TV ala carte

A man and his wife are sitting in the living room and he says to her, "Just so you know, I never want to live in a vegetative state dependent on some machine. If that ever happens, just pull the plug."

"OK," says his wife as she gets up and unplugs the TV.

Update

from Agape Press

by Jody Brown...

Blowing an earlier report on "a la carte" cable programming out of the water, the FCC has just released a report stating that consumers could be "better off" under such a system -- and could possibly even pay less than they are now for programming they don't wish to have in their homes.

Cable providers have argued that allowing their users to bundle their own package of channels would be cost-prohibitive. That argument was propped up by a 2004 study by Booz Allen Hamilton {who named this man?} that concluded a la carte was not economical.

But a "Further Report" by the Federal Communications Commission [PDF] has found the 2004 report contained "mathematical errors" -- since acknowledged by Booz Allen -- and "relied on unrealistic assumptions and presented biased analysis" in its conclusions.

The FCC says with the calculations corrected, three of the four scenarios considered in the Booz Allen study would result in consumers' bills going down anywhere from 3 to 13 percent. {No wonder it was flawed....didn't want to lose that money; ummm, sounds like another set of modern-day, greedy robber barons, if you ask me.}

Today's report from the FCC, says Concerned Women for America, is exactly what consumers have been waiting for. "The FCC puts the lie to cable magnates' wild claims that a la carte would cost consumers more money and was not economically feasible," says CWA's Lanier Swann.

"That argument has fallen flat on its face now that the FCC has shown that consumers could save up to 13 percent on their monthly cable bill."

And like CWA has been saying all along in its push for "family-friendly" cable channel bundling, adds Swann, a la carte pricing "will not only put choice back into consumers' hands, it will also put a few dollars there as well."

CWA says Congress has no excuse not to act now on legislation calling for cable choice for cable users.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
{conservative~by~nature's comments enclosed}

Senate Forum Addresses Cable Choice, Decency Issues Participants Debate 'A La Carte' Idea, Proposals to Increase Media Regulation
By Jenni Parker
from Agape Press

{An idea whose time has come!}
Media executives, government regulators, consumer advocates, televangelists and other religious broadcasters gathered yesterday in Washington, DC, for an "Open Forum on Decency," held by Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Stevens of Alaska. One of the key figures participating was Kevin Martin, head of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), who advised the forum that selling cable channels "a la carte" is a good idea. {Wow, a government entity on our side!}

"We're not involved in this to bring about censorship," Stevens said. ...the "a la carte" system would help parents save money, keep closer tabs on what their children watch, and keep objectionable channels out of their homes. {As it stands right now, the media moguls are discriminating against an entire population of people who do not wish to view what they are offering~~nor do they want to be burdened with allowing this group to choose those programs they want. }

Cable and satellite providers have complained that offering "a la carte" pricing or more family-friendly tiers of channels would drive up their marketing, equipment, and customer service costs and hence would drive up consumer costs as well.

{Drive up their marketing costs? Good grief~~WORD OF MOUTH ALONE WILL SELL THIS CONCEPT WHEN EVERY CHRISTIAN tells their relatives and neighbors that they too can do this! Customer service costs~~how? Excellent customer service is GIVING THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT! You get GOOD calls then instead of angry, irate ones. Or cancelled contracts, memberships, whatever. I think these excuses are just that....excuses from a LAZY INDUSTRY THAT CAN'T BE BOTHERED ABOUT PLEASING THEIR CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN CONSUMERS. It's why I don't have TV. Until, they let ME decide what I want in MY home.....I can live without it. I suspect the real truth is the industry will find out that their "shows" will lose audiences and subsequently get cancelled~~but that's exactly where trash should go. Buh-bye trashy 'Desperate Housewives'...}

Offering a menu of available programming for a fixed price -- i.e., ten channels for $20 or 20 channels for $30. Parents then would be able to receive and pay for only the programming that they are comfortable bringing into their homes. {Which is fair, and not difficult. I think the industry just doesn't want the government telling them they have to do this. BUT if they had done it ON THEIR OWN, government intervention could have been avoided!}

Media Execs Balk at Increased Regulation and argue that the FCC has no authority to require them to offer a family-friendly tier of channels... {Told you so!}

FCC chairman Martin added that he believes the best solution to this controversy would be for the media industry to take measures to address the issue voluntarily. {But like the petulant children they are~~they will have to be told to do this. At this point, they won't, just to see if they can get away with it~~just like a willful child! Meanwhile, I remain TVless!}

"Profanity is the effort of the feeble mind to express itself." -- 1950s English teacher

{Oh, boy, America is IN TROUBLE THEN~~too many vocabulary challenged individuals leaves the feeble minded to rule the day. Ummm, that explains alot about the quality of tv and the "executives" who run it.....}

Top of Page