à la carte cable will kill FSTV and Link-TV

[SoCalDem]

If this goes through, prepare to see the niche programming go by the wayside.. Cable companies will love this idea because they will now have carte blanche to do away with the "marginally profitable" channels that they have carried up until now to make their offerings seems more than they are.. Even HBO and Showtime are examples of this.. They show the SAME stuff over and over on many channels..

I never watch 95% of what's in our "package", but I have a sneaky feeling, that once we are paying by the channel, the ones WE watch will somehow cost the most, and some that we love will just "go away"...
the pay-per-view system only benefits the ADVERTISERS...

Even c-span will vanish under this plan because how many people do YOU know who would be willing to pay for it.. My guess is...not enough..

The only thing that could save TV now would be for the PUBLIC to get very angry and demand to have their airwaves back.. The broadcasters are getting it for free from us, in exchange for "educating" us and providing "public access information"...seen any of THAT lately?? I haven't..

We gave them the cow...and they are selling us the milk...poisoned milk...and we keep drinking it:(..and thanking them for it :(

[nealmhughes]

1. I have DISH TV specifically because it has both FSTV

and Link and does not have either MSNBC or FOX News on the basic program!

[SoCalDem]

2. That's why WE got Dish too.. If we lose those two, I'll drop Dish

and go back to cable..

[BrklynLiberal]

19. Exactly!

[ceile]

3. Hadn't thought it through that far.

I was just commenting last night that I wanted a la carte so that I could get BBC America w/out having to get digital (Time Warner is too expensive). I didn't think about CSPAN, our local music channel or second PBS channel. Huh, I guess the a la carte thing isn't so good after all.

edit spelling

[mike_c]

4. LOL-- this is SUCH a non-problem....

Sorry if I seem less than sympathetic, but I decided years ago that television was an utter waste of electrons. My advice is to unplug the thing-- life really is better without that squawking presence in your living room.

[SoCalDem]

5. I agree..It's not HIGH on the list of "problems", BUT

the "message" is transmitted mostly through tv these days, and it's helpful to at least HAVE an option or two to hear a different one.:)

The newspapers are not reliable, the radio is cluttered with rightwingers, magazines have low subsription rates, adn regularly go out of business..

Tv could be/and should be a buffet...with something for everyone..

[jayfish]

29. Thanks For Prioritizing For Everyone.

Oh, and should we just all stop doing the things that we like because corporations are free to usurp our freedom of choice? Sounds like the folks who say "if you hate America so much, you should just leave".

Jay

[mike_c]

32. nah, just stop sitting in front of the plug-in drug....

OK, to a certain extent you're correct-- I'm guilty of prioritizing for others. People have the right to choose whatever means of rotting their brain they wish, whether it's drugs, religion, or television. I would never advocate taking away those rights.

On the other hand, I do believe that television is the most effective "mind control device" ever invented-- and before you scoff and suggest I tighten my tin foil hat consider that over 75 percent of ALL human sensory receptors are in our retinas. The primary pathway for information about the outside world-- outside our bodies, I mean-- is visual. Some of the most complex information processing networks in the central nervous system handle all that visual information. We're hardwired to absorb and respond to visual information at our most fundamental sensory levels.

Television taps directly into that pathway. It really is like an information IV plugged right into the biggest vein in your head. It's a flood through the wide open doors of consciousness. If that sounds a bit grandiose for a medium used to deliver sitcoms, well, what did I say up-thread about wasted electrons?

Much (most?) of that information is processed nonlinearly and noncontextually. That's why an educational program about, say, particle physics is no better at teaching you particle physics than a good book on the topic or attending a lecture series by a good teacher. But a television program about particle physics CAN reinforce your predjudices against hispanic immigrants, for example, if the narrator is hispanic and dresses sloppily or otherwise reinforces stereotypes. It can't teach you physics, but it excels at influencing your thinking at lower levels. That's a rather contrived example, but before you dismiss it, consider that ALL television advertising uses exactly that principle-- it relies on the direct pipeline through your visual cortex to create associations between ideals and values, and products someone wants to sell you.

Television is arguably the most potent advertising medium that has ever existed. Its advertising efficacy is the primary reason that it exists so ubiquitously. Advertising is nothing more than behaviour modification-- in a word, mind control. If television is so excellent for selling soap, what makes you think it isn't just as good at creating and maintaining cultural and political memes as well? In fact, it is the best tool ever invented for doing just that.

Sorry for the OT rant, but I rank television in the same category as crack cocaine-- fun, but dangerously addictive, and ultimately capable of utterly warping ones's perspectives on life. It is your right to do so, but not necessarily a smart thing to do.

