• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senator John McCain pushes to end the cable bundle | Internet & Media - CNET News

azgreg

azgreg

Chicks dig the long ball
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
25,239
Reaction score
24,032
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Senator John McCain pushes to end the cable bundle | Internet & Media - CNET News

John McCain wants to make it easier for consumers to buy only the TV shows they want to watch.

On Thursday, the Arizona senator introduced legislation that would force cable operators and other TV providers to split up their so-called programming bundles and instead offer TV shows in smaller, more affordable packages and as a la carte channels. His legislation, called the Television Consumer Freedom Act, also would require sports leagues that use publicly financed stadiums to broadcast home games within their local markets. Now many home games are blacked out in an effort to encourage fans to go to the stadium.

McCain called this practice "unconscionable" considering that taxpayers are the ones paying for these stadiums to be built.

He also sent a warning to TV broadcasters that have threatened to move some of their broadcasting behind a cable paywall. He said that if broadcasters did that they would risk access to the airwaves that the government allows these broadcasters to use for free.
Click to expand...

I wasn't sure where to post this. It's entertainment and it's legislation.

I wonder what took so long. I hope this passes.
 
ManOman! How many programs would immediately and blessedly go off the air? 80%? 90%?

Interestingly, the demographics of the finally purchased programs would provide an entirely new targeting tool for advertisers.
 
Ikari said:
Yeah, the cable corps probably ain't gonna be too hardcore behind free market ideals.
Click to expand...

Or if they are, it's because they can justify jacking up the price of all their content, across all physical and streaming mediums. They like to punish the world for technological improvement and updated distribution networks.
 
azgreg said:
Senator John McCain pushes to end the cable bundle | Internet & Media - CNET News



I wasn't sure where to post this. It's entertainment and it's legislation.

I wonder what took so long. I hope this passes.
Click to expand...

I like the idea of cheaper cable bills. I absolutely HATE their business model. All of them. I'm not sure this idea is in our best interests. The more channels the better. The greater variety is a good thing. Small unknowns serve niche markets that are important and might not stay on the air if left to a popularity contest.

I can see smaller bundles. I can see picking and choosing bundles. But to be able to pick each individual channel? I'm not sure. That might have some unintended consequences.
 
MaggieD said:
I like the idea of cheaper cable bills. I absolutely HATE their business model. All of them. I'm not sure this idea is in our best interests. The more channels the better. The greater variety is a good thing. Small unknowns serve niche markets that are important and might not stay on the air if left to a popularity contest.

I can see smaller bundles. I can see picking and choosing bundles. But to be able to pick each individual channel? I'm not sure. That might have some unintended consequences.
Click to expand...

I like your idea of smaller bundles-if we can actually choose them.

We like Nat Geo,Discovery,History & Animal planet.

I'm also a sports fan So League bundles would be cool Aka Nhl Center ice.

I wouldn't miss any of the shopping channels or music channels.

What would be nice would be an inexpensive Indie bundle, to take care of

new programming.
 
MaggieD said:
I like the idea of cheaper cable bills. I absolutely HATE their business model. All of them. I'm not sure this idea is in our best interests. The more channels the better. The greater variety is a good thing. Small unknowns serve niche markets that are important and might not stay on the air if left to a popularity contest.

I can see smaller bundles. I can see picking and choosing bundles. But to be able to pick each individual channel? I'm not sure. That might have some unintended consequences.
Click to expand...

The most crooked model of all is the wireless communication business. I have no doubt that the govt is somehow also partly at fault. Paying for minutes is a joke, that hardly uses any bandwidth at all.
 
American said:
The most crooked model of all is the wireless communication business. I have no doubt that the govt is somehow also partly at fault. Paying for minutes is a joke, that hardly uses any bandwidth at all.
Click to expand...

And I agree with that as well. Almost the same crooked model.
 
If they do smaller bundles, they are still going to put all the lead channels in a bundle with crap nobody watches. To get ESPN, you will end up having to pay for 3 Spanish language channels, a home shopping network, and a bunch of women's channels.
 
I don't trust anything that mccain does.

More legislation is not required for anything.

What we have now is not enforced.
 
John McCain confuses me. Sometimes he does really great things like this and has good ideas and then other times Sarah friggen Palin. It will never pass as the cable and sports lobbies are way to big and will never allow it to get through, but good for him for proposing it.
 
I'm very close to cutting the cord to cable. I can see just about every thing I want on Netflix, Hulu Plus, and Ruku at 1/4 the cost. Most the sports I would lose I can find online or at a local sports bar.
 
tererun said:
John McCain confuses me. Sometimes he does really great things like this and has good ideas and then other times Sarah friggen Palin. It will never pass as the cable and sports lobbies are way to big and will never allow it to get through, but good for him for proposing it.
Click to expand...

Definitely a good turnaround from his Internet Censorship Freedom Act. (a very strange bill coming from a self-described total computer illiterate. "I can't even check email.")
 
SMTA said:
I don't trust anything that mccain does.

More legislation is not required for anything.

What we have now is not enforced.
Click to expand...

In this area the regulations are enforced and they are actually an enforced monopoly. The cable companies bundle these services because they can and because they make more money this way. You cannot switch to another cable company to get better bundles. There is no actual competition between cable companies in the same area and this is by law. For example if you do not like TWC at your house and you want to switch to Comcast because they offer something you prefer you cannot do it. Then you have satellite stupidity. You figure satelite would just be able to offer stuff. My grandparents love the yankees. Satelite broadcasts Yankee games, but only if your billing residence is in NY. They actuall;y have to pay for a friend of theirs in NY to subscribe to satellite so they can have a billing address in NY so their box in florida will unlock the yankees games. There is not even an option for them to pay more in florida for the same signal that they are receiving, but is just scrambled. This is protected and enforced by law.

McCain is right on this. maybe his motives are off which is entirely possible, but this deregulation of competition and forced purchasing of channels you never wanted to watch at all is exactly the kick in the ass the cable company needs to start competing with the internet. This is actually good for the cable company and television. People are dropping TV service because TV sucks. I don't ever watch sports. I am never interested, nor will i ever be interested. I have to pay for the most expensive channels in the whole menu of cable channels if i want basic cable, and those are sports networks. i worked for TWC so i know the actual pricing of channels. The charge for ESPN is more than the charge for a HBO channel or other premium. The only way for you to get cable to your house without sports networks, which are the most expensive, is to be on welfare or public assistance and only get the broadcast channels. That is by design. You pay for 80 percent of channels you are not interested in and will never watch. You pay for them anyway. That is why your cable is so expensive. That is why they can put out so much trash. This is why people would rather pay for what they watch on high speed internet.

Cable needs to step up because the next generations of customers are already growing up with the options to just watch what they want when they want to. They are not going to want to pay all that money for a basic cable feed of BS they can watch on their own schedule online. Cable will fight this tooth and nail because they like their complacent raking in of money without thought. But I am not really complaining too much. If the evil empire dies because it got run over by technology like blockbuster has I am not really going to bitch too much. Still, Mccain is giving them the kick in the ass they need to change their habits and perhaps save television. Considering the bloated ass of the cable companies i don't think he will have much luck, but it would be fun to see him win.
 
American said:
. I have no doubt that the govt is somehow also partly at fault. .
Click to expand...

Translated: you have no evidence and no facts to blame government, so when markets fail (which is common) or have results you don't like, you blame Big Gummit.

The market evangelist brain on autopilot.

As to McCain, it's somewhat hilarious that this conservative wants to interfere with cable's business model and thus interject regulation, only apparently, because it will win him some votes. It's further evidence of the incoherency of conservatism
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom