[opendtv] Re: Re.: FCC: Upgrading Media Rules to Better Serve Consumers in Toda
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 23:53:18 +0000
Daniel Grimes wrote:
Personally, I disagree. I believe, ideally, that OTA should only
be independently and locally owned and operated. They can be
aligned with an affiliate, a larger corporation, for resources
like programming but not corporately owned.
Sorta like the mom and pop book sellers. Which unfortunately have had a nasty
habit of going out of business lately.
I know this is an ideological stance, and that conflicting
ideologies might argue against, but allowing all OTA
broadcasters to be owned by publicly traded and/or large
corporations will ruin (has ruined?) the original function
of the local broadcast.
The problem is that people like to say they only shop at local stores, but in
reality they flock to Walmart.
I guess I see the "original function" of the OTA broadcaster as being primarily
the local transmitter needed to relay the TV networks' program streams. Yes,
with that occasional local newscast breaking in, maybe three times a day at
most. If you think of the European TV broadcast model, which you know well,
that's pretty much how it works there. To the average viewer here, I'm not sure
they can tell the difference between the US system and the European system.
In fact, I was surprised to see the reader comments on the recent Tom Wheeler
blog, the one about abolishing the exclusivity rule. Commenters had this odd
notion that the MVPDs were the victims, and the local broadcasters were the bad
guys with deep pockets. How weird.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
