It seems in recent times television viewers are being "held hostage" because cable and satellite providers want more money from consumers and companies who carry their services, some of you may have seen the post regarding CBS & their standoff with Time Warner Cable, also 36 Raycom Media Stations are being blacked out by Dish Network, and other broadcast outlets are being removed here and there because of other disagreements, how much more can people take?, no wonder many are "cutting the cord" or shifting viewing habits to the Internet and other sources, this trend will continue and will catch up with those who think making more off the backs of us who pay their bills is the way to go, we are tired of it!
-
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
Television viewers being held hostage...
- Thread starter tothedj
- Start date
tothedj said:
The question is, what are you gonna do about it? Some have already cut the cord. I've had a Roku for about a year. The best way to send a message is to stop subscribing. Ball is in your court.
Cut the cord. You'll enjoy the freedom.
quadraphonic said:
Unless you're a fan of college sports or your local pro teams. You have little to none of those if you don't subscribe. ABC & CBS have one or two college football games a week, CBS has regular-season college hoops and about half the NCAA Men's Tournament, and you may be in an area where your local MLB, NBA, and/or NHL team still has an OTA presence.
Here in Phoenix, all local sports save for the Cardinals is on Fox Sports Net. I'm a sports fan, and that's why I'm thinking about reconnecting - this time to DirecTV (Cox Cable is not available where I live). My Roku box gives me MLB (except for the D'backs), and I can get the NBA and NHL if I want them. But college sports is almost exclusively cable/satellite now and that won't be changing anytime soon, if ever.
Online viewing? Fuhgeddaboutit. You have to have a cable or satellite account in order to watch those channels online or on your phone. In some cases, notably ESPN, they mandate "cable only" - you're SOL if you have DirecTV or Dish. I haven't heard anything about The Mickey Mouse Outfit working out a deal with the satellite companies for WatchESPN.
I cut the cord too. When those cheap SOBs at DirecTV wouldn't give me the same HD for Life that they gave newcomers I told them they can do without me as a subscriber, too. If more people cut the cord I bet prices would drop. With what little good television is on these day why waste money on 500 channels worth of slop?
I have a friend dropping Time Warner Cable and his legal reason is because they don't have the CBS channels on anymore they broke the contract with the subscriber, as that was part of the package they purchased.
I have a friend dropping Time Warner Cable and his legal reason is because they don't have the CBS channels on anymore they broke the contract with the subscriber, as that was part of the package they purchased.
I agree every year cable rates go up, they want more form the customer, but they also want more from the provider. So not only will your rates go up but the number of channels you have will go down. I cut the cord I too have an antenna, I get the local news, a few primetime broadcast shows I like along with a couple of syndicated shows. In addition to that have a gaming system hooked up to the TV with HULU and Netflix.
Most of you will remember how I complained after DTV went into effect and I lost all my TV, despite living in Chicago only 3 miles NW of Willis Tower.
Truth is I don't have a TV and I don't miss it. I thought I'd go nuts without it, but I am fine with it. If worse comes to worse, I can go to the gym and watch TV there.
You'd be surprised how easy it is to get along without it. I love OTR, I will admit and listen a lot via the Archive.Org. The cool thing about OTR is you can do other things while listening.
Truth is I don't have a TV and I don't miss it. I thought I'd go nuts without it, but I am fine with it. If worse comes to worse, I can go to the gym and watch TV there.
You'd be surprised how easy it is to get along without it. I love OTR, I will admit and listen a lot via the Archive.Org. The cool thing about OTR is you can do other things while listening.
quadraphonic said:
Sounds great. Unless you want to watch TV in real-time (or anything close to it) and you live in a valley. I'm only 23 miles from the towers, but no signal makes it down the hill. (Okay, ONE signal is detectable, but it's not watchable.)
Here's the other issue with services like Aereo and even Netflix. If you drastically increase your Internet usage, eventually you're gonna find out your "unlimited" plan actually IS limited. Your ISP will either slow you down so much that the shows will be unwatchable or they'll increase your data charge pretty significantly.
I admit it. I also enjoy the freedom of not having to watch sports and not having to watch shows when the networks want me to watch them or when someone says I should.
I don't feel driven to give my time and energy to something that's, at best, amusement, at worst, a COMPLETE waste of time (which most programs ended up being).
"No" is a beautiful word in a lot of cases. When it comes to tv, "no" is my opening bid.
Besides, I'm only around the house during prime time averaging one night a week, so what's the point of being attached to a network tether? In the daytime, well the only appointment tv would be "Globe Trekker" when Megan McCormick is on, or when Olivia Newton-John is doing something (see Fantastic Word Game thread. ).
I get what I get when it comes to tv. If I'm there, bored, nothing else to do, I might check it out. I'm gonna be happy either way, not frustrated by other peops.
We don't live in a valley, but there's only 15 or 18 channels (maybe 6 stations) that regularly come in. Only two stations (7 channels) are actually close enough to be "always" on, because we're in a market that's near other markets, but not really a market in itself, and I haven't tried to install an outdoor antenna, because it's just not been worth the bother. Maybe just as a scientific experiment thing for the kids....
If there's nothing on, then I just move on to doing something else. No tether. No coercion.
T-Y-P-E-G-U-Y I'm that type of guy.
