"It's a matter of options. Most cable companies are practical monopolies in their towns. Suppose a community wants to allow Nickleodian but replace MTV with something else? I see no reason or social benefit to allow Viacom to bundle it's programming. "
Community? What community? Does the "community" get to dictate to everyone in that community? That smacks of socialism, as far as I'm concerned.
Since it's now so easy to block channels in your home, the cable company can broadcast Nickelodeon and MTV, too, leaving the choices of what the individual subscribers want to watch up to the individual subscribers.
Do you not have the ability to block viewing of individual channels in your home? If not, what cable company has your subscription?
Community? What community? The community with which the cable company contracts to provide an exclusive serivce.
Does the "community" get to dictate to everyone in that community?
No, but it gets to dictate to the cable company.
That smacks of socialism, as far as I'm concerned.
It's the status quo, albeit Viacom can refrain from providing channels that a community may want if the community should reject a particular offering.
Do you agree that it is unwise to promote the belief that sexual promiscuity is inconsequential and glamorous?