Doc Searls has a good summary about Viacomm and Dish Network
settling their recent spat
over carrying Viacomm's bundle of
channels.
Unfortunately, financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.
Why not? I think it's because nobody who makes most of their money on
advertising wants to see consumers become customers. Viacom, for
example, is primarily in the advertising business. The programming
they sluice down channels to consumers is just bait. Most of what they
sell is best-guess numbers. They can't begin to think about selling
programming directly to viewers or listeners, partly because that's
not their business, but mostly because they don't want advertisers to
know specifics about actual viewing and listening - such as how often
people tune away from advertising, or skip over it with their TiVos.
Meanwhile the cable and satellite services are mostly in the business
of satisfying habits.\
But speaking as a consumer who would rather be a customer, a la carte
is what I'd like. I think that's exactly where we're headed in the
long run. And that the inevitability of advertising loss is the deeper
issue behind the dispute between EchoStar and Viacom. That loss is
will be felt on the supply side, by Viacom.
I think 95% of viewers would welcome being able to choose what channels
they get and paying only for them. But the Viacom's of the World don't
have any incentive to give it to them. Here's a list of the channels I
watch or want:
Local over the air channels (get it via antenna now anyway)
ESPN/ESPN2 (for MLS games although I might get the MLS
DirectKick package this
season.)
Comedy Central - for the Daily Show.
Fox Sports World, Fox Sports World Espanol
ESPN Deportes
TechTv
And that's pretty much it...