-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Awwww... Not this crap again! WPRI transmission dispute
- Thread starter Skynet74
- Start date
Skynet74 said:
What I thinking....COX strikes a one year deal with WBZ and WFXT.Get them on the line up right away probably in the 800's with the sub channels.Calling LIN's bluff and have two CBS and two FOX affiliates on the line up as leverage.The hell with it throw in WSBK too for MY.
It's odd that I was also thinking one year would be just enough time for LIN to learn their lesson. Well at least we are on the same page. However I think there is a 99.9 percent chance that this will never happen. See ya back here on Wednesday when LIN and COX reach their little agreement which we all know they are going to reach anyway.
I was looking at some web site the other day that had a breakdown of what each cable subscriber was paying for on some of the cable channels.I do remember Each subscriber is charged 5.80 a month for ESPN,I think 1.20 a month for BET. I forgot what MTV was.If anyone knows the link of what Im talking about feel free to post it.
COX can't simply put WBZ and WFXT on in Rhode Island unless LIN hasn't filed for network exclusivity. I have DirecTV and when Sunbeam pulled off WHDH and WLVI we were all hoping to get replacement stations but were told we could not because, despite the fact that Sunbeam pulled the signals off the air, they still had the exclusive rights to both NBC and CW programming in the Boston market. So, in short, we went without these networks on DirecTV for about two weeks. I would sincerely doubt COX could just switch on WBZ and WFXT to replace WPRI and WNAC. Besides, I agree, it will probably be settled soon anyway.
Smaug, after DirecTV pulled WHDH they enabled the WNBC NYC feed. They even sent me an email about it.
Since I live in the Lakes Region of NH (Boston DMA) and can't get NBC OTA could that be why? I noticed anyone even near antenna range didn't get it. Strangely they didn't bring in a distant CW affiliate...not that I cared.
Since I live in the Lakes Region of NH (Boston DMA) and can't get NBC OTA could that be why? I noticed anyone even near antenna range didn't get it. Strangely they didn't bring in a distant CW affiliate...not that I cared.
Hm, Cox could technically put WBZ on their cable systems in many areas of Rhode Island, as several Boston channels have significantly viewed status across various parts of Rhode Island (with the exception of southern Rhode Island, it seems). If Comcast for example dropped WPRI where I live (Bristol County, MA) over a contract dispute, we would still be able to watch WBZ here without a problem for CBS programming. I believe Cox did carry the Boston channels long ago until Providence got Cox to pry them off the lineup. Cox could carry the Boston channels across much of Rhode Island, as they have significantly viewed status, but the fight with the Providence affiliates wouldn't be pretty.
Do note that WBZ is only on that list in Bristol and Providence Counties. Admittedly, it looks like most of the population of RI is in those two counties. (and I didn't look at the Massachusetts side of the market)
Also, it is possible for this list to be modified. Either the Providence stations can get Boston stations declared "not significantly viewed", or the cable systems can get stations not on this list declared "significantly viewed", by submitting Nielsen numbers. The FCC list is based on 1972 data, so the chances current surveys will show changed viewing patterns (generally to the benefit of the stations) are pretty good!
I don't know if such a modification has happened, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Also, it is possible for this list to be modified. Either the Providence stations can get Boston stations declared "not significantly viewed", or the cable systems can get stations not on this list declared "significantly viewed", by submitting Nielsen numbers. The FCC list is based on 1972 data, so the chances current surveys will show changed viewing patterns (generally to the benefit of the stations) are pretty good!
I don't know if such a modification has happened, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Why no WFXT Channel 25 on this list and how would that effect COX being able to legally carry that station in Rhode Island. If LIN and COX don't reach an agreement, FOX Providence will get yanked. So my question is actually very important. Cox would need to add WFXT so that customers can still see FOX programming.
sonicdoommario said:
What is this list? If the station is on this list does that mean the cable system can carry that station without any problems
Skynet74 said:
WFXT isn't regarded as "significantly viewed" in Rhode Island.
It should be noted the list is based on 1972 viewership (?!); the + signs next to channels 7 and 64 mean those stations were added to the list in the subsequent 40 years.
IIRC, channel 25 belonged to the Catholic Church in 1972 and was a religious operation; chances are nobody in Providence went out of their way to watch it.
If I understand the rules properly (I don't guarantee I do), the absence of WFXT on the list means that Cox cannot legally carry WFXT in the listed RI counties if LIN objects.
kenwood101: this list is available on http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/significantviewedstations031011.pdf.
