Comcast Springfield pulling WTNH...

[TXengineer]

Comcast announced in a recent bill (as so I was told and confirmed today by someone AT Comcast) that they are pulling off WTNH 08 off of the Comcast systems in Springfield and Westfield effective sometime in December. This is at the request of WGGB-TV, the Sinclair station has requested non duplication exclusivity, and rather than just switch on newscasts, Comcast has opted to just yank the channel overall.

Commentary: the viewers lose out big time in this. WGGB's signal has been barely watchable on the system for months. Clipping and Noisy video, distorted and buzzing audio. Watching ABC was a relief on WTNH because of how clear it actually looked. Before WGGB makes a classy move like this, maybe they ought to clean up their act first? One would think...

This will mean the ONLY networks duplicated on the systems are WVIT/WWLP for NBC and WEDH/WGBY for PBS. We will only have one ABC affiliate, (WGGB), CBS affiliate (WSHM-LP), and FOX affiliate (WTIC-TV).

 

[rugrats1]

> Comcast announced in a recent bill (as so I was told and
> confirmed today by someone AT Comcast) that they are pulling
> off WTNH 08 off of the Comcast systems in Springfield and
> Westfield effective sometime in December. This is at the
> request of WGGB-TV, the Sinclair station has requested non
> duplication exclusivity, and rather than just switch on
> newscasts, Comcast has opted to just yank the channel
> overall.

It seems that most, if not all, Sinclair stations are pulling this stunt -- in Flint, Sinclair-owned Fox affil WSMH ordered Detroit's WJBK off the systems in their market (never mind that Comcast's Flint system also covers part of Oakland County, in the Detroit market).

 

[jjkktj]

> Comcast announced in a recent bill (as so I was told and
> confirmed today by someone AT Comcast) that they are pulling
> off WTNH 08 off of the Comcast systems in Springfield and
> Westfield effective sometime in December. This is at the
> request of WGGB-TV, the Sinclair station has requested non
> duplication exclusivity, and rather than just switch on
> newscasts, Comcast has opted to just yank the channel
> overall.
>
> Commentary: the viewers lose out big time in this. WGGB's
> signal has been barely watchable on the system for months.
> Clipping and Noisy video, distorted and buzzing audio.
> Watching ABC was a relief on WTNH because of how clear it
> actually looked. Before WGGB makes a classy move like this,
> maybe they ought to clean up their act first? One would
> think...
>
> This will mean the ONLY networks duplicated on the systems
> are WVIT/WWLP for NBC and WEDH/WGBY for PBS. We will only
> have one ABC affiliate, (WGGB), CBS affiliate (WSHM-LP), and
> FOX affiliate (WTIC-TV).
>

What is LIN's reaction to this. Would this affect any agreement with LIN's WWLP?

 

[shadowman]

> > Comcast announced in a recent bill (as so I was told and
> > confirmed today by someone AT Comcast) that they are
> pulling
> > off WTNH 08 off of the Comcast systems in Springfield and
> > Westfield effective sometime in December. This is at the
> > request of WGGB-TV, the Sinclair station has requested non
>
> > duplication exclusivity, and rather than just switch on
> > newscasts, Comcast has opted to just yank the channel
> > overall.
>
> It seems that most, if not all, Sinclair stations are
> pulling this stunt -- in Flint, Sinclair-owned Fox affil
> WSMH ordered Detroit's WJBK off the systems in their market
> (never mind that Comcast's Flint system also covers part of
> Oakland County, in the Detroit market).
>

Maybe this would be the only way WGGB will offer their DT signal,since it's the only channel in Sprinfield that has not allowedf their digital signal to be offered.

Also, what will Comcast will put on that channel on 12-14-2005? I wonder if this is where WHTX TV 43 (Springfield's Univision Affilliate) will be located at the beginning of 2006...

Note: as many of you know, Univision now requires cable operators to carry the local affilliate when it's possible.

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

Two questions:

(1) How good is over-the-air reception of WTNH-8 in Springfield??

