Posted on 06/07/2006 10:31:14 AM PDT by meandog
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) introduced the Consumers Having Options in Cable Entertainment (CHOICE) Act of 2006. The bill is designed to encourage broadcasters and cable companies that own cable channels to sell their channels individually to subscribers. It also promotes cable channel distribution over the Internet.
Attached are Senator McCain’s floor statement that was submitted for the record today, a copy of the bill, the bill summary, and a copy of the of the opinion editorial by Senator McCain and FCC Chairman Martin as it appeared in the Los Angeles Times on May 25, 2006.
(Excerpt) Read more at mccain.senate.gov ...
Unless this affects satellite TV as well... yawn.
I'm not so sure this is good and definelty not so sure it will save me money on my cable bill?
Well anything McCain does......I expect my cable bill to double.
TS
There's only about 5 satellite channels that I ever watch, and I'm guessing that many people are just like me. Not that they watch the same 5 channels that I watch, but that they have a strong preference in what they watch, and that those preferences can be fulfilled by a relatively small number of channels. The satellite/cable companies must be very worried about this.
</sarcasm>
So to paraphrase Senator Dorgan, Senator Durban, et al, "We have soldiers dying in Iraq, high gas prices, unaffordable health care, etc. but we're worrying about private citizen's TV rates!"
Senator McCain, I hope every bill you introduce goes down to defeat. You cannot be trusted.
He may be doing the right thing, but it is probably for the wrong reasons. But desperately ambitious men commit desperate acts. And with the record of the superelitist crowd in the Senate, desperation mixed with unbridled ambition is about the only thing that might move any of them to do the right thing.
Does this mean you're going to vote for the Hildabeaste in '08?
You should invest now in the technology that will bring what is the future of TV. On Demand.
Recall McCain. He always does this, he does 10 or 12 things to stomp on the constitution then he trys to throw the serfs a bone now and then. Just start the recall it may work since he was the main proponent of giving social security benefits and amnesty to ID theft felons.
Bread and circuses
It would be better news for boob tubers if the feds left their hands off it. Let consumer demand dictate how the cable companies operate.
The Law of Unintended Consequences will prevail. Prices will go up, choices will go down, and McVain will portray himself as the champion of the people....
A bill to ENCOURAGE cable companies means what? Will there be some sort of INCENTIVE, if not then I expect nothing to change EXCEPT that if the Cable Companies decide to provide us with the CHOICE, your cable bill will INCREASE as you DECREASE the number of channels you receive?
The only thing that's going to break the ever-rising spiral of cable prices is for municipalities to stop granting monopolies and allow multiple cable companies to COMPETE in the same geographic area. In the places where it's been tried, rates have gone down. Right now, for example, in Henrico County, VA (suburban Richmond), I'm on Comcast, and as far as I'm aware they are the only cable provider allowed in Henrico County. I have no problems with their TV or Internet service, I'm quite pleased with it. But if I had the choice of, say, them or Time Warner, and they had to directly compete with each other? I bet I wouldn't be paying $111 a month for digital cable and high-speed broadband.
}:-)4
But, but, but if everyone does this, cable channels no one watches won't survive. Why, this is just another Wal-Mart putting mom and pop TV stations out of business!
Is bundling channels, forcing us to gobble up the good and bad, socialism? Or is socialism forcing private companies to market their wares as government dictates? Actually, it's the latter.
Well, Dorgan's mama was a floozie, Durbin's mama was a whore...and neither RAT would be here if the rubbahs hadn't tore!
If this happens, it will be interesting to compare the numbers signing up for FOX news compared to CNN.
No, I won't vote for either McCain or Hillary. Anyhow, I personally don't think either of them will get nominated. To go back to McCain, the biggest benefactors of this are big, established channels like FOX, CNN, ESPN, MTV, or SciFi - because this would choke off much of the opportunity for new cable channels to find an audience. In fact, if this had been the law back in the day MTV and SciFi probably wouldn't exist now.
Amen. Why is this a matter of concern for the government anyway?
What's next, mandating what items may be included in fast food combo meals? Personally, I'd like to see those delicious apple pie desserts included along with the coke and fries and burger, but I wouldn't go to my Senator to get it.
In any restaurant, ordering from the ala carte menu is rarely cheaper than the complete dinner. I'd say this is a bill aimed squarely at pandering rather than fairly pricing. Be wary ...
Good bye Black Entertainment Channel.
Yeah this will NEVER happen too many smaller channels that live off the larger ones.
DING DING DING!!!
WE HAVE A WINNER!!!
PS. And the cable providers say that this bill would require consumers to pay as much or more for 10 or 12 channels as they now pay for 50+ channels, including all those 10 or 12.
Face it, McCain just sucks in every possible way.
PS. And the cable providers say that this bill would require consumers to pay as much or more for 10 or 12 channels as they now pay for 50+ channels, including all those 10 or 12.
Face it, McCain just sucks in every possible way.
Eventually the market will sort this out and people will just subscribe to channels individually via the internet or some kind of fat broadband fiber pipe. Then all those worthless channels like Oxygen and the Homo Network are REALLY going to be in trouble.
