Government Failure and Free to Air TV Licensing Essays

Television has been criticized as “a vast cultural wasteland”. Tv is supposed to be something that people use for fun and entertainment not a way to get away from your problems. Now with that being said this quote is trying to say that tv is useless. I think the reason that some people think that tv is useless is because of shows like SpongeBob and family guy. Sponge bob is a very popular kids show that has been around for years but doesn’t benefit the people watching it in anyway. In fact, watching a cartoon like SpongeBob can damaged the mind of many people and children with the stupidity that’s done on the show. Then you have a show like family guy where the things done can be called stupid but at the same time the things done are realistic but the only problem with a show like that is that it’s very inappropriate for kids to watch because of all the inappropriate behavior and violence that that is shown in a show like that. Another problem with tv isn’t the tv it’s the people. The shows are there to watch and to enjoy but it’s up to the person to watch it or the parent to allow their child to watch that. I don’t think that tv is a vast cultural wasteland because there are many different thins to see and watch and learn you just have to watch the right shows and use the right channels. Sometimes watching tv can even be fundamental.

In the Pay TV industry, it would be difficult and expensive to enter the market. The barriers to entry involves costly infrastructure that is already controlled by the big players in the market. Whether programming is coming over cable, fiber, DSL, or satellite dish, the costs to implement this infrastructure is very high. The cost to launch a satellite in 1997 was $51 million, which would be close to $80 million in present dollars (DISH). The threat of new entry is low.

In their article “Moving beyond the 'Vast Wasteland'”, Laurie Ouellette and Justin Lewis critique how public broadcasting functions in the US. Liberal reformers hold to the view that television needs protection from commercialism. The liberal reformer view contains cultural and class hierarchies. They believe that public television is for the white, college-educated middle-class viewer who has “cultural capital”(Ouellette & Lewis, 96). As a result, funding for public broadcasting has gone primarily towards high culture and intellectual programs and not sitcoms or other popular forms of television. Ouellette and Lewis disagree with this, saying that these types of high-brow programming are not the only ones worthy of public investment. Instead, they argue that popular programs that are being commercially maintained also merit public support and investment (96). Rather than reserving public broadcasting for more educational programming, the authors argue that there is a more progressive solution that can incorporate popular media forms while still veering away from commercialization.

The FCC does not license cable TV as a requirement for operating the systems because the municipal government is the primary regulator. Unlike broadcasting, the cable systems’ legal rights can be controlled by cities and countries, or by local governments that franchise cable operators.

Activities leading to the adoption of a code for television were begun simultaneously with the licensing of stations. The experience of many years of operation in radio broadcasting pointed to the desirability of early agreement upon standards of programs. The NARTB Television Code became effective March 1, 1952. Subscribers are entitled to display a seal of good practice signifying compliance with code standards.

The issue of 1st amendment rights are critical subject in a Democracy such as America. For example, in the past countries like Nazi controlled Germany control media content to push out their extremist ideas and to squash any opposition content. That’s why government intervention is imperative to protect individual’s rights of free speech, freedom of press, and right to petition especially in relation to cable regulation. The best way to measure if government intervention in cable regulation is infringing upon citizens 1st amendment right is to focus on major consumer demands. The most appropriate goals to address the problem are to be able to please majority of consumers by implementing the perfect balance between autonomy and control when

Due to this premium channels such as ShowTime and HBO who let you watch TV over the cable without ads decided to be more bold and ballsy by providing content not available on normal

: In 1992, the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act required cable companies to give a certain number of their channels to local broadcast programs. The Cable Act included several “must-carry” rules that limited the control of open channels by cable programmers and increased competition for the left over channels. Soon after the Act became law, Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., the owner of several cable programming operations, brought this case against the FCC and challenged if the must-carry regulations were constitutional. A special three-judge U.S. District Court ruled in favor of Turner Broadcasting, granting the summary judgment that the requirements were consistent with the First Amendment and intermediate scrutiny

“Each year the United States spends .014% of its budget on public broadcasting. This amounted to approximately $445 million spent on funding towards public broadcasting in 2012.”(Defending Public Broadcasting Should Not Be Done Lightly) The funding was meant to help public broadcasting stations get to a state where they could support themselves on their own. However, many stations continued to take the funding even though they did not require it. Despite this, the stations that abused the funding happened to have some very educational programs that most stations lacked which brought the question whether or not they should be punished. But think about it, is it not bad enough that you’re already paying a substantial amount of taxes to help

Their case was dependent upon arguing that the ACMA was acting outside of his jurisdiction and employing powers in which it did not have the authority to exercise. The defending party acknowledged that it was open to the Communications Authority to form an opinion on their actions. Ultimately the case was decided against the position taken by Today FM and the appellant trial judges unanimously. It was ruled that the ACMA was not exercising judicial power in their actions of suspending a broadcasting license, ‘there is no basis on which the Authority, in so acting, could be said to exercise judicial power. None of the indicia of exclusively judicial power would be present.’ The court then went on to make clear that ‘The Authority's cancellation or suspension of the license would not be…the imposition of punishment for the commission of an offence.” As a result, the court acknowledged the ACMA’s power to make findings as to whether an offence has been committed in breach of the Broadcasting Services

The invention of the television has had an impact on all aspects of American's lives. It has affected how we work, interact with others, and our foreign relations. One part of American society that it has especially affected is presidential elections. Television has impacted who is elected and why they were elected. Since the 1960's television has served as a link between the American public and presidential elections that allows the candidate to appear more human and accountable for their actions; consequently this has made television a positive influence on presidential elections. But it has also had a negative affect on elections, making presidential candidates seem like celebrities at times and making it easier to publicize mistakes

Over the centuries, the media has played a significant role in the shaping of societies across the globe. This is especially true of developed nations where media access is readily available to the average citizen. The media has contributed to the creation of ideologies and ideals within a society. The media has such an effect on social life, that a simple as a news story has the power to shake a nation. Because of this, governments around the world have made it their duty to be active in the regulation and control of media access in their countries. The media however, has quickly become dominated by major mega companies who own numerous television, radio and movie companies both nationally and

Over the last forty to fifty years, television has been a major topic of discussion. Specifically, many debate societal benefits to television watching. One widely accepted opinion is that watching TV makes people dumber. People have referred to it with terms like the “idiot box” and do not feel that watching TV has any benefit at all. They feel that it is a waste of time and people need to spend their hours more wisely. Others are of the opinion that TV is actually has societal benefits. From this perspective, they claim that the development of the structure of the programs now requires one to intellectually participate in watching television. Essentially, the argument is whether TV is a beneficial societal force or is it simply a

Channels Television is an Independent television station based in Lagos, Nigeria. The company licensed in June 1993 and allocated a radio frequency, Ultra High

Sources close to the electronic media named a good number of organisations that applied for permission. These are Media One, Liberty Television, Dhaka TeleFilm, Telebangla, Bishal Multimedia, KTV, Bengal News, Janata Televsion, Daffodil Multimedia, Bishal Music, Bijoy Broadcasting Univision, Bangla Television, Maxel Multimedia, Development Media TV Channel, SAS World, TV Bangla, Bangladesh Channel USA, Nationwide Communication, Bangla TV London, Probashi Television Network, National Television, Baishakhi Television, Sonali Television, Gazi Satellite Network and Movie Tone Media Communication.