Monthly Labor Review August 2000 3

Job Growth in Television

Job growth in television: cable

versus broadcast, 1958–99

Dominic Toto

Dominic Toto is an

economist in the Division

of Monthly Industry

Employment Statistics,

Bureau of Labor Statistics.

As the television industry matured over the last 50 years,

technological improvements, increased demand

for video programming, and the easing of some regulations

helped shift employment from broadcast television

to cable and other pay television services

Broadcast television made its public

debut at the New York World’s Fair in

1939, dramatically changing the way

people live, work, and spend their free time.1

A decade later, community antenna television,

an early form of cable television, spread broadcast signals over rural Pennsylvania and Oregon.2 Currently, nearly all homes in the

United States with televisions have access to

some form of cable television, with approximately two-thirds of U.S. households subscribing to a local cable service.3

For more than 40 years, employment in all

areas of television program delivery has risen

substantially. During the first half of this period, radio and television broadcasting accounted for most of the job gains, while during

the second half, more of the growth occurred

in cable and other pay television services.

Throughout the period, changing legislation

has greatly affected the way video service providers conduct their business, contributing to

the trend toward more rapid growth in cable

services. In addition to key regulatory and

policy changes, growing consumer demand for

television entertainment and related technological innovations have helped boost employment

levels in all video-providing industries.

This article compares the employment history of cable and other pay television services

with that of radio and television broadcasting;

it also reviews some of the more significant

regulatory and economic changes that have

occurred over the period. The chronology is

broken into three phases: The first phase

(1958–72) covers the early years up to when

the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

introduced new rules regarding cable television

in March 1972.4 The second phase (1972–84)

covers the subsequent period of rapid employment growth in the television industry up to

when Congress enacted the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984. The third phase—

during which employment growth slowed

down considerably and additional regulatory

and economic changes took place, covers the

period from 1984 to 1999.5 The first part of

the analysis focuses on employment during the

study period, and the second half looks at some

of the technological changes that have shaped

the industry since its inception.

The television industry

According to the 1987 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system, the primary function of

television broadcasting stations (SIC 4833) is

“broadcasting visual programs by television

to the public.”6 Cable and other pay television

services (SIC 484), including satellite services,
4 Monthly Labor Review August 2000

Job Growth in Television

Table 1. Top 10 occupations in cable and other pay-TV and radio and television broadcasting, 1998

 1 Installers and repairers ................................................................ 40,520 21.1

 2 Customer service representatives .............................................. 34,920 18.2

 3 Order clerks .................................................................................. 6,130 3.2

 4 First-line supervisors—product ................................................... 5,230 2.7

 5 Dispatchers, except police and fire ............................................ 5,170 2.7

 6 All other sales and related .......................................................... 5,120 2.7

 7 First line supervisors-administrative ........................................... 5,090 2.7

 8 Sales agents, advertising ............................................................ 5,000 2.6

 9 General managers and executives ............................................ 4,680 2.4

10 Engineering and related technicians ......................................... 4,030 2.1

 1 Announcers .................................................................................. 46,100 18.7

 2 Sales agents, advertising ............................................................ 25,280 10.3

 3 Broadcast technicians ................................................................. 22,990 9.4

 4 Producers, directors, actors ........................................................ 17,890 7.3

 5 Reporters and correspondents ................................................... 11,320 4.6

 6 General managers and executives ............................................ 8,620 3.5

 7 Camera operators ........................................................................ 6,900 2.8

 8 Photographers ............................................................................. 6,800 2.8

 9 Writers and editors ....................................................................... 6,040 2.5

10 Other professionals and technicians .......................................... 5,670 2.3

distribute “visual and textual television programs, on a subscription or fee basis.”7 Broadcast and cable establishments

may also produce taped television programs, but it is not their

main line of business. (Firms mainly producing taped television or motion pictures are classified in the services industry—specifically, in SIC 7812, motion picture and video tape

production.)

What the workers do. The workforces of the two video distribution markets differ significantly. Table 1 shows the top

10 occupations in cable and other pay television services

(SIC 484) and in radio and television broadcasting stations

(SIC 483).8 Installers and repairers (21 percent) and customer

service representatives (18 percent) stand out as the top two

job categories in cable and pay television, together making

up nearly two-fifths of employment in the industry. In radio

and television broadcasting, however, employment is concentrated among announcers (19 percent), advertising sales

agents (10 percent), and broadcast technicians (9 percent).

That announcers occupy the top of this list most likely reflects the “radio” portion of the industry more than the “television” portion. Advertising sales agents and general managers are the only occupations to make both lists, but they are

more heavily used in radio and television broadcasting.

Within cable and other pay television, 6 of the top 10 job

categories were sales related, customer service, or supervisory occupations. More “artistic” categories—such

as announcers, actors, reporters, photographers, and writers—appear among the leading occupations in radio and

television broadcasting.

What the workers earn. In 1999, nonsupervisory workers in

the radio and television broadcasting industry earned, on average, $18.38 per hour. This was about 26 percent more than

the average hourly earnings for cable and other pay television services, and 39 percent more than workers in the total

private economy.9 However, when looking at average weekly

earnings, which take the number of hours worked during the

survey period into account, workers in radio and television

broadcasting earned $656 per week, only about 9 percent

more than workers in cable television. Nonsupervisory workers in cable television averaged 41.4 hours per week, or 5.7

hours more than workers in radio and television broadcasting.

Employment trends

The employment data used in this article are from the BLS

Current Employment Statistics (CES) program, also known as

the “establishment survey.”10 CES employment estimates for

all communications (SIC 48) and for radio and television broadcasting (SIC 483) begin in 1958. (See table 2.) Although the

employment history for cable and other pay television services (SIC 484) does not begin until 1988,11 a reasonable

proxy series can be constructed back to 1958, by subtracting

telephone communications (SIC 481) and radio and television broadcasting (SIC 483) from total communications. The

resulting composite series “pay television and other communications” (SIC 482,4,9), can be used as a rough estimate

of the growth in cable and other pay television services. Using this proxy series, the following analysis compares employment in pay television and other communications over

Rank Occupation Level Percent

of industry total

Cable and other pay television (SIC 484)

Radio and television broadcasting (SIC 483)
 Monthly Labor Review August 2000 5

48 Communications .................................................. 1958 860.0 1,417.1 1,279.9 1,551.5

481 Telephone communications ................................ 1947 732.1 1,071.8 901.1 1,069.7

483 Radio and television broadcasting ........................ 1958 83.6 210.3 227.1 247.8

4832 Radio broadcasting stations ............................... 1982 – 107.7 117.5 116.3

4833 Television broadcasting stations ........................ 1982 – 102.6 109.6 131.5

482,4,9 Pay television and other communications ............. 1958 44.3 135.0 151.6 234.0

484 Cable and other pay television services ................ 1988 – – 110.8 200.5

482 Telegraph and other communications .................... 1985 – – 16.1 11.1

489 Communications services, n.e.c............................ 1985 – – 24.7 22.4

the last 40 years with that of television broadcasting over the

same period.

Cable and other (nonbroadcast) distributors of television

shows have made great strides in establishing themselves as

major employers in video services.12 From 1958 through

1999, employment in pay television and other communications grew by an average annual rate nearly twice that of the

total nonfarm economy. Radio and television broadcasting,

by contrast, grew at a pace closer to that of the overall

economy. (See tables 3 and 4.) In 1958, radio and television

broadcasting employed nearly twice as many workers as pay

television and other communications; by 1999, however,

employment levels in the two industries were about the same.

While the 40-year trend indicates more rapid employment

growth in pay television and other communications, it masks

some interesting, more short-term trends. (See chart 1.)

Over-the-air television stations had already been in existence

for at least 12 years by 1958, and radio and television broadcasters—the principle distributors of broadcast signals—accounted for roughly 84,000 workers at the time. Over the

ensuing 14 years, employment in radio and television broadcasting rose at a brisk pace, accounting for 79 percent of the

job growth in the combined total radio and television services (SIC 483 and 482,4,9) from 1958 to 1972. Employment in

pay television and other communications expanded at a much

slower pace over the same period.

The trend changed significantly during the 1972–84 period, with the introduction of new FCC rules governing cable

in 1972,12 as well as the advent of the satellite and surging

consumer demand for video services. Employment in total

radio and television services grew more rapidly than the overall economy, with pay television and other communications

expanding twice as rapidly as radio and television broadcasting (9.1 percent versus 4.2 percent). A combined total of

191,000 jobs were added over the period—86,000 in radio

and television broadcasting and 105,000 in pay television and

other communications.

In the years following 1972, the FCC altered or abolished

many of the rules regarding cable television, important

deregulatory moves that at least partly explain the hiring surge

in the industry over the 1972–84 period. In 1977, for example, many of the franchise standards were eliminated, and

in 1978, a simple registration process replaced the former

process of applying for a certificate of compliance, making

it easier and less costly to operate a cable system.14 Then, in

July 1980, the FCC repealed rules that had limited a cable

system’s right to import distant signals and that required exclusive or nonduplicative programming by local cable operators.15 In 1983, the FCC eliminated its rule requiring cable

television operators to file financial information.16 These

deregulatory changes helped free cable systems from restrictions put in place in the 1960s and early 1970s.

In October 1984, Congress formally amended the Communications Act of 1934 by enacting the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984.17 In some important ways, 1984

marks a turning point for employment growth in the television industry. Following that year, employment peaked in 1985

for both radio and television broadcasting and pay television

and other communications. Through 1999, annual job growth

decelerated to less than 1 percent in radio and television

broadcasting. Losses accrued in pay television from 1986 to

1988, and employment did not fully recover until 1994, when

growth began to accelerate once again. The period from the

late 1980s through the early 1990s was one of consolidation

for cable television. Many of the new alternatives to cable

(such as satellite systems) did not fare well in the mid-1980s.

