Cable Regulations

* Congress got it all backward when it permitted TV broadcasters to charge cable operators for carrying broadcast programs on cable networks. This should be entirely clear when you consider that the real “product” of television is viewers: Viewers of commercial messages, to be specific. Sponsors pay broadcasters to air commercial messages at rates based on A.C. Nielson or similar ratings of audience size, and these audiences include cable viewers. Broadcasters have no other source of income. For them to insist on payment from cable companies (and, ultimately, cable viewers) for delivering their programming to the cable audience is like charging admission to a shopping mall.

Cable operators should be paid by commercial broadcasters for delivering their advertising messages to the cable audience. As a television consumer, I pay for my viewing by being a captive audience for those commercial messages that convince me to buy a certain brand of soap, or car, or whatever. It seems only fair for me to expect my cable service to be subsidized by the same sponsors who pay for my “free” programming over the airwaves.

RICHARD KREIS

La Palma

* One lawmaker hailed it (Sept. 29) as “the most important consumer victory in 20 years.” That was last year when the government tried to regulate the cable TV industry. The “reform” act has not produced anywhere near the savings it promised. In fact, my rate, as most people’s, has gone up. While everyone from the lawmakers to the FCC bicker and blame each other, the American people get the shaft again. When is it going to end? Now they want to regulate the massive health care system with the same promise of savings . . . right.

KEVIN KONCZAL

Redondo Beach