FCC Finds Cable Companies Too Dominant, Plans To Open Up Market

New York Times:

The Federal Communications Commission is preparing to impose significant new regulations to open the cable television market to independent programmers and rival video services after determining that cable companies have become too dominant in the industry, senior commission officials said.

The finding, under a law that gives the commission expanded powers over the cable television industry if it becomes too big, is expected to be announced this month. It is a major departure for the agency and the industry, which was deregulated by an act of Congress in 1996.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[LateDave]

05:40 PM on 11/11/2007

Screw cable *and* dish *and* FiOS. At least broadcast is available to everybody until it all gets shut off right after Inauguration Day, 2009. (Oh, yes.)

[themodernleader]

07:27 PM on 11/10/2007

The role of the FCC should be to assure the equitable, efficient flow of vital knowledge for informed decision making to all Americans from the poorest to the wealthest.
To militate against monopolistic ownership or special interest control of the free flow of ideas the FCC must put into place such safeguards that limit the acquisition of concentrated power.
Yet, within a geographic area, it is economically foolish to permit more than one cable or satellite company because of the wasteful redundancy. Therefore, there must be constant oversight and review of licenses to guarantee that the citizens are presented with accurate information and news rather than slanted, biased news for the benefit of a special interest. Additionally, basic satellite or cable services must be affordable for every American. The source of knowledge and information must not be restricted to the top 70 percent of Americans. Otherwise, we are creating a balkanized, intellectually unbalanced community and country.
Mr. Martin is wrong in permitting the control of local news media by one large Corporation or person. News media must be owned and operated by diverse individuals representing the American Republic as directed by the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. Anything less is an abdication of The FCC's right and duty.

[hypnotoad72]

06:57 PM on 11/10/2007

Well, it took well over 20 years, but it's nice to see. $50/mo for basic cable channel accessibility is ridiculous. Especially when I watched only one or two channels.

I also tried to sign up for a "competing" cable company. They said they "do not service my area, sorry." A friend told me (and this was some time ago) that the cable companies have their own little sections and don't encroach into other cable companies' areas. Which makes full sense; and why it usually costs the same to go with one vendor instead of another. If it's competition, why are areas of a city stuck with only one vendor only? Every cable company has one thing in common: Presence. Why can't they tunnel in more cable lines or lease?

I recall the days when cable companies spent big bucks having commercials made about "stealing cable is wrong, nah nah nah" and yet they continue to pull antics like the ones I'd mentioned. Nobody I know of has the time to watch all 120 channels to effectively make use and get their ROI's worth of the money they're pumping into the (broken) cable system. (ROI = return on investment, even consumers have a right for that too.)

[thegreatgiginthesky]

06:51 PM on 11/10/2007

Awesome, nothing makes me happier than seeing companies like Comcast and Time Warner getting bitch slapped.

[rollingdivision]

05:58 PM on 11/10/2007

Businesses are all for free markets and competition when it is to their advantage as in a growing market. Once they get big enough businesses work hard to get the only force in the world with the ability to block free markets doing just that. That force is government and more importantly politicians who will use every trick in the book to convince the public stable regulated markets are the best. They make laws in conspiracy with politicians to stop their competitors by the force of government. There is no better example of business government restriction of markets than the cable industry. So anything and everything which will increase competition and disorder in that market is good.

[tililek]

04:16 PM on 11/10/2007

Could say the same about having 6 companies dominate the radio stations. Why are they stopping at Cable, or do they plan to have Clear Channel get into Cable?

Trusting the FCC -- reminds me of Reagan and his comment, "Trust but Verify"

[jennmce]

03:55 PM on 11/10/2007

What's my response to this story?

DUH!!! What the heck took the FCC so long to figure this out?

With cable, the bills go up more and more while the quality of service is less and less. But usually when one company has your city, there is no other option unless you get a dish. I ditched Comcast in favor of DirecTV last year. There should be more choice so that costs go down. One should not have to pay $150 for a minimum amount of channels.

[Ginzaman]

03:32 PM on 11/10/2007

Or be subjected to C-SPAN for that matter. Brian Lamb gets the Medal of Freedom for an "unbiased" network? That's a bit rich.

[Mrrar]

02:04 PM on 11/10/2007

.... What's the catch?