We are faced with so much choice in this country – seemingly 100 different types of Coke alone, for example – that it can drive consumers a little batty.
On the other hand, there’s cable TV. Consumers usually have three choices: Bare bones “basic” cable, expanded basic and premium channels. In this case, less is not more.
An Associated Press survey last year found that 78 percent of consumers favor paying for only the channels they want to watch, as opposed to receiving bundles of channels selected by cable and satellite companies.
What a concept. You only want the QVC channels? You only get QVC the channels. Simple. Beautiful. Fair.
But industry leaders warn us that the concept the “customer is always right” doesn’t apply in this case. Consumers don’t understand that choosing channels “a la carte” just won’t work.
“It’s not a good idea for consumers,” Brian Dietz, vice president of the National Cable &Telecommunications told the San Francisco Chronicle. “It would result in higher prices for most consumers and drive out diversity in programming.”
There’s that American can-do attitude that got us to the moon. Hey, we can put a TV in your phone, but you have to get all 70 channels just to watch Comedy Central 24 hours a day.
Since the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Consumers Union reports, cable rates have increased 59 percent (almost three times the rate of inflation), industry profits have soared and acquisitions and system swaps have further concentrated the market power of the industry leaders.
Threats of higher prices are hardly threatening – they keep going up, whether consumers get more choice or not.
The Federal Communications Commission earlier this month reported to Congress that a la carte programming could lower average cable and satellite bills by as much as 13 percent. Surveys show that even though most cable and satellite subscribers receive well over 100 channels under current bundles, they watch no more than 17 channels on a regular basis.
The FCC is pushing for la carte programming so parents can skip channels altogether to keep kids from seeing so many violent TV programs. The FCC says that tools such as the V-chip aren’t doing enough to keep children from viewing violent images.
There is no evidence, however, that parents who aren’t shielding their children from violent content now will be the ones to choose only violent-free channels in the future. We don’t care. Just as long as the FCC fights for a la carte choice. We think consumer fairness is the overriding issue here.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
