Cable channels: end to bundling?

[ghost of miles]

I hope this comes to pass. My wife & I skip cable, but if we could get just the few channels that we'd like to have, we might opt for it:

Cable Channel-Shuffling Considered

Fri Jul 16, 3:00 PM ET  Add Technology - PC World to My Yahoo!

Mark S. Sullivan, Medill News Service

WASHINGTON-- Congress has raised a question that the cable TV industry does not want to answer: Why can't I get SpongeBob SquarePants without having to buy Stripperella, too?

"By placing their most popular channels in expensive tiers with other channels most people don't watch or find offensive, the industry forces consumers to... buy bloated packages of channels in order to get the programming they actually do want," Gene Kimmelman, senior director of advocacy and public policy for Consumer Reports, told a House subcommittee this week.

The lawmakers are considering proposals to expand consumer choice in cable TV, such as "a la carte" channel choices or smaller groupings of channels with similar programming, known as "themed tiers."

But cable networks, media conglomerates, and cable system operators lined up to oppose government-regulated efforts to allow viewers to choose their channels instead of receiving a large bundle of stations. Even as they united against such "a la carte" fare, they blamed each other for failing to give consumers more choice. The Wednesday hearing was before the Telecommunications and the Internet subcommittee of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.

Bundling for Bucks?

The five media conglomerates--Disney, Viacom, Fox/News, General Electric, and Time/Warner--are to blame, said Ben Hooks, president and CEO of Buford Media Group of Tyler, Texas, and past chairman of the American Cable Association. By leveraging ownership of the 50 or so most distributed cable networks, the media giants obligate cable companies to carry their other, less popular channels, Hooks said.

He said the restrictions hamper cable operators' ability to tailor their programming for the communities they serve, adding, "Quite simply, there is no choice now."

A Disney representative denied the conglomerates are "force-feeding" cable companies channels. Government action to require a la carte or tiered subscription offerings would only result in consumers paying more and receiving less, said Ben Pyne, an executive vice president for Disney and ESPN, with ABC Cable Networks.

"A la carte or tiering would drain advertising revenues from the system and precipitate increased equipment, marketing, and transaction costs," Pyne said.

Small Channels Bolstered

The advent of cable and the digitization of TV signals have resulted in numerous channels and highly fragmented audiences, which makes delivering mass advertising much harder. The cable industry has a financial interest in "bundling" as much programming as possible so advertisers can reach bigger audiences.

Smaller, more specialized channels such as those that offer minority-specific programming oppose a la carte distribution because, by themselves, they cannot get the viewership numbers needed to attract advertisers.

"Some advertisers have told us not even to come to see them until the network is in 20 million households," said Alfred Liggins, president and CEO of TV One, which caters to an urban and African-American audience.

Liggins said that with a la carte distribution, viewers would be able to "segregate themselves" against multicultural television programming.

Consumer Interests

Consumer groups were the only supporters speaking at the hearing of government-regulated a la carte and theme-tiered programming.

Janet LaRue, chief legal counsel for the media watchdog group Concerned Women for America, said federal law requires all subscribers to buy a first level of service, which must include local broadcast channels and community access channels, before they can purchase a second tier.

That tier consists of channels selected by the cable companies that subscribers must purchase in a package to get the specific premium channels they want, she said. They buy Nickelodeon to get SpongeBob, but also get Spike TV and Stripperella.

"The average cable customer watches only 12 to 15 channels on a regular bases, but cable companies bundle 50 to 75 channels in the expanded basic package, and upward of 200 in digital cable packages," La Rue said.

"It's like going to the store for a dozen eggs and being told you must buy at least six dozen, which is more than you can consume, including many that are cracked and broken."

Ongoing Interest

No further hearings are scheduled yet, but the panel expressed interest in looking further into the matter of new cable industry regulation. The FCC (news - web sites) is also investigating the issue with a view toward the revenue structure of the industry.

Consumers might be better served by more flexibility in cable offerings, such as a menu selection rather than the common prepackaged mix, said John Muleta, chief of the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.

He spoke at the AlwaysOn Innovation Summit at Stanford University, occurring at the same time as the Congressional hearing.

[Chuck Nessa]

For the last 20 years we've lived in a place with (maybe) 3 channels without cable, a dish or 100 pounds of steel on the roof. We currently get around 40 channels on our "expanded basic" program. I do not need Fox News any more than I need the knitting channel.

