joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Anyone know how the study was flawed?
I know consumer groups say its flawed, but how so?
I've never been a big believer in a la carte programming saving money - it seems to me that everyone is subsidizing the others viewing habits to a large degree, and it's all a wash - but I would be interested in specific criticisms of the study. |
|
dotditdot
@northropgrumman.c
| Read page 23 of the study (and the following pages). Its all "Comcast states", "Charter states", "Warner states", "Disney states" and then the report goes on to accept the statements from the large cable companies as the correct answer, with minimal consideration of any other point of view. |
|
joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL | Did you read pages 21 & 22? It has comments from the Consumers Union of America and other anti-bundling groups. There are several other places in the report where it lists views from non-cable/satellite companies. |
|
dotditdot
@northropgrumman.c
| I read them... keep reading. The report goes on & on about how the cable co's are going to have higher costs because consumers are too stupid to pick a package on their own, etc etc etc. The report promptly dismisses any views supporting a la carte, and instead accepts the cable cos views. I thought the FCC was to represent the interest of the general popluation? How hard would it have been for them to come to a conclusion that cable cos should offer a la carte side by side with packages? |
|
joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL | Given the facts in the report, it would be very hard to come to that conclusion. |
|