Unless I'm mistaken (and I may well be - this is a little outside the regulatory areas that are my specialty), the "significantly viewed" list isn't going to help cable viewers very much during this dispute. My understanding is that the list effectively grandfathers existing out-of-market cable carriage, but it doesn't provide a blanket authorization for cable companies to begin new carriage of out-of-market signals.
I think (but again am not 100% certain) that if Cox wanted to, say, begin carrying WBZ in Providence County, it would have to secure retransmission consent from WBZ in order to do so. And I am nearly 100% certain that CBS would deny that consent. After all, CBS has a contractual relationship with LIN under which LIN has the exclusive rights to CBS network programming in the Providence DMA, and I would very strongly suspect that the contract does not allow CBS to offer its programming to Providence DMA viewers through alternate means, including WBZ-TV retransmission.
The same is true of Fox and WFXT, though with the additional complication that WFXT isn't even on the "significantly-viewed" list in Providence. (In fact, channel 25 wasn't even on the air when the list was created in 1972; it was channel 38 that had gone from Catholic to commercial in the 1960s, while WXNE 25 signed on as a religious-leaning independent in 1977.)
So why did satellite viewers in northern New Hampshire get access to WNBC during the WHDH/DirecTV dispute? That was a different provision coming into play, under which satellite providers can make distant network affiliates available to customers in "white areas" without OTA DTV service. There are no such areas involved in this fight, and the rules for cable are different, anyway.
I think (but again am not 100% certain) that if Cox wanted to, say, begin carrying WBZ in Providence County, it would have to secure retransmission consent from WBZ in order to do so. And I am nearly 100% certain that CBS would deny that consent. After all, CBS has a contractual relationship with LIN under which LIN has the exclusive rights to CBS network programming in the Providence DMA, and I would very strongly suspect that the contract does not allow CBS to offer its programming to Providence DMA viewers through alternate means, including WBZ-TV retransmission.
The same is true of Fox and WFXT, though with the additional complication that WFXT isn't even on the "significantly-viewed" list in Providence. (In fact, channel 25 wasn't even on the air when the list was created in 1972; it was channel 38 that had gone from Catholic to commercial in the 1960s, while WXNE 25 signed on as a religious-leaning independent in 1977.)
So why did satellite viewers in northern New Hampshire get access to WNBC during the WHDH/DirecTV dispute? That was a different provision coming into play, under which satellite providers can make distant network affiliates available to customers in "white areas" without OTA DTV service. There are no such areas involved in this fight, and the rules for cable are different, anyway.
It's the FCC's "significantly viewed" list, which can be found at http://transition.fcc.gov/mb/significantviewedstations120611.pdf
Here is the list for Bristol County, MA, which is in the Providence DMA and not Boston.
Bristol
WLNE-TV, 6, Providence, RI (formerly WTEV)
WJAR, 10, Providence, RI
WPRI-TV, 12, Providence, RI
+WNAC-TV, 64, Providence, RI
WBZ-TV, 4, Boston, MA
WCVB-TV, 5, Boston, MA (formerly WHDH)
WHDH-TV, 7, Boston, MA (formerly WNAC)
WSBK-TV, 38, Boston, MA
#WLVI-TV, 56, Cambridge, MA (formerly WKBG)39
Notice how we have every major Boston channel, except for WFXT, on that list. Because of the fact that channels 4, 5, and 7 are on those list, Comcast and FIOS can carry those Boston channels in their entirety across Bristol County, despite us being in the Providence DMA. Also, we get those channels on our HD lineup too, so we have two of every network channel in HD, except for FOX.
Now, WFXT is not on that list. Because of that, cable providers in Bristol County, MA, can carry WFXT, but they have to blackout the duplicating network programming (like American Idol) on WFXT. So WFXT in Bristol County, MA is only useful for news and a couple of syndicated shows.
Yes, and you people are correct, WFXT is not on any significantly viewed list (even in counties in the Boston DMA, like Suffolk and Norfolk) because of the fact that they were owned by a religious company back in the hayday. WFXT could petition the FCC for significantly viewed status, but they have decided against doing so. If WFXT was instated as a significantly viewed channel here in Bristol County, MA, then Comcast would be able to lift the blackouts on network programming here on WFXT and we could watch the channel in its entirety.
Significantly viewed lists were (and still are) assembled based on over the air ratings. So if enough people watched a channel over the air, it was added to that county's SV list. Of course, this is an incredibly outdated procedure.
