The topic of a la carte cable service (consumers being able to choose and pay for specific channels they want, and no “basic” tier) has been a big topic of discussion from time to time. Today it gained new attention due to comments by FCC Chairman Kevin Martin (via Reuters):

“An a la carte regime would enable viewers to buy their television channels individually, in smaller bundles, or in the large bundles currently offered,”

The way cable rates are set has little to do with the consumers of entertainment content, which is why we seem to have progressed from 57 channels to several hundred… and still nuthin’ on. We each pay for a package of channels that includes one or two we’d like to have and dozens we don’t care about. Meanwhile, some of these programmers pay the cable company for distribution while others get paid by the cable company for the right to distribute the content.

According to the Reuters article, “cable operators have been reluctant to allow customers to choose their own program bundles, claiming that it would raise prices for consumers.” So what? Consumers frequently trade higher prices for things they want more. The real issue is whether the cable companies would continue to get the kickbacks for certain channels, or whether the consumer would buy any channels at all if they found out the one they wanted was the only one in the 20 they were actually paying for. The article concludes:

Kyle McSlarrow, chief executive of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association, said at a press conference afterward that the industry should not be forced by government to offer networks on an a la carte basis.

Which is the real problem. Who do you trust more: the government or the cable operators. The chances are it is neither, and that is why Joost, YouTube and other options are the real threat to content providers and distributors.