[opendtv] Re: CBS Affiliates Board, Network Agree on All Access OTT Terms | Broadcasting & Cable

From: Albert Manfredi <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 19:32:53 -0400
Craig wrote:


> For years you have argued against the market based broadcast system, 
> suggesting 
> we should move to national broadcast networks like those in Europe. Now you 
> tell us that market based FOTA stations add value.

For years, I have argued against *pretense*. I'm not saying that the local 
broadcast stations must be affiliates. As far as I'm concerned, they can just 
as easily be all O&Os, or all affiliates of the same station group. The only 
point is that these entities CAN still have a role, with Internet distribution.

> But you also argue for the geographically unbounded Internet, and tell me I 
> should be able to get MVPD service from Comcast. You tell us that the content 
> owners do not need geographically restricted middlemen, be they FOTA 
> broadcast 
> affiliates or geographically limited MVPDs.

Follow the logic, Craig, don't just look for excuses to raise inane arguments. 
Content owners need local support for distributing over the Internet too, 
that's called ISPs. Right? They do not need walled-in single-gatekeeper MVPD 
style one-way broadcast nets.

> So now FOTA broadcasters are relevant to the Internet. Interesting.

Again, you're just arguing for its own sake, which makes you sound really 
clueless. I already said that local broadcasters need to carve out a role for 
Internet distribution, I already offered examples of roles, and all of this 
more than once.

> Suddenly the extended basic MVPD bundle is looking more attractive,

For some people, maybe. The fact is, "the bundle" has been losing subscribers 
faster than actual cod cutting, as we have discussed multiple times. So that's 
why you see the more competitive "bundle" formulas appearing over the Internet.

> Even as this is happening in the U.S., Canadian regulators are moving to 
> force 
> a form of Ala Carte - pick and pay TV - on their MVPD services. Slimmed down 
> bundles like those from Sling and possibly Apple do not let the subscriber 
> choose the channels they want; at best the base bundles can be optimized with 
> add on mini bundles.

The CRTC did not need to force what the marketplace was already doing on its 
own, IMO. But that's Canada. The slimmer the bundle, the more the subscribers 
can focus on individual choices, and pay accordingly. It's only a matter of 
finding the right bundles or set of bundles.

> In proposing the rules change, Wheeler specifically had in mind distribution 
> via the Internet rather than cable or satellite. The simple, innocuous rules 
> change that Wheeler proposed would make it impossible for content providers 
> to block Internet-based distribution of their content.

Remember that THIS set of rules was the unnecessary attempt by the FCC to allow 
actual VMVPDs - recreating the same walled garden model over the Internet  It 
is different from the neutrality discussion. As I said, the only thing that 
matters here is what the owners of content decide to do, to compete better in 
the Internet era, as they see their old distribution schemes losing steam. No 
need to force-fit the old model over the Internet.
Bert                                       
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:

- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at 
FreeLists.org 

- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word 
unsubscribe in the subject line.
[opendtv] Re: CBS Affiliates Board, Network Agree on All Access OTT Terms | Broadcasting & Cable

Other related posts:
