Slashdot Mirror
Cable TV Franchise Says No To DSL Ads
Sloppy writes "The Albuquerque Tribune reports that Comcast, who has cable TV franchise agreements with many city governments, refuses to run ads for competing internet service providers. I guess that's something that citizens need to remind their local governments to correct the next time the monopoly terms are negotiated .. fourteen years from now."
I may get flamed for this but when was the last time you saw ads on linux.com advertising windows xp......
Slashdot - The one stop shop for procrastination
"...who has cable TV franchise agreements with many city governments, refuses to run ads for competing internet service providers.... guess that's something that citizens need to remind their local governments to correct the next time the monopoly terms are negotiated .."
Umm, that's not a monopoly action. They have the right to refuse service to anyone. Sorry but I'm not dusting off my pitchfork over this one.
"Derp de derp."
[nt]
with ads for their own add-on services.
I have been buying DVDs and using an antenna recently for cost and value reasons. Spent a weekend house sitting for a friend. The number of self-serving Comcast ads is sickening.
It is like listening to Clear Channel vs NPR.
You are better off buying content on removable media you control, getting DSL and ignoring their self serving fat pipes...
Blogging because I can...
In my area, Comcast just bought out AT&T cable. AT&T was in the habit of refusing to run advertisements for dish systems on the cable channels (you'll still see those ads on the local broadcast channels). Why should they have to advertise their competitors? Adversiting is not a right, its a service. Don't like it? Start your own cable network (where I live in tacoma, they did, Click Network.)
I don't really mind double posts on
How often do you see people on Slashdot complaining about a lack of advertising?
I am the hub of Jack's digital lifestyle.
Though I doubt if any of this results in rules that require them to sell ads to their competitors. And presumably dish companies can still get access by buying time from the channels themselves. God knows I see plenty of dish commercials.
Still, the word "monopoly" is quite appropriate. Except that cable companies are actual monopolies, not potential ones. Few cable customers have a choice of providers, despite attempts to create a competitive market. If you consider how much Americans rely on their TV sets for information, you should be considered about anybody in a position to control that information.
--make it a federal case, literally. Have a "minority" from the dsl service try to get the ad. If they refuse then, have the firm of dewey, cheatham and howe send them a letter. Most places will do anything to avoid getting a discrimination lawsuit. Don't emphasize the service you are trying to advertise,emphasize the person doing the asking if they refuse, then shop it to some law firms and local minority activism center. They love that stuff. Might even help if the local activism center was using this dsl service already-maybe, not sure on that one. It's a tightwire to walk though, going out of your way to FIND a lawsuit is quite risky. Weight the odds on it.
Point two, screw 'em! Why would you want to beneift a monopoly company? If they sell ads, they "make money" off the ads. I say don't go there. Give your advertising money to talk radio instead,(especially independent, mom and pop stations, not clearchannel if possible, etc) the local alternative press newspaper, webcasters, make up a buhzillion flyers and hire some young folks to spread em out.
Anyway, talk radio has a better cost/benefit ratio in most markets, especially target placement, study the shows, the hosts, the times. Obviously rush hour shows are usually the most expensive, but cover the widest range demographically..
Time Warner Cable does it too. I don't see any commercials for DSL, they also cut out the EarthLink commercials (can't tell whether those are advertising dialup or broadband) and replace them with RoadRunner commercials.
Unless you are confusing the words "date" and "see", WTF are you trying to express? Or are you just an idiot?
Wanted to give you the chance to elaborate.
...they own the Philadelphia Flyers and 76ers, and steadfastly refuse to sell any broadcast rights to the satellite TV companies, no matter how much they offer. If you don't have Comcast cable, you ain't seeing any of those teams' home games.
We really don't need any more hockey on TV.
DSL sucks... We'd all be better off if the teleco's go under instead of propping up those dinosaurs. You have to ask yourself, who do you like less? Your cable company or SBC? After all, SBC is trying to re-create "Ma Bell." Only prob is, its a different world than pre 1984. Once the cable companies have switched over to pure digital transmission and offer telephone service, say goodbye to SBC.
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*