[opendtv] Re: Pro a la carte, Another Perspective

You should send this missive to the Rat, aka Disney.
It's not the cable companies that are against a la carte.

If you need a hint, Disney owns ESPN...

dan.grimes@xxxxxxxx wrote:
There has been much discussion, for and against, cable a la carte. One argument for a la carte is the fact that costs might actually go down by paying for what you want and not the whole. Another argument is that it could actually help curb violence by reduction of subscriptions to those channels that offend. The counter arguments is that prices will go up and to use technology to block them or simply don't watch them.
But I have another reason why I am for a la carte. I do want a la carte so that I don't pay for the channels that I don't want to watch due to content; but it is not because I want to lower the payment but rather I don't want to pay producers to produce content that I find negative to our society. If someone wants to fund production of violent, offensive and immoral media, that is their right. But I think it should be my right not to fund them.
I use the analogy of a mutual fund. I don't like to buy mutual funds that contain companies that I think are doing unethical business (either product or in an unethical way.) Yet, if I am to invest in the stock market, I may be forced to if I only have the choice of buying mutual funds. However, I don't have to buy mutual funds and can buy stocks in companies that my philosophy is in line with and can even buy mutual funds that own stocks in line with (most of) my philosophies.
I know my analogy will be torn to pieces by folks on this discussion board, so I ask that you apply my analogy only to the direct purchasing of media.
So even if I had to pay the same money for a package that only contained the media I wanted to support, it would be better than having to fund media that I do not want to support. Unfortunately, with only eight major production companies and each of them producing both moral and immoral content, even if I do pay for a channel I consider consistent with my philosophy, it doesn't stop a production company from using profits from family entertainment towards production of other content. This happens a lot in the movie industry already. But it at least gives the consumer some power in funding better content. And it allows the consumer to "vote" for their content choices by showing what the consumer is willing to pay for.
At present, I do not subscribe to cable or satellite and this is one of the reasons. I do subscribe to a DVD delivery service that delivers much of the TV programming available for a low monthly fee. One might argue that this is the same and they have a point. So I look forward to the day when I can buy the media I want and don't have to fund media I don't think should be produced.
Now I could go into reasons why gratuitously violent and overtly immoral media should not be produced, but that goes into philosophy and then I'd be wandering into another realm. And please don't take me as an overly sensitive, censor-all viewer except where it is necessary for the mission of a programming franchise, i.e. foul language on the Family Channel or nudity at during a football game. 

Dan Grimes




----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org 
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.

Other related posts: