aTypical Joe: a gay New Yorker living in the rural South

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

A la carte cable channels

I want them. Techdirt is skeptical:

[T]he FCC studied the issue and pointed out (probably quite accurately), that any a la carte offering would likely be prohibitively expensive for cable viewers. It would clearly drive up costs for the TV providers, who would have to create new systems for managing a huge number of programming permutations, rather than just a small number of bundles. It would also drive up the cost of acquiring content, since many networks only offer certain channels if the cable provider agrees to bundle it with a less “desirable” channel or two. All combined, it means that each channel in an a la carte bundle would likely be quite expensive, and most people would be better off just sticking with a bundle. Where this gets problematic is that if it’s mandated, a good part of those costs still need to be dealt with by the providers—even if very few people will opt for the (expensive) a la carte offerings… While many people (myself included) would love to be able to pick channels on an a la carte basis, the likely expense probably wouldn’t make it worthwhile.

I’ll be looking for the counter argument, but the Techdirt post was precipitated by this from Reuters:

The U.S. Federal Communications Commission is expected to suggest that cable companies could best serve their customers by allowing them to subscribe to individual channels instead of packages of several stations, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.

The newspaper said that FCC Chairman Kevin Martin is expected to announce on Tuesday that the commission will soon revise the conclusion it reached in the report it issued last year on “a la carte” pricing in the cable industry.

Citing an FCC official familiar with the revised report, the Journal said the report will conclude that buying individual channels could be cheaper for consumers than bundles and that themed tiers of channels could be economically feasible.

Why the change? Techdirt:

[O]ne possibility is new FCC head Kevin Martin—who is also known for being a stringent supporter of cracking down on “indecency” (perhaps more than his predecessor). Back in March, we noted that the crackdown on indecency could reopen the debate about a la carte programming, as many of those who support cracking down on indecency believe that a la carte programming is a way to avoid the “bad” channels and just get the “good” ones. Perhaps that view is now getting more attention at the FCC. Of course, weren’t we just saying that the concept of the “channel” is increasingly outdated?

UPDATE, they did it. Sort of (we get the indecency part with only a nod to a la carte):

Declaring television coarser than ever, a top federal regulator served notice on cable and satellite programmers Tuesday to shield children from racy shows or risk coming under sharper government scrutiny. 

“Parents need better and more tools to help them navigate the entertainment waters, particularly on cable and satellite TV,” Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin told Congress. [...]

He also said that cable and satellite providers might want to consider letting consumers pay for a bundle of channels that they could choose themselves, a variation of the so-called “a la carte” pricing system that some in Congress have backed.