No way. You can bet that the good channels will still end up subsidizing the losers, especially if a loser channel is geared toward a "protected group".
I agree with you. Whatever McCain is a party to I can't help but think that something BAD is going to happen.
My five.
RSN Regional Sports Network 1
RSN Regional Sports Network 2
TCM Turner Classic Movies(The greatest movies, commercial free.)
A&E Arts and Entertainment (I am hooked on City Confidential)
TBS (I must have my Seinfeld reruns)
What pleasure I would have in not contributing to the incomes of O'Reilly, Anderson Cooper, and Keith Olberman by not having a cable news network.
What pleasure I would have in not contributing to ESPN which in my opinion has done more to harm the enjoyment of sports than to help it.
There are a lot more pleasures that I did not mention.
I'd like to see Texas do the same with TimeWarner's cable system. Allow smaller cable companies to sell services over AOLTIMEWARNER infrastructure.
I agree, but the problem is (mostly because of previous legislation) that cable companies won't go competitive in the marketplace...read Moose4's comments. I have the same problem: one cable company. I attempted to get on the satty but Direct TV claimed that I would have to cut down all my neighbor's trees for the receiver to see the bird in the low southeast sky...My cable bill is running $89/mo for basic plus HBO (no Showtime), History Channel, Fox News, SciFi, National Geographic, Discovery and TV Land--all of which I cannot do with out.
Cable is against a la Carte. They sometimes pretend otherwise when forced to the wall.
For whatever reason he supports this, McCain is not trying to appease Cable.
Groan. Keep gov't out of it. Can't imagine what good gov't will do better than markets. Technology is moving nicely toward the better solution: video via Internet. I'll be dropping cable TV in a few weeks, with no interest in going back.
Apple has part of the solution: for $2 get what video you want, now, and keep it. (Yes, a maturing technology - won't take long.) Just need some groups to develop a constant-stream source to satisfy the braindead "amuse me now" mindset.
Between my ultraportable wireless notebook computer, wide-area networking (unlimited broadband data via cell phone tech), and on-demand Internet video delivery, standard "cable TV" is obsolete.
Digital TV flubbed: too fuzzy (overcompressed), too slow (can't channel surf fast), too pushy (ads everywhere), too uninformative (inadequate menus). Give me downloadable video.
Gawd..what is that? An A$$clown?
Too many channels can't even get their foot in the door.
I agree with you. One of the unspoken thruths about pricing is that price goes up in proportion to the granularity of the schedule.
Agreed. I just need one channel. As long as I can pick which one it is at any given time...
Close. A senator.
Well, it sure is taking its own sweet time about it...and, besides, what insurance to you have that my faves (FOx, HBO, Nat. Geo., SciFi, Discovery, Military, History, TV Land) will want to go on the net? The more likely channels are the ones I'M PAYING FOR now (Spanish-speaking Channels, MSNBC, SeeBS, CNN) but don't watch.
But if I could pick the handful of channels that I want and ensure that none of my cable bill goes to Ted Turner via CNN and TBS and TNT, and none goes to MTV, then I wouldn't mind paying the same amount for my 10 to 20 (or less) combo as their 60 channel basic or whatever.
I refuse to have cable or satellite right now for that very reason. If I could pick my own package, I would reconsider.
My personal direct tv choice package would include:
Local broadcast stations
Fox News Network
ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNNews, FoxSportsSW
Animal Planet
Discovery
Sci-Fi Channel
CMT and The Nashville Network
That would be a package of about 18 stations, which would be plenty for me.
Many small networks would likely become unviable, or their programming have to be scaled back, if 'a la carte' were imposed. The Canadians have 'a la carte' but it's to their benefit because they are free riders on American programming. American consumers support the spectrum of niche networks that Canadians can then select for their TV cable packages.
He is a traitorous, scumbag North Vietnamese Ace!
IIRC, part of why the industry is taking its sweet time is that gov't regulation practically prohibits TV-over-Internet. That coupled with cable providers forcing monopolistic market exclusivity clauses means you can't get SciFi et al anywhere else.
Note that your "faves" are limited to only what your local provider gives you on the sampler plate. Regulation + practical monopolies = you only get what bigwigs want you to have. There's a lot of other material looking for an audience - stuff you'd like.
Go see what TV iTunes is channelling now. The menu is growing rapidly. Check out Google Video, Atom Films, and other free & paid video distributors.
Critical mass for "IP TV" has almost arrived. Whoever makes it continuous and brain-dead simple will be rich.
Check back with me in a few months. I'm dumping cable TV and seeking out new sources. Worst case is some shows will be delayed, premiering on regular TV and downloadable soon thereafter. Giving up prolific ads & narrow choices sounds good to me...
And, so far as McCain is concerned, he himself proclaims that he does things for political expediency, so whenever he proposes anything the common sense thing to do is look at who it most benefits to figure out who he's sucking up to. The biggest beneficiaries of 'a la carte' would be the big, established TV networks, ergo until there's evidence to the contrary it strikes me as safe to assume that that's who he's sucking up to.
And there's also the side-benefit where he gets to pander with buzzwords like "choice" and "competition" that always sound good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.