Democrats Are From Cablevision & Republicans Are From Fox In Retransmission Fee Dispute?

from the republicrats dept

One of the nice things about most tech issues is that they're not split down typical political party lines. In practice, tragically, that sometimes means that both of the major political parties side with rent-seeking interests, rather than the public good, but in other cases, it does mean that you can get actually cross-party discussion on the issues, rather than the talking points. However, it seems that whenever any particular issue gets "big enough," it suddenly has to break down on party lines. We saw it happen with net neutrality, but now it appears to be happening on the whole silly retransmission fight between cable companies and TV networks. As mentioned, these fights break out every few months, with both the networks and the cable companies blaming each other. In the end, consumers end up with higher prices either way. The whole fight itself is silly, but when TV stations get blocked during key sporting events (football, baseball playoffs), apparently Congress immediately sees an issue worth grandstanding over.

And, as Broadband Reports notes, at least in the case of Cablevision/Fox, it's become a partisan issue, with Democrats lining up behind Cablevision, introducing legislation that would bar broadcasters from pulling channels during negotiations. Meanwhile, Republicans are being lobbied heavily by News Corp to take its side. It could just be that it's because this is News Corp./Fox, which tends to support Republicans. So it will be interesting to see if similar battles involving other broadcasters split along similar lines...


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    zaven (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 5:07am

    No Libertarians

    I have to say I'm interested to see how this whole thing plays out but as always, the customers are the ones that get screwed when this happens. Less channels but we still pay the same amount on the bill?

    As for the political standing, I always thought most people who really give a damn about tech issues seem to lean towards the Libertarian point of view. And everyone else just tends to think of us as paranoid wackos. At least, this is my experience.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 1:50pm

      Re: No Libertarians

      Never understood the term "consumers getting screwed," in situations like this. If you don't like your service, pull your money. Money speaks loud and clear to corporations. 20,000 people pull their cablevision monthlies, people will notice.

      Just pull your money, it's the loudest and clearest way to speak to a corporation.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        zaven (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 6:04pm

        Re: Re: No Libertarians

        So here's the issue to pulling your money. If you actually want to watch TV for example. You still can't. Also remember that a lot of the time, companies force you to sign a contract to get their service. So you really can't just walk away sometimes(without paying some kind of termination fee).

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    abc gum, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 5:28am

    Newscorp thinks their content is worth ~100% increase?
    What is the rational for this ... ahhhh never mind.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Hephaestus (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 7:40am

      Re:

      They need to make up for all the papers that are going to fail because of paywalls.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Stuart (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 8:18am

      Re:

      It is if they can get it.
      It is not a problem if I want to sell my stuff for what I think it is worth. If I price it to high people will not buy it. Why the fuck do you care how much entity A wants to charge entity B for it services. 2 PRIVATE companies negotiating. It is a fucking crime that congress would step in either way here.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Dark Helmet (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 8:24am

        Re: Re:

        "It is a fucking crime that congress would step in either way here."

        Agreed, except if this is all a show so that they can both raise prices on the consumer....

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Berenerd (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 5:29am

    Tis the order of things...

    yes, Fox is rightwing through and through (have you read some of the comments on their boards?) In the ends as said we will be the ones who pay more for less. It will always be that way.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      KKK Rove, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 5:50am

      Re: Tis the order of things...

      How dare you call Fox right winged! It is a fair and balanced news network.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        The eejit (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 5:53am

        Re: Re: Tis the order of things...

        IF, by fair and balanced, you mean buying up all the political estate, sure.

        OH wait,t hat was SARCASM. Got it.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        DaveL (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 6:11am

        Re: Re: Tis the order of things...

        It's only fair... the conservatives have Fox and the liberals have CNN...

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Dark Helmet (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 6:18am

          Re: Re: Re: Tis the order of things...

          "It's only fair... the conservatives have Fox and the liberals have CNN..."

          Which is why they're both worthless....

          This whole political theatre show is useless....

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 6:30am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Tis the order of things...

            Amen. I propose we abolish the democratic republic governing system and put in place an Absolute Monarchy. DH HAS THE DIVINE MANDATE!

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Dark Helmet (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 6:47am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tis the order of things...

              First order of business: Our National Anthem will henceforth be "Let the Bodies Hit the Floor" by Drowning Pool.

              Coincidentally, that will also be the theme for our foreign policy....

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Mr. Fair, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 7:33am

          Re: Re: Re: Tis the order of things...

          CNN? And MSNBC, and NBC, and CBS, and ABC, and TBS.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            CommonSense (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 8:03am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Tis the order of things...

            So reality is liberal leaning... That is very good to know.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              sdub, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 8:56am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tis the order of things...

              Reality is that all media is liberal... I see plenty of liberal crap on fox(yes, mixed in with the uber conservative crap). Be a human and read multiple news sources.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Ima Fish (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 5:32am

    I remember the good old days when cable companies could legally rebroadcast without paying. I still don't understand how a broadcaster could complain that its number of viewers is being increased by being rebroadcast. Expecting and demanding payment for having your audience vastly increased is pure greed.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Comboman (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 6:06am

    Paywalls

    Do cable subscribers realize that you can get Fox for free with a set of rabbit ears (usually with better HD than over cable)? How long will it be before Murdoch tries to put paywalls around broadcast TV?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Ima Fish (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 8:40am

      Re: Paywalls

      "Do cable subscribers realize that you can get Fox for free with a set of rabbit ears"

      No. The current generation of TV viewers are about three decades removed from the days when we received all TV from antennas. I'd guess that 99% of people under 25 would have no clue that you can get HD network television for free. 95% for those under 30.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        doughless (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 11:12am

        Re: Re: Paywalls

        Case in point:

        A few months ago I put some HD rabbit ears on a TV in our guest room. Tuned into Chuck to test it, and my wife (29) said, "I didn't know you could still do that."

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Cynyr (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 9:24am

      Re: Paywalls

      I can't Even with an amplified indoor antenna i get noting here in Minneapolis MN. I think it has something to do with the terrain.

      (yes i have looked at antennaweb and etc.)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    that_id (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 6:37am

    Dems want it fair and GOP wants the market to decide? Work together AND help the consumer at the same time by making cafeteria plans for channel line-ups a mandatory offering by ALL cable and satellite.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    a-dub (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 7:44am

    "For example, News Corp.'s second-largest shareholder, after the Murdoch family, is Prince Alwaleed bin Talal (pictured at left, and above right), the nephew of Saudi Arabian King Abdullah, and one of the world's richest men."

    See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/crp19D

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 8:19am

    I gave up cable in lieu of Broadcast Digital. Now I get PBS hah. The best damn programming around and I get 4 channels of it on broadcast TV for free. I don't get $65.00 a month bills. I don't get shutoff notices. I just watch TV. When I had Cable I had tons of channels with lots of reruns and commercials. Then on Saturday and Sunday morning I got tons of 1/2 hour Paid Advertisements. I paid all that money to watch a bunch of ads. I'll pass. People with lives don't have that much time to watch TV anyway.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      ChronoFish (profile), Oct 20th, 2010 @ 8:33am

      Re:

      Happily Sans Cable for 10 years now. Rabbit-ear free for 3 years. Everything I want is legally available online for free or a small pay-as-you-go fee.

      -CF

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        TheStupidOne, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 10:43am

        Re: Re:

        I've kept my rabbit-ears because I've been unable to find any reliable way to watch HD sports online and broadcast at least gets me some.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 20th, 2010 @ 10:22pm

    Remember when that bill about loud TV commercials showed up? Now we get a bill to stop cable companies from cutting service in the middle of big sports events. Apparently, somewhere along the line we elected a congress full of couch potatoes, and they're writing laws into effect to improve their viewing experience.
    If we get a bill a couple of months from now specifically banning a handful of particularly annoying commercials, I'll probably laugh my head off.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    DanVan (profile), Oct 22nd, 2010 @ 9:05am

    Those who want true captialism are getting it....no regulations, no rules, and ZERO ability by the consumer to win

    I love this country but the idea that the government sets some consumer-friendly rules should be implemented

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This