In addition, increased video rentals had a negative effect on

the cable industry. Home satellite dishes, complete with expanded channel capacity, started to make an impact in the early

1990s, and this development helped offset some of the drags

on employment in pay television and other communications.

The revision of the SIC system in 1987 paved the way for

[In thousands]

Employment in communications, annual averages for selected years, 1958–99

Series Industry beginning date 1958 1982 1988 SIC

code 1999

Dash = data not available.

n.e.c.= not elsewhere classified.

Table 2.
6 Monthly Labor Review August 2000

Job Growth in Television

Table 3. Employment in the television and radio communications industry, selected years, 1958–99

1958 1972 1984 1999

Level Percent Level Percent Level Percent Level Percent

Total television

and radio ..................... 127.9 100.0 195.9 100.0 386.9 100.0 481.8 100.0

Radio and television

broadcasting ............ 83.6 65.4 137.2 70.0 223.5 57.8 247.8 51.4

Pay television & other

communications ...... 44.3 34.6 58.7 30.0 163.4 42.2 234 48.6

Table 4. 

1958–99 1958–72 1972–84 1984–99

Average Average Average Average

annual Level annual Level annual Level annual

 percent percent percent percent

change change change change

Total nonfarm ................. ... 2.3 ... 2.6 ... 2.1 ... 2.1

Total television

and radio ..................... 353.9 3.3 68.0 3.1 191.0 5.9 94.9 1.5

Radio and television

broadcasting ............ 164.2 2.7 53.6 3.6 86.3 4.2 24.3 0.7

Pay television & other

communications ...... 189.7 4.3 14.4 2.1 104.7 9.1 70.6 2.5

Level

Industry

BLS to begin publishing employment data specifically for

cable and other pay television services (The composite industry “pay television and other communications” used in this

study includes telegraph and other communications, such as

radar and satellite tracking, and communications services, not

elsewhere classified.) In early 1988, employment in cable

and other pay television services (SIC 484) about equaled that

of television broadcasting stations (SIC 4833); by the end of

the year, cable employment exceeded that of television broadcasters. The gap continued to widen over the next decade,

with employment in cable and other pay television services

growing by an average of 5.6 percent per year. In contrast,

television broadcasting stations grew by only 1.7 percent annually over the same period. (See chart 2.)

In summary, from 1958 through 1972, the maturing radio

and television broadcasting industry added jobs more rapidly

than cable and other pay television services. Over the next 12

years, both industries grew much faster, with pay television

(9.1 percent) outpacing radio and television broadcasting (4.2

percent). After 1984, the employment trends in both series

slowed until the early 1990s, when they began to accelerate

after 1992, especially in pay television and other communications. From 1988 forward, cable and other pay television

services (SIC 4841) maintained relatively steady annual growth,

as its employment level surpassed and pulled away from that

of television broadcasting. In 8 of the last 11 years, employment in cable and other pay television services has grown by

4 percent or more. By 1999, there were 52 percent more workers

in cable and other pay television services than in television

broadcasting stations.

The growth of cable television

In addition to rapid employment growth, other statistics document growth in the cable television industry. By 1999, twothirds of households with televisions subscribed to cable services. The growth of cable subscribers mirrors that of the

industry’s employment until the mid-1980s. While employment stagnated until after the 1990–91 recession, the number of subscribers continued to expand, with more than 65

million households subscribing to cable television in

1999.18 (See table 5.)

Cable systems, which provide service in a given geographic

area and generally serve 50,000 or more subscribers,19 grew

more rapidly over the period than television broadcasting stations, cable’s main competition. In 1958, there were approximately equal numbers of television broadcasting stations and

cable systems. Since then, annual growth for television stations averaged only 2.8 percent through 1999, compared with

7.7 percent for cable systems. (See chart 3). The growth of

[Levels in thousands]

Industry

Employment change in the television and radio communications industry, selected periods, 1958–99

[Levels in thousands]
 Monthly Labor Review August 2000 7

Chart 2. Employment in cable and other pay television versus broadcast television, 1988 99

[In thousands]

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

100

120

140

160

180

200

100

120

140

160

180

200

Cable and other pay television

Broadcast television

[In thousands]

1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

 Employment in radio and television broadcasting versus cable and other pay

 televison services, 1958 99

Radio and television 

broadcasting

Cable and other pay

television services

Cable Rules of 1972 Cable Act of 1984

Chart 1.

[In thousands] [In thousands]
8 Monthly Labor Review August 2000

Job Growth in Television

Table 5. The growth of cable TV

1958 1972 1984 1999

Pay-TV and other communications .......

employment (SICs 482,4,9) ................ 44,300 58,700 163,400 234,000

.............................................................

Cable systems ...................................... 525 2,841 6,200 10,466

Cable subscribers ................................ 450,000 6,000,000 29,000,000 65,000,000

National cable networks ....................... (1) (1) 48 214

Cable’s market penetration ................... (2) (2) 43.7 68.0

1 Cable network data begin in 1976, when the number totaled 4.

2 Market penetration data begin in 1975, with 13.2 percent penetration.

SOURCES: Employment data: BLS Division of Monthly Industry Employment Statistics. Systems, Subscibers: Warren Publishing, Inc., Television &

Cable Factbook, Services Volume No. 67, 1999. Networks: National Cable

Television Association, Cable Television Developments, Spring/Summer 2000.

Market Penetration: Nielsen Media Research, from NCTA’s Cable Television

Developments, Spring/Summer 2000.

Industry

cable systems accelerated during the 1980s, but it leveled

off in the 1990s, due mainly to a wave of consolidation in the

industry.20

Although closely related, it is the greater number of channel choices with better reception that sets the cable market

apart from regular television broadcasting. Today, cable operators provide video programming to their customers using

satellite earth stations and coaxial cable or fiber optics as the

main lines for transmitting television signals. This advanced

technology did not exist during the early years of television

and prevented rapid expansion in the number of video programs offered by cable distributors.

The early years of television

Six television broadcasting stations were in operation in

1946,21 and the earliest cable systems were built during the

following 4 years. These latter systems were constructed to

serve homes on the “fringe” of the broadcast area, those who

otherwise would not be able to receive clear signals from the

television station. Cable distributors placed community antennas on mountain tops or other high points and connected

homes to the towers with cables, allowing them to receive

broadcast signals.22

At the time, cable television was a very labor-intensive

business, and despite high demand, it was difficult to find

enough capital to launch a new cable enterprise. Another

obstacle faced by the cable pioneers was obtaining permission to use public rights-of-way and utility poles.23 Cable

television was a simple application of available technology

in the early years, and operators were capable of carrying

only a few channels, because of the primitive transmission

technology involved and the relatively sparse number of

broadcast signals to retransmit.24

Cable television went largely unregulated until the mid1960s. In their book on the industry, Patrick R. Parsons and

Robert M. Frieden identify several historical phases of cable

television within the period from 1947 to 1972. During the

initial 5 years of this era, the first modern systems began to

install wire-based television. After that, many family-owned,

“Mom-’n-Pop” operations sprouted up until about 1964. Finally, during the 8 years ending in 1972, the FCC began instituting rules regulating cable television.24 Nevertheless, cable

television continued to expand, but not without growing pains.

Regulation in the industry, 1940–72. By 1940, the FCC had

tested on-air television stations and authorized limited commercial television operation.26 Regulation of television occurred because the broadcast spectrum was a publicly owned,

but limited resource. 27 From 1948 to 1952, the FCC placed

a 4-year freeze on awarding licenses for new television broadcasting stations. The airwaves were becoming congested, and

the FCC needed more time to sort out issues on standards.28

Meanwhile, largely due to the freeze, demand for cable television services increased in areas not yet served by any form of

television, and cable systems responded by forwarding broadcast signals to these additional communities.

In 1958, the FCC took the position that it had no jurisdiction

over cable television, because the cable operator simply provided a piece of equipment and did not carry a signal.29 As cable

grew, however, local television stations regarded the importation

of distant signals as a competitive threat. Because cable operators received broadcast signals essentially free of charge, additional stations in a viewing area could fragment local advertising

dollars and drive the local broadcaster off the air.30 Heavy lobbying ensued on both sides.

A year later, the FCC launched its first study on how the

cable television industry affected the television broadcasting market, but nothing was found that could be used to

restrict the entry or continuation of cable systems.31 By

the mid-1960s, however, the FCC had become the regulatory authority over cable television. In 1962, the Commission ruled that cable operators could use microwave systems to relay distant broadcast signals, with the provision

that there be no adverse economic effects on broadcasters.31 In 1966, the FCC froze the expansion of all cable firms

in the top 100 markets and stipulated that cable systems

obtain the consent of any remote broadcast station before

importing that channel and distributing it to viewers.33

In effect, cable television was regulated as a natural
 Monthly Labor Review August 2000 9

monopoly: an entity that incurs significant economies of

scale as output (the number of subscribers) increases.34

Local franchising authorities granted these monopolies

on the basis that inefficiencies, such as redundant line duplication, would have arisen if more than one firm provided video programming.

Although the first formal FCC restrictions on cable were

in place by the late 1960s, the cable industry had managed

to evolve from a transmission service to an active player in

the video program delivery market. More specifically, channel capacity had risen from 3 or 4 to about a dozen.35 Cable

television was basically reborn, and as the financial health of

the industry improved, larger businesses, and their capital,

were increasingly attracted to cable. By the mid-1960s, television broadcasters themselves owned nearly 30 percent of all

cable systems.36

Cable and satellite growth, 1972–84

After several years of restricting cable firms from receiving

and distributing long distance television broadcasting signals,

in March 1972 the FCC issued new rules that eased some of

the limitations and restrictions—the Cable Rules of 1972.

