The End of Cable As We Know It
It is not my intention to write about television, but Paul Davidson's article in USAToday on Nov. 29th raised my eyebrows a little. Davidson chronicles the FCC's new stance on the packages that cable companies currently offer. It would like cable providers to get rid of the cable packages in exchange for an 'menu' pricing schedule. FCC chairman Kevin Martin asserts that 'a la carte pricing could both allow parents to block raunchy programming and lower their cable bills.' While I agree with Martin that TV is going a little overboard with its primetime programming, I fear this measure means the end of quality cable channels such as the History Channel, TLC, Bravo, etc.
Think about it. Who (besides me) flips to the History Channel on a Thursday night for some good WWII coverage, of looks forward to the spleenectomy on Discovery Health? No one. These channels' actual viewership ratings are terrible. If it were not for the revenue produced by the existing cable packages none of these educational channels would be in existence. My prediction is that once this measure is passed, the 'raunchy' channels will increase their profits and popularity tenfold. (Did our country learn anything through prohibition?).
Mr Martin also leaves out the little tidbit about the price per channel. The average channel price would be $3.90, and only subscribers who pay for fewer than nine channels would save under an a la carte. Nine channels? A 2004 FCC report found that the average cable household, which watches 17 channels, would see its bill rise 14% - 30%.
On the bright side, maybe this move will finally make it clear that TV is just not worth my time.
Think about it. Who (besides me) flips to the History Channel on a Thursday night for some good WWII coverage, of looks forward to the spleenectomy on Discovery Health? No one. These channels' actual viewership ratings are terrible. If it were not for the revenue produced by the existing cable packages none of these educational channels would be in existence. My prediction is that once this measure is passed, the 'raunchy' channels will increase their profits and popularity tenfold. (Did our country learn anything through prohibition?).
Mr Martin also leaves out the little tidbit about the price per channel. The average channel price would be $3.90, and only subscribers who pay for fewer than nine channels would save under an a la carte. Nine channels? A 2004 FCC report found that the average cable household, which watches 17 channels, would see its bill rise 14% - 30%.
On the bright side, maybe this move will finally make it clear that TV is just not worth my time.
posted by JP at 9:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home