Mediacom Cites Legislative History Expressly Supporting its Claim that the FCC has the Authority and Responsibility to Order Resumption of Carriage and Binding Arbitration

MEDIACOM COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION (NASDAQ: MCCC) today filed with the FCC an Emergency Petition for Reconsideration of the FCC’s Media Bureau’s January 5, 2006 Order denying Mediacom’s request that the FCC order Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: SBGI) to authorize Mediacom to continue carriage of Sinclair’s stations pending final resolution of its FCC complaint against Sinclair, including appeals. In its Order, the FCC’s Media Bureau "strongly encouraged” Mediacom and Sinclair to submit their dispute to binding arbitration. Yet it also stated that "the Commission does not have the authority to require the parties to submit to binding arbitration.” In its filing today, Mediacom cited to the FCC the legislative history of Section 325 of the Communications Act which expressly addresses this issue and makes clear that, in fact, the Commission does have the authority and is expected to use it in situations where an impasse in retransmission consent negotiations results in an interruption in cable carriage of a broadcast signal. Mediacom quoted the following colloquy conducted by Senator Inouye (the manager of the 1992 Cable Act) and Senator Levin of Michigan when crafting the retransmission consent statutory provisions in 1992: MR. LEVIN.....I strongly suggest, and hope that the chairman of the subcommittee concurs, that the FCC should be directed to exercise its existing authority to resolve disputes between cable operators and broadcasters, including the use of binding arbitration or alternative dispute resolution methods in circumstances where negotiations over retransmission consent rights break down and noncarriage occurs, depriving consumers of access to broadcast signals. MR. INOUYE. The FCC does have the authority to require arbitration and I certainly encourage the FCC to consider using that authority if the situation the Senator from Michigan is concerned about arises and the FCC deems arbitration would be the most effective way to resolve the situation. Mediacom also quoted a similar point made in a separate colloquy involving Senators Burdick, Adams, Wellstone, and Inouye, wherein Senator Inouye stated: I am confident, as I believe the other cosponsors of the bill are, that the FCC has the authority under the Communications Act and under the provisions of this bill to address what would be the rare instances in which (retransmission consent) carriage agreements are not reached. I believe that the FCC should exercise this authority, when necessary, to help ensure that local broadcast signals are available to all the cable subscribers....If (the FCC) identifies such unforeseen instances in which a lack of agreement results in a loss of local programming to viewers, the Commission should take the regulatory steps needed to address the problem. With respect to the Sinclair dispute, just yesterday, FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin stated publicly, "I continue to believe that this (binding arbitration) would be good for both parties to be submitting to.” Consumers, he added, shouldn’t lose access to programming while a dispute is in arbitration. Mediacom first offered binding arbitration to Sinclair almost two months ago. Mediacom again offered binding arbitration on January 4 and a full week later, Sinclair summarily dismissed Mediacom’s offer. On January 14, Mediacom offered to submit the dispute to arbitration by the FCC’s Media Bureau. Sinclair has yet to accept Mediacom’s offer and today communicated to Mediacom that it will not be able to consider Mediacom’s offer until next week. In light of Sinclair’s apparent unwillingness to timely respond to Mediacom’s arbitration offer and the fact that Sinclair’s stations have been dark on Mediacom’s cable systems for almost two weeks – an occurrence that Congress did not intend – Mediacom requested that the Commission immediately (especially before the upcoming weekend’s NFL Playoff games) order Sinclair to authorize Mediacom’s renewed carriage of its signals on an interim basis and order the parties to submit to binding arbitration. Mediacom Communications is the nation’s 8th largest cable television company and one of the leading cable operators focused on serving the smaller cities and towns in the United States. Mediacom Communications offers a wide array of broadband products and services, including traditional video services, digital television, video-on-demand, digital video recorders, high-definition television, high-speed Internet access and phone service.