Wednesday, March 23, 2011
In U.S.A.'s war on cable, the internet is pursued by the detectives of the Major Cable Providers. These are their stories.
"You won't have to pay your cable company for the dozens of channels you won't ever watch just get the ones you do." says Henry Blodget in his article called Sorry, There's No Way To Save The TV Business.
Looking simply at the title of his article, I agree. The internet has given us faster and less expensive ways to watch what we want to watch, when we want to watch it. We don't have to just sit in front of the TV to see what's on one of the 6,000 channels that DirectTV is charging us $300 a month for, only to find that there's nothing good on. If we have all those options at our fingertips, why waste all that money for stuff we don't want anyway?
Personally, I'd hate to see TV go because I hate having to sit at a desk to watch my shows. But with today's technology, you can hook your laptop to your TV, plug your external hard drive into your PS3 or just browse the internet right on your big screen , so in a way, my pet peeve isn't even legitimate anymore.
One thing I liked about Blodget's article was that he outlined what would happen if the internet (and sites like Hulu and Yahoo) was to take over. The networks and producers would all make money off of the advertising as usual, and the sites would make money from memberships that would be much more personalized for the viewer. It would mean losing the "triple play" bundles, the ancient home phone technology and DVR, but we'd be able to watch our favorite shows, and ONLY our favorite shows.
I scrolled down a bit on this article and took a look at some of the comments. The very first one brings up a good point - what about sports?? Internet would have to get much faster and much more reliable before you put live streaming sports on there. It's tough to watch live programming period, let alone something as fast paced as a hockey game. I guess if you're going to comment on this to stir up debate, respond with your thoughts about broadcasting live sports on the internet! Is it a good idea? Would it work? Would you pay for it? Would you prefer they be online instead of on TV, provided the predictions in Blodget's article are true (lower prices, only paying for what you want, etc.)?
Posted by Sasha Hudak at 11:42 PM