Some registered account users are experiencing password recognition issues. The issue appears to have been triggered by a PHP update last night. If this is occurring, please try logging in and using the "forgot password?" utility. Bear in mind auto-generated password reset emails may appear in your spam folder. If this does not work, please click the "Contact Us" option near the lower right hand corner of the index page to contact me via email.
It seems like it's only been a short time since the Nexstar dispute with AT&T/DirecTV blew up... now this time, DISH network and Meredith are in a dispute... complete with news articles containing the same talking points accusing one another of the same crap over and over again.
Is it just me, or have these retrans disputes exploded in frequency (and have become the norm) over the past few years, especially since the particularly nasty spat between WNWO in Toledo and Buckeye shortly after the former was bought (along with the rest of Barrington) by Sinclair?
The roadmap for the cable or satellite provider is make your fee demand, refuse to negotiate, discontinue running the miscreant offenders, and blame the station for not wanting to provide their programming to the viewers who have your service.
When government shutdowns are almost expected every year, then this series of events shouldn’t be a surprise. They could skip the posturing and serve the public, but that would be out-of-character.
I’m seeing Nexstar blaming AT&T, and AT&T blaming Nexstar. I don’t believe either side.
I cannot understand why AT&T/DirecTV, which makes BILLIONS in profits every year refuses to compensate local TV stations for the local news, weather, sports, entertainment programming they provide. I'd rather have my local TV stations than some of the cable stations they force us to include in their bundled packages.
Here's another thing to look at. Those same local TV stations use government property to supposedly predict weather forecasts. I think the TV stations need to pay the NWS for their retransmission of doppler images. If the stations have "defunded" local dopplers, the images should not be given to stations to profit off of. Funny that not one political person ever talks about this. This could be something to use in retransmission issues.
TeddyBear: by your same argument, entities like the Weather Channel or apps/websites that use this data would also not be able to use taxpayer funded weather data? Not sure that helps with the retrans dispute between local broadcasters and a media conglomerate like AT&T... or the local TV viewers that are being negatively impacted by blackouts who need the severe weather alerts to protect their families and property.
I have ditched the dish and went with Hulu. Funny that Wjrt, Wsmh, and Wnem are on there but not Weyi. Wonder why when they come from the same server as Wsmh.
I'm on the side of the providers. Why should they pay to re transmit channels that are supported by advertisers? You'd think the broadcasters would want all the eyeballs on them that they can get via any means.
autolab wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 12:38 am
TeddyBear: by your same argument, entities like the Weather Channel or apps/websites that use this data would also not be able to use taxpayer funded weather data? Not sure that helps with the retrans dispute between local broadcasters and a media conglomerate like AT&T... or the local TV viewers that are being negatively impacted by blackouts who need the severe weather alerts to protect their families and property.
It's another cost to put into retains fees for cable and sat license fee reclamation.
There are NOAA WX radio, EAS activations, and weather spotter frequencies.
I think all commercial entities should pay NOAA for the retransmission of the dopplers and other radars down the road. The government is currently getting screwed by allowing free access to its product. Also, someone is really stealing the radar product now. They are making money off of it. It's part of the WX forecast in the newscast. As you know, stations charge a major markup for spots in a newscast. The most dollars made are from newscast ad revenue.
TeddyBear: I think we're talking about two different things. Local broadcasters use government data (radar, temp info) as part of their FCC mandate to provide local news and weather information free to viewers over the air. Yes, local broadcasters make money through advertising... but they don't charge an access fee like DirecTV/DishTV -- who want to take the local feeds of network programming and local news for free to make a profit. Local broadcasters employ local workers. We pay local taxes. We volunteer in local charities. We're covering local issues, elections, etc. There is significant cost to provide this service. Without the retrans fees to recoup some of those costs, local advertising fees for local businesses would go up (hurting those companies) or there would be major layoffs of local journalists as a result of the decline in retrans revenue.
All for what? To line the pockets of AT&T, a company that makes billions of dollars in profits every year, doesn't employ local workers or pays local taxes, doesn't have FCC mandates to provide localism?
No one likes to pay more. I understand why viewers are pissed off after Dish stopped negotiating and dropped TV5. But I side with the content makers (local broadcasters) and their right to receive compensation for their programming.
Lots of variables that we don't have privy to. Is Meredith going for a package equal to other broadcasters? How much are they asking for in an increase? Should any of that matter?
It would be nice to pick all channels "a la carte"....pay for what you actually watch. That said...I don't watch all that much television to begin with, and I can watch 5's news via the chromebook.
autolab wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:16 am
I cannot understand why AT&T/DirecTV, which makes BILLIONS in profits every year refuses to compensate local TV stations for the local news, weather, sports, entertainment programming they provide. I'd rather have my local TV stations than some of the cable stations they force us to include in their bundled packages.
The flip side is local TV should compensate ATT for getting them viewers since OTA viewing is much smaller than it used to be.
Also ATT has a fiduciary responsibility to its stockholders. Since 54% of the stock is institutionally owned a lot of those stockholders are average schmoes like you and me with some sort of work related 401 plan or perhaps an IRA that includes Mutual Funds and the like.
The disagreement is waged between cable/satellite companies and station owners or ownership groups. A fair amount of content on most stations is from a network.
Since the networks carried on the removed stations lose viewers and therefore potentially lose revenue, shouldn’t the networks have some input into these negotiations?
Couldn’t the networks arrange their own deal in situations like this to have network programming available On Demand through the cable provider, since they’ve not been part of the process? In Grand Rapids, AT&T has pulled both NBC and ABC from the On Demand due to those networks being represented on Nexstar stations in that market. There is another ABC station licensed to Grand Rapids that has no connection to Nexstar, and that’s carried by AT&T, but ABC’s On Demand has been pulled from the AT&T cable nonetheless.
The ultimate goal would be for all 3 groups to recognize that they have the common goal of making money, and respect that the process works best when everyone can compromise.
