First NO channel want to be a la carte, as it limits the potential viewership for ads. More importantly, Current TV would NOT exist had full a la carte system been imposed because Current could have NEVER been able to attract advertisers to a channel that has limited appeal that could not come to the table with potential number of viewers committed to a package that includes Current TV.
This is, ironically, the reason MANY smaller channels (think of Current TV (especially limited to younger liberal viewers), Documentary Chanel, etc.) and channels appealing to various ethnic audiences such as SiTV, are NOT in favor of a la carte programming as it would virtually eliminate "diversity" of programming and from whom. They feel that it would be impossible for such channel to ever get distribution on MVPD's, and viewers would be undeserved as it would mean only the largest media conglomerates would have either the scope or leverage to make an a la carte make economic sense for the channel owner.
This post is not intended to argue for or against a full a la carte implementation, just that it has some unintended consequences that have been pointed out to Congress by those smaller channels. And Congress has listened to some degree as they do have concerns about the issue of diversity, not shutting out channels that have an ethnic component and access for smaller channels that may have different points of view. In short, if one is a fan of some of the smaller but higher quality channels, then A la Cate is NOT GOOD for you. It really would be "buh, bye, Current TV."
