Interesting conflict, for the theocons

[Norman Bernstein]

From www.washingtonmonthly.com (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com), comes this very interesting dilemma. Some religious conservatives want to support 'a la carte' cable channel choice, so that families can choose not to subscribe to channels they find offensive... some other religious conservatives realize that if 'a la carte' channel selection becomes the default, they'll lose their channels... and the money those channels raise.



MAY THE BETTER DEMAGOGUE WIN....The debate among conservatives over "a la carte" cable -- in which consumers pay only for cable TV channels they want -- got a little more interesting this week when the James Dobson weighed in (http://www.family.org/cforum/news/a0040788.cfm), on the opposite side of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.


Advocates for cable choice have picked up a big endorsement: Dr. James Dobson, the founder and chairman of Focus on the Family Action. [...]
Daniel Weiss, senior media and sexuality analyst for Focus on the Family Action, said even if a family blocks objectionable channels, it still winds giving money to the company's behind them.

"You're not only losing money out of your own wallet," he said, "you're actually subsidizing and helping to fund the very program you find reprehensible. That's simply not an option."


Except to many of Dobson's closest allies, it has to be an option.
The FCC says that the average household watches only 17 channels -- and apparently, evangelical right-wingers aren't pulling in many viewers. As far as Robertson, Falwell, Benny Hinn, and a few others are concerned, if consumers pick which cable channels to receive, they probably won't sign up for Christian Broadcasting Network and Trinity Broadcasting Network. For TV preachers, fewer households means fewer viewers, and fewer viewers means less power, influence, and cash.

It's set up quite a fight (http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6751.html) among the theocons. Focus on the Family and the Parents Television Council want a-la-carte cable so families won't have to pay for channels they find offensive. CBN and Falwell ministries are in a panic over a-la-carte cable because, without it, they're effectively going to be run off the air (http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/051006/news1.html).

Colby May, a lawyer for Robertson's American Center for Law and Justice, noted that religious broadcasters believe the measure "will cause a significant dent in their ability to fill the great commission: to go into all the world and share the news that Jesus is Lord."

Who'll win? Stay tuned.

[ljb5]

The 700 Club wants to have a popularity contest with HBO?

I'll take that bet.

We always knew Pat Robertson was insane

[johnw]

You've got that backwards. Robertson doesn't want a la carte cable. Dobson does. Dobson doesn't get his money from television shows. This would make Robertson less powerful and by default, Dobson more powerful.

It's all about the money.

[BrianW]

I suppose many channels will suffer, not only Christian channels. But religious battles sell magazines.

Personally I love the idea of picking my own channels. Good bye MTV and VH1! Plus a few others.

[huisjen]

That's hilarious. Talk about conflicted.

I've chosen to have the boob tube turned off for all but a couple hours a year for the last decade.

Dan

[RichKrough]

Tv without Ernest Angley or Gene Scott on Sunday Mornings? Man that is the best comedy around!

A classic Gene Scott video:
http://media3.guzer.com/videos/gene_scott_preacher.wmv

[Gary E]

I looked into getting cable when it was wired into the area and because I had to take a buncha crap I did not want, I told Time Warner to SHOVEIT..so who lost $$... wasn't me.

[ljb5]

You've got that backwards. Robertson doesn't want a la carte cable. Dobson does.

Ah yes, now I see..

Really I was just looking for an opportunity to slip in that link about Pat Robertson leg-pressing 2000 lbs.

[ljb5]

I looked into getting cable when it was wired into the area and because I had to take a buncha crap I did not want, I told Time Warner to SHOVEIT..so who lost $$... wasn't me.

I had the same experience when I tried to buy a two-speed Ford with three seats but only one window. I sure as heck didn't want to pay for something I wasn't going to use.

[Gary E]

I had the same experience when I tried to buy a two-speed Ford with three seats but only one window. I sure as heck didn't want to pay for something I wasn't going to use.

You had your list farked up...

You could of bought a 2 speed ford, with 1 seat and 3 windows...

wana guess what year?

But you werent alive then, so no, YOU could not of bought it new.

[Meerkat]

Hmmmm... since cable is regulated in many places by city governments, one could make the case that being forced to buy religious channels in a package is an establishment of religion... Hmmm.... ;)

[geeman]

Interesting comment Meer,It could be argued as you say I think.

