Comcast flack responds ...

I meant to comment on this earlier but I spaced it: ["Viewers first"]. Yeah, I too was a bit shocked when I first read this letter in Saturday's Concord Monitor because it is supposed to be one of those "clarifying letters" by a corporate mucky-muck trying to defend terrible decisions.
First, McLaughlin writes:

The decision to move C-SPAN2 to our digital lineup was made after careful deliberation and with a tangible benefit to our customers foremost in mind.

"Careful deliberation"? With whom? No one contacted me. Did anyone contact you? The "tangible" benefit is that they get to charge MORE to people who want the C-Span channels - channels which should be on every cable system, free of charge. I would bet that if polled a lot of people would list the C-Span channels at the top of their list for access choices.

McLaughlin also writes:

C-SPAN2 remains available to every Comcast customer.

Well, no it does really. It does remain "available" to people willing to pay a lot more money than you used to have to pay to get it, just to keep an eye on the "Congress critters." That doesn't seem fair, does it? And, it doesn't seem like a good "tangible" decision with any "benefit" to anyone except Comcast. At the same time, we pay for three Spanish language channels and four shopping channels which we never use. Ala carte can not happen fast enough! Bring it on.

Update: I found this interesting site allowing people to choose what they cable bill would be if customers were allowed to make ala carte choices: ["HowCableShouldBe.com"]. According to my choices, I could get expanded cable for about $15 per month ... instead of the $60 Comcast was previously charging me!