2008 Woodie Awards
Whose Media Is It, Anyway?
Katie Gay | Samantha McNeill
Issue date: 6/26/08 Section: Op/Ed
Monopoly is no longer just a board game; it is reality for cable subscribers in Wilmington, NC. Perhaps the Parker Brothers were trying to warn the public by designing a game in which the main goal is to bankrupt other players by accumulating the most money and property. The objectives are similar to those of Time Warner Cable (TWC). Although TWC has a non-exclusive franchise, meaning other cable companies could technically provide cable service within Wilmington if granted a franchise, they have dominated the cable market in Wilmington mainly because their infrastructure is already in place. In Monopoly terms, their houses, or cables, are on every block. Just like in the board game, competition requires an extended amount of time and money, which other cable companies are not willing to spend since TWC's infrastructure is in place. This means we, the citizens of Wilmington, are stuck with TWC and their virtual monopoly.
And the story gets worse. As citizens of Wilmington we once had the right to give our input on which cable companies we wanted the city to grant franchise agreements. This right has been taken away. In 2007, a new North Carolina media law, "An Act to Promote Consumer Choice," was enacted. According to the statute, the State instead of the City now issues franchise agreements with cable providers. This prohibits citizen input regarding what cable company serves our area. In a sense, TWC holds a "get out of jail free card" which allows them to maintain total access to our city. Thus, the "Act to Promote Consumer Choice" is in reality an Act to Deny Citizen Contribution. Beginning this year, 2008, when the City franchise expires, TWC may be free to jack up prices and provide substandard customer service throughout Wilmington.
We can relate to the monopoly analogy not only because we have all played a time or two, but more importantly, because the rules of the game are deeply ingrained within us. In a society dominated by corporations, we have learned to live as consumers. The rules, in theory, are simple. The more competition we have in a market, the more likely we will receive higher quality goods for lower prices. Let's assume that logic to be true and move on to the real issue, the question that never gets asked. Even if we did have competition, does consumer choice equal democracy? Democracy is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. This means institutions such as our media system are supposed to serve us, not the other way around. But, what does it mean to have a media that serves the people, why does it matter, and how does this relate to Wilmington's situation?
And the story gets worse. As citizens of Wilmington we once had the right to give our input on which cable companies we wanted the city to grant franchise agreements. This right has been taken away. In 2007, a new North Carolina media law, "An Act to Promote Consumer Choice," was enacted. According to the statute, the State instead of the City now issues franchise agreements with cable providers. This prohibits citizen input regarding what cable company serves our area. In a sense, TWC holds a "get out of jail free card" which allows them to maintain total access to our city. Thus, the "Act to Promote Consumer Choice" is in reality an Act to Deny Citizen Contribution. Beginning this year, 2008, when the City franchise expires, TWC may be free to jack up prices and provide substandard customer service throughout Wilmington.
We can relate to the monopoly analogy not only because we have all played a time or two, but more importantly, because the rules of the game are deeply ingrained within us. In a society dominated by corporations, we have learned to live as consumers. The rules, in theory, are simple. The more competition we have in a market, the more likely we will receive higher quality goods for lower prices. Let's assume that logic to be true and move on to the real issue, the question that never gets asked. Even if we did have competition, does consumer choice equal democracy? Democracy is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. This means institutions such as our media system are supposed to serve us, not the other way around. But, what does it mean to have a media that serves the people, why does it matter, and how does this relate to Wilmington's situation?
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
William Bolduc
Bill Bolduc
posted 6/27/08 @ 12:40 PM EST
Katie and Samantha,
Nicely written editorial that points out one of the many problems associated with the media today. You are right on the mark with the expectation that our service will likely deteriorate and Time Warner will become even less responsive to customer concerns. (Continued…)
John
posted 6/27/08 @ 4:44 PM EST
At least there are always the satellite companies, DirecTV and DishNetwork. The service from satellite is better and aside from losing transmission during the worst weather it is an all around better consumer experience. (Continued…)
Post a Comment