On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 11:09:11 -0500, blake murphy >
wrote:

>On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 13:40:26 -0800, sf wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:20:07 -0500, "Nancy Young"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>I'd be mad if I turned on my tv and Food Network and HGTV
>>>disappeared.
>>
>> Me too, and I wouldn't care one whit if they took all of those dumb
>> sports and shopping channels off. What I don't understand is why they
>> don't just say "pick xx channels from this list" as your premium
>> package in this day and age of digital. Extra channels can be an
>> extra monthly charge or viewed on demand. How hard is that? On
>> demand is perfect when you only watch one show per channel or only
>> follow one sports team.
>
>to a certain extent, you can blame the god-bothering networks and other
>niche broadcasters for that:
>
>(MAY 2, 2005)
>A la carte is a backdoor attempt to influence content by forcing cable
>operators to let consumers pick the channels that they want to buy. If
>parents could choose their channels instead of having to select one of the
>packages offered by the cable companies, the argument goes, then they could
>get the kid-friendly Disney Channel, for example, without also signing up
>for the more risqué MTV.
>
>But such disparate parties as Disney, religious broadcasters Pat Robertson
>and Jerry Falwell, and groups including the Leadership Conference on Civil
>Rights helped the cable industry deep-six that proposal. Without cable's
>broad programming packages, they argued, networks like Black Entertainment
>Television and the Christian Broadcasting Network would have never
>survived. One idea that is favored by Senator Stevens and Kevin J. Martin,
>the new chairman of the FCC, would require cable operators to offer a
>package of family-friendly channels.


Seems our provider is more instep with the times then, we have to take the
basics but can pick and chose any other seperate channels other than theme
groups for $1.99 each.