FCC & Cable Retrans

[TheBigA]

As 2009 ended, there were several cases regarding major cable companies and content providers. Time-Warner Cable battled Fox in a very public display, while Cablevision ended their relationship with Scripps Howard, owner of HGTV and The Food Network. Time Warner ended up settling with Fox, but the dispute got lots of media attention, as well as the concern of Massachusetts Senator John Kerry.

So what did the FCC have to say about this? Not much. The Media Bureau Chief discribed the FCC's role as "circumscribed" by Congress. All the FCC can do is promote negotiations. So why even bother? It's obvious that cable retransmission rights will become a major issue in coming years. Cable companies are given market exclusivity, while residents in those markets have very limited choices: Cable, over-the-air TV, or satellite TV. If a market's cable company refuses to air a popular show, or even carry a popular network like Fox, the public can't change cable companies. Meanwhile, the Congress told the public that they have promoted competition, meant to lower rates (they haven't gone down), and improve service (it hasn't improved).

It is time for the public to put this issue back on the Congressional front burner. The FCC is powerless in this matter. The public needs real choices. Congress needs to end market exclusivity for cable companies, so real competition can happen, rates can drop, and service can improve.

 

[audiophile.]

I got a wild idea, put up an outdoor antenna, there is plenty to watch OTA...

 

[landtuna]

Cable companies are given market exclusivity, while residents in those markets have very limited choices: Cable, over-the-air TV, or satellite TV.

While it is true all three provide the same general service cable and satellite providers both serve up a very nearly identical line-up of programming. By comparison OTA is extremely limited so as not to be competitive insofar as program choices go. While OTA is a choice it probably doesn't deserve to be in this comparison.

It is time for the public to put this issue back on the Congressional front burner. The FCC is powerless in this matter. The public needs real choices. Congress needs to end market exclusivity for cable companies, so real competition can happen, rates can drop, and service can improve.

I think you have the answer. Allow as many 'cable' companies to operate as is feasible within a given area. The 'best' technology with the most performance-competitive cost should prevail. And, instead of laying more cable take advantage of cell phone technology and use the cell towers as mini-broadcast towers.

 

[landtuna]

I got a wild idea, put up an outdoor antenna, there is plenty to watch OTA...

That is exactly what I did after discovering I was paying $70/month to watch five channels of satellite TV. However, OTA isn't the same as cable/satellite by a long shot and seems to be getting less and less so every year - specifically in the area of live sports.

For instance, several years ago you could find most college football, NHL hockey and NASCAR races OTA. Now there is almost no hockey (except in major markets where OTA contracts have not yet expired). College football broadcasts only a few games in each market each weekend during the regular season and less than 1/3 of the bowl games. And one-third of the NASCAR season is not on OTA any longer.

If you are a regular TV sports fan you are having fewer and fewer places to watch each year.