FCC CHIEF MAKES DEBUT BEFORE CABLE INDUSTRY

Dennis Patrick’s first major speech to a television industry group didn’t win him rousing applause. Then again, the 35-year-old chairman of the Federal Communications Commission wasn’t exactly telling the cable TV industry what it wanted to hear.

Appearing Wednesday at the annual national cable convention in Las Vegas, the new FCC leader said that “this is an industry with a very bright future.” But Patrick, a country music buff, then offered a word of caution, using an analogy based on lyrics from Kenny Rogers’ “The Gambler.”

“Never count your winnings when you’re sitting at the table,” he said.

He advised cable operators to hold on to the aces in their hands--meaning their First Amendment rights and the prospect of a free, competitive marketplace.

“As for the jokers--those short-term cards of protectionism and regulation that slant your way--fold ‘em,” Patrick said. “Fold ‘em and walk away. In the long run, you don’t need them. And if you hold on to them too long--well, a marked deck will always come back to haunt you.”

Here is where the cable industry and Patrick may view the cards differently, especially as they relate to the issue of protectionism.

The FCC is reviewing whether it should reimpose controversial rules that would force cable operators to black out programs they import from commercial TV stations in other cities (such as WTBS in Atlanta) if the shows duplicate what a local broadcaster already has obtained exclusive rights to in that market.

The syndicated exclusivity rules were repealed by the FCC in 1980, and the cable industry would be content to leave them that way.

Patrick indicated that the time may have come to reimpose the rules in order to bring TV viewers even greater programming variety.

His speech was received with far less applause and conviviality than the one that his predecessor, Mark S. Fowler, delivered earlier this year to the nation’s broadcasters at their convention in Dallas.

Fowler, a former broadcaster, is an ardent supporter of deregulation and championed the effort to give broadcasters First Amendment rights equal to those enjoyed by the print media.

While Patrick, also a conservative Republican, shares Fowler’s general philosophy on deregulation, his style and low-key approach are markedly different, and so are some of his interests.

In his post now for about a month, Patrick faces the challenge of not merely tackling these thorny exclusivity and copyright issues, dealing with the aftermath of the agency’s controversial obscenity ruling and setting his own agenda, but also of doing it in what could be a short term of office.

Although his term runs until 1992, the former White House employee knows it could end in less than two years when President Reagan leaves office.

He is not without political savvy. A native of Glendale whose father was a policeman, Patrick graduated magna cum laude from Occidental College in 1973. While attending law school at UCLA, he clerked for former Interior Secretary William P. Clark, who was then a member of the California Supreme Court. After earning his law degree in 1976, he joined a Los Angeles law firm, then moved to Washington in 1981 to work in the White House personnel office dealing with regulatory agencies. He was named to the FCC in 1984.

In a recent interview, Patrick said that he is eager to move ahead with an agenda that will promote the public interest.

“The focus of the next two years will be on maximizing consumer welfare,” he said.

The agency’s agenda will cover a wide array of issues, ranging from the restructure of the telephone industry in the wake of the breakup of AT&T; to such broadcast issues as licensing regulations and high-definition television.

“One thing I have learned is that the commission is not very good at anticipating all of the issues,” Patrick said. “Technology is creating new issues all the time.”

As the Las Vegas speech to the cable industry showed, Patrick may have his work cut out for him on areas of ownership and contract rights--issues that are also of vital interest to the production industry in Hollywood.

“I don’t look at these issues in terms of Hollywood per se,” he said, “but it is obvious that the production community has some interest in a number of issues that have been and will be before the commission.”

Patrick believes that the competitive marketplace cannot function unless there are well-defined property rights.

“The property that is at issue for the most part in the broadcasting marketplace is programming,” he said.

“Unless you protect property rights with respect to programming, you will disrupt the appropriate incentives to produce, to distribute and to promote and supply programming within that broadcasting marketplace.”

Patrick said that lack of adequate protection for property rights may also lead to unfair competitive advantages in that marketplace. As one example, he pointed to independent television stations.

“Independent television stations today are disadvantaged in competing in the broadcast marketplace because they are the only group of stations competing in that framework that cannot secure effective exclusivity rights for the programming that they pay for as a result of the compulsory license and the syndicated exclusivity rules,” he said.

Patrick is considered a bright, capable individual whose knowledge was called impressive by lawmakers when he made his first appearance at a hearing on Capitol Hill. He is likely to be more low-key and less confrontational than Fowler, especially when dealing with Congress.

“The commission is facing a number of important issues,” Patrick said. “I expect the Congress will take an active interest in those issues, and I welcome that.”

While pushing ahead with his own agenda, Patrick must deal with the heated controversy that has erupted as a result of the FCC’s decision in April to admonish KPFK-FM (90.7) in Los Angeles and two other radio stations for broadcasting what it deemed to be offensive material.

The ruling has been challenged in a lawsuit by KPFK, and other groups have urged the FCC to clarify its decision with specific guidelines.

“I think the commission has made a reasonable judgment,” he said. “We are talking about material that I think the vast majority of persons who reviewed it would consider to be patently offensive. This is not by any means mild material.”

But he also said that the commission will judge cases individually and does not plan to issue general guidelines for broadcasters to follow in approaching questions of obscenity and indecency.

“Broadcasters are more familiar with their own broadcast offerings, viewerships and listening patterns than the commission,” he said.

Patrick, a bachelor, is known for working long hours, often including Saturdays. But his job isn’t the only challenge he likes. When he has a chance, the California native loves nothing more than to don his new wet suit and return to his favorite beaches to surf.