That argument only holds water for like-priced channels. I don't care if they have 30 channels I don't watch that are getting 30 or 40 cents each. When one oddball is included at 10-15 times the 'normal' rate, it makes the whole mess lopsided.
Wait... so it is unfair for you to have to pay $5 for one channel you don't want but it is somehow fair for me to have to pay $5 for 10 channels I don't want?
How does that work?
Isn't it the same argument?
My paying for ESPN in that package helps support you by me also paying for all those channels you like but that I never watch... similarly, your paying for those channels you like then helps me get ESPN.
While we all know why a la carte isn't the savior that people think it would be... at least people who want ALL channels a la carte are being fair to everyone. Your argument to just single out ESPN wouldn't be fair to everyone at all.
I would still be paying for dozens of channels that you like but that I don't watch in your scenario, whereas you would be saving money by not paying for ESPN. How is that fair?