FCC May Finally Act To Ease The Pain Of Stupid Cable TV Content Negotiation Blackouts
from the dig-your-own-grave dept
If you still watch traditional TV chances are you've increasingly been accosted with blacked out content and annoying ticker warnings as cable operators and broadcasters bicker over programming contracts. Whether it's Fox News's ugly fight with Dish, DirecTV's feud with The Weather Channel, or the Cablevision - News Corporation fight that blacked out the World Series a few years back, these obnoxious disputes have only gotten uglier over the last few years as programming costs have soared and the cable and broadcast industry works tirelessly to ensure its looming irrelevance.For the consumer, these fights usually go something like this: you're bombarded with on-screen tickers and ads from both your cable operator and the broadcaster telling you the other guy is being a greedy villain during a contract standoff. After the programming contract expires, content you're paying for gets blacked out (which you're of course never given a refund for) by one side or the other in the hopes of pushing negotiations along. After a month or two the two sides then ultimately strike a confidential new programming deal. A few weeks later your cable bill sees a price hike -- potentially your second of the year.
It's kind of a lose-lose scenario for consumers, who get used as public relations pinatas (call your cable operator to complain!), lose access to content they're paying for, and then get accosted with an endless series of rate hikes. For the last few years, the FCC has generally had a hands off approach to these disputes (boys will be boys, and all that), but as they've gotten uglier and consumers have increasingly been railroaded, pressure has mounted for the regulator to at least do something. According to a new blog post by FCC boss Tom Wheeler, the FCC head says he's looking at a number of ideas that could help ease the pain of these idiotic standoffs. Maybe.
One, the FCC is considering lifting rules that prohibit cable companies from simply piping in another region's local broadcast affiliate, allowing them to at least provide customers with some version of ABC, NBC, Fox or CBS while negotiations continue. The agency also suggests it's going to look more closely at the very definition of "good faith negotiations," since these blackouts make it clear there's not much of that actually going on:
"The NPRM currently before the Commission undertakes a robust examination of practices used by parties in retransmission consent negotiations, as required by Congress. The goal of the proposed rulemaking is to ensure that these negotiations are conducted fairly and in a way that protects consumers."Since these are private business contracts, the FCC injecting itself into these negotiations is going to piss off free marketeers and the cable and broadcast industry to no end, but the industry brought it upon itself by behaving like absolute jackasses for the last few years. Not only have they consistently held traditional TV customers hostage, some broadcasters have even blocked access to online content in petulant responses to contract feuds.
In its fight with Cablevision in 2010, News Corporation went so far as to get Hulu to block Cablevision broadband customers from accessing all Fox content. Viacom did something similar in 2014 when it blocked all CableONE broadband customers from accessing Viacom content online, even if those broadband users were paying for TV from another provider. Let that sink in a little bit: you pay for Viacom content through, say, DirecTV, but you can't access that content through your broadband provider because the cable arm of your ISP is engaged in a TV content contract dispute.
And while broadcasters do deserve the lion's share of the blame for soaring programming rates, the cable providers aren't faultless since they're quick to impose rate hikes of their own (modem fees, broadcast TV fees, set top rental charges, charges to pay over the phone) as often as possible. Layer this lost content and annoyance on to existing high prices and the industry's absolutely legendary reputation for atrocious customer service, and you've uncovered the industry's ingenious plan to more efficiently dig its own grave on the eve of the cord cutting revolution.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blackouts, cable tv, fcc, fights, networks, retransmission, satellite tv, transmission, tv, tv content
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Push Some Buttons
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not sure what they will complain about since the market is self regulating and all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If it were truly free, Aereo wouldn't have been railroaded into duck-dum under a 70's era regulation meant to protect broadcasters (what's the logic of extracting payments for broadcasts that are sent over the air for free?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The invisibility of the hand makes it hard to see the manipulations
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A message to broadcast providers...
You should learn from the many death scenes you air in daily dramas, and at least die gracefully. A little drama is OK, but don't drag it out or overact. Leave your customers with at least a few fond memories amidst the rest of the dreck you've foisted on them for so long.
Sincerely,
A former (many years ago) customer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is why
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All familiar, but are there any examples of, well, something that's a loss? Or is it exactly these sorts of outfits that most like to pull the heavy-handed contract negotiations? Because hey, do we really need to intervene in the suicides of these sorts of psychopathic narcissists?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well, there's the thousands/millions of innocent subscribers who've paid money for a service who, through no fault of their own, are no longer getting what they paid for, and are never going to get restitution for it.
You go right ahead and say what they were paying for wasn't worth anything. It's still theft on a massive scale.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
To Joe Blow on the street, it is nitpicking. He knows he's been robbed. Lawyers can dance on the heads of pins all they want determining what the specific infraction's called, but he's not going to care.
Isn't it interesting that the MafiAA sees any existence of "piracy" to be damned near a failure of civilization, but little things like this that rob thousands or millions at a time are just business as usual?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Market
Hey idiots, if there really were a free market over what is being negotiated, the FCC wouldn't need to be inserting itself.
Lifting the rules that prohibit bringing in a different station's network affiliate channel would actually be useful towards creating a free market for cable systems carrying network tv affiliates.
I would also point out that markets end up getting regulations imposed for a reason -- because the very complainers created the conditions that made it necessary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No one has to help the networks and cable companies play these games anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Us
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is not a free market, it is an oligopolistic command economy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]