I read the Wikipedia article on Sky Angel, an IPTV television provider which only offers channels and networks which pass a Christian-family threshold. 

Basically, this is the first time that I’ve heard of a television provider, rather than just individual channels, catering to specific niche demographics of viewers. Perhaps IPTV, as a medium, potentially allows for that ability to forego packages of all types of content without taking serious dents into the financial bottom line of the provider (at least compared to cable, satellite, terrestrial or fiber). 

But I wonder if Sky Angel could be the first prominent example of entire television providers fragmenting themselves by the type of content which their carried channels (VOD, live streaming, or playout) offer.

It would make sense, I’m sure, for providers to begin appealing to niche audiences by setting such thresholds, at least because the traditional "one size fits all" buffet of digital cable and satellite television has become rather large and ungainly.

So I’m pretty certain that we’re going to have a women-specific television provider in the future, for example. This hypothetical provider would carry Lifetime, Oxygen, WeTV, the upcoming OWN, and other networks which generally provide content which is (intentionally or not) appealing to significantly female-composed audiences. This could even carry women’s sports (collegiate and professional), women’s business, women’s travel & lifestyle, women’s comedy/drama (scripted and reality), women’s politics, women’s music, women’s news, etc., perhaps as video-on-demand.

I’m thinking that there’s also some room for other niche-specific providers, such as one for LGBT, Jewish, Islamic, Liberal religious (perhaps a UUA member congregation can be to it what the Unification Church was to American Life TV Network?), Neopagan, and Men’s interest (for both gay and straight guys).

I’m also thinking of a provider which offers television channels chock full of live events and instructionals on sports, fitness and health. This would appeal to sports fans, health nuts and muscle freaks alike, and would still have enough diversity in content to offer a buffet of topical interests within which one may immerse themselves without feeling limited by the threshold of the content offered by the provider.

My problem with this fragmentation of TV providers, however, is that, with the breadth of moving space that is allowed by such topic-specific providers to the channels which are carried by them, the quality or standards of the content offered by the channels or VOD services will decrease. Basically, as with the proliferation of websites on the WWW which appeal to the most particular demographics and the reduction of production quality which accompanies the content posted onto such sites simply for their relevance, the fragmentation of providers will allow providers to hold onto channels and shows which would not survive the scrutiny of critics who watch and evaluate the multi-niche providers’ wares. Provider fragmentation would be a sort of "welfare" for channels and productions for as long as they stay relevant to a sub-niche of the niche audience to which a provider would cater.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the production quality of television series, movies or whole channels on niche providers would approach the low-budget level that is found on YouTube, Ustream and public access television. Perhaps productions might be harvested from such sources as well?

But still, it would be an interesting phenomenon to see geographically-widespread (or even multinational) providers fragment for specific niche audiences.