So here's the final score: Time Warner Cable got some but not all of what it wanted. CBS got pretty much everything that it wanted.
And after a month of being denied access to CBS, Showtime and other popular channels, Time Warner subscribers got the certainty of even costlier monthly bills and the assurance that money-grubbing squabbles among multibillion-dollar media giants will continue.
Excuse me if I'm not exactly thrilled about this week's conclusion to the latest in a series of go-ahead-make-my-day confrontations between greedy corporations.
Moreover, why aren't our elected officials hopping mad about these ongoing industry food fights and racing to pass legislation aimed at finally giving consumers a break from the endless cycle of rising pay-TV bills?
"We need regulators who are willing to stop powerful special interests, whether broadcasters or cable firms, that use consumers as pawns in their spats," said Ed Mierzwinski, consumer program director for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
"In the long run, we need better rules, including a la carte pricing, to help change the video marketplace," he said.
I've been pushing for years for a la carte pricing — paying only for the channels you want. More on that in a moment.
First, let's sample the bury-the-hatchet statements released by Time Warner Cable and CBS after they made the peace.
Glenn Britt, Time Warner's chief exec, said the company's hard-nosed bargaining stance was guided by wanting "to hold down costs and retain our ability to deliver a great video experience for our customers."
"While we certainly didn't get everything we wanted, ultimately we ended up in a much better place than when we started," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment