http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-cable29-2009dec29,0,527822.story


Los Angeles Times Editorial

Another tangle for cable TV
Any deal between News Corp. and Time Warner to settle their dispute over 
cable TV subscriber fees is likely only to lead to more pressure to 
overhaul the business model.

December 29, 2009



A dispute between News Corp. and Time Warner Cable threatens to remove 
Fox, FX and Fox's regional sports channels from Time Warner's systems 
across the country on Jan. 1, just as Fox prepares to broadcast four 
major bowl games, almost half of the NFL playoffs and the new season of 
"American Idol." Although it's a big deal to 13 million cable 
subscribers -- more than a million of whom live in Los Angeles -- the 
rumpus is just the latest in the seemingly endless conflicts between 
content producers and cable operators over the value of television 
programming. And if history is any guide, this one will be settled 
shortly before the new year dawns. After all, Time Warner has already 
indicated its willingness to start paying Fox for the right to 
retransmit its broadcasts. But a deal won't bring peace to the TV 
industry. Instead, it will simply raise the pressure to overhaul the 
existing business models.

Broadcasters have long been able to demand payment for their 
programming, but cable operators traditionally provided a different form 
of compensation: They agreed to carry the fledgling cable channels the 
broadcasters were trying to launch. That's how several channels owned by 
News Corp., such as FX, won distribution deals from cable operators 
across the country. Those networks grew in popularity to the point where 
they could command monthly fees from cable in addition to revenue from 
advertisers.

In recent years, however, cable systems have become packed with hundreds 
of channels that split audiences into ever-smaller (and less valuable) 
groups. Three years ago, CBS started collecting fees for its broadcasts 
in lieu of launching new cable networks. Now Fox is raising the stakes, 
reportedly demanding about $1 per month per subscriber -- twice what CBS 
reportedly collects. If it prevails, the other broadcast networks are 
certain to follow.

The broadcasters have numbers on their side: Their programs attract far 
bigger audiences than comparable fare on cable-only networks. But with 
competition intensifying from the Internet, video games and other forms 
of entertainment, cable operators will be hard-pressed to stick their 
customers with higher programming fees, as they have in the past. And if 
they try, they might provoke Washington into re-regulating cable rates, 
forcing operators to give subscribers the option of paying only for the 
channels they want. Such an a la carte approach is anathema to cable 
operators and some Hollywood studios, but it's where Internet-savvy 
consumers are heading. If cable keeps charging more for the same 
channels, it will drive consumers more quickly to alternatives that 
charge them only for what they actually watch.

-- 
================================
George Antunes, Political Science Dept
University of Houston; Houston, TX 77204
Voice: 713-743-3923  Fax: 713-743-3927
Mail: antunes at uh dot edu

***********************************
* POST TO [email protected] *
***********************************

Medianews mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews

Reply via email to