[Jazzmoose]

We've got diddly right now. If I could pick and choose at a decent price, I'd sign up tomorrow. Here's hoping!

[sidewinder]

I use a thing called 'Freeview' here in the UK. Costs about $100 for the box and gives a basic package of digital channels as an alternative to the analogue terrestrial channels, also digital radio (which I feed through the hifi). Works for me, no monthly fee - and I resent having to pay Rupert Murdoch $40 or so a month for a bunch of crappy extras. There's even the occasional jazz on BBC4, the 'cultural' channel that is provided for digital-only.

[RainyDay]

If I could lose all that crappy sports stuff, shopping networks, and those inspirational channels, I'd be a happy camper. Right now, I have a zillion movie channels (not pay for view) and know what's on? Not a darn thing I want to see. Some months, there's tons of good movies and documentaries. This month, nothing good. There are so many really good movies you wonder why only the crap ends up on commercial-free cable and the good stuff ends up on TBS or USA hacked up with commercials. Even CSPAN sucks tonight. Nothing good on book tv. Arrrrggghhhhhh.

So here I am online griping about it. What's wrong with this picture?

[GA Russell]

I no longer enjoy sitting there watching the box. I imagine my internet surfing has something to do with it.

[BERIGAN]

Oh I hate 95% of the channels BUT...there wouldn't be stupid channels like the Food Channel, Home and Garden , Outdoors channel, Speedvision or CNN (Sorry if I offended anyone with the first 4 choices!) without the bundling...it really was a brilliant idea back in the day, force all these channels no one wants in every basic package, and over time, a few people will flip by , by and by, all of the sudden..."Hey, do you watch that show about the father and son who bitch all the time while making $100,000 custom motorcycles? Just like world series of Poker on EPSN, it's must see TV! "

Edited July 19, 2004 by BERIGAN

[Dan Gould]

Berigan is right-if bundling were done away with, would there be enough people choosing, say, Trio, one of the pseudo-cultural channels, to keep it viable?

Of course, strangely enough, this puts me and Berigan arguing against letting the market decide, but there you go!

[jazzypaul]

well, cable is a strange notion all the way around. We pay for commercial TV. The commercials are supposed to be what pays for them to be around, so really, we're getting ripped off already.

Then we get ripped off again (I have dish TV, and their "America's top 60" package includes 15 home shopping networks. Those bastards...), for not getting what we originally bargained for.

Then, we get ripped off once again if we decide that it would be nice to put something decent in our brains, such as AMC, Trio, Ovation or Bravo, and they charge extra for even more commercial TV stations.

Then, we get ripped off one more time for good measure by getting charged (if we wish) $12 per channel for the movie channels. It sucks not having HBO. Well, maybe not...it's a chance to go hang at the local bar that plays the Sopranos on Sunday nights.

Frankly, I'm offended that we pay for services that are filled with commercials. I really have to wonder how this works. Wouldn't these cable networks get money from cable subscriptions, thus rendering the idea of not bundling somewhat useless? Seriously...I'd be a lot happier about doling out $30/month for commercial TV if I didn't have to have 17 different cartoon and kids channels, and instead could have Bloomberg, BBC America, Trio, Ovation, BET on Jazz, FX and the like. (and say what you will about Fox, their sports programming is universally excellent)

If I'm missing something in this equation, I'd love to know.

Cable sucks. But Comedy Central and The World Poker Tour are too cool not to have. grrrr...

[Shawn]

I have satellite, but it's the same "bundle" bullshit there as well.

Often I've wished for the ability to make a customized bundle of channels....sounds like a good idea to me.

[catesta]

If I could lose all that crappy sports stuff, shopping networks, and those inspirational channels, I'd be a happy camper. Right now, I have a zillion movie channels (not pay for view) and know what's on? Not a darn thing I want to see. Some months, there's tons of good movies and documentaries. This month, nothing good. There are so many really good movies you wonder why only the crap ends up on commercial-free cable and the good stuff ends up on TBS or USA hacked up with commercials. Even CSPAN sucks tonight. Nothing good on book tv. Arrrrggghhhhhh.

So here I am online griping about it. What's wrong with this picture?

Word.

When I switched to digital cable I ended up with the "movie tier" so I could get the east coast feed of HBO to watch the Sopranos at a decent hour. But, I have to pay for bullshit I never watch.

[Soulstation1]

what the world needzz is another station that will carry the cosby show.