Benton RSS Feed

Broadcast television network executives admitted during upfronts that they weren’t happy with their product, either. Cable networks have been waiting for this moment.

Mel Berning came out swinging at the A+E Networks upfront, scolding broadcasters for charging a "failure tax" and telling ad buyers that the smart money was with his networks' hits. David Levy, head of ad sales for Turner, has been pushing for parity with broadcast for years, and now, he told Adweek, "We’re getting there." "Sports, kids and news have been at parity for five, six years," Levy said. "For entertainment, there just hasn't been enough quality programming, but we’ve really stepped things up in the last four or five years." Many across the negotiating table agree. "You can get three spots on cable for the cost of one on broadcast," said a buyer for an over-the-counter medicine brand (every buyer who spoke to Adweek for this story asked to be quoted anonymously). So why buy broadcast at all? "We don't."

In sports, one person’s greed is another person’s sound business decision. So, while greed may ultimately determine how many top-tier sports events move to cable, making money generally is not a crime.

A harbinger of the balance could come as the NBA negotiates its next TV contract, where ESPN and Turner are the incumbents. Nearly all playoff games are on cable, though the finals have remained on ABC. If ESPN offers the NBA substantially more to move them off-broadcast entirely, will the league say yes? Or, would it forfeit the dollars as sort of a public service, keeping them available to all TV homes. Yes, there are still millions of Americans who don’t have cable. The way things are going, all of the blue-chip events may be on cable by 2025, save the Super Bowl and the Masters final rounds. Having Fox Sports 1 and a Comcast-enriched NBC Sports Network eager for content further shifts the balance of power in sports negotiations to the leagues and other rights holders. Assuming cable networks are willing to offer them more than broadcasters, it will be up to them to decide where bottom-line interests start and end.

Last fall, Alex Gibney, a documentary filmmaker who won an Academy Award in 2008 for an exposé of torture at a U.S. military base in Afghanistan, completed a film called “Park Avenue: Money, Power and the American Dream.” It was scheduled to air on PBS on November 12th. The movie had been produced independently, in part with support from the Gates Foundation.

“Park Avenue” is a pointed exploration of the growing economic inequality in America and a meditation on the often self-justifying mind-set of “the one per cent.” As a narrative device, Gibney focusses on one of the most expensive apartment buildings in Manhattan—740 Park Avenue—portraying it as an emblem of concentrated wealth and contrasting the lives of its inhabitants with those of poor people living at the other end of Park Avenue, in the Bronx. Among the wealthiest residents of 740 Park is David Koch, the billionaire industrialist, who, with his brother Charles, owns Koch Industries, a huge energy-and-chemical conglomerate. A large part of the film subjects the Kochs to tough scrutiny.

Shortly before “Park Avenue” aired, Melissa Cohlmia, the chief spokesperson for Koch Industries, sent WNET a two-paragraph statement criticizing the film as “disappointing and divisive.” Cohlmia acknowledges, however, that neither she nor Koch had watched it. WNET aired the statement, unedited, immediately after the film. Cohlmia said that she based the critique on the trailer.

MetroPCS dropped its lawsuit challenging the Federal Communications Commission's network neutrality regulations on May 17, leaving Verizon to continue the legal battle against the rules on its own.

T-Mobile, which was not challenging the rules, acquired MetroPCS earlier this month. Putting the regulations into place was one of the signature accomplishments by Chairman Julius Genachowski, who stepped down on May 17 as well. In a statement, Chairman Genachowski applauded T-Mobile for withdrawing the MetroPCS suit: “The FCC’s widely supported open Internet framework has contributed to healthy growth in innovation and investment across the U.S. broadband economy. Since 2010, our strong and balanced rules have been protecting entrepreneurs and consumers, and have increased certainty and predictability for investors in Internet services as well as networks," he said. "The ongoing litigation – now pursued by a single company – only serves to reduce that certainty and predictability," Chairman Genachowski added. Verizon declined to comment. Gigi Sohn, president of consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge, claimed Verizon's ongoing challenge is an "attempt to take away the FCC's ability to protect consumers and promote competition." "In addition to being anti-consumer, this is against the long-term interests of the largest incumbent providers," she said.