Have you heard of this recent push -by some activist groups- to have the FCC require that cable and satellite companies offer their channels on an a la carte basis?  The theory goes that if people only pay for the channels they watch, they'll save money.  Also by selecting channels, people could supposedly limit "objectionable" material coming into their homes.  (Who is it that is so appalled by the content on commercial basic cable anyways?  If that stuff is too racy for them, they should just get rid of the TV.)

I hope that this never goes through!  This kind of thing would kill small and upstart channels.  It would also decrease the likelihood that we'll find a show that we like by just "flipping around".  It always makes me mad when people want to make my media choices for me.

The idea that people would save money is a bit dubious.  The package deals that we are now sold help keep prices down.  Cable companies can purchase blocs of channels, which are selling advertising time according to the amount of homes in which the channels are available.  Once people stop purchasing certain channels, advertising would dry up, and individual niche channels would die.  That may be okay if the only shows individuals watch are on the "most popular channels", but it is a nightmare for the rest of us.

Does anyone think that this will actually be an improvement to their life?  I don't, unless one would call limited choice and higher cable bills an "improvement".

Summary link to a Washington Post article.