Now, another example is that WCVB is a SV station in Kent County, while WBZ is not. So if Cox could, they could carry WCVB on their cable systems in Kent County, including the ABC programming. Heck, WCVB would probably pile up more viewers in RI than WLNE ever did. However, if Cox decided to carry WBZ in Kent County, in which it isn't SV, Cox would need to black out the CBS programming on WBZ in honor of WPRI.
EDIT: I also wanted to point out that the significantly viewed list is a big reason why you see the Providence channels on Comcast on Cape Cod, despite the fact that the Cape and the Islands are all in the Boston DMA. Here is the SV list for Barnstable County, for example.
WBZ-TV, 4, Boston, MA
WCVB-TV, 5, Boston, MA (formerly WHDH)
WHDH-TV, 7, Boston, MA (formerly WNAC)
+WDPX, 58, Vineyard, MA (formerly WCVX, WZBU)
WLNE-TV, 6, Providence, RI (formerly WTEV)
WJAR, 10, Providence, RI
WPRI-TV, 12, Providence, RI
So Comcast can carry the big 3 out of Providence without needing to blackout programming. I don't believe that the Providence channels are in the HD lineup on the Cape, however. Here, in Bristol County, we get 2, 4, 5, 7, 38, and 44 on the Comcast HD lineup in addition with all of the major Providence channels. Neat, huh?
Here is the list for Bristol County, MA, which is in the Providence DMA and not Boston.
Bristol
WLNE-TV, 6, Providence, RI (formerly WTEV)
WJAR, 10, Providence, RI
WPRI-TV, 12, Providence, RI
+WNAC-TV, 64, Providence, RI
WBZ-TV, 4, Boston, MA
WCVB-TV, 5, Boston, MA (formerly WHDH)
WHDH-TV, 7, Boston, MA (formerly WNAC)
WSBK-TV, 38, Boston, MA
#WLVI-TV, 56, Cambridge, MA (formerly WKBG)39
Notice how we have every major Boston channel, except for WFXT, on that list. Because of the fact that channels 4, 5, and 7 are on those list, Comcast and FIOS can carry those Boston channels in their entirety across Bristol County, despite us being in the Providence DMA. Also, we get those channels on our HD lineup too, so we have two of every network channel in HD, except for FOX.
Now, WFXT is not on that list. Because of that, cable providers in Bristol County, MA, can carry WFXT, but they have to blackout the duplicating network programming (like American Idol) on WFXT. So WFXT in Bristol County, MA is only useful for news and a couple of syndicated shows.
Yes, and you people are correct, WFXT is not on any significantly viewed list (even in counties in the Boston DMA, like Suffolk and Norfolk) because of the fact that they were owned by a religious company back in the hayday. WFXT could petition the FCC for significantly viewed status, but they have decided against doing so. If WFXT was instated as a significantly viewed channel here in Bristol County, MA, then Comcast would be able to lift the blackouts on network programming here on WFXT and we could watch the channel in its entirety.
Significantly viewed lists were (and still are) assembled based on over the air ratings. So if enough people watched a channel over the air, it was added to that county's SV list. Of course, this is an incredibly outdated procedure.
Now, another example is that WCVB is a SV station in Kent County, while WBZ is not. So if Cox could, they could carry WCVB on their cable systems in Kent County, including the ABC programming. Heck, WCVB would probably pile up more viewers in RI than WLNE ever did. However, if Cox decided to carry WBZ in Kent County, in which it isn't SV, Cox would need to black out the CBS programming on WBZ in honor of WPRI.
EDIT: I also wanted to point out that the significantly viewed list is a big reason why you see the Providence channels on Comcast on Cape Cod, despite the fact that the Cape and the Islands are all in the Boston DMA. Here is the SV list for Barnstable County, for example.
WBZ-TV, 4, Boston, MA
WCVB-TV, 5, Boston, MA (formerly WHDH)
WHDH-TV, 7, Boston, MA (formerly WNAC)
+WDPX, 58, Vineyard, MA (formerly WCVX, WZBU)
WLNE-TV, 6, Providence, RI (formerly WTEV)
WJAR, 10, Providence, RI
WPRI-TV, 12, Providence, RI
So Comcast can carry the big 3 out of Providence without needing to blackout programming. I don't believe that the Providence channels are in the HD lineup on the Cape, however. Here, in Bristol County, we get 2, 4, 5, 7, 38, and 44 on the Comcast HD lineup in addition with all of the major Providence channels. Neat, huh?
sonicdoommario said:
I strongly suspect that you'll find that those channels aren't just showing up on Comcast because Comcast decided it would be nice to carry them. There is almost certainly an agreement in place between Comcast and CBS/Hearst/Sunbeam allowing continued carriage of those stations in Bristol County. I am not expert enough on the cable carriage rules to be able to say whether CBS/Hearst/Sunbeam can demand compensation for that carriage (or demand must-carry), since it's outside the Boston DMA.
