« It's the Process, Stupid |
Main
| The Video Fiction »
January 17, 2006
Conservative Crackup over Cable?
Posted by Dana Blankenhorn
A split seems to be developing within the conservative movement over cable policy.
It may be the harbinger of a series of splits on the right over technology. Or it may be nothing.
On the religious side, we have Brent Bozell (phony news a specialty, and if you believe that you're part of the Liberal Media Conspiracy) pushing the idea of a la carte pricing for cable services. This would enable good Christian people to toss not only dirty, smutty HBO but Comedy Central, CNN and TBS out of their homes. They could order just good Christian stations and maybe Turner Classic Movies, plus Fox of course. (The news, not that F/X smut.)
On the corporate side we have Adam Thierer, formerly of the Cato Institute, now of the Bell-funded "Progress & Freedom Foundation", sending otu a "Progress Snapshot" (given the funding maybe it should be a "Regress Rewind") saying bundling is the way to go, and (interestingly) calling out Bozell by name. (Whatever happened to the 11th Commandment of St. Ronnie, boys?)
Ah, the conceit of a regulator and central planner. Mr. Bozell is fine with consumer choices shrinking so long as what's left on the air is the “good programming” that he desires! In the name of “choice,” a la carte advocates will give us fewer choices. But the choices will be “good” ones.
It just goes to show that the fight over a la carte is really a moral battle about what we can see on cable and satellite TV. But Mr. Bozell and many other a la carte crusaders are likely going to be sorely disappointed when the channels that they dislike (such as MTV, F/X, and Comedy Central) survive because they will likely remain very popular, while the channels they think contain “good programming” witness massive price hikes and potentially go under. Some of the most vulnerable programmers to a la carte regulation will be religious and ethnic-focused channels. Without bundling, there probably won't be the audience to support these channels.
He's right, you know. If they didn't force 'em down my throat there are literally dozens of channels I'd love to get off my box. Probably the ones Bozell wants me to watch.
Comments (1)
+ TrackBacks (1) | Category: Politics
POST A COMMENT
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › The Legend of Dennis Hayes
- › Evolution Changes Its Mind (Again)
- › Welcome to 1966
- › What Must Craigslist Do?
- › No Such Thing as Free WiFi
- › The Internet As A Political Issue
- › Google Images Ruled Illegal
- › Fall of Radio Shack
Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for over 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the "Interactive Age Daily" for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age, and dozens of other publications over the years.
1. Brad Hutchings on January 17, 2006 03:49 PM writes...
The thing to understand about the so-called social conservatives like Bozell (a name too close to "Bozo" to not think he's a clown) is that they are useful to the Republican Party in three situations: (1) when they line up with small-l libertarians on economic issues, (2) when they line up with hawks on security issues, and (3) when they give money. Otherwise, they are irrelevant. Theirer is simply giving Bozell the Cliff Notes version of Econ 101, reminding Bozell and his contingency that when they stray from (1), they sound like the Democrat Party. This is a very polite shot across the bow. Bozell should put down his beard comb for a few minutes and read Arnold Kling's The Club vs. The Silo.
Truthfully though, this isn't much of a "split" because Bozell knows he's being provacative. It's not even nasty. The way to tell it's getting nasty is if someone pulls the Pat Robertson card against Bozell. That is now the ultimate STFU in debates within Republican circles.
Permalink to Comment