-
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
Olympics on CBC (CBUT) and King 5
- Thread starter e-dawg
- Start date
Have no idea... But I wish Comcast here in the Puget Sound are would carry CIVI, as the CTV network up there has the Olympic rights this year, and carrying most events live.
CTV is carried by Comcast in the Bellingham area. Problem is south of Whatcom County, we run into the "market exclusive" problem as CTV and Global carries many American network shows (The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are also carried over the air on CTV.)
I think it's stupid myself. I personally prefer watching the Vancouver channels compared to the Seattle stations....But it's all about keeping eyes for advertisers. This is also why KVOS lost CBS to KIRO in the early '80s.....
I think it's stupid myself. I personally prefer watching the Vancouver channels compared to the Seattle stations....But it's all about keeping eyes for advertisers. This is also why KVOS lost CBS to KIRO in the early '80s.....
toonces2u said:
35.8 million other Americans would disagree with you , but what do they know? ???
Clearly NBC's programming is being done by the same people who "ruined" KMCQ. :
NBC ownership is 51% Comcast (we'll be there between 12 & 4) and 49% GE (who didn't pay any corporate income taxes) what would you expect????
Bongwater said:
Also on their system in Anacortes and maybe a in couple of other parts of Skagit County.
Bongwater said:
On the other side of the coin, CTV gets "simultaneous substitution" rights in the Great White North, eh. Funny thing is they think the syndicated talkers actually originate with a U.S. network (see their programming grid). Fortunately, the Olympics don't seem to fall into that category since it's an internal CTV production.
Bongwater said:
This is where a good Yagi pointed to Mt. Seymour comes in handy, assuming it's feasible where you live. I'm lucky enough to have a straight shot where I live. 97% signal quality on my telly. It would be nice if geography and signal quality would favor more people around here. But if you're north of County Snohomish (maybe King but probably not) or across the way on the Peninsula, are somewhat in the clear, have an ourdoor antenna and can spin it in the direction of the Lower Mainland's big TV hill, give it a shot. You might get lucky.
BTW: In case you all haven't heard, CBC has regained the Olympics for Sochi and Rio. Comcast (et al) dare not mess with CBUT's availability. Quite widespread even to this day.
S
searadiofreak
Guest
NBC coverage is providing some of the best ratings ever for Olympics. They must be doing something right.
Yes, along the border, you can see some differences, but that being said, most are not along the border, so why not look at the big picture here? NBC is doing it right.
Yes, along the border, you can see some differences, but that being said, most are not along the border, so why not look at the big picture here? NBC is doing it right.
Joe_Capitano said:
"Simsub" applies to syndicated US programming, not just prime-time network fare. It's quite common to see Canadian local stations and networks shuffle their daytime and prime-access schedules to follow along as network affiliates south of the border rearrange their own schedules, just to preserve the valuable simsub rights.
Jack Griffin said:toonces2u said:
35.8 million other Americans would disagree with you , but what do they know? ???
Clearly NBC's programming is being done by the same people who "ruined" KMCQ. :
Yet another predictable comment from a sour little man. What else are people going to watch when that is all that is offered? Just because the ratings might be good does not mean that NBC's coverage is. It just means that it is our only option for TV viewing. Sheesh!
Jack Griffin said:toonces2u said:
35.8 million other Americans would disagree with you , but what do they know? ???
Clearly NBC's programming is being done by the same people who "ruined" KMCQ. :
This is such a stupid post.
Okay, let's say CBS broadcasts the Ravens/Bears Super Bowl next year, it airs on tape-delay at 11:00 PM ET/PT, commentators are the host from Survivor and Lady Gaga. Pre-game show is hosted by someone who knows nothing about football. They take breaks in the middle of the game to show you their upcoming fall lineup and miss 25 plays in the process. 105 million people watch, that means the coverage was fantastic.
Come on man....
A
AQH
Guest
Mookie said:Jack Griffin said:toonces2u said:
35.8 million other Americans would disagree with you , but what do they know? ???
Clearly NBC's programming is being done by the same people who "ruined" KMCQ. :
This is such a stupid post.
Okay, let's say CBS broadcasts the Ravens/Bears Super Bowl next year, it airs on tape-delay at 11:00 PM ET/PT, commentators are the host from Survivor and Lady Gaga. Pre-game show is hosted by someone who knows nothing about football. They take breaks in the middle of the game to show you their upcoming fall lineup and miss 25 plays in the process. 105 million people watch, that means the coverage was fantastic.
Come on man....
Do you really think that Al Michaels or Dan Patrick know anything about beach volleyball or gymnastics besides what interns or producers feed them? Anyone can find fault with coverage of the Olympics. My thought is that the coverage of the Opening Ceremony was disgraceful on multiple levels.
Who can blame NBC for trying to make a buck? Remember they paid $1.2 billion for the rights to broadcast the games. Not to mention the hard costs, such as equipment, labor and travel.
