Cable Reform

Cable Reform

The Cable industry has evolved dramatically since its inception in the early 20th century. Its roots starting out as a monopolistic competition has evolved into an ideal competition market. In the following text we analyze. The evolution of the cable industry, its market structure, how government impacts the industry, the public, and business. Today, much like any other industry, reform is advocated from many stakeholders whom feel that change is required. In Washington and across the country, cable television consumers are concerned with soaring cable bills and decreasing customer service. (Summers, 2007) Local franchising was appropriate in the earliest days of cable television when small monopoly cable systems were being constructed on a local basis. Now that the monopoly is over, local franchise authorities (LFA’s) is duplicative, inefficient and survives mainly as an opportunity for local government to collect tax revenue through other means other than property and sales taxes.

The Federal Communication Commission (FCC), which is responsible for promoting the deployment of broadband – a cable service- instead working to facilitate the desire of local officials to impose a multiplicity of less-visible taxes. Further complicating the cable industry from its beginnings is that today it envelopes not just cable and video services but also, advanced communications such as data and voice services via high-speed internet access and voice over internet have made regulation a multi-prong approach to engage the FCC to ensure that they serve the community as a whole.

Consequently, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 is criticized for being so fundamentally flawed that it is difficult to imagine how even the most deregulatory-minded (FCC) could have brought about substantive change. (Summer, 2007) The Act of 1996 was to promote competition, reduce regulation, and encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications...