The FCC news was met with mixed reports in the popular press. As always, it depended on the newspaper. Papers in smaller cities and towns tended to jump on the a la carte bandwagon, while metropolitan dailies generally fleshed out all sides. The Providence Journal painted cable as the big bad wolf: "Don’t expect Cox Communciations to anytime soon give its customers the option to pick and choose only the channels they want, a cable industry model known as ‘a la carte’ service." That lead sentence doesn’t look so great when it’s followed by a paragraph explaining how the FCC "found that most consumers would be better off" with a la carte. Cox was allowed to say a la carte would be more expensive, but was quickly followed by RCN saying it was "gratified" by the FCC’s report. An AP story in The Washington Post and other papers was a bit more balanced, noting many industry analysts are skeptical about a la carte, citing 1st Amendment concerns. The NY Times gets credit for realism: "Despite Mr Martin’s use of his bully pulpit, industry analysts say that Congress is unlikely to pass any laws to force cable companies to sell channels piecemeal."

The Daily


ACAC Shaken by USTelecom STIR Proposal

With the FCC set to vote on draft order Wednesday related to implementing the STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication framework to combat robocalls, there are some last-minute proposals coming in. USTelecom has

Read the Full Issue
The Skinny is delivered on Tuesday and focuses on the cable profession. You'll stay in the know on the headlines, topics and special issues you value most. Sign Up