I'm stunned. Over at the Bits section of The New York Times, there is actually lucid, coherent, intelligent discussion happening ON THE INTERNET!
I know, I know... hard to believe. I'm sure we'll all get back to yelling FAIL! or FIRST! at each other soon, or debating the merit of Britney wearing a bra (she really should), but in the meantime, there's a super interesting piece about the cable companies getting upset about all the networks putting so much content on the web for free (South Park, Monk, The Daily Show, Battlestar Galactica, etc.). Their claim is that putting it on the web devalues it, so they should have to pay less to carry the networks on their cable systems.
The networks seem to be trying to have it both ways, spreading their brand for free on the web or generating ad revenue, and still monetizing their content through the cable systems.
Now, here's the crazy part: the comment section is actually good and raises interesting points! Mark Milner says:
When cable was first introduced years ago, its pitch went like this: “The reason you pay for cable is because there are no commercials.”
The cable companies are making millions and millions on their overpriced product and they slam us with commercials as well.
Seems like they are trying to have it both ways as well.
And I liked Tantrum's concise refrain. I think I'll make a bumper sticker out of this:
Show me a competitive business that has fought customers’ habits and preferences successfully yet managed to thrive.