PERSPECTIVE ON TELEVISION : No Cable Pie for the Networks’ Sky : Barry Diller wants to tap cable for a new revenue stream. He’d do better to put broadcasting’s house in order.

The broadcast networks should be ashamed of themselves. Their latest solution to their money-losing situation is to demand that the cable industry bail them out. Just a few days ago, Fox Inc. chairman Barry Diller said: “Broadcasters have to get paid (by cable operators) because if they don’t get a second stream of income beyond advertising support, they will eventually go out of business.”

As the former president of ABC Television, let me tell you that Diller and his friends are completely out of line. This is the same group of astute business executives who pay their affiliates hundreds of millions of dollars a year to carry hit shows like “Roseanne,” “60 Minutes,” “The Bill Cosby Show” and “The Simpsons.”

The networks not only spend millions of dollars to develop and air these shows, and give their affiliate stations advertising time next to them, but they continue to pay them dearly for exhibiting these shows. This system of bribing stations to carry a particular network was designed back in the days when there were only two networks. It’s incredible that this is still being done. Does Fox pay movie theaters to exhibit “Grand Canyon?” No way!

It should be the other way around--the station affiliates should be paying the broadcast networks. Just like the cable affiliates pay the cable programmers. Then the networks would have their second revenue stream.

Yes, annual reports certify that the networks are losing money. But at the same time, many local broadcast stations are still making profits in excess of 50 cents on the dollar. It’s tough to feel sorry for these people. Maybe if stations paid an affiliate fee to their broadcast network, they could be very happy with a profit of, say, 25 cents on the dollar.

Who do the local stations pay? No television station ever paid for the use of the publicly owned broadcast spectrum they occupy. It was given to them absolutely free by the government. And cable, which was mandated to provide more programming choices in addition to helping take the three networks over the hill to the people who couldn’t see ‘em, is going to be their cash cow?

Cable operators, on the other hand, have paid billions of dollars to build their delivery systems and are reinvesting billions more in newer and better technologies, like fiber optics. In the process, the operators also pay hundreds of millions of dollars to local municipalities for the privilege of using those systems.

The broadcasters’ cry for new legislation is an interesting twist, because I can remember when not too long ago they--myself included--lobbied for the “must carry rule,” forcing cable operators to televise the networks on their systems. Now they’re saying, “Pay me for what I make you take!”

Perhaps my friends who have decided to stay in the network business should consider that they still have many options for making money. They can reverse their system of paying affiliates for what they program. They can take advantage of cable and broadcast’s natural synergies in joint programming ventures and shared production facilities.

Finally, the networks should reconsider the way they do business. It’s no longer 1952, and antiquated broadcast business practices must change. It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee!

Does CBS need 7,000 employees when CNN has only 500? Do Los Angeles broadcast stations need 300 to 500 employees per station when we at Prime Ticket operate with fewer than 90?

Are billion-dollar rights fees for sports an appropriate expenditure? Are newscasters like Peter Jennings, Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw really worth annual salaries in excess of $2 million to sit and read the news for 30 minutes?

Why is it that from 7 to 9 a.m. every morning, every network televises the same hosts interviewing the same guests with the same weather breaks coming at the same times? In L.A., why do all the stations program local news at 5 and 6 o’clock and network news at 6:30 p.m.? Why do the network affiliates all program the same type of game and reality shows from 7 to 8 p.m.? What law says that all television programs must be divisible by 30 minutes?

Broadcasters are right to want to see their business change. It has changed, but the networks haven’t.

The philosophy of pursuing ratings at any cost is hurting the networks today. Instead of thinking about how many ratings points they can get, they should be concerned with rate of return.

For 23 years I was in the broadcast business; I’m guilty of having perpetuated many of these practices. However, that was then and this is now.

In our free-enterprise system, every business is entitled to get as big a bite of the pie as they can. But I’d like to think our government doesn’t have to spoon-feed it.