Over at The Progress and Freedom Foundation, Adam Thierer has a few posts up related to the politics of the current regulations around new media dissemination- specifically with cable and DSL which remain the primary means of most people’s access.  The most relevant is a summary of a list made by Ted Hearn of Multichannel News of the travesties of FCC Chair Kevin Martin’s regime and his “war on cable.”  The list is pretty long, but some of the main problems with/for cable are less political (at least of a red-blue variety) than they are typical unwilling corporate adoption of technologies that are not obviously in short-term best interests.

One of the main issues on the list is Martin’s crusade to make cable a la carte. But he is just a little ahead of the market curve- with the increase in internet and VOD viewing, a la carte is going to be a consumer demand no matter what (why do you want to keep paying for those 50 channels you never watch if someone will provide you the option- on any platform- to just buy the channels you want)? That said, that such a thing would suggest a need for regulation speaks to the odd backwards-leaning mentality of cable.

In another example, non-proprietary technology such as true2way or the CableCARD might in the long run improve service in general (the premise being that open source technology has the potential to move more quickly and be more responsive than the mysterious voodoo stuff cable companies traditionally put in their boxes).  But it is understandable that cable companies like to maintain control- so people can’t “steal” cable and so they can charge fees for things and monitor what you watch, etc.  When revenue models are becoming increasingly polarized, cable/DSL/salelite companies want more control, not less.

‘What candidate would be better’ for the new world of online video seems like an almost fruitless question in its complexity- though I’d be curious about people’s responses. (It seems only Obama went to the Googleplex).  It somewhat depends on your perspective- as a rights holder, as a viewer, as a company trying to disseminate video online.  It isn’t straightforward.  Ideally things will get faster and cheaper and yet not filled with so much spam and poor-quality piracy that it’s not really worth wading through.  Ideally it will get cheaper and yet be a great place to make money.  Is that a red or a blue idea?

• DISCUSS THIS Post in discussion

• BROWSE / IN TIMELINE
• « New Distribution at TIFF
• » The Politics of Broadband pt. 2: Net Neutrality

• BROWSE / IN broadband cable politics
• « The politcs of reproduction
• » The Politics of Broadband pt. 2: Net Neutrality