 |
|
 |
|
Football Free For All?
January 4, 2008
The Hartford Courant (CT)
Editorial
More viewers watched the National Football League game between the New England Patriots and New York Giants last Saturday than any program since the Oscars. That's not surprising, given that the game was as ubiquitous as the State of the Union address and reached most households.
That happened because of a last-minute decision to simulcast the game on CBS and NBC as well as the NFL Network, which had exclusive rights to the game.
The NFL Network, on which the game was scheduled to air, is not carried by the major cable providers with the exception of Comcast, which charges a premium for the service. The National Football League, which owns the network, has been trying unsuccessfully to get the major cable providers to make the NFL programming part of their extended basic service.
That would please the fans because it would spread the cost of the service to all subscribers, rather than just to those who like football. But, as the cable companies plausibly argue, charging premiums would be fairer because only NFL fans would pay.
The cable companies have a right to charge what the market will bear, just as the NFL has a right to charge high ticket prices for its games. Football is not a public service. If the NFL wants all households to have access to games regardless of income, they should make the games available on broadcast TV as they did for the Patriots-Giants game.
It turned out to be a great game. Though the Patriots won, Giants fans had to be proud of their team's all-out effort against undefeated New England. The Patriots made history by winning all of their regular-season games. The NFL scored plenty of goodwill.
The special arrangement to air the Patriots-Giants game on the broadcast networks was a response to viewer complaints that many would be shut out of the historic game because their cable franchises did not provide the NFL Network.
Connecticut's congressional delegation even got into the act by putting pressure on the NFL to share the programming. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., wrote a letter to the league. The Senate Judiciary committee expressed its displeasure by threatening to hold hearings on the NFL's special antitrust exemption and the impact of premium sports channels on the consumer.
The broadcast networks and the NFL took credit for making the game widely available and downplayed the role of Congress. Still, you'd hope that the politicians would approach affordable health care or the federal deficit with as much zeal.
The NFL wants the Federal Communications Commission to step in and mediate the dispute between it and the major cable companies. The league contends that the cable companies are holding viewers hostage by failing to include the NFL Network premium-free.
Not really. The NFL would not provide the programming to the cable companies for free. Higher fees for the content would surely lead to higher cable rates for all.
Either way, the viewer will pay.
courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-footballtv.artjan04,0,4870838.story
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
