Question: The FCC and broadcast media
The latest National Nanny News has me wondering something.
Though Bubba the Love Sponge and Howard Stern have plenty to complain about, FCC head Michael Powell’s crackdown on indecency began with Janet Jackson’s boobing appearing on broadcast television. And it has stayed alive thanks to recent (largely questionable) complaints about the network broadcast of Saving Private Ryan and, er, the GODDAMNED MOTHERFUCKING OLYMPICS. So, by and large, it has focused on broadcast television.
Yet broadcast television is very nearly an anachronism. Only the few major networks and their affiliates are “broadcast” and thus still subject to the FCC’s regulation of the free, public airwaves. Much as Howard Stern can broadcast anything he wants to his subscribers on satellite radio, and I can (and do) view all manner of degenerate filth over my paid-for wireless internet connection, the FCC has no statutory power to regulate cable television, which is subscription-based.
So I’m tossing this question out there for anyone with more knowledge:
I have no antennae set up to receive Rick Dancer. All of my “broadcast” reception comes via my paid cable service.
Given that I, and an ever-increasing number of viewers of “broadcast” television, actually receive my / our “broadcasts” of “broadcast” television networks via cable, why don’t the major “broadcast” networks simply bid traditional broadcasting a fond farewell, join entirely with cable and satellite services, and invite the FCC to kiss their receding asses?
Either unpaid-for “public” broadcasting still counts for enough of the major networks’ viewership that it would be economically foolish to abandon the format, or there is some legal restraint I’m unaware of.
Since I’m too busy to research this myself, I invite knowledgable comments. Non-knowledgable but amusing comments are also invited.
Shhh! You’ll blow my cover.
That’s not as good a moniker as Blog.
Thanks, Cable Boy! Pipe up more often!
Oh boy, finally a topic for me!
If I’m remembering the figures from our most recent sales meeting correctly, cable television reaches only 40% of Willamette Valley homes. Various satellite services make up another 10 – 15%, leaving around 45%, possibly more, of the local market still fiddling with rabbit ears. Since cable subscribers are staying away from the networks in increasing droves, NBC and all the rest are going to cling ever more tenaciously to that 45%.
KOIN, KGW, KEZI, etc. are also required by the FCC and various contracts with city/county governments to provide air signals, at least partially so the EBS can piggy-back on them in the in case of a natural disaster. The local news stations all cut to live feeds whenever something interesting happens, which binds them to at least a moral obligation to make their broadcasts available to everyone.
Slight digression: We’re required to keep the costs of basic cable down so areas that unable to receive a clear air signal can pick up the locals. This is why there’s a wide discrepancy between the cost of basic (around $10 bucks a month) and the non-regulated next step up, expanded basic/standard ($42+).
Another reason for the nets to stick with the FCC is that there’s a substantial amount of viewers out there that still want their entertainment filtered (In Bushs America? C’mon!). While the Nets have allowed their programming to become increasingly lewd, it’s nothing in comparison to what you might find on Comedy Central or (GASP!) MTV, which many subscriber think of as the Gomorrah TV. Before 9 PM, the nets (overlooking Fox) are a haven for family-friendly programming that’s guaranteed not to offend.
As cable TV continues to jack up its rates, and as the costs of programming increases, more people are going to gravitate towards satellites or back down to basic cable, possibly leading to a network renaissance. Or least that’s my mostly groundless speculation.
I hope you’ve enjoyed this magical trip through the land of broadcast TV.
I don’t really suppose the corporation I work for constitutes “very large” (3300 employees state-wide) but I think the age and the attitude are good examples of corporate stubborness…anyway, I’ll email you examples.
I can see that as a possibility. But with broadcast audiences dwindling and audiences repeatedly proving their hunger for filth, you’d think that the networks would take the path of least regulation before too long, unless there was a compelling argument against it. Mere intransigence? I tend to doubt it, but then I haven’t spent too much time within very large corporations.
And again, I’m open-minded here. I look forward to your examples.
[WARNING: Libertarian Analyst Guessing]
To hazard my gut feeling, it’s not so much out of economic interest or FCC law as it is organizational stubborness. It has always been this way, therefore it should continue. When I’m up in January and a little sloshed I will give you examples of this from my continuing adventures in banking.