[opendtv] Re: 20040608 Twang's Tuesday Tribune (Mark's MondayMemo)
- From: Craig Birkmaier <craig@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 07:51:24 -0400
At 9:13 PM -0700 6/10/04, John Willkie wrote:
>So, you're in favor of the opposite? Less unique programming, all confined
>to a single virtual channel?
>
>Do you think the networks should confine their public interest programming
>to a single virtual channel, and only carry presidential addresses when the
>(perceived ahead of time) "news value" is more important than (to put it
>mildly) "displeasing regular viewers?"
>
>Or are you just wailing?
>
>John Willkie
>
>P.S. My vote is for wailing.
Wa Wa Wa Wa Wa...
Come on John. This is uncalled for.
Are you familiar with the term ROAD BLOCKING?
In TV land, this is when the same content is pushed through all
available channels so that viewers have no choice except to do
something other than watching TV.
Politicians have always LOVED this. In years gone by they could
depend on wall-to-wall coverage of their political conventions, and
that major speeches and news conferences would be carried by
virtually all of the major channels.
They still do something similar when they buy political advertising.
It is common to buy the same time slot on all local newscasts so that
no matter which channel the viewer prefers, they will see the ad for
that candidate.
The last time we saw effective road blocking was in the aftermath of
911, when most of the cable networks carried the same content as
their parent networks. The pinnacle was the 911 fund raising concert
which was shown on more than 30 channels of our cable system.
The real issue raised here is whether we should expect ANY level of
public service in return for FREE use of the spectrum?
In a world with hundreds of channels, it may be more appropriate to
have networks that are dedicated to news and public affairs. We have
this today if you subscribe to cable or DBS, and increasingly, the
broadcast networks are moving away from carriage of political fare,
using their 24/7 news channels to do this instead. The problem with
this approach is that the people who still depend on FTA TV may not
have the choice to see the political coverage, and this is raising
all kinds of red flags among the politicians.
Using sub channels to carry public affairs could mitigate this, but
it opens another can of worms.
Now the viewer has the choice NOT to watch the events that were
historically road blocked. The reality is that public affairs
programming has rarely produced any statistically measurable
audience, at least in comparison to popular entertainment
programming. It is a loss leader that broadcasters have been
compelled to offer because of their DEAL for the spectrum.
I saw this first hand Wednesday evening in my own home. We sat down
for dinner just as the State funeral for Reagan was beginning in the
Capitol Rotunda. I changed the TV from some old movie my
Father-in-law was watching to the coverage of the funeral. My 18 year
old daughter immediately went ballistic. "What give you the right to
control the TV and decide what we are going to watch?"
I responded that this was a bit of history worth watching, and that
she could watch re-runs any time. She continued to object and I told
her to show a little respect. She didn't. After a few minutes of
constant interruptions she picked up her plate and finished her
dinner in her room, watching some sitcom.
Personally, I think that the quid pro quo of public service for free
spectrum is a joke. Broadcasters do a good job of covering the stuff
that people in the communities they serve are interested in. As the
old cliche' goes, however, "You can lead a horse to water, but you
can't force it to drink."
Entertainment television is a HUGE business. A HIGHLY profitable
business. I have no problem using the spectrum for this service. I DO
have problems with the notion that the use of this spectrum should be
free, and that broadcasters can use the force of government to not
only gain carriage by competitors, but compensation as well.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