(2) Could WWLP-22 demand that cable operators in the Springfield area remove WVIT-30 Hartford/New Britain to make their own station the exclusive NBC affiliate on Springfield-area cable systems??

I thought there was some kind of FCC regulation that permits multiple affiliates of one network to be available on cable systems in a particular community if the community involved is within the "Grade B" (a station one should be able to receive over-the-air with an outdoor TV antenna) signal area of the involved station(s).

Maybe WTNH's "Grade B" signal area doesn't reach Springfield, although I thought that it would.

Personally, given the number of channels now available on cable, the FCC should institute a new "must-carry" rule that mandates cable systems to carry all broadcast TV stations whose over-the-air signals can be received with at least an outdoor TV antenna in the community served by the cable system, even if such signals are from nearby markets. Here in the Northeast especially, many TV viewers can get over-the-air TV signals from nearby markets with either indoor or outdoor TV antennas.

 

[KML0224]

I've often asked why Comcast of New Britain carries WGBY-TV (PBS) channel 57 of Springfield in the first place? Much of the prime time programming is identical to WEDH-TV (PBS) channel 24 of Hartford. Speking of Hartford and its stations, does Comcast of Springifeld carry WUVN-TV (UNI) channel 18 of Hartford? How is their over-the-air signal in that area? (Here in New Britain's south end, I can't properly receive channels 18 or 24 since the hill I'm at the bottom of is in the same direction as Avon Mountain, home to the channel 18 and 24 transmitters.)

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

I think the carriage rules for noncommercial TV stations are different than those for commercial TV stations.

Many cable systems in the Boston area carry four PBS stations: WGBH-2 and sister station WGBX-44 (Boston), WENH-11 (Durham, NH), and WSBE-36 (Providence). In many cases, WSBE is the only Providence station carried.

 

[MJB13]

> I think the carriage rules for noncommercial TV stations are
> different than those for commercial TV stations.
>
> Many cable systems in the Boston area carry four PBS
> stations: WGBH-2 and sister station WGBX-44 (Boston),
> WENH-11 (Durham, NH), and WSBE-36 (Providence). In many
> cases, WSBE is the only Providence station carried.
>

Correct. I believe the regulations require at least 2 noncommercial stations per cable system. Western Massachusetts cable systems (sans Berkshire County in the Albany market) carry both WGBY-57 (Springfield) and WEDH-24 (CPTV - Hartford) or WGBH-2 (Boston).

In most of Connecticut, CPTV is the default noncomm while WGBY is carried as far south as Meriden on Cox. In Southern and Western Connecticut you will find CPTV complimented by WNET-13 (Newark/New York). Parts of Eastern Connecticut usually have WSBE-36 (Providence) as the secondary noncomm.

 

[TheBigDon]

> I thought there was some kind of FCC regulation that permits
> multiple affiliates of one network to be available on cable
> systems in a particular community if the community involved
> is within the "Grade B" (a station one should be able to
> receive over-the-air with an outdoor TV antenna) signal area
> of the involved station(s).

If I'm not mistaken, if a station is within 50 miles of a CATV headend, then it can either.

1) Do retransmition consent: the cable operator must reach an agreement with the operator. Those may be non-carrage of a station outside the 50 mile radius. Often, O&O's back down from larger markets since the smaller affiliates in CT want the full viewership on cable. I think WGGB leaned on ABC, which leaned on WTNH not to renew trasmition.

OR

2) must carry, this is where the cable operator MUST carry a channel, as long as the tv operator can provide a singal to the headend, and is within 50 miles of said headend.

 

[shadowman]

> I've often asked why Comcast of New Britain carries WGBY-TV
> (PBS) channel 57 of Springfield in the first place? Much of
> the prime time programming is identical to WEDH-TV (PBS)
> channel 24 of Hartford. Speking of Hartford and its
> stations, does Comcast of Springifeld carry WUVN-TV (UNI)
> channel 18 of Hartford? How is their over-the-air signal in
> that area? (Here in New Britain's south end, I can't
> properly receive channels 18 or 24 since the hill I'm at the
> bottom of is in the same direction as Avon Mountain, home to
> the channel 18 and 24 transmitters.)
>

WUVN is not carried, although their signal quality is B grade (perhaps better than WGGB), however Comcast and Charter must start carrying either WUVN or WHTX LP for their Univision outlet soon.

