[IP] more on FCC wants to regulate "violence" on broadcast and basic cable TV

[David Farber <dave@farber.net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Seth Finkelstein <sethf@sethf.com>
Date: April 24, 2007 7:23:19 AM EDT
To: David Farber <dave@farber.net>, ip@v2.listbox.com
Cc: lauren@vortex.com
Subject: Re: [IP] FCC wants to regulate "violence" on broadcast and  
basic cable TV

[For IP, if worthy]
> From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren@vortex.com>
> Here we go.  The FCC is about to release a report to Congress
> suggesting that lawmakers enact legislation controlling "violent
> content" -- not only on broadcast television but apparently on
> "basic cable" channels as well.
>
> See: http://tinyurl.com/267ea5 (Washington Post article)

	This is so far out from my understanding of both the limits of the
FCC's power and that US law basically cannot regulate "violent content"
that I thought there must be another aspect to the story.

	Aha! Page 2 of the article:

 "According to FCC sources, the report's recommendations include the
  creation of an "a la carte" system that would allow consumers to buy
  only the cable channels they want -- a favorite plan of Martin's that
  is widely opposed by cable companies."

	THAT's what this is about - the "a la carte" cable-pricing issue.
The "violent content" posturing, and any proposals for new laws, are
just an excuse, in order to get to a "compromise" proposal of having
an "a la carte" cable-pricing system justified by saying consumers
need to able to choose not to have the violent "basic cable" channels.

	No need to ask "who benefits?" - it'll be in the report.

--
Seth Finkelstein  Consulting Programmer   http://sethf.com
Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/
Interview: http://sethf.com/essays/major/greplaw-interview.php


-------------------------------------------