If you're going to assail a point someone else made, at least make your point apples to apples and not something completely different.
AQH said:Mookie said:Jack Griffin said:toonces2u said:
35.8 million other Americans would disagree with you , but what do they know? ???
Clearly NBC's programming is being done by the same people who "ruined" KMCQ. :
This is such a stupid post.
Okay, let's say CBS broadcasts the Ravens/Bears Super Bowl next year, it airs on tape-delay at 11:00 PM ET/PT, commentators are the host from Survivor and Lady Gaga. Pre-game show is hosted by someone who knows nothing about football. They take breaks in the middle of the game to show you their upcoming fall lineup and miss 25 plays in the process. 105 million people watch, that means the coverage was fantastic.
Come on man....
Do you really think that Al Michaels or Dan Patrick know anything about beach volleyball or gymnastics besides what interns or producers feed them? Anyone can find fault with coverage of the Olympics. My thought is that the coverage of the Opening Ceremony was disgraceful on multiple levels.
Who can blame NBC for trying to make a buck? Remember they paid $1.2 billion for the rights to broadcast the games. Not to mention the hard costs, such as equipment, labor and travel.
If you're going to assail a point someone else made, at least make your point apples to apples and not something completely different.
You're not reading my point correctly. He's saying that NBC's coverage clearly must be good because of the ratings and that people like it. That's hardly the case especially since they're the only game in town. So I used my Super Bowl comparison to say that CBS could do a hatchet job on the Super Bowl and it'd still get high ratings, it does not mean that the coverage is great.
Good God, some of you have such deeply ingrained pre-existing scripts, that you'll reinterpret anything anyone else says as an attack against your precious market exclusivity contract!
Sure, those people who think that all them furiners is funny lookin, and that any sport that ain't baseball, football, or basketball is insignificant - those folks can do without the Olympics, since they obviously miss the whole point of it. "Cept the missus is probably looking for some hot ice dancers to watch.
But those of us who wanted to watch the elaborate opening ceremonies without feeling like we were in the back row sitting next to a bunch of morons who wouldn't shut up, well, we were doubly disappointed that we couldn't switch our TVs to the CTV feed to see how they handled it. CBC four years ago let the event speak for itself, and just filled in with explanations, only when needed and helpful
Sorry if I'm slaughtering any more sacred American cows, but I find Marv Albert's wide-eyed and amazed pronouncements a big turn-off. With all those camers and the expense of covering the Games, why not help us feel like we have a front row seat, explain things before and after the athletes compete, and shut the bugger up when they're in the middle of something important. They really do talk down to the American viewers.
Maybe some day our TV sets will have access to honest competition, where we could access HD coverage from a dozen or more differnet national broadcasters, and select the ones we like for the events we want to watch. Jamaican TV's coverage of their fastest runner might have been over the top, but in a fun way to watch. Then contrast that with an evenhanded approach from BBC. And, if you're loucky, try NBC to see what the "American angle" is on everything. And all live and also "on demand."
Sure, those people who think that all them furiners is funny lookin, and that any sport that ain't baseball, football, or basketball is insignificant - those folks can do without the Olympics, since they obviously miss the whole point of it. "Cept the missus is probably looking for some hot ice dancers to watch.
But those of us who wanted to watch the elaborate opening ceremonies without feeling like we were in the back row sitting next to a bunch of morons who wouldn't shut up, well, we were doubly disappointed that we couldn't switch our TVs to the CTV feed to see how they handled it. CBC four years ago let the event speak for itself, and just filled in with explanations, only when needed and helpful
Sorry if I'm slaughtering any more sacred American cows, but I find Marv Albert's wide-eyed and amazed pronouncements a big turn-off. With all those camers and the expense of covering the Games, why not help us feel like we have a front row seat, explain things before and after the athletes compete, and shut the bugger up when they're in the middle of something important. They really do talk down to the American viewers.
Maybe some day our TV sets will have access to honest competition, where we could access HD coverage from a dozen or more differnet national broadcasters, and select the ones we like for the events we want to watch. Jamaican TV's coverage of their fastest runner might have been over the top, but in a fun way to watch. Then contrast that with an evenhanded approach from BBC. And, if you're loucky, try NBC to see what the "American angle" is on everything. And all live and also "on demand."
A
AQH
Guest
crainbebo said:
Given who owns NBC the chances of that happening are slim and none.
Just to be clear....they have about 5 channels running Olympics (all NBC affiliated) ... a very deep web site, but all the criticism is based on the ONE of the networks choosing the highlights for their "PRIME TIME" coverage?
Don't think you're judging the complete picture here.
The time shift thing MAY be worthy of complaint ... but if you drop $2B it doesn't seem reasonable to expect people to tune in overnights/mornings.
Don't think you're judging the complete picture here.
The time shift thing MAY be worthy of complaint ... but if you drop $2B it doesn't seem reasonable to expect people to tune in overnights/mornings.
- Status