If The Cable Regulatory Act of 1992 Had NOT Passed?

[Jack 1000]

Hey All,

For those that follow cable history, there was a time when commercial and standard cable stations had what was called "MUST CARRY" status.  Before the government passed the 1992 Cable Regulatory Act, the law stated that cable systems provided the local network, and selected programing stations.  For example, every cable operator had to provide the locals, CNN, ESPN a standard level of cable service.

In 1992, when the government started regulation of cable, they gave stations a choice.  To either go the route of "Must Carry" or "Retransmission Consent."  Which would give the station owners to do what most are doing now.  Reconsent renewal contracts approximately every three to five years.  The other consent that the government gave to cable was the ability to charge cable/dish/TV programs for their networks.  In turn, cable would work to standardize services, rates, and prices across systems.

Much of this was subtle for a while, because station owners could rely on strong commercial sponsors and advertising that used to represent quality.  Even if there was a talk of a blackout, station owners could rely on the power of sponsored commercials to get the rate fees they wanted.

Flash forward fifteen years and the economic crunch has made quality commercials more expensive to produce and buy to cover advertising costs.  All these station owners and sponsors who gave them money were and are now being replaced by infomercials.  Cheap advertising.  However, the infomercial does not always endorse a quality product and many of them are scams.  The stations are desperate for revenue and if you read the fine print before the infomercial comes on, it will say "The following is a PAID ADVERTISEMENT The Station assumes no responsibility for the claims made in this program or the validity of its content."

The major commercial advertising went away and has stayed away since.  This is why the stations are demanding so much money from Cable, Dish, U-Verse, and all media providers.  Locals now have to go on local news, weather, old movies, and infomercials, because they can no longer afford to pay the advertisers to showcase the quality products of the past.

My question is, if the Cable Regulatory Act of 1992 had NOT passed, would cable TV venders, Dish, U-Verse, whoever, be having these retransmission disputes?  

Satch

[Jack 1000]

A well written article on the dispute.  And some history about "Retransmission Consent" can be found here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/cbs-vs-time-warner-cable-_b_3632160.html

Jack

[ArgMeMatey]

Some other imperfect "solution" would have been implemented.  I remember the uproar at the time.  My employer was paying about $3.50 per pop for well over 1000 units and the cable company wanted to raise it to $10 or so.  Part of their justification was this act, although other programming costs were going up fast as well.

Eventually the market will resolve this problem.  As I've said many times before, local TV is headed down the tubes.  It no longer serves the public interest, since their coverage of daily local affairs concentrates on personality problems in leadership rather than actual issues such as tax policy, local control and civic matters.  If it weren't for the weather and the Packers, they would already be out of business.