Bizarre Fox News Sex Video

"Fox Attacks: Decency", the newest video from Brave New Films, makers of the Real Rudy series, is burning up the YouTube charts, with over half a million views in just four days. The film takes a look at Fox News' use of sexual content... in the face of its stated opposition to sexual content. The film could spell trouble for Fox in another way, as there is a petition to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) calling for "A' la Carte Cable" , that accompanies the film. The petition has already picked up over 20,000 signatures.

Here's the film, which I found surprising in a number of ways. I'll examine that and the particulars of that petition drive after the jump.

The biggest surprise about this film is that it surprised me. I've seen a lot of Brave New Films and Robert Greenwald films, like "The Real Rudy" and "Outfoxed", and I thought I know what to expect. I assumed that the film would feature the same sort of soft-news jiggle factor that you'd see anywhere, but juxtaposed with Fox's supposed anti-smut stance. Nice, but not that compelling.

Instead, the film quickly and succinctly does that, and then also shows that Fox News seeks out the thinnest excuses to run sexy footage. Waaay thinner than I imagined. The kicker, however, was the bizarre juxtaposition of the spring break footage with the "crime reporter"'s recap of the grisly details. It really disturbed me.

To be honest, I was not a big fan of "Outfoxed", at least as a film. I thought the information was valuable, and it's point was valid, but it felt really long to me. The shorter films that Greenwald is doing now, however, are much more effective, and this piece did an excellent job of highlighting Fox's hypocrisy and freakish kink.

What I don't get is the link to "A' la Carte Cable." There are lots of things that the FCC could do to Fox, and in fact, a petition drive aimed at sponsors might be more effective. Using outrage at Fox to move the "A La Carte" agenda? I don't see it. It's like asking for a tax cut so you don't have to pay for "Gary" to have his street paved.

I have 2 huge problems with A La Carte. Basically, it means the cable subscriber only pays for and gets the channels they want, including basic cable. Sounds like a winner, right? Well, first off, if you think the Cable companies are going to lose their bulk discounts and not pass the cost on to you, you are a very optimistic person. Try ordering a meal at a fast food joint without the $1.50 beverage. Somehow, it ends up costing a nickel less. You will not save money with A La Carte.

A La Carte would, however, be a serious blow to programming diversity. Channels like Logo or BET or The Golf Channel might not generate enough subscriptions on their own to stay afloat, even from people who might have otherwise watched. The remaining channels would have to compete in a far different manner than they do now, where they generally concentrate on filling a niche or putting out quality programming.

See, now, you get the channels, and they try to make you happy. Under A La Carte, they have to get your attention, quick, and then keep it. The current model has allowed cable networks to produce much more challenging programming than the Nielsen-ruled broadcast networks. A La Carte will deliver less programming, at lower quality, for the same or more money, in my view.

Controlling cable prices is a worthy goal, but there are better ways to do that, like through competition.

Maybe there's an angle that I'm missing here, please enlighten me. I will see if I can get a response from Brave New Films, and I'll keep you posted.