Abstract
The 1992 Cable Act requires cable systems to carry local broadcasters. Noncarriage of local stations may represent an attempt by cable systems to disadvantage rivals, and thereby raise the prices of advertising and cable service. Alternatively, noncarriage might represent the efficient replacement of low-valued channels with more highly-valued programming. This study attempts to discriminate between these hypotheses with data on cable carriage decisions. The results support the efficiency hypothesis. Systems selling advertising are less likely to drop local stations than nonadvertisers. Dropped stations tend to have low audience ratings, and tend to originate in a different geographic market from the system.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Broadcast Investment Analysts. 1991. Investing in Television: 5 Year Ratings Review. Washington: BIA Publications, Inc.
Chipty, T. 1995. “Horizontal Integration for Bargaining Power: Evidence From the Cable Television Industry.” Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 4: 375–97.
Federal Communications Commission. 1966. In re CATV, 2 F.C.C. 2d 725, 736 (Rulemaking; Second Report and Order).
Federal Communications Commission. 1990. Competition, Rate Regulation and Policies for Cable TV Service, 5 F.C.C. Rec. 4962.
Federal Communications Commission. 1991. Cable Television Basic Service Rates; Carriage of Television Broadcast Signals, 6 F.C.C. Rec. 4545.
Federal Communications Commission. 1992. Policy & Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau, FCC, Overview of the Television Industry, filed in Review of the Commission's Regulations Governing Television Broadcasting, MM Dkt. No. 91–221 (FCC).
Fisher, F., J. McGowan, and D. Evans. 1980. “The Audience-Revenue Relationship for Local Television Stations.” Bell Journal of Economics 11: 694–708.
Greene, W. 1990. Econometric Analysis. New York: MacMillan.
Huber, P. 1967. “The Behavior of Maximum Likelihood Estimates Under Non-Standard Conditions.” Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability 1: 221–33.
Kennedy, P. 1992. A Guide to Econometrics (3rd ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
National Association of Broadcasters. 1991. National Association of Broadcasters' Comment filed in Cable Television Basic Service Rates; Carriage of Television Broadcast Signals, MM Dkt. 90-4 & 84-1296.
Paul Kagan Associates. 1996. The Kagan Media Index. January 31, 1996.
Vita, M., and J. Wiegand. 1993. “Must-Carry Regulations for Cable Television Systems: An Economic Policy Analysis.” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 37: 1–19.
Wirth, M. and B. Allen 1979 “Another Look at Crossmedia Ownership.” Antitrust Bulletin 24: 87–103.
Wirth, M. 1990. “Cable's Impact on Over-the-Air Broadcasting.” Journal of Media Economics 3: 39–53.
Woodbury, J., S. Besen, and G. Foumier. 1983. “The Determinants of Network Television Program Prices: Implicit Contracts, Regulation, and Bargaining Power.” Bell Journal of Economics: 14, 351–65.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vita, M.G. Must Carry Regulations for Cable Television Systems: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Regulatory Economics 12, 159–172 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007953528237
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007953528237