The Growing Cable Problem

There is a growing problem with cable television and the FCC needs to step in soon. Let me explain. First, all cable companies with wires (Comcast, Time Warner, etc.) and those without wires (DirectTV, etc.) have a finite amount of bandwidth. They cannot transmit 10,000 HD channels even if they wanted to. Therefore, they have to make choices, and that is where the problem starts. There are certain channels they must carry like ESPN and ABC, which happen to be owned by the same company. Now, when they are negotiating a price for ESPN and ABC with their parent company, the parent company says we will charge you $X for ESPN and $Y for ABC and we will throw in ESPN 2-10 and ABC 2-7 for FREE! The cable company probably doesn't want those 15 channels for free because they contain mostly crappy, unpopular content, but they do not have a choice since they must have ESPN and ABC. Now, why would the parent company throw in 15 channels for free --- especially when the content they carry is not completely free. Because, they know that Comcast et al can only carry so many channels, and by filling up their bandwidth with ESPN 2-10 they can indirectly force Comcast to drop potential upstart competitors to ESPN. The ABC/ESPN parent company is using their powerful channels to block possible competitors and gain a near monoply.

Solution: The FCC needs to step in an require: (1) ala cart channel availability to consumers, and, more importantly, (2) big content providers (i.e., ESPN) cannot bundle channels when negotiating with the cable companies --- they must negotiate a single price for ESPN, a different price for ESPN2, another for ESPN3, etc.

Review: The Soloist by Steve Lopez

I just finished this book on an airplane.  I was in a hurry to finish it because the movie is already out.  I really enjoyed the bood and felt like I learned a lot.  It explores the incredibly difficult question of how much freedom/control should be given to someone that is mentally ill.  Should the mentally ill individual be forced into treatment?  The current law is basically someone cannot be forced into treatment unless they are a danger to themselves or others.  Obviously, the definition of "danger" is highly subjective.  Overall, the book explores the issue without providing an answer.  The book does, however, provide hope, and that makes it a wonderful book to read.

TED

One of my favorite discoveries recently is www.ted.com.  This sight posts videos of short talks and performances by the top scientists and artists in the world.  I especially loved the talks by Bonnie Bassler, Pattie Maes, Dan Arlie, Sean Gourley, Peter Donnelly, and Nate Silver.

My Job

Many people ask me "How is your job going?" or "Do you like your job?" ever since I moved from Arizona State to Montana State.  I don't know the answer to these question so I usually just mumble something like "good".  The short answer to the question is I absolutely love my job, but it often keeps me awake at night, and I don't think this is a contradiction.  The job is very complex and diverse since it is a combination of teaching, research, meetings, community service, councilor, and cheerleader.  I absolutely love lecturing and teaching.  I love it when a student working in my lab solves a problem.  I work with a wonderful group of colleagues and I have the best department head in the world so the meetings part of my job is enjoyable.  The hard parts are getting proposals rejected and seeing students fail even though they are trying hard.  Those are the parts that keep me awake at night.  On balance, I have the best job in the world and I hope I can do it forever.  I also hope I can sleep tonight since I should be getting a proposal review back soon.

Fixing the Airlines

I had a rough travel experience last week due to a combination of bad weather and bad customer service.  It  got me thinking about how to improve the customer service delivered by the airlines.  I've interacted with a few 100 airline personnel over the past 10 years, and 98% of the time they have given me outstanding (seriously, outstanding) help.  However, many of us have also encountered the rare helpless (or worse) airline employee, and unlikely a bad employee at Starbucks, this bad employee can really ruin our week, not just our coffee.  For example, I arrived at the airport an hour before my flight and the kiosk wouldn't print my ticket.   I picked up the phone, as instructed by the kiosk, and the person on the other end was not only completely helpless (costing me at least 10 valuable minutes), but she sent me in the wrong direction.  Thus one person ruined my day, and caused half a dozen co-workers  to have to make up for her failure.  This is simply unacceptable.  The airlines NEED to find a way to identify employees that cannot or will not help customers and get rid of them.  In many cases this is impossible because there is no record of the customer interacting with the employee, but, in my case, there should be a record of the call and a record of non-help.  They can take the money they save by not paying worthless employees, and give bonuses to the top 2% or top 5% of employees --- you know, the ones that FIX your problem.

Grey's New Mojo

In 2006 I wrote the following about Grey's Anatomy in my previous blog:

"The only other show I watch regularly, Grey's Anatomy, started out as an interesting show that explored the experiences of young doctors going through their internships. I've always found the psychological, emotional, and physical impact of the medical internship to be fascinating after reading Robin Cook's excellent "Year of the Intern", which basically argued that the workload and stress experienced by medical interns may not be the best way to train someone to be a doctor. Since the first season, however, Grey's Anatomy has descended into a soap opera that explores only a few medical/internship issues and now explores having affairs….how pathetic."

Grey's Anatomy soap opera continued for 2007 and 2008, but, for unknown reasons, the show has returned to its roots and been amazing this year. Welcome back and congratulations.

The Death of the Newspaper

Bill Simmons and Chuck Klosterman had an interesting podcast this week in which they argue about the rise of the internet and the death of the newspaper.  Klosterman identifies the loss of advertising revenue to Google, Craigslist, etc. as the cause.  This was, of course, one of the major factors.  Simmons argues that it is the low quality of writing in newspapers compared to the best options available on the internet.  For example, on the internet I can read about sports as  written by the 3 or 4 best sports writers in the country.  In my local newspaper, I can read about sports as written about by the 498th best sports writer.  (And, yes, on the internet I can read about sports as written by the 1 billionth best sports writer.)  Simmons also identified a major factor in the downfall of the local paper.

I think, however, that they missed a third major factor in their debate -- the  flattening of the world.  By 'flattening' I mean that we care more about our country and world and less about our local town than  people used to...relatively speaking.  For example, my Dad loves to go to the local coffee shop (cafe) and catch up on the local news (i.e., gossip).  I love to go to the local coffee shop (Starbucks) and read magazines.  We, and by 'we' I mean generation X and younger, care less about the local news that the newspaper has a monopoly on.  There you have it, Simmons', Klosterman's, and Heys' theories on the downfall of the newspaper.

Finally, a book review for the road....I loved "Same Kind of Different As Me".  I learned more from an illiterate cotton picker from Louisiana than I have from any PhD.