Last edited Tue Apr 28, 2015, 11:47 AM - Edit history (1)
There is a need to get information to the public, and people are willing to PAY to send such messages. This was the basis for broadcast radio and later Television (The messages wanting to be sent were the Ads not the programs). As mentioned above Religious cable programs are also efforts to reach out to people, thus will survive on Cable for they are willing to break even or suffer a small loss to stay on the air. Other groups will obtain cable channels for similar purposes, to get their messages out to the general public (I suspect the History Channels is such channel, it is full of right wing bad history in addition to "Ancient Aliens" and other questionable history so it seems to me to be means to get a right wing version of history to the masses).
The above will be "basic cable Channels" for the simple reason they will be low costs (if not free) if you have cable,. If you want something that actually costs to produce and watch, then those will be on some sort of content subscribing channel. Such channels will depend in people paying to watch that channel or program NOT on advertisements or other methods of payment (Donations in the case of charities and religious channels AND payments to keep certain programs in the air for money interests want people to be able to see them at no cost).
Thus, like broadcast television, "Basic Cable" will survive, it may become a minor part of cable, almost forgotten like broadcast television, but it will survive for it fills a niche.
It is clear this is the wave of the future, for the religious channels are complaining about being "blocked" out by cable companies for the cable companies want them to pay a higher fee then they have been. The Religious channels are willing to be on the low end of any cable selection, but they want to be able to be selected by the viewer NOT the cable company. The Cable companies are using the Federal Communication law that says they are NOT "Common Carriers" to refuse to permit such channels unless the provider pays a larger fee. If the courts would rule the Federal Communication Act ban on Common Carriers only apply to broadcasters, the Federal Communications Commission could force such Cable Companies to carry any channel who wanted to be on the bottom end of the Cable Service for what it costs that cable company to carry that channel. People do NOT have to watch such channels but these providers want to be able to reach people who want to be reached.
Cable profits are NOT in the lower end but in the upper end, this is where most of the fight over revenue is occurring. The fight is over who gets the profits, the cable company or the content provider? Again, this reflects the fact that Cable Companies are "Common Carriers" but the law says they can NOT be "Common Carriers". As NOT a "Common Carriers" the cable provider can charge what the market will bare and EXCLUDE anything they do not want to carry for what ever reason. If Cable Providers are "Common Carriers" the fee they charge has to be reasonable and they MUST provide their service to anyone who is willing to pay the fee. Furthermore the FCC can regulate such fees to make sure they are "reasonable".
Congress has REFUSED to rewrite the Federal Communication Act to remove the language that anything under that act is NOT a "Common Carrier". The Courts have followed that Law. The FCC has followed that Law. The problem is Cable came out of State Regulations in the 1950s. Cable started out as providing Television Service to isolated rural areas to far from broadcasters to get a clear signal. In the 1950s and 1960s and into the 1970s, that was what cable was, a common carrier of broadcast programs regulated by the States or local government to provide television service to rural areas. This included the duty of including all broadcasters whose broadcast area included that rural area. Technically this brought them under the FCC, but the FCC saw them as minor and basically left the local government handle them till the 1960s.
In the 1960s, Cable reached into the Suburbs (and small cities) to compete with high end antennas. Some of the suburbs (and Smaller cities) had complained about poor television reception for years and cable solved that problem. Given the greater wealth of in the Suburbs, it is with this move to the suburbs that you started to see for cable only programs. Most started as programs for the local municipality only, but then expanded. In 1972 HBO debuted in Allentown PA on its cable system (Allentown was picked for it had NO Broadcasting channels at that time EXCEPT for a PBS Channel, technically Allentown was "served" by Scranton, Philadelphia, Reading, Harrisburg and Trenton NJ stations. Please note New Jersey technically did not have ANY broadcasting channels till the early 1970s, it was covered by Philadelphia and NYC Channels).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBO
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_stations_in_Pennsylvania
Thus, Cable had presented itself to rural area, then smaller cities, then the suburbs, as a "Common Carrier" of all broadcasts, so they could win the right to provide cable service, till the 1970s. In the 1970s, as cable moved into the Suburbs and Cities that had excellent reception, the cable to show they were providing something else, such as local programming. Then things like HBO kicked in and the present Cable system was born, i.e. a method to carry several programs from several providers into your home, way more providers then you could received via the airwaves.
The problem was this is clearly the job of a Common Carrier, someone who is in the job of providing trandsport to anyone who can pay. Common Carrier rules apply to cabs, trucks, buses, trains, stage coaches etc. Common Carrier rules goes back to the Middle Ages. The basic rule is the Common Carrier MUST take on anyone provided it does NOT represent a danger to any other person being carrie. i.e. a Row Boat that is a Common Carrier, can refuse to take on a piano for it is to heavy for the boat, but if the Row Boat can take an organ, it can NOT refuse a Piano because the Common Carrier provider dislikes piano music.
On the other hand the Federal Commication Act says providers are NOT Common Carriers. Thus you had a Common Carrier covered by a Law that forbade such Common Carriers.
This dispute was fought out in the 1970s, as the Cable Companies moved into Urban Areas. Many Cable companies made promises to get franchises fro urban municipalities, then broke those promises when the FCC said such promises would make the Cable Company a Common Carrier and the Federal Communication Act forbade Common Carriers. Out of that litigation came the present rule that local municipalities have little control over Cable Providers for such controls would reduce the Cable Companies to be Common Carriers and the Federal Law forbids them from being Common Carriers.
Thee Cable Companies are using this rule for all it is worth, charging high fees to those companies who just want to be on cable, and setting up systems so that programs people want to see and are willing to pay for they can charge the most for.
Thus your statement of content subscription faces a problem. For such a system to work, the cable providers must be ruled to be a Common Carrier. At present the law says cable providers are NOT common carriers and as such can bundle the programs as they see fit. This is hurting those who want to be on basic cable (The Religious broadcasters are the most conspicuous but they are others) AND those who want higher end products. The Cable company wants to max revenue and to max revenue it is better to bundle a lot of high end programs together, for such programs do advertise and the more people who "subscribe" to a service the more revenue from ads they receive. Many people do NOT watch most of the programs being bundled, but the cable provider can claim that the people who subscribe to the bundle can watch and charge those providers accordingly. The Cable Companies can do this for they are NOT Common Carriers.
Thus Congress has to take out the Language in the Federal Communication Act that forbids Common Carriers OR the courts have to rule that such language only cover broadcast rights as those were known in 1934 when the act was passed. Once cable providers are classified as "Common Carriers" all of the traditional rules on "Common Carriers" kick in, including the right to take on any content provider unless such content overwhelms the system OR causes some other hazard to other content provider or the carrier itself. Once Cable providers are called Common Carriers most of the problems of Cable today will disappear and subscription will become more and more the norm, but till that change in the law occurs, subscription is NOT the most profitable way to provider cable service and for that reason it was be fought tooth and nail.
= new reply since forum marked as read
.