UPDATE: Time Warner and Viacom Reach Agreement, SpongeBob Saved

Brett Singer — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 03:52:00 GMT

The war has ended, and we are all winners -- the kids can watch Dora, the grown-ups can watch Colbert. Technically, the kids can also watch Colbert, and the grown-ups can even watch Dora.

Viacom and Time Warner have reached an agreement, terms to be fleshed out later, that will keep the various channels on the air for Time Warner Cable subscribers, according to the New York Times. Perhaps they took Dora's advice to "stop and think" for a minute.

One interesting idea did come from this, however, via the comments below: pay-per-minute television. I like it. They'll never DO it, but I like it. It would probably greatly reduce TV viewing in most households. "Hey kids, there's a Spider-Man marathon on! 65 episodes in a row!" (That was this morning, actually.) If you add, "It'll only cost us a dollar a minute!" I might just pick up a book, y'know?

Anyway, for now, everyone can keep watching their favorite shows. And thank goodness -- isn't there a new "Hills" spinoff? (Note: if there is, I don't know what it's called because I don't watch that show. But somebody must.)

Original post follows below:

*-*-*-*

If you get your TV service from Time Warner Cable and your kids love them some SpongeBob and Dora The Explorer, you might want to stock up on DVDs.

Viacom wants an increase in the fee Time Warner pays to carry their channels, and Time Warner doesn't want to pay it. The deadline is midnight tonight. What channels are those? A partial list: Nickelodeon, MTV, VH-1, Comedy Central. So no Diego for the kiddies, and no Daily Show and Colbert Report for you. (Or for your kids, if they enjoy a humorous take on current events.)

Unsurprisingly, both sides think they are right. In a press release, Viacom says the following: " Ultimately…if Nickelodeon, COMEDY CENTRAL, MTV and the rest of our programming is discontinued - over less than a penny per day – we believe viewers will see this behavior by their cable company as outrageous." The fee increase Viacom is asking for is "about 25 cents a month, or $3 a year, per subscriber for its package of channels," according to the LA Times. Time Warner says its about Viacom trying to make up for decreased ad revenue: the LA Times quotes Time Warner Cable spokesman Alex Dudley as saying, "Advertising revenue stinks so they are looking to stick our customers for the difference. We have to hold the line for our customers. They are holding our customers hostage for a bunch of networks with sagging ratings and only one or two good channels."

Personally, I've felt for years that it should be possible to pick and choose which channels you actually want to receive. For example, Comedy Central, sure. But no one in my house watches Nickelodeon, so that one can go. Of course, that's not how it works. Oh well.

The thing is, while both sides may or may not have valid points in this matter, customers don't really care. It's not like Time Warner will offer refunds if they drop the Viacom channels from their lineup (although I suppose they might if it lasts long enough). But I think it you ask cable customers, the vast majority would say that they pay too much for their service. Take away channels that they actually want to watch, and that makes it even worse. It's two rich companies fighting with each other over more money, and while they fight, I don’t get to watch "The Hills." (Note: I don't actually watch "The Hills." That's just an example.)

Anyway, midnight tonight. If Viacom and Time Warner can't come to an agreement by then, bye-bye Dora and Jon Stewart. Let's see what happens.

Source: LATimes

Disney Bails on Narnia

Miss Piggy Wants a Bailout For Christmas

They Say: Autism is Linked to Watching TV

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:15:00 GMT

If you ever suspected it was no coincidence that the rise in childhood autism began around the same time as the advent of cable TV, a Cornell study shows you were on to something.

Researchers at Cornell University claim to have established a definite link between autism rates and TV watching among toddlers in California, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Oregon. Beginning in 1980, when cable TV brought Nickelodeon and other children’s programs into people’s homes, autism rates rose most sharply in counties with a high percentage of homes with cable. Specifically, the Cornell study found that “roughly 17 percent of the growth in autism in California and Pennsylvania during the 1970s and 1980s was due to the growth in cable television.”

And studying the amount of time children watched television based upon particularly rainy and snowy years in the Western states (bad weather is known to increase child TV watching), the researchers concluded that “just under 40 percent of autism diagnoses in the three states studied is the result of television watching.” Although it’s possible that these numbers reflect a relationship between autism and staying indoors (not watching TV), these numbers are much more conclusive than any of the numerous studies looking to establish a link between autism and vaccines.

The Cornell researchers are advancing no theories as to why increased television watching among toddlers causes an increased likelihood of an autism diagnosis, but it’s possible the link is related to the fact that the ability to process visual data develops in the first three years of life; children with autism exhibit abnormal activity in these areas of the brain.

It may be time that researchers turned their attention away from chemicals and genetic links in the search for a cure for autism. If something as simple as avoiding TeleTubbies and Baby Einstein could help lower autism rates, this is something every parent needs to know.

Photo: Cleveland Leader

Schools Tying Up Autistic Kids

Strollerderby : cable

UPDATE: Time Warner and Viacom Reach Agreement, SpongeBob Saved

No Christmas Specials for Some Jewish Kids

Disney Bails on Narnia

Miss Piggy Wants a Bailout For Christmas

They Say: Autism is Linked to Watching TV

Interview: Larry Martinek of Mathnasium