[opendtv] Re: Ted Turner on Media Consolidation
- From: "Cliff Benham" <cliff.benham@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:13:30 -0500
Mr. Wilkie,
The things of which you write are stratospheric=20
compared to the daily mundane technical junk I deal with.
I spend my time attempting to make sense of MPEG type 5=20
private data and finding ways to generate it, and other
related mysteries.=20
I have no connection with and little real interest in the political
and high ended business musings of giant communications companies
except when they compass my ability to watch a tv show or play with=20
a 'new' technology.=20
I wish that I could claim, like Mark Schubin, that I am bound by
strict non-disclosure agreements which prevent me from answering and
replying to your questions and assertions, but in reality,
I simply am not in that league.
I sincerely hope you understand.
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of John Willkie
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 2:42 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Ted Turner on Media Consolidation
Really? I'm not so sure that your employment does not color your =
perception
of the problem.
When, for just ONE example, was the LAST time that Comcast acquired the
rights to carry a programming channel that wasn't offered by one of the
seven sisters and for which Comcast didn't try to acquire a stake in the
program provider? I don't follow cable very closely (largely, it's
unnecessary), but I'd venture that the last time that occurred at =
Comcast
was in the 1970's -- perhaps as late as 1983 or so.
Do you think that stance helps or hurts media consolidation?
And, then there's the practice of cable franchising after the =
mid-1970's,
with "rent-a-minority" and "rent-a-citizen". Comcast was not one of the
biggest players in these shell games (letting a local citizens of color =
or
influence, preferably both, have a stake -- or payoff -- in a potential
system as a way of easing the approval through franchising authorities), =
but
largely that was because Comcast was outbid in franchising bids.
Not to forget that cable by it's very essence -- one large company
controlling most or all of the cable households in a zone, region or =
city --
is media consolidation.
If there was no cable, there would be more TV stations. While the =
limits on
TV ownership have increased in recent decades, the economic impact of a
medium size cable system is larger than the economic impact of a single
television station. And, there has never been a limit on the size of a
single cable system, other than those imposed by the franchising
authorities.
More TV stations mean more points of views: limiting TV stations (with
ownership caps) limits points of views. And, as we all know, cable
EXCLUSIVELY provides a menu of programming from TV stations and from
CONSOLIDATED MEDIA GIANTS.
I've told you on-list and off-list that my problem with cable is the
gatekeeper function.
You have trouble perceiving media consolidation. Having been on the =
other
side of the table, I have a different point of view.
Don't throw me slow-pitch insults; I was always good at hitting long =
balls.
Who I work for -- usually myself -- has never had any effect on my =
ability
to discern right from wrong. Sometimes, I pull punches when my economic
interests are at stake; but I tend to clearly know what I am doing.
John Willkie
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Cliff Benham
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 6:47 AM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Ted Turner on Media Consolidation
Fortunately, who I work for has no effect on my ability and right=3D20
to express my beliefs and say what I feel is proper and correct.
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of John Willkie
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 7:26 PM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Re: Ted Turner on Media Consolidation
Cliff, have you forgotten who you work for? Or, are you against media
consolidation only after the Disney thing fell through? :-)
John Willkie
-----Original Message-----
From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Cliff Benham
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 11:59 AM
To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [opendtv] Ted Turner on Media Consolidation
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0407.turner.html
=3D20
=3D20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at =
=3D
FreeLists.org=3D20
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word =
=3D
unsubscribe in the subject line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
=20
=20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at =
FreeLists.org=20
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word =
unsubscribe in the subject line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