Now, this brings another question. What will Comcast (Charter does not Carry WTNH, but carries WCTX TV 59 aka UPN 9) will put on Channel 10 in Springfield (Channel 8 in the rest of Western Massachusetts) as of 12/14? Can this channel allocation be used for WHTX LP 43 or will it be either empty or another informecial or shopping channel? And if they finally carry Univision's local, what would they put in replacement of the Univision EAST feed (Channel 27 in Springfield, Channel 55 on the rest of Comcast service area, Channel 70 on Charter systems)?

I also wonder if the WGGB ownership (Sinclair) would ever offer WGGB DT 55 to Cable companies in the near future?

 

[DonM]

Maybe this is finally in response to another system, Cox in northern Connecticut, covering WGGB with WTNH's signal whenever an ABC network program is on. And sometimes WTNH covers WGGB when it's not supposed to because of computer glitches I guess. And this is in an area where WGGB is providing a grade A signal. I'm surprised the FCC is allowing WTNH to get away with this, as WGGB is like a local station in northern CT, whereas WTNH barely is receivable over the air.

 

[KML0224]

Maybe so, but if you're in Enfield, you're still in the Hartford/New Haven TV market.

 

[TXengineer]

> And sometimes WTNH
> covers WGGB when it's not supposed to because of computer
> glitches I guess.

That would be COX's glitch, as COX controlls that switch


> And this is in an area where WGGB is
> providing a grade A signal. I'm surprised the FCC is
> allowing WTNH to get away with this, as WGGB is like a local
> station in northern CT, whereas WTNH barely is receivable
> over the air.

Get away with what Don? The systems that COX operates in North Central CT are in the Hartford/New Haven DMA (As KML said) so WTNH has priority on the system reguardless of how strong WGGB's signal is...

 

[TXengineer]

> Univision EAST feed (Channel 27 in
> Springfield, Channel 55 on the rest of Comcast service area,
> Channel 70 on Charter systems)?

Channel 56. 55 is SPIKE.


> I also wonder if the WGGB ownership (Sinclair) would ever
> offer WGGB DT 55 to Cable companies in the near future?

Maybe if they ever get their act in gear and get HDTV going. But they need to clean up their analog act first.

 

[shadowman]

> > Univision EAST feed (Channel 27 in
> > Springfield, Channel 55 on the rest of Comcast service
> area,
> > Channel 70 on Charter systems)?
>
> Channel 56. 55 is SPIKE.
>
thank you for clearing that one.
>
> > I also wonder if the WGGB ownership (Sinclair) would ever
> > offer WGGB DT 55 to Cable companies in the near future?
>
> Maybe if they ever get their act in gear and get HDTV going.
> But they need to clean up their analog act first.
>

When that happens, WGGB will no longer have a newscast lol

 

[rugrats1]

> Now, this brings another question. What will Comcast
> put on Channel 10 in Springfield (Channel 8 in the
> rest of Western Massachusetts) as of 12/14? Can this
> channel allocation be used for WHTX LP 43 or will it be
> either empty or another informecial or shopping channel?
> And if they finally carry Univision's local, what would they
> put in replacement of the Univision EAST feed (Channel 27 in
> Springfield, Channel 55 on the rest of Comcast service area,
> Channel 70 on Charter systems)?

When WHTX signs on, it'll most likely try to get as low a channel slot as possible.

In the Tampa Bay area, Univision affil WVEA moved from low-powered ch.61 to high-powered ch.62 in 2001 (through a station acquisition and tranny move). Since it was on a high-powered signal that covers most of the market, it got must-carry on most of the market's systems. Prior to 2001, WVEA was only on Time Warner's Hillsborough systems as a local channel, while the others carried the national signal on the Basic tiers. In Pinellas, the national Univision was on ch.47, but after 2001, when WVEA became available, it moved to ch.7, with local access moving to ch.47.

 

[r566]

> Two questions:
>
> (1) How good is over-the-air reception of WTNH-8 in
> Springfield??
>
> (2) Could WWLP-22 demand that cable operators in the
> Springfield area remove WVIT-30 Hartford/New Britain to make
> their own station the exclusive NBC affiliate on
> Springfield-area cable systems??
>
> I thought there was some kind of FCC regulation that permits
> multiple affiliates of one network to be available on cable
> systems in a particular community if the community involved
> is within the "Grade B" (a station one should be able to
> receive over-the-air with an outdoor TV antenna) signal area
> of the involved station(s).
>

Not if the station is deemed "duplicating" to another station. (Applies to commercial network stations, not PBS stations, which fall under NCE carriage rules.) Just visit a part of Prince Georges County, 30 miles away from Baltimore, but Baltimore TV isn't available on Comcast.

WTNH is deemed duplicative to WGGB, despite different newscasts, syndication and local advertising. Given WTNH is in a different DMA than Springfield, WNTH has no right on cable there.

The cable system need only carry the closest network affiliate of a given network.

As for answer to question #2), the difference is WVIT is licensed in Hartford, not New Haven.

I know that Comcast Reading PA must-carry WGAL 8 Lancaster, only because Lancaster, the city of WGAL's license, winds up being closer to Reading, than Philadelphia, even though WGAL transmits further west of that city. Harrisburg-licensed network stations have no must-carry privileges in Reading, as Comcast need not carry them - Phila. is closer.

> Maybe WTNH's "Grade B" signal area doesn't reach
> Springfield, although I thought that it would.
>

It's Grade B is insignificant.

> Personally, given the number of channels now available on
> cable, the FCC should institute a new "must-carry" rule that
> mandates cable systems to carry all broadcast TV stations
> whose over-the-air signals can be received with at least an
> outdoor TV antenna in the community served by the cable
> system, even if such signals are from nearby markets. Here
> in the Northeast especially, many TV viewers can get
> over-the-air TV signals from nearby markets with either
> indoor or outdoor TV antennas.
>

That just goes against what most broadcasters want - exclusivity.

 

[fybush]

> Correct. I believe the regulations require at least 2
> noncommercial stations per cable system. Western
> Massachusetts cable systems (sans Berkshire County in the
> Albany market) carry both WGBY-57 (Springfield) and WEDH-24
> (CPTV - Hartford) or WGBH-2 (Boston).

The regs require 2 noncomms per system, when available. Here in Rochester NY, we get only local WXXI on cable - the signals from Syracuse and Buffalo aren't strong enough to trigger must-carry.

> In most of Connecticut, CPTV is the default noncomm while
> WGBY is carried as far south as Meriden on Cox. In Southern
> and Western Connecticut you will find CPTV complimented by
> WNET-13 (Newark/New York). Parts of Eastern Connecticut
> usually have WSBE-36 (Providence) as the secondary noncomm.

The Adelphia system in Norwich doesn't have WSBE; instead, probably for historical reasons that predate WSBE, it carries WGBH - and over an off-the-air pickup that's quite susceptible to E-skip interference. I've seen the channel 2s in Florida overwhelming WGBH on the Adelphia Norwich system.

(That system also carries WJAR and WPRI from Providence and WCVB from Boston, though WCVB is heavily syndex'ed.)<P ID="signature">______________
Tower Site Calendar 2006 JUST RELEASED! - <a target="_blank" href=http://www.fybush.com/nerw.html#calendar>www.fybush.com</a></P>

 

[MJB13]

> > Correct. I believe the regulations require at least 2
> > noncommercial stations per cable system. Western
> > Massachusetts cable systems (sans Berkshire County in the
> > Albany market) carry both WGBY-57 (Springfield) and
> WEDH-24
> > (CPTV - Hartford) or WGBH-2 (Boston).
>
> The regs require 2 noncomms per system, when available. Here
> in Rochester NY, we get only local WXXI on cable - the
> signals from Syracuse and Buffalo aren't strong enough to
> trigger must-carry.
>
> > In most of Connecticut, CPTV is the default noncomm while
> > WGBY is carried as far south as Meriden on Cox. In
> Southern
> > and Western Connecticut you will find CPTV complimented by
>
> > WNET-13 (Newark/New York). Parts of Eastern Connecticut
> > usually have WSBE-36 (Providence) as the secondary
> noncomm.
>
> The Adelphia system in Norwich doesn't have WSBE; instead,
> probably for historical reasons that predate WSBE, it
> carries WGBH - and over an off-the-air pickup that's quite
> susceptible to E-skip interference. I've seen the channel 2s
> in Florida overwhelming WGBH on the Adelphia Norwich system.
>
>
> (That system also carries WJAR and WPRI from Providence and
> WCVB from Boston, though WCVB is heavily syndex'ed.)
>

Since we're on the topic of noncomms on cable, Comcast here in Greater Springfield/Westfield offers digital PBS auxiliary channels (e.g. 'GBY World, 'GBY Kids, 'GBY Create) on their digital tier (Channel 200's). These are fed from WGBH in Boston. For a while, these channels were ID'ing as "WGBH-DT Boston - WGBY-DT Springfield". Now they just ID as "WGBY-DT Springfield", however you can often catch 'GBH promos and spots before it switches to a non-specific or WGBY spot.

 

[GUMBA1225]

Re: out of market "must carry" ...

> Personally, given the number of channels now available on
> cable, the FCC should institute a new "must-carry" rule that
> mandates cable systems to carry all broadcast TV stations
> whose over-the-air signals can be received with at least an
> outdoor TV antenna in the community served by the cable
> system, even if such signals are from nearby markets. Here
> in the Northeast especially, many TV viewers can get
> over-the-air TV signals from nearby markets with either
> indoor or outdoor TV antennas.
>

I agree with you Joe. I think it is a problem, especially in the Northeast, where markets overlap state borders and cross metro areas. For the last few years, SBC has pushed their "bundle plans" combining SBC phone service, SBC Yahoo! DSL, Cingular Wireless phone service, and the Dish Network satellite cable all on one bill. The problem in Connecticut is that people in New Haven or southern Litchfield counties accustomed to seeing the NYC stations on their local cable lineup, soon find the SBC/Dish Network lineup to have none of the out of market stations from NYC.

Instead, the Hartford/New Haven SBC/DishNetwork lineup is as boring as this:
Channel 3 WFSB, Hartford
Channel 8 WTNH, New Haven
Channel 13 WRDM, Hartford
Channel 18 WUVN, Hartford
Channel 20 WTXX, Waterbury
Channel 24 WEDH, Hartford
Channel 26 WHPX, New London
Channel 30 WVIT, New Britain
Channel 59 WCTX, New Haven
Channel 61 WTIC, Hartford
(Channel 100+ begins the cable stations, music, movie lineups)

Alot of people in New Haven and southern Litchfield Counties soon end up resenting the fact that they chose SBC/Dish Network cable because they can no longer receive the NYC stations. The reverse goes for those in Fairfield County who go to DirectTV for example. They soon realize that they cannot receive New Haven's WTNH-8 or Bridgeport's WEDW-49 (in addition to the other Connecticut stations). Instead, they can only receive the NYC stations. I have many friends and relatives on both sides of the coin who ended up disappointed after making the switch from their traditional cable providers that provide lineups from both markets.

While I would agree that the cable companies would waste more bandwidth and not bring in the money that cable stations would pay, I have to agree with you that there should be some kind of "must carry" rule in these circumstances. Fortunately, cable companies on the fringe of bordering markets do a good job of carrying stations on both sides. However, the satellite cable providers, and these other plans like SBC/Dish Network, should be forced to do the same. Someone in Milford or Southbury (New Haven County) or New Milford (Litchfield County) have an equal need of the New York City stations just as someone from Danbury or Stratford (Fairfield County) have the need for Hartford/New Haven stations. It's a no brainer.. any cable/satellite provider should provide lineups from both markets as a good will gesture for the community.