Isn’t it funny how quickly people will change their view when they are the ones needing the help? When Mediacom was publicly attacking the FCC for their stance on net neutrality, they made it clear what they thought of the FCC interfering with their business.

“I think what we’re saying is we’ve made an investment, and I don’t think the government should be coming and telling us how we can work that infrastructure, simple as that,” Commisso said during a panel discussion about issues faced by companies like his, adding, “Why don’t they go and tell the oil companies what they should charge for their damn gas?” – Rocco Commisso, CEO of New York-based Mediacom Communications, CNET

Mediacom would also go after the FCC for making critical decisions even though they were “unelected government officials.” Mediacom demanded that Congress, and not the FCC, was the “appropriate venue” for making major decisions and even floated the idea that maybe, just maybe, the FCC was secretly helping Obama to TAKE OVER THE INTERNET!

But now, Mediacom is asking the FCC to help them with a major change. A major change that oddly enough helps Mediacom. Specifically, Mediacom wants the FCC to change its rules to where a TV station can’t pull their signal upon the expiration of a retransmission consent agreement if the station is not accessible via over-the-air reception or Internet streaming to at least 90% percent of the homes in its local market served by the MVPD.


Mediacom claims that these TV stations are the reason that customers have such high TV bills.

“TV viewers all over the country have become subject to retransmission consent-fueled increases in the price of pay TV service or service disruptions that result from retransmission consent impasses.” – Mediacom Letter, TVNewsCheck

Mediacom CEO Rocco Commisso went on to say that he was disappointed in the FCC for continuing to not meet with parties during an ongoing retransmission consent dispute.

Let’s set aside the fact of whether Mediacom is right or wrong in their view. That isn’t the point. Even if they are correct in blaming the TV stations (which they aren’t), it is downright laughable for Mediacom to now claim that this MAJOR ISSUE (as Mediacom itself is claiming) needs changing and therefore wants/needs the FCC to step in and change the rules. Was it not just several months ago that Mediacom wanted the FCC to stop making virtually any decision at all?

This request by Mediacom comes just after they had filed another petition asking the FCC to declare all “non-reciprocal” and “asymmetric” pole attachment indemnity clauses unjust and unreasonable because a Mediacom employee was recently killed while working on a pole in Iowa. Again, whether Mediacom is right or wrong is irrelevant. They are asking the FCC to make a change that has not been done before because it benefits them.


By the way, what “investment” is Mediacom CEO talking about? His company is known as “America’s perennially worst-rated cable company” because they have gotten getting caught injecting their own ads into web-sites that their own customers were visiting, have continued jacking up below-the-line TV fees to hide the actual cost of their TV packages, have cities unanimously revolting against Mediacom’s service quality and have been called out for hiding a customer’s ability to opt out of Mediacom’s advertising programs.