[Norman Bernstein]

Hmmmm... since cable is regulated in many places by city governments, one could make the case that being forced to buy religious channels in a package is an establishment of religion... Hmmm.... ;)

In my town, cable is licensed by town government... but goverment has no say in what the cable offers, other than the obligation to provide free access to the two community channels (which my wife manages).

[geeman]

Do cities such as yours Norm,ever show an interest in whats being broadcast on those public stations? curious here.

[PatCox]

The inevitable result of a la carte would be a drastic reduction in the number of viable cable channels. Many of the things we here all like to watch, the science and technology and history and nature channels we elite intellectuals enjoy, are, just like the 700 club, subsidized by the current system. We'd be left with nothing but "That 70s show" reruns and TCM running Gone with the Wind 10 times a week.

[Meerkat]

In my town, cable is licensed by town government... but goverment has no say in what the cable offers, other than the obligation to provide free access to the two community channels (which my wife manages).Sure it does - for instance, "the two community channels." I doubt the cable company would run those on it's own initiative.

[Meerkat]

The inevitable result of a la carte would be a drastic reduction in the number of viable cable channels. Many of the things we here all like to watch, the science and technology and history and nature channels we elite intellectuals enjoy, are, just like the 700 club, subsidized by the current system. We'd be left with nothing but "That 70s show" reruns and TCM running Gone with the Wind 10 times a week.Possibly, or one might end up paying more. If that happened, I would insist on no commercials.

The ever increasing flood of adverts on cable, that I pay to bring into my home, is seriously annoying! The damned cable companies are making it at both ends! :mad:

[Sailing-Randy]

I like the idea of being able to pick my own channel...but then again when I go to a motel with "144" channels I still can't find anything either worth watching or I want my kids to see. So maybe the problem isn't the packaging of channels as much as it is coming up with a chennel I would want to watch. Or course, that will be difficult since I find the news channels irritting when they give more opinion than news...maybe I am becoming an old curmudgeon!

[Rick Starr]

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00004SBDE.01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg

$13 from Amazon.

Honestly, I cannot understand the rationale for allowing oneself to be painted into a corner against one's will.

How many remotes must one wear out before one gets the point? Do others not, like me, weep for the hours lost to tv ads (and sometimes the WBF, for that matter)?

Anything on TV worth watching will be on netflix, cheaper and with no ads.

[Keith Wilson]

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00004SBDE.01._SCMZZZZZZZ_.jpg

And you can get Chinese ones from your local discount store for about two bucks; they'll be just as good for this application.

Cable TV? What's cable TV?

[John of Phoenix]

TIVO RULES!!

[ljb5]

TIVO RULES!!

I second that.

I've had Tivo for almost two years. The last commercial I saw was for the 2004 elections.

That alone is worth the price.

[Cec]

We have the UN-advertised cable low end package $9.95 a month. They don't show it on the Comcast.com site and you have to ask for it. Granted, most of the channels are local with your basic ABC, NBC and CBS, FOX .. but I get PBS, History, Travel and MSNBC for when I want to waste time watching the tube.... I can get what I need during storm season and have a couple of kid shows like Disney and Halmark for the little one... and no huge cable bill to deal with.

BTW, without any type of cable, even local channels don't come in well.

[BrianW]

We have the UN-advertised cable...

Good grief! The United Nations is now in the cable business!

:)

[Paul Pless]

I've chosen to have the boob tube turned off for all but a couple hours a year for the last decade.


Durn Dan, you still haven't been able to wean yourself off of The Macy's Christmas Parade yet?

[Meerkat]

Our "basic-est" cable package costs ~$35 and is mostly broadcast plus shopping channels. :mad:

For "basic" cable, it's ~$50/mo! :mad: :mad:

[johnw]

I have a television in the state of nature. No cable, just broadcast. I went without television for a couple years. A friend has cable with lots of channels, but there isn't much more to watch.

[ccmanuals]

I've gotta think that having the ability to only pay for the channels you want is a good thing. Of the about 100 channels I have now I think I could eliminate about 80 of them.

[Cec]

Good grief! The United Nations is now in the cable business!

:)
LoL ... ok, ok, written that way for emphasis ....

[clancy]

Anything on TV worth watching will be on Netflix, cheaper and with no ads.

You can also find anything worth watching on the usenet newsgroups.This is even cheaper then Netflix since you're paying for internet access already.