Cable firms were granted permission to import distant signals into major markets, but they were still limited in terms

of quantity and variety.37

The early and more restrictive pay television rules limited

cable operators’ ability to offer better products outside of

broadcast channels. With the introduction of satellite technology in the industry, cable television gained the support of

a communications network in the sky, ushering in a new era

in video program delivery. The first use of satellites allowed

for more long-range capture of remote broadcast signals. In

1975, Home Box Office (HBO) rented a satellite to distribute a

boxing program to cable systems in Florida and Mississippi.38

The fusion of cable and satellite technology permanently

changed the way television is viewed in the United States.

Satellites allowed cable franchises to expand channel capacity

and offer more programming alternatives. Similar to the earlier

effect of cable television on the entire television market, the

eventual role of satellites in the video programming service

industry would change from a program delivery tool to a distribution competitor. New channels, ESPN and MTV for example,

targeted special interest groups such as sports enthusiasts

and teenagers. In short, cable became a more marketable service after satellites were introduced, and the growth of cable

television accelerated.

The extensive cable satellite system also attracted more

advertisers because it allowed for a larger audience base. Using satellite technology, for example, Ted Turner was able to

expand his local television broadcasting station into a national

cable network and thus sell advertising at more lucrative rates.

In 1975, WTBS became the first satellite-delivered broadcast

station and soon became known as the first “superstation.”39

Chart 3. Index of growth of cable systems and television broadcasting stations, 1958 99

Index

1958 = 100

Index

1958 = 100

1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Cable systems

Television broadcasting stations

SOURCE: Television & Cable Factbook (Washington, DC, Warren Publishing, Inc., 1999).
10 Monthly Labor Review August 2000

Job Growth in Television

.

Top company ......................... 24.0 25.2 24.8 29.3

Top 2 companies ................... 36.7 37.9 37.3 47.7

Top 3 companies ................... 42.0 43.2 42.4 55.6

Top 4 companies ................... 45.6 48.2 47.2 62.3

Top 10 companies ................. 61.6 64.6 63.3 79.8

Ranking

Today, superstation TBS has about 75 million subscribers and

roughly 12,000 affiliates nationwide.40

Rising demand for television entertainment, marketing efforts, and technological innovations furthered the growth of

cable television in the 1970s and early 1980s. HBO became the

nation’s first pay television network and created the first television production originated by a cable company. Their parent

company, Time Inc., invested in motion picture production to

differentiate Home Box Office as a premium channel and to

improve the quality and quantity of movies available on HBO.

41

The Cable News Network (CNN) became the first all-news cable

channel, when it began satellite service in 1980.42 More variety and better services meant more revenue for cable firms,

which in turn meant more growth for the industry. With satellite technology firmly entrenched, the number of cable systems had grown to 6,200 by 1984. Cable networks, numbering only 4 in 1976, numbered 48 in 1984. (See table 5.)

Deregulation and consolidation, 1984–99

Key legal aspects of the cable television industry were clarified when Congress enacted the Cable Communications Policy

Act of 1984, which deregulated the industry further and reversed many of the restrictions from 1972. The purpose of the

1984 Cable Act was to streamline the expansion of cable systems and promote competition.43 After some consideration,

the FCC concluded that less cable regulation was needed. Specifically, the Commission no longer regulated cable rates in

markets where sufficient competition existed, but cross-ownership of a cable and broadcast system was disallowed.44 The

FCC contended that as cable service grew, rates charged to

customers would be checked by competition from developing video delivery alternatives, such as home satellites and

videocassette rentals.

The 1980s were characterized by increased competition between television broadcasters and cable operators. Meanwhile,

decreased viewing time for all forms of television further complicated the issue.45 Among other things, videocassette recorders

(VCRs) reduced time spent watching cable and broadcast television—the number of VCRs in use increased from 15.5 million in

1984 to 170.3 million in 1998.46 In addition, new alternatives

to cable and television broadcasting, such as home satellites,

struggled to make their way into the video market.47 Despite

the move toward other viewing options, basic cable networks

still managed to gain ground relative to over-the-air television

broadcasters.48 (See chart 4.)

In the 1990s, cable system ownership became more concentrated, due to the many mergers and acquisitions that took

place during the period, and this activity tended to dampen

growth, especially that of employment. Time Warner, for example, merged with Turner Broadcasting Systems in 1996.49

On the programming side, the Walt Disney Company acquired

Capital Cities/ABC and Westinghouse bought CBS.

50 In 1975,

the top 10 cable companies supplied 40 percent of all cable

television subscribers.51 According to a later source of industry concentration data, by 1997, the market share of the

top 10 cable companies had doubled to 80 percent. (See table

6.) Also, in 1992, multiple cable system operators owned all

or part of 15 of the 25 largest cable networks.52

In response to the accumulated market power of cable television operators, Congress enacted the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992. More restrictive measures were implemented in the following years and

included rate regulation in the absence of effective competition, the prohibition of exclusive franchising, and must-carry

rules, which obligated cable operators to carry all available

local broadcast signals.53

Technological advances. While competition from other

video viewing options served to slow growth, technological

innovation continued to play a large role in the maturation

and competitive status of the cable television industry. Fiber

optics, a key breakthrough that took place during the 1980s,

enabled faster and better quality cable connections. Further

technical improvements, such as digital compression technology, allowed more system capacity,54 and numerous new

cable channels, such as Disney, The Weather Channel, and

Discovery, entered the market.55

With the proliferation of cable television channels, overthe-air television audiences became more fragmented, and advertising revenues increasingly were diverted to cable.

“Narrowcasting” allowed advertisers to target specific niche

audiences that come with unique cable channels.56 More than

one-third of all television advertising dollars were directed

toward cable audiences in 1997, compared with only 6 percent in 1984.57 New products—such as NFL football on cable,

“at-home” shopping, video-on-demand, and even the coverage of the Gulf War by CNN—served to increase the popularity of cable among consumers as well.58 The number of cable

subscriptions continued to grow despite hikes in cable teleSOURCE: Paul Kagan Associates, Inc., cited in Annual Assessment of

the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming: Fourth Annual Report, FCC 97–423 (Federal Communications Commission, January 2000), p. E-4.

Cable industry concentration ratios, 1990–97

Market share

[In percent]

Table 6

1990 1992 1994 1997
 Monthly Labor Review August 2000 11

 —

Chart 5. Consumer Price Index (CPI) for cable television and for all urban consumers,

 annual averages, 1983 99

Index

1982/84 = 100

1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

100

150

200

250

100

150

200

250

Index

1982/84 = 100

Cable television CPI

CPI for all urban consumers

Chart 4. Television viewing shares: cable versus broadcast television, 1985 99

Percent Percent

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Cable television

Broadcast television

SOURCE: Cable TV Facts 2000 (Cabletelevision Advertising Bureau, 2000), on the Internet at http://www.cabletvadbureau.com

(visited July 2000).
12 Monthly Labor Review August 2000

Job Growth in Television

vision prices, which since the early 1980s have risen more

than twice as rapidly as the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U). (See chart 5.) Despite climbing programming costs—as cable networks began charging local

systems for program content, whereas previously the networks had paid the local systems to get in their channel

lineup—by the late 1980s, the revenue picture appeared to

be quite rosy for the cable industry.59

Cable companies made use of their increased revenues by

investing in plant and equipment, and in programming. From

1984 through 1992, the cable industry spent more than $15

billion on hardware.60 Similarly, cable systems’ programming

expenditures rose more than 300 percent to $7.5 billion from

1984 to 1998.61 These investments improved the competitive position of cable relative to that of broadcasters.

Following the 1992 legislation, and as the U.S. economy

began recovering from the 1990–91 recession, the trend in

video delivery programming began to change once again. This

time the move was from “cable” to “other” in the cable and

other pay television industry. Like the first cable television

customers who were out of reach from a strong broadcast

television signal, direct-to-home satellite services initially

served viewers who were not able to receive cable television

services from an operator in their geographic area.

Similarly, the technological and market history tended to

repeat itself as direct-to-home satellite service customers

soon enjoyed better picture quality and more channels than

cable or broadcasters offered. These new services also developed a technological advantage in the form of digital television service.62 Just as cable accompanied the development

of television broadcasting, the same held for satellites with

respect to cable television’s growth. In both cases, the older

industry was at first helped by the new technology, only to

later find itself in direct competition with the younger form

of video distribution.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996. The television industry was further deregulated when Congress passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which was intended to provide

a “pro-competitive national policy framework.”63 The act also

sought to remove additional barriers to competitive entry in

order to expedite competition with other multi-channel video

programming deliverers.

Cable rates were deregulated on their extended basic tier,

which included specialty channels such as ESPN, MTV, and

TNT. The rates were no longer regulated if a telephone company, for example, offered cable service comparable to those

of the competing cable system.64 Finally, the FCC was given

the authority to suspend its rules on a short-term basis in

order to promote new or improved technology or services.65

This opening to more competition and better technology proved

to be a double-edged sword for cable companies in the 1990s.

Direct Broadcast Satellite, for example, began to move into

both cable and television broadcasting stations markets.

Information and entertainment. Industry classifications separating the delivery of information from that of entertainment

became blurred in recent years, creating a new kind of video

product, sometimes called infotainment. Firms began “bundling”

their services—a single company might offer cable television,

local and long-distance phone service, and Internet access, for

example. These “full-service” telecommunications enterprises

are expected to become increasingly prevalent, as technology

continues to improve with the change from analog to digital

distribution.66 Cable television providers expanded their services by offering quicker access to the Internet, using high speed

cable modems rather than regular telephone lines. Similarly,

television broadcasting companies improved their strategic position by investing in cable networks, such as when the National

Broadcasting Company and Microsoft began MSNBC, a 24-hour

cable news network.67 In addition, the satellite market was attractive enough that AT&T purchased a 2.5-percent equity stake

in DirecTV in 1996.68

Many cable firms reacted by offering new channels and better service as a direct result of new competition from satellite

television providers. Cable was able to increase its programming services by enabling digital compression technology for

the first time. The technological cycle had come full circle:

Satellites or other pay television services were able to offer

better picture quality and increased channel capacity, just as

cable services had enjoyed an advantage over broadcast television in the early years of the industry.

