Backchannelmedia

Newsday, Melville, N.Y.

By Richard J. Dalton Jr., Newsday, Melville, N.Y.

Nov. 30--The latest V-chip could be a la carte programming from your cable station, if the Federal Communications Commission has its way.

Allowing cable subscribers to choose which channels they subscribe to will give viewers more freedom to choose family-friendly programming, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin told a congressional committee hearing on decency in television content yesterday.

Parents "are forced to buy the channels they do not want their families to view in order to obtain the family-friendly channels they desire," Martin told the committee.

The FCC can't mandate such service, but its conclusions could prompt Congress or the industry itself to take action.

In his push for the family-friendly programming and the pay-per-channel model, Martin faces a problem: Several studies, including a report by the FCC last year, have concluded that a la carte programming would be more expensive, in part because networks would raise rates to make up for revenue lost to a smaller base of subscribers.

But an upcoming FCC report will conclude that a la carte programming would save consumers money by reducing the number of channels they subscribe to, Martin said.

The cable industry disputes that conclusion and says it has already addressed indecent programming. "We don't think a la carte is the most effective manner of addressing indecency," said Paul Rodriguez, spokesman for the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, a trade group in Washington, D.C., representing cable networks and operators. "We think parental controls are the most effective manner of addressing that."

Eric Rabe, a spokesman for Verizon, which has entered the cable business, said the a la carte model also could stifle new programming. "Some groups, maybe religious groups, object to some programming that's on television and don't want to see it, but furthermore don't want to pay for it," he said. "I think the reality is that if you want to allow the development of new programming ideas and give start-up channels a chance to get out there and see if they're going to be successful, you need some mechanism to help get them going."

Cablevision spokeswoman Lark-Marie Anton referred comment to the National Cable and Telecommunications Association.

Jeff Kagan, a telecommunications analyst based outside Atlanta, Ga., said the FCC push for the pay-per-channel model is politically motivated, but the move would benefit consumers.

"Consumers have long complained that they pay too much for cable television, that they get too many cable channels and they just don't watch them all," Kagan said. "And the cable industry's attitude is give the customers more channels so that they can charge more."

The previous FCC report concluded that, under a pay-per-channel model, fewer consumers would subscribe to a given channel, reducing the network's advertising revenue and likely prompting the network to raise the subscription rate.

Furthermore, cable channels would have to scramble all their channels, even basic cable, so customers would need cable boxes for each television, the report said. Cable companies charge about $5 a box per month.

But Martin said last year's FCC report made erroneous calculations and understated the number of channels a customer could buy without an increase over the current subscription model. Furthermore, a la carte programming could be implemented only for digital cable, which would eliminate the additional rental cost of set-top boxes, he said.

-----

To see more of Newsday, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.newsday.com

Copyright (c) 2005, Newsday, Melville, N.Y.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.

VZ,