The main reason why cable has been losing ground to streaming has to do with the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992. The law allowed broadcasters the option to demand carriage fees from pay TV providers, with per-subscriber rates varying by channel (sports networks—like ESPN, which charges $9.42/subscriber on average—tend to be the most expensive to carry). Cable providers were against it as they felt broadcast stations (which the compensation provisions were supposed to apply to) should be carried for free; George H.W. Bush thought the law would be bad for cable customers and vetoed the bill, but Congress overrode the veto.

Media consolidation led to media companies to essentially extend the fee-for-carriage concept their cable networks, and ultimately abusing their market power to jack up subscriber fees. Consolidation in the cable industry gave providers little leverage over media companies, and the result was an increasing number of channel blackouts and consistent price increases for pay TV packages, resulting in customers cutting the cord and switching to streaming services (including vMVPDs like YouTube TV and Sling TV) and over-the-air broadcasts. Even though there have been bills introduced to change the retransmission consent model as late as 2021, Congress hasn’t bothered to fix the system and let pay TV providers twist in the wind, an odd case of supposedly pro-business politicians screwing over one industry, while the other is now seeing the gravy train it gained in 1992 steadily derail because it kept abusing its leverage.

It’s a wonder if traditional pay TV would be more competitive if some other fee system was used and regulated subscriber rates in a way that limits content distributors from hiking fees too much, like a flat royalty fee (at levels similar to what superstations used to receive when they were still prevalent). I don’t think other countries employ a fee-for-carriage system, I’m pretty sure Canada never has.