&gt; I don&#x27;t even see why public access cable was forced on any company to begin with.<p>That&#x27;s a great question...  and the fact that we have to consider it is a testament to how thoroughly the corporate-state has succeeded in refiguring our concepts of natural resources and democratic participation.<p>The justification is that natural resources are the property of the people with the government managing them as an entity where distributed individuals can not.  The key is to realize that not only clean, safe, air and water are resources, but also the wireless spectrum is a resource and the infrastructure to support cable television.  Hence entities like the FCC to manage these natural resources.  When the cable television infrastructure was set up, it was clear it was going to be an enormous windfall for the corporations at the cost of public and private land.<p>It was also going to divert attention, including sources of information necessary for running a democracy, such as the ability to organize communities, away from existing media.  They were afraid we would become an isolated nation of television-watching dummies.  (Imagine that!).  Furthermore, access to these public resources is not free.  You have to pay, further limiting the ability for everyone to participate.  So in negotiation with these industries, our government from several generations ago gained us the right to participate for free in the communications process through community access television.  It wasn&#x27;t perfect, but it was a serious attempt at democracy, the town hall process through which everyone gets a say.<p>As opposed to the market sense of democracy, in which expression and participation in governance is cheap, but still costs money.  That&#x27;s what you&#x27;re talking about when you say &quot;I can rent a VPS for a few dollars a month and generally do with it whatever I&#x27;d like.&quot;  The issue here is that while &quot;noarchy,&quot; a Hacker News reader for over five years, who could probably be considered an expert and well beyond the top 1% of skill level in their field can express his desires, that&#x27;s cool and the gang, but that doesn&#x27;t further democracy, the ability for everyone to take part in the governing of their lives and country for free.<p>It&#x27;s worth pointing out that the effect on cable companies has been absolutely minimal.  They&#x27;ve never been burdened by this requirement, just look at the billion dollar mergers.  Also, the FCC has finally pushed off the corporate forces of NPR and allowed Low-Power FM radio for community organizing.<p>I hope my discussion has been persuasive to you.  You seem bright, but maybe just a little overtaken with the notion of pure meritocracy - in this case meaning that people get to express themselves once they&#x27;ve earned enough money to produce the media to do so.<p>If you look at history over the last century, you&#x27;ll notice that the cellular bandwidth allocation, with absolutely no concessions to the public, as resulted again in overwhelming corporate success and greater community isolation.  It&#x27;s a shame, I wish we could get back to the days of CB radio, but I have high hopes for Low-Power FM.