yelvington.com

There's a movement among some of my blogbuddies to line up in the outrage column in the wake of this week's FCC decision on broadcast licensing, which drops a longtime general ban on assignment of new licenses to owners of daily newspapers in the same market.

I just can't get excited about it. It may feel good to carry a lance against big corporate media ownerships, but it seems to me a case of fighting the last war.

Local television franchises are rapidly losing their luster, and today are little more than a "must carry" opening to cable distribution. Audiences are fractured. The sun is setting on both broadcast networks and local affiliates.

Newspaper companies that might have gone on a rapacious acquisition binge a decade ago are now just trying to keep the wolf from getting through their own doors.

And, of course, the Internet makes anyone and everyone a publisher.

If you want to worry about something, worry about Comcast, which the FCC has only begun to deal with (a vote Tuesday caps any cable company at 30% of nationwide subscribers) and, more importantly, net neutrality. If the owners of the pipes that carry the Internet are allowed to start strangling content creators and demanding tribute, we're all in trouble.

NPR's David Folkenflick reported Friday on the continuing campaign to change basic cable TV from flat-rate to "a la carte" pricing. He explained Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin's efforts as an attempt to impose conservative "family values" restrictions on cable, removing from basic services anything that might offend.

In the "strange bedfellows" department, left-leaning filmmaker Robert Greenwald also wants the FCC to do away with flat-rate basic cable. Again, it's an effort to get rid of "offensive" content; in this case it's Fox News.

As I've said before, unbundling basic cable is a bad idea. A la carte subscription models will not work. Cable TV makes for a clumsy, ineffective marketplace. In order for a marketplace to work, consumers need to know what's available. This requires an ability to examine and consider and sample. A la carte pricing would place such a barrier between consumers and content that people would never discover long-tail, niche and fringe content. Serendipitous discovery? Fuggetaboutit.

Consumers have a strong preference for flat-rate pricing, especially in telecommunications. Internet access has gone from metered by the minute to "all you can eat." Ditto for long distance. Under pressure from consumers and competition, even the mobile phone services are moving to flat-rate in areas such as text messaging or in-network calling.

People don't want cable unbundling. The real backers of a la carte pricing have political motivations, on one side or another, and those motivations have no business being injected into the cable regulatory process.

I don't need a la carte pricing in order for me to make up my own mind about what I want to watch.