above, I have no problem with teams or leagues offering
those as subscription products, but they should be simple, and
preferably one-stop-shops, so that viewers don't need a whole new
service when their team is carried nationally or makes the playoffs.
Broadband Competition and Affordability. The rise of streaming
services means that more sports than ever before are available to
watch. For example, during the 2024 Paris Olympics, every sport, no
matter how obscure, and every heat, preliminary round, or trial was
available to watch--mostly on streaming. However, the benefits of
streaming are unevenly shared.
Millions of Americans still lack access to affordable, reliable
broadband. According to the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration's Internet Use Survey, one-sixth of households in this
country don't use the Internet at all.
Question 1. Mr. Bergmayer, how can Congress and the Administration
increase competition and affordability in the broadband market and make
sure that everyone is connected?
Answer. Congress and the administration can implement a variety of
legislative and regulatory reforms to enhance competition and
affordability in broadband markets. In particular, they should
prioritize policies that open broadband and spectrum markets to non-
traditional providers, enforce antitrust laws rigorously, and ensure
robust, long-term Internet affordability support.
First, Congress should act swiftly to reintroduce and pass the
Community Broadband Act, which would prohibit states from enacting laws
that ban or restrict municipalities from building their own broadband
networks. These networks--whether municipally operated or developed
through public-private partnerships--fill critical gaps where private
ISPs have failed to invest or where competition is too weak to deliver
high-quality, affordable service. Even in areas with existing
incumbents, community-led networks exert essential competitive pressure
that drives down prices and improves service.
Additionally, as broadband increasingly relies on wireless
technologies that require access to spectrum, it's imperative that
spectrum allocation be made more equitable. Spectrum policy has long
favored the largest wireless carriers, creating steep barriers for non-
traditional providers such as Tribal Nations, community-based
nonprofits, and small ISPs. Congress and the FCC should prioritize
policies that preserve and expand shared access to mid-band spectrum--
particularly through frameworks like the Citizens Broadband Radio
Service (CBRS)--and set aside dedicated spectrum windows for Tribal
communities, or allow for more flexible, low-cost leasing. These
reforms would unlock community-driven broadband solutions that promote
local job growth, technical innovation, and equitable connectivity.
When paired with strong antitrust enforcement and thorough merger
review by the FCC and DOJ, these measures can serve as a critical check
on the market power that leads to high prices, limited choice, and
underinvestment in service.
With respect to more direct affordability measures, the expiration
of the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) and rising broadband
prices underscore the urgent need for a sustainable, long-term
broadband support. The most viable path forward is to reform the
Universal Service Fund (USF) by modernizing the program and expanding
its contribution base to ensure that it is sustainably and equitably
funded. Congress and the FCC should specifically reimagine the Lifeline
program, which currently offers only $9.25/month for broadband, by
applying key lessons from the ACP. At a minimum, these should include
increasing the monthly benefit to meaningful levels such as the ACP's
tiered $30/$75 (standard/high-cost area) subsidies, indexing it to
inflation, and expanding eligibility to better reflect current income
and access realities. The USF is an appropriate vehicle for a policy
designed to ensure universal access, and reforming it will ensure that
these critical affordability initiatives are housed in a durable,
stable funding framework.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
John Bergmayer
Topic: Cost of Streaming
For an NFL fan to watch every single game last season, they would
have needed some combination of Peacock, Amazon Prime Video, Netflix,
E-S-P-N Plus, YouTube T-V, and N-F-L Sunday Ticket--costing over $850
for the 2024 season alone. While I recognize the benefits of streaming,
these costs add up and are out of reach for too many Americans.
Is the current landscape sustainable, especially as
Americans face rising costs across the economy?
Answer. I do not think the fragmentation of leagues and teams
across multiple services (where multiple subscriptions are necessary,
as opposed to multiple services with comparable offerings) is
sustainable. It's in the best interests of leagues themselves as well
as viewers for there to be one-stop shops where all of a team's games
are available. This is not just a cost issue, though as I have
mentioned in other answers and in my written and oral testimony, costs
are substantial. Things like keeping track of subscriptions and where
they are managed, keeping track of log-ins, keeping multiple devices
updated with a variety of apps, and then finally figuring out where a
game is actually available that day, impose costs on consumers of a
different kind.
Topic: Sports Streaming Venture
Last year, Disney, Warner, and Fox Sports called off a proposed
joint venture focused on streaming sports content due to antitrust
concerns. I want to ensure sports fans can easily stream the sports
they love but I also want those consumers to benefit from the low
prices and innovation that comes from competition.
How can we ensure that streaming sports is convenient for
fans while also preserving competition among content
distributors and the leagues?
Answer. Sports content is valuable, but should not be used as an
economic weapon by major video distributors to lock out competition.
Among other issues, the proposed joint venture might have been the
exclusive way to access some sports content. In the traditional MVPD
space, program access and program carriage rules prevented major cable
companies from using their market power to lock up content and
disadvantage their rivals-a threat that is particularly pronounced with
less-substitutable content such as sports programming.
[all]