3 ms·

What exactly does the public access TV station do for the community? How does something like that fit into the modern world where the price of a TV studio (or h

by tmzt 13y ago

What exactly does the public access TV station do for the community? How does something like that fit into the modern world where the price of a TV studio (or handheld HD) is not prohibitive, and the content can be distributed via the internet? Does the franchise protect the company recouping the cost of the physical plan or is it more of a monopoly on providing video service locally? Both cable and phone have their own extent systems and are not competing for physical access to some right of way, or what ever mechanism or reason the multichannel operators have long used to justify this system. I haven't closely followed the so-called "national franchise" debate that took place a few years ago, other than that it was defeated. The phone companies are talking about abandoning the POTS system on an accelerated schedule, but at the same time Verizon failed to invest in FIOS expansion, leaving the replacement for POTS low speed, long-distance ADSL service. The cable companies have very belatedly been working on introducing an IP-based system based on a home gateway, similar to what AT&T's Uverse system uses. I found it very interesting when the head of Cox Communications commented at a recent talk (in March I think) that he visited the valley 5 years ago, and then proceeds to talk up Palm. I can understand why a local community would embrace and accept this solution to their fiscal problems, but we should debate whether the franchise system is holding us back technologically on regional and national level.

jbooth 13y ago
Hey, missed this earlier. What exactly does the public access TV station do for the community? How does something like that fit into the modern world where the price of a TV studio (or handheld HD) is not prohibitive, and the content can be distributed via the internet? Lots of people still use TV, and yes, the costs of the equipment they provided are relatively low. But we were starved for cash, that's why we could be bought cheaply. Does the franchise protect the company recouping the cost of the physical plan or is it more of a monopoly on providing video service locally? It's sort of a monopoly, in our case it was a duopoly. They have to come to an agreement with the town to provide service, but it doesn't (usually) prohibit the town from bringing in other providers. If I recall correctly, there were clauses that other providers couldn't come in for cheaper than they did. I haven't closely followed the so-called "national franchise" debate that took place a few years ago, other than that it was defeated. A version of this came up in MA when I was there, as a state wide franchise. It was basically a way for them to get access everywhere, for cheaper, without paying the towns and paying a smaller aggregate total to the state instead. I was opposed to that (not that I had a voice), because we needed every cent we could get from whatever source. I agree that the net sum of the system is pretty silly.

by tmzt 13y ago

jbooth 13y ago

Hey, missed this earlier. What exactly does the public access TV station do for the community? How does something like that fit into the modern world where the price of a TV studio (or handheld HD) is not prohibitive, and the content can be distributed via the internet? Lots of people still use TV, and yes, the costs of the equipment they provided are relatively low. But we were starved for cash, that's why we could be bought cheaply. Does the franchise protect the company recouping the cost of the physical plan or is it more of a monopoly on providing video service locally? It's sort of a monopoly, in our case it was a duopoly. They have to come to an agreement with the town to provide service, but it doesn't (usually) prohibit the town from bringing in other providers. If I recall correctly, there were clauses that other providers couldn't come in for cheaper than they did. I haven't closely followed the so-called "national franchise" debate that took place a few years ago, other than that it was defeated. A version of this came up in MA when I was there, as a state wide franchise. It was basically a way for them to get access everywhere, for cheaper, without paying the towns and paying a smaller aggregate total to the state instead. I was opposed to that (not that I had a voice), because we needed every cent we could get from whatever source. I agree that the net sum of the system is pretty silly.