The clamor on the street here in Dago is that Fox 6 has not resigned its affiliation agreement with XETV and that FOX shows are going to be making their new home on KUSI-TV Channel 9.......
-
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
FOX-TV AFFILIATION IN SAN DIEGO
- Thread starter sdwulfdawg
- Start date
M
mrfish67
Guest
RicoGregg said:
Interesting ideas, but two points:
1. I would like to see some citation or reference for this claim that the affiliation will switch.
2. Minor quibble--the transition in February 2009 is for switching to digital broadcasts, which are not necessarily HD broadcasts.
RicoGregg said:
I guess I'd think Fox would consider the continued presence of an analog signal on XETV a reason to *keep* channel 6 as an affiliate. (and I know of no FCC rule that would prevent Fox from providing the network signal to a Mexican station that will broadcast it back into the U.S. in analog, as long as the necessary permission (which XETV already has) has been granted.)
And lest we forget, we have a cross-border Fox affil in Texas' Rio Grande Valley -- XHRIO channel 2. That station currently has no digital signals of its own (it uses its American sister, KNVO, for digital programming). Furthermore, that station became a Fox affiliate not to long ago -- sometime in 2006.
It should be known that Entravision programs both XETV and XHRIO.
It should be known that Entravision programs both XETV and XHRIO.
J
jvparent
Guest
This isn't exactly a new story. There have been rumours on the street for months now that FOX wanted to take its affiliation out of XETV's hands and was offering McKinnon a long-term deal to place FOX on KUSI. It's not something that makes a great deal of sense outwardly, since XETV has been quite good for FOX, and vice-versa.
RicoGregg said:
There is no requirement by Mexico (or Canada) television stations to broadcast in digital. XETV has a digital station on UHF 23. It is one of the few Mexico-based stations to offer this. There are several Baja California stations in HDTV. (I have an old fashion TV antenna)
San Diego is one of the most 'wired' cities (after Honolulu) for cable and/or satellite. So the old fashioned antenna viewers are very small in numbers.
KUSI-TV 51 is avail on UHF 18 for digital. Presently their digital broadcast is pathetic over the air. It's 480 stretched and it is not known if they have ever presented any HD programming. That doesn't mean they won't but knowing the cheapness of the owner ......
McKinnon has tried to wrestle with Fox TV before and lost. Unless the Bay City TV (the operators of Fox 6 and myTV 49) is opting out (from a business sense that doesn't make sense) this is another rumor on the island.
Please resume normal programming.
Garrett said:
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/archive/ENG/Notices/2007/pb2007-53.htm
which says in part:
"Television licensees will be authorized to broadcast only digital OTA signals after 31 August 2011, although exceptions may be made in northern and remote communities where analog transmissions will not cause interference."
http://www.cft.gob.mx/wb/COFETEL/COFE_Periodos_de_Transicion_a_la_TDT
(link is in Spanish)
The title and first sentence read:
"Triennial Periods for the Transition to DTV"
"The DTV Policy establishes a gradual and progressive transition in six triennial periods running from 2004 through 2021."
Stitch said:
There's a link on Wikipedia to the video where he announces it.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/topic/kplr-sam-zell-visit,0,662339.htmlstory
It's in the second half of the video "Sam 5."
I wonder what happens to CW if this actually is happening. (CW9?) And to XETV. (Univision 6?)
- Trip
Don't be so sure that CW would go anywhere even if KSWB gets FOX. Remember, television will soon be a digital only operation. It's quite conceivable that FOX would be on the main KSWB feed while CW programming would be on a subchannel.
I'm sure Sam Zell will push very hard to keep both.
I'm sure Sam Zell will push very hard to keep both.
artie fufkin said:
Would CW want to be on a subchannel with no OTA HD feed in San Diego? If I recall correctly, that would make San Diego the largest market without CW in HD over the air*. After San Diego, the largest would be Cincinnati, and then** would come Grand Rapids. Nothing else in the Top 50.
*Pittsburgh is currently the largest, but will have a digital signal with HD on 02/17/09. WPCW-DT has been tied up in bureaucracy for years.
**San Antonio falls in between here, but is an analog-only station which actually did apply for a digital signal and the FCC said no. KCWX will have a digital signal, most likely with HD, on 02/17/09.
- Trip
Cox already imports KTLA and shows it on channel 14. I know that they blackout programming during prime time to not conflict with KSWB. Couldnt the cable and sat companies just all bring in KTLA and make it a full time station instead? It makes sense that KUSI would probably try to get the affiliation instead but it seems like this could be an option as well.
But KTLA and KSWB are both owned by Tribune so there would be no real reason to complain.
The other problem is when a station broadcasts High Def it takes up all the bandwidth. I know some people say it can be done, but in the forums I've read if you try to run a SD channel and a HD channel it really effects the HD. I imagine in the future you'll be able to compress the signals more, but right now when FOX is running their sports in HD it would pretty much mean the CWs signal would be crap or FOX's signal would be less than adequate HD
I think Sam Zell's interest in FOX may be a sign of things to come. I wonder if the Tribune would like to push harder for more FOX affilates.
The other problem is when a station broadcasts High Def it takes up all the bandwidth. I know some people say it can be done, but in the forums I've read if you try to run a SD channel and a HD channel it really effects the HD. I imagine in the future you'll be able to compress the signals more, but right now when FOX is running their sports in HD it would pretty much mean the CWs signal would be crap or FOX's signal would be less than adequate HD
I think Sam Zell's interest in FOX may be a sign of things to come. I wonder if the Tribune would like to push harder for more FOX affilates.
Mark said:
Most stations would disagree with that statement. Here in Nashville, four out of five stations air one SD along with their HD. (the fifth is HD-only; the market's remaining stations have no HD)
Yes, if you spend enough time looking for compression artifacts on a HD channel, you can find them. (I would not be at all convinced you wouldn't have found them even if there was no SD subchannel. Even if you give the HD stream 100% of the bandwidth, it isn't anywhere near enough for *uncompressed* HD.) The vast majority of viewers have no problem with the HD signal.
Further, stations are rolling out "statistical multiplexers", which dynamically allocate the available bandwidth between the subchannels. When the HD subchannel is running a scoreboard or a static headshot or something like that that compresses well, it hands more bandwidth over to the SD; when the HD shows the Lakers making a fast break for the basket, it grabs more bandwidth.
Anyway, the powers-that-be at most stations (including in Engineering) have no problem running one SD alongside a HD. If Tribune finds themselves in a position to run Fox-HD and CW-SD on KSWB, and they feel it financially advantageous to do so, they *will* do it.
- Status