WFXT is not on the list because it was not on the air at all in 1972, when the data behind the list was collected...
It certainly is. And it should be noted that stations aren't added to the list automatically. They have to request it, and they have to be able to show a certain percentage of "circulation" among over-the-air households in a given county. Perhaps WFXT could show that viewership...but maybe not, these days.
But you're missing a key point here. It's not just "in honor of WPRI." It is, I'm pretty sure, a contractual commitment to protect each local station's network territorial exclusivity. While I'm not privy to the affiliation agreements between CBS and WPRI, or between ABC and WLNE, I expect they contain language that says existing out-of-market cable carriage is grandfathered, but no new out-of-market cable carriage can be added. So while Cox might have the ability under the SV laws to carry WCVB in Kent County, I suspect WCVB would be contractually obligated to deny Cox permission to carry its signal.
(This protects stations in the other direction, too - if WCVB were to get into a carriage dispute with Comcast, it doesn't want WLNE to show up on Comcast systems within the Boston DMA where it's not already grandfathered in.)
There is more behind this. It may also be because there is a pretty good amount of Boston TV viewership in Bristol County, despite being out of market. It may also have to do with Bristol County's proximity to Boston, and the fact that Boston stations will cover Massachusetts issues that may be of interest to Bristol County viewers.
A couple of years ago, we had all of the major Boston channels in HD, including WFXT. This was because none of the Providence stations were capable of broadcasting in HD yet. When Providence stations became capable of doing so, they were added to the Comcast HD lineup, removing the corresponding Boston affiliate in the process. This ticked off a lot of Bristol County viewers, because they thought that they should be watching Massachusetts channels when living in Massachusetts. When Comcast did their digital expansion a couple years ago, they re-added many of the Boston channels on the HD lineup (so bandwidth was also an issue when the Boston channels were pulled off the HD lineup).
So, as I said, it most likely also has to do with the probable strong viewership of Boston channels in Bristol County and the proximity to Boston.
A couple years ago, WPRI tried to exempt WBZ from significantly viewed status in a couple of Bristol County towns, which could've lead to either A) The blackout of CBS programming on WBZ in these towns, B) WBZ being dropped off the HD lineup here, or C) WBZ being dropped entirely on Comcast systems here. WBZ fiercely objected to this, and rebutted to the FCC, stating how they are a Massachusetts station and offer much more Massachusetts-based content to Bristol County viewers than WPRI or any other Providence station. From what I've heard, the FCC is not going to act on WPRI's petition.
I agree about your opinions with Cox and Boston channels, especially since the Boson stations will only cover a Rhode Island event if it is a pretty major event. Because the Providence stations are based in....Rhode Island, it wouldn't be wise to carry the Boston channels across Rhode Island, because I'm sure none of the big three out of Providence would appreciate it.
It's a reason why I wouldn't want to live in Rhode Island. Heck, in southeastern Mass, you get a mix of Boston and Providence. Even in parts of Worcester County you can get both Boston and Providence. Even in eastern Connecticut you can get Hartford and Providence. But the MOMENT you cross into Rhode Island it's Providence and nothing but Providence, even if your next door neighbor literally lives on the other side of the border.
I live in New Britain, CT. The only out-of-market station Comcast offers is WGBY-TV (PBS) channel 57 from Springfield, MA. The last time I checked, we only got that in SD. Years ago, we had WSBK, WWOR and WPIX. I think we may have had WWLP and WGGB at one time, too. Of course, that was all in the pre-syndex analog days.
As for state and county boundaries, I wonder how the channel line-up works in Enfield, CT? It's in Hartford County, CT and the Hartford/New Haven DMA, but is a bit closer to Springfield, MA.
As for state and county boundaries, I wonder how the channel line-up works in Enfield, CT? It's in Hartford County, CT and the Hartford/New Haven DMA, but is a bit closer to Springfield, MA.
This is one reason I keep an indoor antenna on my TV's as an alternate source. COX shuts out every Boston channel except for PBS stations. So I watch Boston channels with an antenna. At least Rhode Island affiliates can't stop a signal from traveling through the air. I know they would if they could.
- Status