IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v45y2014i3p275-293.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trying to Promote Network Entry: From the Chain Broadcasting Rules to the Channel Occupancy Rule and Beyond

Author

Listed:
  • Stanley Besen

Abstract

This article traces the efforts by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission to promote the entry of new networks, starting from its regulation of radio networks under the Chain Broadcasting Rules, through its regulation of broadcast television networks under its Financial Interest and Syndication Rules and its Prime Time Access Rule, and finally to its regulation of cable television networks under its Channel Occupancy and Leased Access Rules and its National Ownership Cap. The article’s principal conclusion is that these efforts by the FCC were largely ineffectual and that only the removal of regulatory barriers to new network entry could, and indeed did, achieve the Commission’s goal. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Stanley Besen, 2014. "Trying to Promote Network Entry: From the Chain Broadcasting Rules to the Channel Occupancy Rule and Beyond," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 45(3), pages 275-293, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:45:y:2014:i:3:p:275-293
    DOI: 10.1007/s11151-014-9424-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11151-014-9424-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11151-014-9424-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Besen, Stanley M & Soligo, Ronald, 1973. "The Economics of the Network-Affiliate Relationship in the Television Broadcasting Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(3), pages 259-268, June.
    2. Michael Spence & Bruce Owen, 1977. "Television Programming, Monopolistic Competition, and Welfare," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(1), pages 103-126.
    3. Steven T. Berry & Joel Waldfogel, 2001. "Do Mergers Increase Product Variety? Evidence from Radio Broadcasting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(3), pages 1009-1025.
    4. Peter O. Steiner, 1952. "Program Patterns and Preferences, and the Workability of Competition in Radio Broadcasting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 66(2), pages 194-223.
    5. Hans Zenger, 2012. "Loyalty Rebates And The Competitive Process," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 717-768.
    6. Andrew Sweeting, 2010. "The effects of mergers on product positioning: evidence from the music radio industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(2), pages 372-397, June.
    7. Rolla Edward Park, 1975. "New Television Networks," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 6(2), pages 607-620, Autumn.
    8. Austan Goolsbee & Amil Petrin, 2004. "The Consumer Gains from Direct Broadcast Satellites and the Competition with Cable TV," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 351-381, March.
    9. Park, Rolla Edward, 1971. "The Growth of Cable TV and Its Probable Impact on Over-The-Air Broadcasting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(2), pages 69-73, May.
    10. Besen, Stanley M, 1974. "The Economics of the Cable Television "Consensus."," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(1), pages 39-51, April.
    11. Rolla Edward Park, 1972. "Prospects for Cable in the 100 Largest Television Markets," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 3(1), pages 130-150, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Torben Stühmeier, 2019. "Media market concentration and pluralism," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 247-259, April.
    2. Behringer, Stefan & Filistrucchi, Lapo, 2015. "Hotelling competition and political differentiation with more than two newspapers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 36-49.
    3. Marco Antonielli & Lapo Filistrucchi, 2011. "Collusion and the political differentiation of newspapers," Working Papers 11-26, NET Institute, revised Nov 2011.
    4. Darlene Chisholm & Margaret McMillan & George Norman, 2010. "Product differentiation and film-programming choice: do first-run movie theatres show the same films?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 34(2), pages 131-145, May.
    5. Anderson, Simon P. & Gabszewicz, Jean J., 2006. "The Media and Advertising: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 567-614, Elsevier.
    6. Anderson, Simon & Waldfogel, Joel, 2015. "Preference Externalities in Media Markets," CEPR Discussion Papers 10835, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Brendan M. Cunningham & Peter J. Alexander, 2004. "A Theory of Broadcast Media Concentration and Commercial Advertising," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 6(4), pages 557-575, October.
    8. Crawford, Gregory & Shcherbakov, Oleksandr & Shum, Matthew, 2015. "The Welfare E ects of Endogenous Quality Choice in Cable Television Markets," CEPR Discussion Papers 10793, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Andrew Sweeting, 2010. "The effects of mergers on product positioning: evidence from the music radio industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(2), pages 372-397, June.
    10. Gregory S. Crawford & Oleksandr Shcherbakov & Matthew Shum, 2015. "The welfare effects of endogenous quality choice in cable television markets," ECON - Working Papers 202, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    11. David P. Byrne, 2015. "Testing Models Of Differentiated Products Markets: Consolidation In The Cable Tv Industry," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(3), pages 805-850, August.
    12. Monic Sun & Feng Zhu, 2011. "Ad Revenue and Content Commercialization: Evidence from Blogs," Working Papers 11-32, NET Institute.
    13. Carare, Octavian & Zentner, Alejandro, 2012. "Program substitutability in network television: Evidence from Argentina," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 145-160.
    14. Christos Genakos & Andreas Lamprinidis & James Walker, 2023. "Evaluating merger effects," CEP Discussion Papers dp1921, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    15. A. Yeşim Orhun & Sriram Venkataraman & Pradeep K. Chintagunta, 2016. "Impact of Competition on Product Decisions: Movie Choices of Exhibitors," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 73-92, January.
    16. Mitsukuni Nishida, 2015. "Estimating a Model of Strategic Network Choice: The Convenience-Store Industry in Okinawa," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 20-38, January.
    17. Steven Berry & Alon Eizenberg & Joel Waldfogel, 2016. "Optimal product variety in radio markets," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(3), pages 463-497, August.
    18. Man-Lui Lau & Bruce Wydick, 2014. "Does New Information Technology Lower Media Quality? The Paradox of Commercial Public Goods," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 145-157, June.
    19. Verboven, Frank & Bourreau, Marc & Sun, Yutec, 2018. "Market Entry, Fighting Brands and Tacit Collusion: The Case of the French Mobile Telecommunications Market," CEPR Discussion Papers 12866, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Argentesi, Elena & Buccirossi, Paolo & Cervone, Roberto & Duso, Tomaso & Marrazzo, Alessia, 2021. "The effect of mergers on variety in grocery retailing," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 79, pages 1-19.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:45:y:2014:i:3:p:275-293. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.