EMPLOYMENT IN THE TELEVISION INDUSTRY has grown immensely

since 1958, with radio and television broadcasting leading the

way up to 1972, and pay television and other communications

adding more jobs since then. The latter industry, however, currently still trails slightly in terms of the total number of workers. Looking at the more specific industry data available since

1988, job creation in cable and other pay television services

has outpaced that of television broadcasting. Although the two

industries had similar employment levels in 1988, cable had

added 52 percent more jobs than broadcast television by 1999.

Workers in cable and other pay television services earn less per

hour than their broadcast television counterparts, but they also

tend to work more hours per week. The occupational make-up

of the two industries is quite different, with installers and repairers leading the list for pay television, while announcers make

up the leading occupation in radio and television broadcasting.

For more than 40 years, the employment and market trends

in broadcast and cable television have gone through unique

phases, as both industries matured at different times. Cable

television began as a rural-based supplement to broadcast

television, but increased demand and technological innovations

spurred tremendous growth in the industry. Legislation and regulation in the industry both checked and boosted cable television
 Monthly Labor Review August 2000 13

expansion. The establishment of a national cable and satellite distribution network followed the relaxation of some of

the more restrictive policies. Technical advantages enabled

cable to eventually exercise a certain degree of market power

over broadcast television in their respective geographic markets.

As cable systems improved their market positions, they

responded by upgrading their infrastructure and improving

their service levels, channel capacity, and reception quality.

 1 Robert L. Hilliard and Michael C. Keith, The Broadcast Century: A Biography of American Broadcasting (Stoneham, MA, Butterworth-Heinemann,

1992), p. 88.

2

 Hilliard and Keith, The Broadcast Century, p. 150.

3 Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in Markets for the

Delivery of Video Programming: Sixth Annual Report, FCC 99–418 (Federal

Communications Commission, January 2000), appendix B, table B-1.

4

 See Federal Communications Commission Fact Sheet: Cable Television

Information Bulletin, June 2000, on the Internet at http:www.fcc.gov/csb/facts/

csgen.html (visited July 2000), pp. 1–2.

5 Federal Communications Commission Fact Sheet: Cable Television, p.

2.

6 Standard Industrial Classification Manual: 1987 (Executive Office of

the President, Office of Management and Budget, 1987), p. 283.

7 Standard Industrial Classification Manual: 1987, p. 283.

8 These data are from the BLS Occupational Employment Statistics

(OES) survey, “a periodic mail survey of nonfarm establishments that

collects occupational employment data on workers by industry;” see BLS

Handbook of Methods, bulletin 2490 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, April

1997), ch. 3, pp. 32–35.

 9 Average hourly earnings data are from the Current Employment Statistics (CES) Program. Average hourly earnings are gross payrolls (including

premium pay such as overtime) divided by total paid hours. Therefore,

average hourly earnings differ from wage rates, which are the payments for

a unit of time worked. Retroactive payments, irregular bonuses, and benefits

are excluded. The data are for nonsupervisory workers only.

10 For more information on the CES, see “Employment, hours, and earnings

from the establishment survey,” in BLS Handbook of Methods, bulletin 2490

(Bureau of Labor Statistics, April 1997), ch. 2, pp. 15–31. From the Handbook (p. 15): “BLS cooperates with State employment security agencies in

the Current Employment Statistics (CES) survey to collect data each month

on employment, hours, and earnings from a sample of nonfarm establishments (including government). In early 1996, this sample included over

390,000 reporting units. From these data, a large number of employment,

hours, and earnings series in considerable industry and geographic detail

are prepared and published each month [by BLS].”

11 The industry group “cable and other pay television services” was not

classified independently until 1987, when the SIC system was revised with

the publication of the new Standard Industrial Classification Manual: 1987.

12 Other pay-TV services include, but are not limited to, closed circuit television, multichannel multipoint distribution systems, satellite master antenna systems, direct broadcast satellite, and other home satellite dishes.

13 Federal Communications Commission Fact Sheet: Cable Television, p. 2.

14 Ibid., p. 2.

15 Patrick R. Parsons and Robert M. Frieden, The Cable and Satellite

Television Industries (Needham Heights, MA, Allyn and Bacon, 1998), p. 56.

16 Federal Communications Commission Fact Sheet: Cable Television, p. 2.

17 Ibid., p. 2; where it also says that “The 1984 Cable Act established policies in the areas of ownership, channel usage, franchise provisions and renewals, subscriber rates and privacy, obscenity and lockboxes, unauthorized

reception of services, equal employment opportunity, and pole attachments.

The new law also defined jurisdictional boundaries among Federal, State and

local authorities for regulating cable television systems.”

18 Television and Cable Factbook (Washington, DC, Warren Publishing,

Inc., 1999), p. J-96.

19 Television and Cable Factbook, p. J-97.

20 Paul Kagan Associates, Inc., cited in Annual Assessment of the Status of

Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming: Fourth

Annual Report, FCC 97–423 (Federal Communications Commission, January

2000), p. E-4.

21 Television and Cable Factbook, p. J-97.

22 National Cable Television Association, The History of Cable Television information sheet, on the Internet at www.ncta.com/glance.html (visited July 2000).

23 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries, p.

33.

24 Robert W. Crandall and Harold Furchtgott-Roth, Cable TV: Regulation or

Competition? (Washington, DC, The Brookings Institution, 1996), pp. 2–3.

25 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries, p.

20.

26 Hilliard and Keith, The Broadcast Century, p. 92.

27 Douglas F. Greer, Industrial Organization and Public Policy, 2nd ed.

(New York, NY, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1984). p. 436.

28 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries, p.

27.

29 Ibid., p. 38.

30 Ibid., p. 36.

31 Inquiry into the Impact of Community Antenna Systems, quoted at

The National Cable Television Center and Museum website, on the

Internet at http://www.cablecenter.org (visited August 1999).

32 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries,

pp. 42–43.

33 Ibid., p. 44.

34 Greer, Industrial Organization and Public Policy, pp. 434–35.

35 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries,

p. 45.

36 From Television Magazine, March 1967, cited in Parsons and Frieden,

The Cable and Satellite Television Industries, p. 47.

37 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries, p. 49.

Strong job growth continued. Meanwhile, competition from

telephone companies, utilities, wireless industries, and home

satellites began to provide rivalry in the market for video

program delivery, as these related industries crossed over

or entered into pay television. Today, cable, broadcast, and

other television services continue to both influence and adapt

to the rapidly changing world of telecommunications. If technology keeps pace with demand, employment in the industry

should continue to expand as well.69 

Notes
14 Monthly Labor Review August 2000

Job Growth in Television

38 Ibid., pp. 53–54.

39 Ibid., pp. 53–55.

40Cable TV Developments (National Cable Television Association), fall 1998/

winter 1999.

41 The National Cable Television Center and Museum website, on the Internet

at http://www.cablecenter.org (visited August 1998).

42 Hilliard and Keith, The Broadcast Century, p. 230.

43 Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, Public Law 98-549, 98th

Congress, Sec 601, Title VI, Part I, General Provisions, Purposes, 47 USC 521.

44 Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, Sec 623, 622, 613, and 634.

45 J. Fred MacDonald, One Nation Under Television (New York, NY, Pantheon Books, 1990). p. 258.

46 Television and Cable Factbook, 1999, p. J–3.

47 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries,

p. 60.

48 Nielsen ratings, cited in Cable TV Developments (National Cable Television Association), spring/summer 2000, p. 5.

49 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries,

p. 16.

50 James Walker and Douglas Ferguson, The Broadcast Television Industry, (Needham Heights, MA, Allyn and Bacon, 1998). p.37.

51 Crandall and Furchtgott-Roth, p. 9.

52 Crandall and Furchtgott-Roth, p. 15.

53 Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Public Law 102–385, 102nd Congress, Oct. 5, 1992.

54 The National Cable Television Center and Museum website, on the Internet

at http://www.cablecenter.org (visited August 1998).

55 Communications Engineering and Design (CED) magazine website, on

the Internet at http://www.cedmagazine.com/retro/eighties.html (visited June

1998).

56 MacDonald, One Nation Under Television, p. 254.

57 Television and Cable Factbook, p. J-12.

 58 The National Cable Television Center and Museum, on the Internet at

http://www.cablecenter.org (visited, August 1998).

59 Cable TV Developments (National Cable Television Association), fall,

1997, p. 8.

60 National Cable Television Association information sheet on the 1980s.

61Cable TV Developments (National Cable Television Association), fall 1998/

winter 1999.

62 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries, p.14.

63 Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the

Delivery of Video Programming: Third Annual Report, CS Docket No. 96–133

(Federal Communications Commission, January 1997), sec. 2, par. 5.

64 Telecommunications Act of 1996, 104th Congress, Jan. 3, 1996, S.652,

section 301.

65 Telecommunications Act of 1996, 104th Congress, Jan. 3, 1996, S.652,

section 303.

66 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries, p.12.

67 The National Cable Television Center and Museum web site: http://

www.cablecenter.org (visited August 1998).

68 Parsons and Frieden, The Cable and Satellite Television Industries,

p. 134.

69 A discussion of the outlook for jobs in both the broadcast and cable

television industries can be found in Career Guide to Industries: 2001–01

Edition, Bulletin 2340 (Bureau of Labor Statistics, January 2000), pp. 105–09.