[opendtv] Re: Sinclair's TV deal would be good for Trump. And his new FCC is clearing the way.
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 02:00:14 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
Why do we need local caps Bert?
What are local caps for, Craig. Tell us, so I don't have to state the obvious.
You have been outspoken about the need for localism for years...
What do "local caps" have to do with "localism," Craig? Anything at all? It's
almost the exact opposite. Explain, Craig.
The logic of retaining the UHF discount, from this FCC so interested
in abolishing old rules, sounds like just another example.
One glaring example is the one about the rate floor for rural service.
What the hell does this have to do with broadcast ownership caps?
Follow the thread, Craig. Pay attention, and don't just respond with the first
random thought that comes to mind. These are examples of the new phoniness we
get from the FCC. Say one thing, using politically correct language to placate
those who aren't paying attention, but mean the exact opposite.
You are behaving like the mass media,
Not at all. I am explaining exactly why the new FCC rhetoric is disingenuous
and phony. I'm using their own words, their own blogs and news releases.
Rural telephone service is not going to suffer Bert.
Because Craig has proclaimed it so. Explain the simple math, Craig. The rate
floor goes down or is abolished, the USF? Goes down too? Goes up? What? Explain
what has to happen for rural service not to suffer, if the rate floor goes
down. Unlike you, the FCC does acknowledge that providing rural service *is*
expensive. So explain, Craig. Do not proclaim.
Funny that you did not take the bait and talk about the FACT that
Magic Jack can avoid the FCC regulatory morass, and the taxes,
simply by offering a internet based VOIP service,
Am way ahead of you, Craig. For one, rural service now includes (or soon will)
Internet broadband service, not just telephone. For another, VoIP requires
Internet service. Only you, Craig, have to have this explained to you. So tell
us, Craig, do you expect that deploying Internet broadband in rural areas will
cost less or more, than deploying just POTS in these rural communities?
How about telling us why we still need a USF fund at all.
ROTFL. Once again, Craig shows his true colors. First, he gets pissed because I
tell him that Chairman Pai's "explanations" for why the rate floor should be
abolished sound totally phony, illogical, and disingenuous. And then, he proves
my point. Why indeed, Craig? Why doesn't the FCC "explain" the simple
arithmetic to everyone, instead of attempting to appease with politically
correct formula-speak?? Do I have to repeat that Chairman Pai thinks the rate
floor is too high? Do I have to show you again where Chairman Pai thinks that
rural customers are charged too much, and often have less income than urban
customers?
The arithmetic is very simple. Take away the rate floor, take away the USF, and
then? Rural service will cost less than it does now, and no more than urban
service? You are totally out to lunch, Craig. Give it up.
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:
