Are Apple and Verizon Finally Working Together

The buzz is that the Apple iPhone may have found a new phone partner this Fall and for Verizon customers it could be good news. "The Wall Street Journal reported late Monday that Apple plans to release an iPhone this year that would work on CDMA networks -- a technology used by Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel Inc. in the U.S., as well as some carriers overseas." As a fan of the iPhone, I wanted one the moment it came available, but I struggled with its phone capabilities. I was a former AT&T Wireless customer who switched to Verizon one day after number portability was allowed. And having struggled with dropped calls, poor signals, and the inability to make a phone call while sitting in Penn Station, I vowed never to return. Verizon was a welcome relief.

But the Apple iPhone was only available with AT&T and I could not go back; so I have patiently waited. Just yesterday I asked a friend again about their iPhone and their response is they love everything but the phone call feature. Heck, that is what I need a cell phone to do the most. Without that connection, it is simply a brick in my pocket.

The light at the end of the tunnel may finally be in sight. I look forward to the day an official announcement is made and the day the Apple iPhone is first available for connection with my Verizon wireless phone number. For now, I will continue to wait patiently.

DirecTV Puts On ESPN's 3D Glasses

I just spent too much money for a family of four to see "how To Train Your Dragon" in Real 3D this weekend. My kids were excited; I was not. Early on in the film, the 3D created a nice effect of delineating foreground from background. But as the story took root, I nearly forgot that it was in 3D, except that I hated wearing the glasses.

And so networks are launching 3D channels, TV sets are being made with 3D capability, and even blu-ray players come with the 3D option. And I keep wondering why? What works as an added value for a theatre experience, seems silly for a home experience. At the movies, we focus entirely on the screen; at home we multitask, even as we watch movies at home. We chat on the phone, we email, we go on Facebook. Are we really going to keep these glasses on watch at home. And while I love watching sports on TV, I don't think the 3D experience will improve it.

I'll wait for the day that technology enables 3D without the glasses; I may even wait till we build 3D rooms to watch so that we are feeling immersed in the action of the movie or the sport. Until then, no 3D TV set for me.

Will Sirius Stock Price Go Over A Dollar?

Will the stock price go over a dollar? It really seems to depend on whether Howard Stern agrees to his contract renewal; otherwise, it may be the first indication that Sirius is not long for this world. "Analysts are conflicted about their views on Sirius XM(SIRI), with some skeptical about the company's soundness as a stock investment -- and others wholeheartedly confident of its financial strength." It seems the power rests with Howard Stern to keep this ship righted, If Howard goes back to terestrial radio, then I would suspect that consumers would follow and Sirius would start to see tons of defections from its subscription service. Stay tuned.

Fox Subscription a Cable Killer?

On the surface, it sounds like another business model to grow revenue via a subscription model. "The News Corp. subsidiary this morning unveiled Bitbop, a subscription service for smartphone owners that will deliver both streaming and downloadable movies and TV programs to smartphone users." Obviously, mobile is not cable, but the concept is a cable killer.

If Fox Mobile can get subscription revenue in this platform, then why not a subscription model under the web platform. No middle man, more direct contact with the customer. Isn't cable trying to deliver a TV anywhere platform to extend its reach beyond the wire to other boxes? And does this approach intrude on the cable partnership? Most likely, Fox will say its all experimentation to find out where the glue is.

But it is a clue that content owners may be willing to bypass cable subscription revenue if they can get the money directly from the viewer without a need for an intermediary. Cable companies must stay relevant and flexible to changing viewer interest. It's time for the cable companies to embrace SLingbox and other devices that enable programming to be moved from wired boxes to untethered pcs and smartphones. Until then, Fox and others wiwll continue to look to bypass the converter box and sell directly to the viewer.

Web Not Cannibalizing TV Viewership, Rather It Strengthens It

The fear that a new technology will destroy an old one is probably as old as the story of creation. That the rise of web use in a day would in a zero sum game, bring TV viewership down by an equal amount. That is not the case! "Nearly 60% of TV viewers now use the Internet once a month while also watching TV." Yes TV viewers do multitask.

The rise of social networking, the need for shared experiences, and the content on the big tube comes together into a converged usage model. We watch the Oscars, Super Bowl, American Idol, or other program, and simultaneously share our thoughts at the virtual water cooler, through Facebook, instant messaging, or other online program. As more people put their computer into the same room as their TV, that percentage will only rise. And as TV manufacturers add internet access directly into the TV, we could literally approach 100% simultaneous web and TV usage. That convergence is here and actively being embraced.

In addition, this study by Nielsen shows a rise in DVR usage as well as mobile and online. "Online video consumption is up 16% from last year. Of note, approximately 44% of all online video is being viewed in the workplace." I presume, the lunch hour is being used for that time to catch up while eating your sandwich. Let's hope our productivity doesn't suffer too much!

FCC Seeks Public Comment on Comcast NBC Merger

As part of the merger process, the FCC is asking for public comment by May 3. Just wondering, does the FCC even know about the internet or blogs? Besides my own, there exists more public comment than you can shake a stick at. So why not synthesize what is being written to get a greater sense of what the implications of this merger could be. "The FCC process is just one part of a comprehensive regulatory process for the $30 billion joint venture between the No 1 U.S. cable operator and NBC Universal, which as well as a national TV network also owns cable networks, including USA Network, CNBC and MSNBC. The transaction, which has caused an uproar with consumer groups and smaller cable providers, is also being examined by the Justice Department's antitrust division."

Antitrust, do ya think? Businesses and government have faced issues with vertical integration for too many years. Movie studios and theatres are the best example of restricting vertical integration. Unfortunately, the difference between broadcast ownership and cable ownership is the slippery slope that we have slid down from. Hard to say no to broadcast ownership for cable operators when cable network ownership has been granted for years. Still the line in the sand must be drawn.

On the side, just watched the last episode of 30 Rock, where NBC is being bought by Kabletown. Hilarious! Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. But in its satire comes a lot of truth.

Barnes & Noble Planning For Their Future

Nothing stands still, especially business. Unless you adapt to a changing environment you are bound to lose your way. Hence the decline of Blockbuster. But Barnes & Noble seems to understand that change is necessary. Technology is changing the bookstore; the rise of the Kindle, e-book, and now iPad. So B&N is reshaping their future. "Barnes & Noble named the president of its Web site as its new CEO -- a surprise move that signals a new focus on digital media for the book retailer." A bold move and a smart move. Brick and mortar stores can be complementary with the web. One does not mean the destruction of another; TV didn't replace radio,on demand didn't replace movie houses. But as the new entrant arrives, the former must adapt to reclaim their space. For radio, a move to more talk radio and less sitcom; for movie houses, a move to more 3-D. The old establishment must reinvent itself to find its new hook.

Barnes & Noble can do the same thing. Consumers still like leaving their homes and going to stores. They will bring their kindles and iPads with them if you provide a reason and opportunity to use it. And once you get them into the store, figure out what else you can sell them. Build complements of the web and the store and Barnes & Noble will be a long term survivor in a changing entertainment landscape!

Blockbuster Bankrupt?

A classic case of a company not changing to stay profitable in a changing environment. "Movie rental chain Blockbuster Inc. said in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing that it may have to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection if unable to generate enough cash flow to meet or restructure its debt commitments." Beaten on the rental side and sales side too. As other companies underpriced them, Blockbuster became a follower and not a leader. Reacting not acting. And so they lost market share to Netflix with unlimited rentals, to Redbox with cheaper rentals. Blockbuster even lost on the gaming front, allowing companies like Game Stop to come in with new and used games. It seems Blockbuster had the edge but lost the vision.

Because Blockbuster is a brick and mortar business, it is not in their best interest to compete with mail order or VOD. Instead, they must figure out how to bring customers BACK into their stores. For video, it is lower prices and no penalties. They need to aggressively enter the gaming fray and offer competition immediately to Game Stop. And they must push a game rental component, to rent before you buy, as an added inducement to join them. Kids love downloads and offer opportunities by bringing your handheld into the store to download characters or games, simply for coming in. Heck, once in the store, you have a greater chance of getting a sale.

Blockbuster must change its model and adapt to changing times; else, this bankruptcy will be a Chapter 7, not a Chapter 13.

Is My Space For Sale?

Publicly, News Corp is stating its commitment to My Space, but rumor has it that the site is for sale. So News Corp took an up and coming site and turned it into a dog while it's competitor, Facebook, continued to grow and grow. So who who wants to buy a dog? Per the article, "A separate gossiper close to News Corp management tells us News Corp is asking private equity firms for $700 million." Is it worth that much?

And can a new owner turn My Space around or does it have too much baggage that it would need a whole new brand name, strategic direction, and marketing push to recapture the social network user. And given all that, wouldn't it be cheaper to start from scratch. At $700 million I would say so.

Facebook Most Popular Website

From today's Cynopsis: "Facebook surpassed Google as the most popular U.S. site for the week ending March 13 in terms of weekly share of visits, according to Hitwise, amassing 7.07% of all U.S. Visits. Facebook also reached the #1 ranking on Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and New Year's Day as well as the weekend of March 6 and 7. Google trailed close behind last week with 7.03% of visits, followed by Yahoo Mail (3.8%) and Yahoo (3.67%)." And where is My Space? While Facebook grows, My Space falters.

More interest in social networking than searches! No wonder Google tried to enter the fray with Buzz. Has Facebook hit its stride or is it a temporary pinnacle and changing interests will find users getting bored with Facebook shortly and looking for the next thing.

Will Disney Spin Off ABC?

In a very interesting turn of events, Disney is saying that they would consider spinning off their broadcast and affiliate networks from their cable properties. All this as Comcast is trying to merge a broadcast network NBC with it's cable properties. "Chief Executive Bob Iger said on Wednesday that the top U.S. media company was keeping its options open for dealing with TV network ABC and its struggling news division, including a spin-off." Certainly this was said in a shareholder meeting and may simply indicate that all options (even remote ones) are available, it may not mean that it is actively being considered. Still to talk spin off amidst a FCC review of a possible merger indicates two different management strategies.

The final decision will be a financial one. If broadcast can build a stronger revenue base, and retransmission fees from cable companies are one such option, the long term outlook for broadcast may be too promising to spin off today. Should regulation emerge to protect the consumer from dropped broadcast services, these new fees, if any, may not be enough for Disney to keep ABC. The results of the NBC-Comcast merger may provide some clue for a possible Disney-ABC spin off.

Could Retrans Affect the Comcast-NBC Merger?

As the FCC and DOJ review the planned merger of NBC and Comcast, MSOs and others are seeking guidance on retrans rules. "According to a copy of a letter being sent to the House and Senate Commerce Committees from Time Warner Cable, Cablevision, Dish, DirecTV, the American Cable Association and others, cable and satellite operators want the committees to take a new look at the Cable Act and retransmission consent in light of what they say is the current imbalance in favor of broadcasters and a "broken system" in need of repair... Also signing on to the letter were Charter, Insight, Mediacom, Suddenlink, Bright House Network, and OPASTCO, the small telco lobby."

So what is most interesting about this above quote. Not who is not included in this letter. Comcast is not taking part in this request. And it is because they do not want to further rock the boat. But a long shadow hangs over these merger proceedings precisely because of ABC and Cablevision, and in the next few months, ABC and Time Warner Cable. And how easy we forget that at midnight at the end of last year, Fox was ready to be pulled off of Time Warner Cable.

Technology and economics have changed the model of "free TV". Yet, every broadcast network owns cable nets too. For ABC, its sports is managed by ESPN; for NBC, its news comes from MSNBC. CBS spun off its Viacom properties but still owns College Sports Network and Showtime. Public interest though must still be considered if broadcast nets are also available over the air. Cable companies haven't built converter boxes to work effortlessly to switch from an antennae to cable. They built the mousetrap and we must figure out how to work with it or around it.

Google CEO: mobile computing reshaping Internet

The cellphone has changed computing! "Google's CEO says mobile smartphones are transforming the Internet" in so many ways. For both Google and Apple, the smartphone adds a convenience in exchange for a smaller screen. I've seen it firsthand. Need a railroad schedule, its at your fingertips; need directions or GPS, just tap a few keys. And do it without being tethered to a computer screen; rather, on a device that comes with you than you going to it.

Given its compact size, the smartphone becomes a must-have accessory 24 hours a day, seven days a week. And with that number of eyeballs comes subscription revenue and advertising opportunities. Convenience, portability, internet access, knowledge. The proliferation of apps simply helps to expand the value of the device.

And so I wonder if a tablet device, too small to replace a computer, to large to fit in a pocket, will become the next must-have device. Will men start carrying manbags for their tablet, comb, and wallet? Or will the smartphone be good enough to handle the computing and reading and viewing needs of the consumer? Or will we need both! Stay tuned.

TiVo Subscriber Losses Accelerate In 2009

I loved my Tivo! Yes past tense. As cable companies converted to all digital and scrambled each cable channel signal, my Tivo Series 2 lost its value. I thought about upgrading, especially since we had just put an HD set into the same room. But talking to the CSR at the cable company, getting a CableCARD seemed out of her vocabulary and I wasn't about to buy a Tivo till I knew they could support it. And finally, our household enjoys both DVR and VOD and I wasn't about to put both a cable DVR box and a Tivo box on the same HD TV. Hence my dilemma, my Sophie's Choice, so to speak.

But having used the cable DVR, I miss the functionality, convenience, ease, and other benefits of my Tivo. It is a superior product forced to work with its dysfunctional cousin. If only the two could play more effortlessly together. But it is that issue that primarily hurts consumers from putting a Tivo into a cable home.

One hope is that the release of their latest version solves that problem. "The company last week launched Premiere, TiVo's next generation of set-top boxes that have a 16:9 interface optimized for HD displays. RCN plans to release the TiVo Premiere as its primary DVR in the second quarter, with the ability to access content from broadband sources as well as VOD." And that is the key; to successfully market this product by simply work WITH the cable company. For Tivo, close those cable deals! Market in their newsletters, guides, triple play offers, and such. Run cross channel showing the ease of replacing a Tivo with the current box and that all functionality not only remains, but is improved. Gaining cable company partnerships and marketing alongside their messaging will grow the Tivo subscriber base!

ABC's Fight Doesn't End With Cablevision

ABC may have drawn its line in the sand when negotiating with Cablevision, but it's impact was also meant to be felt with Time Warner Cable. "Disney may repeat the maneuver if it can’t reach a deal with Time Warner Cable Inc. once their agreement ends in August, according to Wunderlich Securities LLC analyst Matthew Harrigan." And ABC isn't afraid to pull its programming off, even if a big event is possibly affected. Perhaps the notion that these problems aren't going away will be noted by the FCC before it reaches the next deadline. It is better to make changes in the direction before the gaping hole is too close to easily maneuver around. These issues need to be reconciled now by the FCC, both because of these kind of public concerns and because of the potential merger issues that an NBC Comcast combination could cause. The FCC needs to be proactive, not reactive.

ABC Cablevision Deal Struck Too Late

Approximately 13 minutes after the start of the Oscar telecast at 8:30pm ET, a crawl came across WABC that the deal with Cablevision was struck and that the signal was restored. Unfortunately for viewers, that announcement came almost three hours too late. Those that watch the awards show most likely made their plans prior to 6pm what they would do: buy an antenna, go to a friend's house, install a dish, or switch to FIOS. It is hard to imagine that Cablevision viewers were switching from their other show to WABC to see if it was back on. Can't see the Oscars; some may have left their home and gone to the movies to watch a nominated film or stayed home and rented one for the night.

And while publicly both sides will say that relationships between the two companies has returned to normal, I bet that lingering feelings remain. I would guess that one side will see it as a win-lose deal and will remember the next time. Interesting too that the FCC did not formally get involved.

And how does the repercussions of this deal affect the NBC Comcast merger plans? What happens when it is NBC's turn to negotiate with Cablevision, or FIOS? How can a deal be fairly struck when the potential NBC owner is another cable operator. I see that as a major problem, especially when it involves negotiations for a broadcast channel. And while that negotiation already occurs for cable networks, a broadcast network represents the majority of viewing across the country and should prescribe to different rules. Too much vertical ownership poses a major problem that the FCC must clearly address in the NBC Comcast merger discussion.

ABC Turned Off For Cablevision Viewers

I hope no Cablevision customer was surprised when they woke this morning to find WABC turned off. Cablevision has the leverage on access to viewers and ABC has the determination to lie down for their license fee. The result, no agreement, and ABC's only response to turn off the signal they provide to Cablevision. "Just after the stroke of midnight Sunday, 3 million Cablevision viewers in the New York area saw their televisions turn into pumpkins. At least that was the case for those subscribers' ABC channel, which went dark because of an impasse by the cable operator and broadcaster to resolve a feud over transmission fees."

The question is, who looks worse, or perhaps, does either company look better. Most likely it is a lose-lose situation; for ABC and the viewer, not Cablevision. Cablevision figures that a significant number of their customers won't drop the service; they will simply wait it out. That was the learning with the Scripps negotiation and is consistent for this current one.

Most likely, negotiations are on again today, but I personally doubt that the situation will change unless it is ABC that walks away from the edge and accepts less than what they may be asking for. It's Sunday so I doubt the FCC will do anything to push either to a quick resolution that results in a signal being turned back on. Likely, Cablevision has already given its best offer and has no intention of offering more. Who will blink first? At the end of the day, my bet is that ABC rolls over first. Whether it is today, before the Oscars begin, or after is up to ABC.

Will FCC Get Involved in Cablevision ABC Mess

It seems Senator John Kerry remains tired of these negotiations between broadcaster and cable company. "As Chairman of the Commerce Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, he just weighed in on Cablevision negotiations that could leave 3.1 million Cablevision customers without ABC's Oscars broadcast on Sunday. In a letter to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski Kerry urges Genachowski to push both parties to keep WABC on air during negotiations."

Is it now time for the FCC to have an opinion on all negotiations regarding broadcasters and cable companies? Should government get involved or let competition determine outcome. As there are other means to get these signals, the best advice for the consumer could just be to switch providers.

Tivo Building Box to Work With Cable Companies

Tru2way, cable's architecture to assure the security of its programming, has not been well received by TV manufacturers. Notice that most new TV sets come with internet connects and not Cablecard slots. Well Tivo wants to play nice in the sandbox. "TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO) says it's building a tru2way version of its new interface for Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) and other cable operators, but it's also pitching major MSOs on using the company's new "Premiere" boxes -- unveiled Tuesday night -- as their primary DVR for cable subscribers." Quickly please!

I hate my Motorola DVR, but I need the cable box to get on demand. The Tivo interface, search features, and other differences makes it the best DVR box out there today. And it seems Tivo is finally modifying its strategy to gain new business. "While selling DVRs remains a core part of TiVo's business, (CEO Tom) Rogers said the company remains focused on generating revenue from the software for its user interface." The sooner Tivo software is added to my DVR box, the happier I will be.

The public has no idea what a Cablecard is and the cable companies do little to promote them. Tivo boxes need a card to access all the scrambled/digital channels. Ask a CSR about them and you get confusion; go online and you get little or no information, especially on the MSOs' own websites. It remains an uphill road but I am feeling hopeful.

Lastly, what great news to hear that Dish has lost yet again in their lawsuit with Tivo. You steal, you pay the price!

ABC and Cablevision Both Get Ugly

Remember the good old days when TV was indeed free, once you bought the antenna and connected it to your roof. Walk through the neighborhood today and most antennas are gone, replaced either by more wires into the home or dishes on the roof. The result has been a unlimited increase in content for a monthly fee. And that same fee assured that the picture was clearer, never snowy, and full of HD detail. So how much is that worth, both to the cable company providing the signal and the viewer, paying to receive it today?

I contend that broadcast signals should be carved out from the subscription equation. They are the backbone of the TV landscape and offer a "basic" choice to those that do not seek more variety. And frankly those broadcasters also own cable nets so they are receiving compensation. In fact, broadcasters once used their weight with broadcast to help force in cable channels that a cable company may have been initially unwilling to launch.

I believe too that once the FCC forced broadcasters to switch their analog feed to a digital one, they opened up a Pandora's box. It actually led to more cable subscriptions rather than try to convert an analog antenna to digital. In fact, the next signal that broadcasters should send is an IP one. Allow the viewer to receive your network through the web. It will ultimately provide TV Anywhere and gain you more viewership to increase your ad revenue. A Comcast NBC merger by the way would definitely slow down the shift into this distribution platform.

But at the moment Cablevision and ABC are fighting over money for carriage and the loser will always be the cable customer; signals dropped temporarily, monthly bills raised, all to feed the pockets of both companies. So it is possible Cablevision customers would not see the Academy Awards on Sunday night. It is also possible that a last minute stay will keep it on. But what is true is that monies will get resolved and monthly bills will rise.

ABC Cablevision Fight To Get Nasty

The contract negotiation between ABC and Cablevision is tuning nasty. Just months ago, Fox went through this same issue with Cablevision and only last minute negotiations saved them from being pulled off the air; Scripps Networks negotiations with Cablevision went from bad to worse and customers lost these networks for a couple weeks. Now it is ABC's turn. And they seem to be following the playbook. Open letters in newspapers, websites devoted to save the channel, and Facebook friends connecting under this same type of group. And Cablevision will hold the line till the very end until 12th hour negotiations on March 7 either save the channel or drop it from availability for Cablevision customers. Ultimately a no win scenario.

"The signal for ABC’s New York station, WABC, has been retransmitted, essentially free, by Cablevision for decades, but Cablevision said Tuesday that ABC now wanted $40 million a year, or about $1 a month for each subscriber." At the same time, ABC, and its owner Disney get tons of subscription revenue from its other networks - Disney, ESPN, Family, and others. But they are cable networks and ABC is broadcast. Both offered over the air and through cable lines, but a broadcast signal nonetheless. Does it or any broadcaster deserve a fee? This speaks to the heart of the argument.

It also points out the potential problem that faces the Comcast NBC merger. A distribution platform owning a broadcaster presents many problems of fair and equitable distribution; profit before public. It is the fundamental problem that should force the FCC to not approve the merger. Just imagine what might happen when it is NBC's turn to negotiate its "carriage" on Cablevision, Cox, or one of Comcast's rivals, Verizon, AT&T, et al. And what about pursuing new distribution platforms not beholden to a cable platform, like IP. Cablevision's negotiation with ABC is simply a precursor to the bigger problems that a Comcast NBC merger represents.

Viacom Programming To Leave Hulu

Viacom, he owner of Comedy Central, MTV and other networks, has decided not to renew its Comedy Central deal with Hulu. Despite its appeal and high usage on the Hulu platform, Comedy Central programming like The Daily Show, South Park, and others will cease being available as of March 9. I'm sure as other network deals expire they will not be renewed either. "Hulu said it was still talking to Comedy Central about “a number of opportunities.” A Comedy Central spokesman declined to say whether the channel would strike a distribution deal with one of Hulu’s competitors."

If I am to read between the lines, advertising revenue split between Comedy Central and Hulu was not enough to continue. It also has had the reverse effect of providing an alternative to cable, thus reducing cable subscription fees. The solution is obvious: a subscription model on Hulu so that Viacom captures a dual revenue stream. Hulu customers may not like that. The second is to do deals with cable companies that offer authentication to a cable subscription. Thus it would be more likely to keep Comedy Central on Fancast inside a walled garden and accessible only to Comcast customers.

Consider this a turning point for Hulu and one that seriously will impact their model. Content companies like the two stream model of subscription and advertising. Free does not fly in today's marketplace and ultimately the consumer will lose.

ABC Could Pull Plug Off Cablevision

Just months after losing Scripps programming during contract discussions and almost seeing FOX pulled, another network is threatening the same path. In this case it is a broadcaster, WABC in New York, but the target remains the same, Cablevision. "ABC says that it may pull its WABC-TV New York signal from Cablevision at 12:01 a.m. on March 7 unless the cable operator agrees to pay for the channel in a retransmission-consent dispute. Broadcasters are increasingly pushing for cash in their retransmission-consent negotiations for their channels given the size of their audiences relative to cable networks that receive higher per-sub fees." I get the need for fees for cable networks, but I would like to think that broadcast signals are a different story. It is essentially over-the-air signals being captured and aired on cable. While not entirely technically true, the fact is that broadcast should remain "free" TV.

And trust me when I say that ABC won't suffer. In fact all the major broadcasters also own cable networks as well as additional digital offshoots of their broadcast signal. For ABC, Disney, Family ESPN and others can certainly support ABC's bottom line.

Eventually these broadcast, now digital, signals will become IP delivered signals, free to the TV over a broadband or wireless connection. It is this unlimited access to the world that means that their should not be a fee for carriage; otherwise, count ABC as simply another cable network. And isn't that the concern the FCC has with the NBCUniversal Comcast merger. The worry that Comcast will turn the NBC broadcast signal into another cable network.

But I may be too late to this argument. Broadcast television has already been receiving fees for carriage. And once the genie is out of the bottle, it is hard to plug it back up. Still, for our sake, the consumer and viewer, it is worth a try by the FCC. Otherwise you might as well turn them all into cable networks!

SAG and AFTRA To Work Together

The writers strike just 2 short years ago is an ancient memory for some; others, it was lost wages and acrimonious negotiations. The actors union lost its clout and was unable to push its own agenda. Well the actor's current contract expires in June of next year and new learnings have been made. SAG and AFTRA recognize they are more powerful working together then individually. "The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, or Aftra, said its national board of directors had approved plans to negotiate jointly with the Screen Actors Guild toward its next prime-time television contract." My only hope is that it results in an agreement with the producers and not another strike in Hollywood!

iPad Getting Content From Conde Nast

Apple's iPad may not be on sale just yet, but it is certainly building its content appeal. "The first magazines for which it (Conde Nast) will create iPad versions are Wired, GQ, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker and Glamour, the company plans to announce in an internal memorandum on Monday." Earlier it was announced that the Associated Press will also sell a paid subscription on the iPad. or you can simply buy a subscription to The NY Times or other newspapers. And of course, the real reason to buy - access to books, video, and music!