Just say no to television.

[C_U_L8R]

6. I'm all for A LA CARTE

i'd opt out of Faux in a heartbeat

[SoCalDem]

8. I opted out, but blocking it from my channel guide

I will gladly pay to HAVE it , if it means i also get FSTV and Link-tv

[drbtg1]

7. Actually, I think cable companies will hate it

If packaged channels become a la carte, people will get only the channels they really want, causing the cost per subscriber becoming exorbinant. This will cause a second wave of subscriber loss, as people realize they would have paid for certain channels, "but not at that price!" Consequently, I doubt the consumer would see a benefit and the cable companies would lose product.

C-SPAN won't be lost, as they are seen to be fulfilling public interest requirements.

The only positive I see would be on major league player salaries (other than the NFL). As people drop the most expensive channels (i.e. sports), this will have an effect on TV rights fees and in turn what teams can spend.

[onenote]

9. you're right about a la carte, but wrong about one thing

The cable companies hate a la carte..or at least most of them do. To the extent that they carry niche channels now its because they've determined its in their interest to do so, not because anyone makes them. If the underlying economics of those channels changes because they have to be offered a la carte (which also will be a billing/customer service nightmare for many operators), they won't offer them (or, more precisely, they won't be around to be offered) anymore.

The one exception to this is that some smaller cable companies would like to have the option of acquiring the rights to present channels on an a la carte basis, principally to give them another bargaining chip with the big programmers. Right now, Disney, which owns ABC as well as numerous cablen networks (the various ESPN channels, SoapNet, Disney, ToonDisney, Family, etc), can use their market strength with respect to their broadcast channels and/or ESPN to force these operators to take additional channels (ESPN Classic, or ESPN news, etc.) These operators would like to be able to negotiate for these channels one by one, not as a package.

[drbtg1]

17. Yes, but I think that's a different point

I think the main point was a la carte as a choice for consumers, not cable companies.

I agree that cable companies should be allowed to acquire channels individually (that's what's holding up the retransmission of ABC-HD for me), but I doubt they'd pass that freedom to us.

[SoCalDem]

18. I'm sure the consumer is LAST on their list

It's all about the "Cha-ching"...and who gets it :(

[long_green]

10. What would I drop?

MTV, The History Channel (which just gets worse and worse), VH1 for starters. A bunch of other stuff, too. I'd like to able to dump ESPN for the eight months of the year when football isn't being played.

[suston96]

11. Is there a link to the story?

[SoCalDem]

12. Just my brain leaking a few thoughts..

The "story" about a la carte was a CNN blurb, but it's been kicking around for months.. I guess they are going to vote on it later today in the house..

It always amazes me when these freaks holler about "free-market", and then line up to vote on stuff that stifles free market..

[onenote]

16. not being voted on.. McCain has introduced legislation

and the FCC has been making noises.

[SoCalDem]

13. There are many links to all aspects of this issue...here

links here

[Roland99]

14. The only channels I would have would be >>>>

Locals (including local PBS)
C-SPAN 1/2
AMC
ESPN/2
Discovery
Nickelodeon (maybe Disney, too)
MSNBC (for K.O.)
CourtTV
Comedy Central
Maybe Sci-Fi (those cheesy horror movies are funny as hell and Ghosthunters is cool)

That's it.

I'd add LinkTV and FSTV if my cable provider offered them.

[thoughtanarchist]

15. with a la carte you open yourself up to individual price targeting...

supermarkets give you that little discount card which saves you a small percentage on your bill (for awhile), but then when the market has a profile on your buying habits they raise the price on all your most frequent purchases. It costs you in the long run.

Expect a la carte programming to work just like that. Once you make your picks, the price goes up on those picks.
You'll end up paying more for the privilege of opting for less programming.

[rinsd]

24. Huh?

"Supermarkets give you that little discount card which saves you a small percentage on your bill (for awhile), but then when the market has a profile on your buying habits they raise the price on all your most frequent purchases. It costs you in the long run."

Really Vons jacks me individually? How exactly do they accomplish that?

As far as the other stuff goes, that could be accomplished before the advent of the discount card by keeping track of one's inventory. Does the card make is easier to calculate such data? Certainly. Do you basically forfeit your right to have that data remain private in exchange for discounts? Yes.

"Expect a la carte programming to work just like that. Once you make your picks, the price goes up on those picks."

Again, individually or based on popularity?

"You'll end up paying more for the privilege of opting for less programming."

Well that would depend on your tastes.

[thoughtanarchist]

34. End result: Higher cable bill.

> Really Vons jacks me individually? How exactly do they accomplish that?

