I'm trying to get my head around the piece in today's Variety about cable's restistance to proposed FCC regulation aimed at making cable adopt an a la carte subscription model. Given the current lack of regulation in media these days, I'm all for the government coming in breaking up what is essentially a cable monopoly. The fact that I need to order 200 channels I never watch in order to get the 5 I do doesn't hurt the FCC's case. However, with this administration I have to remember that the few times I do support the actions they are taking, I have be very wary of the goals.
This is the same FCC that is trying to deregulate cross media ownership to allow for one company to own a broadcast station and a newspaper in the same market. With so few companies controlling how we get our news already, this deregulation only further dilutes the information that people receive. Good for business is not always good for democracy.
So why deregulate one place to regulate somewhere else?
Maybe to further consolidate the news and information people here. A fox news veiwer, for example, could choose to only get Fox News so that they wouldn't be exposed to the "liberal" views of... oh wait... is their a liberal news station? So that they wouldn't be exposed to the honesty of C-SPAN or the insight of the Daily Show. Our biases can act as a filter as much as corporate control. Who knows though? Maybe Kevin Martin really doesn't want me to have to pay for WE.