Desperate to hook up

Those at AT&T call the "Fair Competition in Video Act" a step that will improve TV-watching technologies and finally give consumers a choice by bringing competition to markets that have long been dominated by cable companies like Charter Communications.

Meanwhile, those at Charter and other cable companies see it differently, calling it an attempt by AT&T -- the bill's main backer -- to unfairly nudge its way into the television services businesses by allowing the telephone giant to forgo rules that Charter has had to strictly follow for years.

In other words, the picture's still not quite in focus.

The bill, introduced into the Missouri Legislature by Sen. John Griesheimer in January, would make it easier for telephone companies to offer television services in competition with other cable companies. The bill has stalled in the Senate and is still awaiting a vote.

Technically, cable companies and phone companies already compete. Cable companies can offer local phone service and a phone company can reach franchise agreements with cities or counties to also offer television services. Griesheimer's bill would spare phone companies from having to strike deals in each of the state's 553 cable franchise areas and instead let them get a state-issued franchise allowing them to enter multiple markets at once.

AT&T, formerly known as SBC Communications and before that, Southwestern Bell, promises to invest $100 million to bring its television service to Missouri if lawmakers pass the bill. Cable companies have been joined in competition by many local governments -- though not Cape Girardeau -- which receive about $35 million annually in franchise fees from cable companies. Cape Girardeau received $302,000 last year from Charter as part of its franchise fee.

"This legislation will bring new technology to the state of Missouri and give consumers a choice in cable services," said Marsha Haskell, regional director of external affairs for AT&T in Cape Girardeau. "It's just that simple. It's really not about the cable company or my company. It's about the consumer and giving the consumer another choice for video."

Charter doesn't see it that way.

"AT&T says this will introduce competition," said Jim Renken, Charter's vice president and general manager in the St. Louis area. "Our opinion is that competition already exists. What they are saying really rings hollow."

If the bill is passed, Renken said, phone companies like AT&T could choose to offer television services only in certain neighborhoods, instead of having to serve the cable franchisee's entire area. AT&T could, he said, target the areas perceived to be most profitable.

The thought of "cherry picking" also bothers state Sen. Jason Crowell of Cape Girardeau.

"If the state grants a franchise, AT&T could come in and offer services to everyone who has a million-dollar home," Crowell said. "I have a problem with that."

Crowell said that what AT&T wants, rather than to come to the city of Cape Girardeau, is to go to the state's Public Service Commission, get a statewide agreement and bypass Cape Girardeau.

"I don't like having two sets of rules," Crowell said. "You can't change the rules in the middle of the game. The rules should be the same for everyone. I'm for competition, but I'm for fair competition."

Crowell said the bill didn't get much support in the Senate, so Griesheimer has parked the bill until language can be reached that all sides can agree to. Crowell said it's a work in progress, though no vote has been scheduled.

Haskell said talk of "cherry picking" is simply a scare tactic.

"We do not build its networks to exclude people," she said.

Haskell points to when DSL was first deployed by SBC. Some of the first areas to get the Internet technology were downtown Cape Girardeau and the south part of town.

"To hear them say we exclude people based on their socio-economic situation, that's frustrating," Haskell said. "It's just a false statement."

Still, Haskell did admit that it wouldn't be financially practical to provide service everywhere.

"It's like putting in sidewalks," she said. "Everyone in the city may want sidewalks to go everywhere, but it may not make sense to build sidewalks if there are only two houses there."

The technology AT&T would use, Internet Protocol Television, would be built on existing digital-subscriber-line networks, she said. Instead of offering one-way video through a cable box, AT&T's service will enable customers to choose programs they want through two-way communication. The company says this would increase competition for television service, thereby benefiting consumers and driving down costs.

Haskell specifically points to a case where Charter prices dropped 25 percent in Texas after that state allowed AT&T to compete, she said. Charter spokeswoman Anita Lamont said those rates dropped as part of a special discount that had been planned for a year. Since then, the rates have risen back to their normal levels, Lamont said.

Cape Girardeau spokeswoman Tracy Glenn, who also is the liaison for the city's cable commission, said the city hasn't taken an official position on the bill.

"But we would hope it would all be on equal footing," she said. "We welcome the competition. But we hope they would compete on an equal level."

She also hopes that AT&T would do what Charter does: air city council meetings, emergency broadcast messages and school board meetings.

Regardless, she said, it's not like the city would lose its franchise fee either way. Even if the bill passes, the Public Service Commission would then dole out the fee from AT&T to the cities and counties.

Dr. Jim Dufek, a mass communication professor at Southeast Missouri State who teaches television courses, said all of the issues can be solved.

"Competition would be wonderful," he said. "The advantages could be far greater than we think."

smoyers@semissourian.com

335-6611, extension 137