First degree price discrimination is where retailers evaluate you as an individual according to how much you are willing to pay for goods you buy. In using your discount card to accumulate your purchasing data, the supermarket determines exactly how much you are willing to pay for each class of item. Do you prefer the jumbo eggs as opposed to the large ones? What if the jumbo eggs are $0.50 more? Do you notice? Do you buy Jumbo anyway? How about if Jumbo is $1.00 more? Now do you notice? If you pay attention, you'll see that the supermarket introduces what are sometimes huge price differences in nearly identical items. When the market can identify the circumstances under which you are willing to pay more -- or insensitive to a price gap, they are in a position to test the limits on what you are willing to pay for your favorite items.

For a more in-depth look at price targeting check out "The Undercover Economist" by Tim Harford

you can read an excerpt http://www.timharford.com/favourites/gofigure.htm">here

[high density]

20. That's too bad.

I'm tired of paying $$ for sports channels every month that I have NEVER watched in my life. If a few small channels get left behind then that's just too bad. I only have about 10 channels on my 70+ channel lineup that interest me, which at this point is about $5.50/channel/month.

[SoCalDem]

21. I hate the sports channels too and have them blocked, BUT

I am afraid that "MY" channels might not be popular enough to hang around if a la carte actually happens..

It's market-driven.. the pickled pigs feet section at the store is pretty skimpy compared to the cereal aisle..

[rinsd]

22. The TV preachers hate it for roughly the same reason

If they're restricted to ala carte, they will lose audience and money.

"The only thing that could save TV now would be for the PUBLIC to get very angry and demand to have their airwaves back"

But what does this have to do with cable?

I don't have an issue with ala carte provided that it is not coupled with giving the FCC more authority over cable content.

As is the fuckers in Congress increased obscenity fines 10 fold for broadcast TV.

[SoCalDem]

23. the Big Three (four?) OWN most of the cable channels these days

There are few "independents' left these days.. pressure on the broadcast channels might work some magic..

It;s happening on the "internets' too.. Look at how "corporate" it's gotten in the last few years, and how interested the government is in the net these days :scared:

[rinsd]

25. I'm not sure I understand you.

"There are few "independents' left these days.. pressure on the broadcast channels might work some magic"

To keep these independents? Is that what you're saying?

[SoCalDem]

26. Pressure might get Disney,GE & Viacom to quit absorbing

the independents, and who knows, they might actually start selling them.. Maybe a smart cable company would re-instate them (the independents) on their own..

Remember when TLC was educational?

when the History channel was history, and not "fairy tale"?

when Natl Geographic had great programming?

when Discovery had their own programming and not just recycled NBC crap?

when the Animal show was more animals..less schmaltzy? (my cats dearly miss "Bird TV")

when A &E was more A and waaay less E?

when there was original programming on most iindependent channels and they were not dumping grounds for failed series and snippets of Stone Phillips...(at least they have quit showing the Jane Pauley parts)

[Neecy]

30. Speaking of the Discovery channel...

Have you ever tuned in to the Discovery/Times channel? It's an obscure little add-on to my DirecTv package and I swear to Christ it's neocon central. Just nonstop propaganda, and perhaps not surprising that the NY Times of Judith Miller is a co-sponsor of this crap. Lots of booga-booga Bin Laden stuff, ridiculous glorification of the CIA without mention of the many atrocities they've committed for the past half century, warmongering galore. It'll give you an interesting new take on the regular Discovery channel programming (and I'll mention that Discovery Wings, which used to be a mildly interesting aviation channel, is now the even more war-loving Military Channel - it's little more than a recruitment ad).

Anyway, I love Link TV and I'll be pissed if it disappears - then again, I'm shocked that Murdoch hasn't already banished it from DirecTv.

[SoCalDem]

31. I love the new DOC channel, but I agree on the Disc/Times

I had hopes for it when i first saw it, but then I realized it was little more than a tv-ification of their editorials..:puke:

[SoCalDem]

28. My point is that the big guys might DUMP some of the independents

they BOUGHT, and they might actually come back in their original format.. We might get them back..They would have a competition problem, but TLC and History once were selliing features of cable..

As cable devolved into HBO/Showtime and the rest, crappola the drive for a la carte went up.. I think the influence of the big fish is what's making cable pretty blah these days.. If the smaller channels they snatched up, suddenly become LESS profitable to them, they might just "set them free"

[Ian David]

27. But we'll also lose all those Televangelist infomercial hate-fests! n/t

[lies and propaganda]

33. Link Tv is awesome

channel 375 for DirectTv viewers, right next to the BYU Devotional chaneel, hhee