[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: Verizon Pulls Tegna Stations Over Retrans Dispute
- From: "Craig Birkmaier" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "brewmastercraig" for DMARC)
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 07:33:43 -0500
On Jan 2, 2019, at 10:17 PM, Manfredi (US), Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
These headlines sound oh-so-20th-Century, anymore.
Granted this type of headline was common at the end of the 20th Century, as
cable systems resisted the use of a broadcast flagship to negotiate massive
packages of content from the content oligopoly. Sadly it is still common today,
for exactly the same reason:
The vast majority of homes in the U.S. still subscribe to a (V)MVPD bundle, and
the content congloms can still get away with this form of extortion.
There is one major difference. In the last century these contract disputes were
used to force the MVPD systems to add more channels so that the cable systems
could raise the rates that the 1992 Cable Act was SUPPOSED to control. Now it
seems that the 1992 Cable Act can just be ignored.
Exactly. Use OTA, use cbs.com, use any number of OTT sites which carry CBS
material. Verizon FiOS broadband carries them all.
What’s your point Bert?
Yes the content is available via “other” pipes, But that’s not the problem.
The problem is that “you” are paying for this content, but the content owner is
blocking its distribution on the pipe you are paying for to force your MVPD to
pay more, which in turn makes you pay more.
Even more important, the FCC is powerless to do anything about this - CONGRESS
is responsible...
The 1992 Cable Act should be used as a case study for “The Law of Unintended
Consequences.” The intention was to protect the most important ally of the
politicians - the broadcast conglomerates.
More than a quarter century after the bill’s passage the broadcast
conglomerates control more than 90% of everything we watch on the Telly...
And the Internet.
The threat from cable was not only thwarted, the congloms have used the MVPD
systems to increase the cost of TV content at rates significantly higher than
inflation - and this has happened EVERY YEAR since the 1992 Cable
“Reregulation” Act was passed.
Today, our crooked FCC Chairman is gloating, because the pin-head formula
thinkers in Congress failed to overturn his "let's make the Internet
non-neutral" order. All it would take would be for Verizon to start playing
games with the Internet streaming options consumers have, to really raise a
public outcry.
No Bert. There was NEVER a realistic chance that the Congressional Review Act
could be used to overturn the decision by the Trump FCC to overturn the 2015
Title II order. Even if the House voted to overturn the new regulation, it
would have required the signature of the President. The reality is that it
would have required a veto override.
Truth is that the Democrats could not come up with enough signatures to
discharge the decision to the House floor for a vote.
Can you believe it? Some Democrats actually took campaign contributions from
those evil MVPDs and telecoms that supported the now current FCC regulations
regarding Net Neutrality.
Push to Restore Net Neutrality Stymied by Dems in Congress
https://gizmodo.com/last-minute-push-to-restore-net-neutrality-stymied-by-d-1831023390
Verizon has NO REASON to “start playing games” with Net Neutrality - nor does
any other ISP. The system was never broken.
The Obama Administration used it’s FCC to advantage the monopolistic edge
providers who ARE a serious threat to Net Neutrality. It is worth noting that
the FCC is still powerless to stop this abuse, as it would have been under the
Obama rules.
It is now in the hands of the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice
Department, to use anti-trust laws to reign in these Edge Provider monopolies.
Note: as I write this, Jordan Peterson is discussing Internet censorship on Fox
News.
Funny thing is, in the past, we have seen just such overly greedy stupidity
at work. That's what got Title II slapped on broadband service to begin with.
Hardly something inconceivable.
Wrong. The FCC used Title II in a failed attempt to open up telco data lines to
competition. It didn’t work and the data lines were properly classified as a
Ttile I information service rather than a Title II telco service.
Regards
Craig
Other related posts:
