Comments on: Why?

By: Bryan

Bryan — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 19:32:01 +0000

Cox Cable is a prime example of the sort of thing these people do – add a couple of channels to the line-up that no one wants or asked for, and raise the price. Make anything that has a cult following [NASCAR, NFL, college football, etc.] a very expensive, extra cost option, because the regular channels provide such lousy coverage.

They relocated the transmitters in Pensacola to cover the Mobile, Alabama viewers, and dumped everyone living to the east. If you don’t have cable, you get a snowy picture from channel three.

By: Cookie Jill

Cookie Jill — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:05:34 +0000

We only have ONE cable provider here in town. You can’t even get the local station without cable here. (Santa Barbara is angled in a weird a** sort of way geographically) Cox bleeds us dry.

I do watch Olbermann, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report and, gasp….Top Chef and Project Runway. I can probably do without them…but I need a laugh sometime. But, to put entertainment at the top of the priority list is just unfreakinbelievable.

Why don’t we just campaign for “none of the above” on ballots. Show those morons they don’t have their seats permanently.

I’m just so pissed.

By: hipparchia

hipparchia — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:41:43 +0000

have to agree with on that, and the corporate welfare too.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 05:47:02 +0000

And the basic networks are given government assets, the broadcast spectrum, in exchange for that service. They are never satisfied.

By: hipparchia

hipparchia — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 03:22:22 +0000

i think michael’s analysis is quite plausible.

in spite of the fact that almost everything on tv these days is misinformation, disinformation, useless information, infotainment, etc, the basic networks [cbs, nbc, etc] are still the tv version of a “newspaper of record” and keeping those channels accessible to all members of the public is probably one of the few things both sides could agree on, even if for less than noble reasons.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 03:01:09 +0000

Sounds plausible Michael, if you don’t know who started the move and the give-away of the broadcast spectrum that is involved. The conglomerates told Congress that they needed this, that, and the other for free to upgrade the telecommunications systems in the US. Congress agreed to the giveaways predicated on the conversion to digital and the broadcast of high definition signals. The conglomerates used the free bandwidth to expand their revenue stream while making no serious effort to convert. This conversion has slipped several times already and Congress finally imposed a “drop dead” date.

The broadcasters and manufacturers are the ones responsible, and they are the ones who should be paying. I’m really sick of corporate welfare.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 01:01:22 +0000

Let me play devil’s advocate for a moment. Could it be that Congress, for once, decided to help defray the costs of one of the myriad initiatives that it imposed? They like to prate about letting “the market” decide such things, but in this case they decided to mandate a change that the market is still dawdling over. And for once, when they created a mandate, they decided to fund it–albeit only partially.

As to why they might think it’s important, like it or not, television is one of the major sources of news and information for a lot of people. Congress likes to maintain the illusion, if not always the reality, that the citizenry is informed by the news media and acts rationally on the basis of the information it receives therefrom. Accordingly, if Congress forces a change in the way the media present their information to the public that makes it impossible for some people to receive any information in that way, it is arguably incumbent upon Congress to restore that access; hence the coupons.

Not saying that’s why it happened, just offering a plausible hypothesis.

By: Bryan

Bryan — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 00:00:53 +0000

They are subsidizing the circuses and adding sawdust to the bread. There are certainly any number of better things to do with a billion plus, and the media should have been making people aware of the need to swap for years. They have been stalling, and reality has hit them, so they want more corporate welfare.

By: distributorcap

distributorcap — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 23:58:45 +0000

this country cannot live without being entertained — all the time
yankee tickets are going up 30-50% next year to help pay for that stadium (and A-rod’s $400 gazillion dollar contract) – i wouldnt give them a nickel

health care, raises for the military, affordable heating?
bah!
no worth nearly as much as one’s fill of Britney and American Idol

By: andante

andante — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 22:06:16 +0000

I know that $1.5 billion is just chump change, but when I think of the good stuff it COULD do – it almost makes me sick enough to go to a doctor.

Well, not THAT sick.