] That may change, if some lawmakers and consumer groups
] get their way, as the cable industry finds itself under
] increasing scrutiny. Lawmakers report that their
] constituents are angry about cable bills that have risen
] at three times the rate of inflation since the industry
] was largely deregulated in 1996.
]
] One possible solution being proposed is a la carte cable,
] a way to give consumers more choice over what they watch
] and how much they pay for it. But it's not an answer the
] cable industry will swallow easily, if a Senate Commerce
] Committee hearing last week on cable rates is any
] indication.

[ Says John McCain, "'When I go to the grocery store to buy a quart of milk, I don't have to buy a package of celery and a bunch of broccoli,' McCain said. 'I don't like broccoli.'"

It's an interesting question... i think there's *some* validity to the mechanism of subsidizing lesser watched channels by packaging them with more popular channels, but I still think the consumer needs to be given a choice. Nothing says the channels need to cost the same amount... if USA is the most watched, make it more expensive than, say, Oxygen. Offer incentives to try out new channels. People are even more likely to require that their entertainment be on-demand and custom tailored these days. Cable is locked into a model that's too restrictive, and it can't last.

I think we're about 3 weeks away from cancelling our cable altogether, acquiring by broadcast the network stations that account for 80% of our viewing (and pretty much all of the shows we watch on purpose, none of the hm-lets-see-whats-on-while-i-eat-lunch type shows). 70 bucks a month for cable just isn't worth it. If i could buy the networks, UPN, and FoodTV, maybe cartoon network for 20-25, that'd be much more compelling.

While I'm dreaming, I'd also like to be able to pay-per-view any football game... they have cameras at all of them... I should get to choose what game to watch. -k]

Duluth News Tribune | 03/28/2004 | Cable industry defends packaging