How do you watch TV? Is it even ...on TV?

I'm hooked on a news series on NETFLIX. Called House of Cards it's the story of a "Ruthless and cunning, Congressman Francis Underwood." Think of it as The West Wing, minus the idealism.

Kevin Spacey, arguably one of the best in the business stars. He's also Executive Producer. Robin Wright and the rest of a terrific cast make for great entertainment. NETFLIX obviously believes in it because they've invested $100 Million in the series.

What makes the viewing experience different:

• It's on a streaming video channel which you can watch on your iPad or TV through various devices. You do have to subscribe to NETFLIX to view the series.
• All 13 episodes of the first season are available for viewing at your convenience. Watch when, where and on what you want. I used to watch Entourage the same way. Why subscribe to en entire premum channel when you just want to watch one series?

As someone who is old enough to remember being the first house on our street with a TV, and just one channel that signed on at 4pm, this sort of thing always amazes me. Technology empowers us, including how we watch TV. I watch House of Cards on an iPad mini with Bose headphones. So am I even watching TV? Long answer: No, I'm consuming video content on a mobile device. Short answer: I'm being entertained on my own terms.

There is no difference between watching a program on a 60 inch big screen or an iPad mini because it's not the size of the screen, it's how close you are to the screen.  So kicking back with my iPad a foot or so away from my eyes and the awesome sound from those Bose headphones is as good as any home theater experience.

Of course while I'm watching the show, I'm not watching traditional TV, nor the ads that still run on the bulk of TV whether it be off-air or via satellite or cable. The way we watch programming is changing with the rapid evolution of the technology we use to consume it.

It's empowering and an important step forward for us.

We as consumers are achieving a long-time goal, "A la Carte" programming. Just watching and paying for what we want to watch. Like at our house, if you subscribe to a satellite or cable television service, you buy program "bundles." You buy a package of channels, maybe watch 10 of them but are stuck paying for another hundred channels you never watch. It makes sense as consumers to pay for just what we consume, right? Up to now, those who control content distribution have prevented us from doing that.

To be fair to satellite and cable companies, they're victims to some extent of major programmers who say "If you want to carry this channel from us, you have to also carry these other channels. Take it or leave it." We as subscribers ultimately end up picking up the tab. A growing added cost for us are the so-called regional sports channels. Many cable systems have no choice but to provide them  at extra cost to us, even though we could care less about the teams or sports covered. It's about to change and here's why:

• We can get an amazing amount of digital channels, many in HD using a simple off-air antenna.
• Companies like NETFLIX are providing a huge and growing number of programs like House of Cards via the Internet.
• Technology like Apple TV is yet another video content pipeline. Ditto for YouTube, already producing several series, they've just announced a new country music channel.
• Many networks themselves are providing their shows on-demand. Watch how, when and where you like.
• We're willing to give up a little, to gain a lot AND save a lot. Heck, I'm willing to give up ESPN if they don't stop creating financial and fan-killing monstrosities like the Longhorn Network.

Consumers have a funny way of getting what they want, and these days are more than willing to shop around for what meets most their needs and save the most money. Outlets like NETFLIX get that.

When I told my wife about YouTube's plans, she said it's time to cancel our DISH Network service, or at least cut way back on it. I don't think she was kidding.

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you"

Making the case for a la carte television programming

Pay Television customers are cutting the cable and ditching the dish by the hundreds of thousands.

There are a few reasons for this, not the least of which is the economy. Folks simply can't afford to pay over a hundred bucks a month for TV. The real reason is the alternative programming choices like Apple TV or the increasing amount of programming available on the Internet. You can receive local stations free off-air, many other channels are free via the 'Net and there's a huge amount of programming that yes, you have to pay for, but it's on demand and you only pay for what you really want to watch.

I love Entourage but don't subscribe to HBO. So I just wait for it to come out on iTunes and buy the season for under 20 bucks.

Here's the challenge satellite and cable companies face. It's the program providers themselves because of a process called bundling. When you purchase a programming package from a satellite or cable company, you do so in tiers. You can't just pick the channels you want to watch.

Here's how it works, and why satellite and cable companies are held hostage, then have to hold you hostage as a consumer. Let's say a hugely popular channel decides to add another one to its programming line-up. Maybe they come up with the "Best of George Hamilton" channel. With apologies to George, it likely would attract few, if any viewers. But darn it, they believe in it and want eyeballs.

So the company will tell the satellite and cable companies that if they want to carry the hugely popular channel, they also have to "bundle" the boring channels as well. Which costs more, and that cost is passed on to you. You pay for what you don't watch.

Think about it. Of all the channels you have available to you, how many do you actually watch at your house. 5, 10, 15? This out of a several hundred you're having to pay for. So Apple TV, or services like Netflix provide an alternative. You pay only for what you actually watch. Plus more and more channels are available free on the 'Net. Click, play, enjoy.

Out of the tens of millions of people who use satellite or cable, the loss of a few hundred thousand may not seem like much. But I remember back in the day when satellite companies came along and the cable companies laughed at the few hundred thousand original customers companies like DISH Network or DIRECTV offered. The cable companies long since stopped laughing. Actually a few tears were shed.

To be fair, no one has fought harder to keep programming costs down than DISH Network's Charlie Ergen. His battles with program providers are legendary. He's already adapting his company for the new way people watch TV, when and where.

In the toughest of economic times, the last thing people will give up besides food and shelter, is television. But they are no longer interested in, and can no longer afford to pay for programming they don't watch in the first place.

It's time for consumers to have the freedom to pay for only what they watch, a la carte. People that produce programming, and the companies that distribute it better wake up to that fact and find a way to make it work.

There's a counter-argument that a la carte programming would cost consumers more. It's akin to another argument (from Washington) that the states would never pass a balanced budget amendment. In both instances why not let us make that decision? "We the people" pay the bills. We're not "Monetary" units." We're customers.

(I've offered a friend in the industry equal time)

Brian Olson
Conversation Starters Public Relations