I don't feel driven to give my time and energy to something that's, at best, amusement, at worst, a COMPLETE waste of time (which most programs ended up being).
"No" is a beautiful word in a lot of cases. When it comes to tv, "no" is my opening bid.
Besides, I'm only around the house during prime time averaging one night a week, so what's the point of being attached to a network tether? In the daytime, well the only appointment tv would be "Globe Trekker" when Megan McCormick is on, or when Olivia Newton-John is doing something (see Fantastic Word Game thread.
).I get what I get when it comes to tv. If I'm there, bored, nothing else to do, I might check it out. I'm gonna be happy either way, not frustrated by other peops.
We don't live in a valley, but there's only 15 or 18 channels (maybe 6 stations) that regularly come in. Only two stations (7 channels) are actually close enough to be "always" on, because we're in a market that's near other markets, but not really a market in itself, and I haven't tried to install an outdoor antenna, because it's just not been worth the bother. Maybe just as a scientific experiment thing for the kids....
If there's nothing on, then I just move on to doing something else. No tether. No coercion.
T-Y-P-E-G-U-Y I'm that type of guy.
It's stuff like this that I'm glad to not be a subscriber to pay TV. I'm making do with the OTA channels I get. While DSL isn't as fast as cable, at least in my neighborhood, it's reliable, because Comcast refuses to upgrade the lines in the neighborhood to make their service better. For now, I'm unaffected by network outages program wise, since I'm not on UVerse, or online programming getting blocked by the content providers (like what's happening now for those with Time Warner, where not only CBS is blocked on the TV side, but CBS is also blocked on the internet side of Time Warner as well). If I'm not mistaken, when Viacom had a dispute with DirecTV a year or 2 ago, DirecTV went as far as directing people to the online content while a deal was being worked out. Then Viacom decided to penalize everyone else by blocking all online content as well (to everyone), because few people subscribe to DirecWay internet when subscribing to DirecTV.
Living in Gary Indiana, I get 73 channels (when counting subchannels), with about 9 of them coming in when they feel like it (also, those same 9 have nothing worth watching, & don't care if they come in or not). Out of the 73 that I can get from Chicago, I only watch at the most, 28 of the channels. With WGN-TV taking over This TV next month, WCIU might put Touchvision on 26.5, or if they're smart, move Bounce from 23.2 (a low power station) & move it to 26.5 (must get WWME-LD in order to watch Bounce, or I don't have that network at all, while MeTV on 23.1 is simulcasted on WCIU 26.3) If I can get the right UHF antenna combination, it's possible to get the 5 full power stations from South Bend Indiana, & that adds an additional 13 channels, with overlap in 2 of the subchannels (Antenna TV & Livewell Network). CBS, NBC, & Fox don't overlap outside of network programming, so that's moot.
Living in Gary Indiana, I get 73 channels (when counting subchannels), with about 9 of them coming in when they feel like it (also, those same 9 have nothing worth watching, & don't care if they come in or not). Out of the 73 that I can get from Chicago, I only watch at the most, 28 of the channels. With WGN-TV taking over This TV next month, WCIU might put Touchvision on 26.5, or if they're smart, move Bounce from 23.2 (a low power station) & move it to 26.5 (must get WWME-LD in order to watch Bounce, or I don't have that network at all, while MeTV on 23.1 is simulcasted on WCIU 26.3) If I can get the right UHF antenna combination, it's possible to get the 5 full power stations from South Bend Indiana, & that adds an additional 13 channels, with overlap in 2 of the subchannels (Antenna TV & Livewell Network). CBS, NBC, & Fox don't overlap outside of network programming, so that's moot.
tothedj said:
Consumerist.com: "Don’t Be Fooled: Both Time Warner Cable & CBS Hate Your Guts"
http://consumerist.com/2013/08/05/dont-be-fooled-both-time-warner-cable-cbs-hate-your-guts/
This is going to become increasingly common.
Every cable system and satellite operator will be in these kinds of heated talks where channels could be dumped because of disputes over how much to pay for various stations and networks.
Every year, every cable system will likely threaten to drop (if not actually drop) at least one channel because of disputes over how much to pay programmers. It won't be the same channel on every cable system, but every cable or satellite subscriber could see popular channels get dumped, or at least threatened to be dumped, every year.
I can see the cable/satellite industry drawing a "line in the sand" and refusing to pay increased carriage fees.
As a result, you'll see more of these disputes.
Some believe that Washington may be the best solution. But Washington's in political gridlock that will last at least a generation, and maybe for the rest oft his century. It's that bad.
Every cable system and satellite operator will be in these kinds of heated talks where channels could be dumped because of disputes over how much to pay for various stations and networks.
Every year, every cable system will likely threaten to drop (if not actually drop) at least one channel because of disputes over how much to pay programmers. It won't be the same channel on every cable system, but every cable or satellite subscriber could see popular channels get dumped, or at least threatened to be dumped, every year.
I can see the cable/satellite industry drawing a "line in the sand" and refusing to pay increased carriage fees.
As a result, you'll see more of these disputes.
Some believe that Washington may be the best solution. But Washington's in political gridlock that will last at least a generation, and maybe for the rest oft his century. It's that bad.
Nah, it'll only be until the old fogies desperately clinging to their relevance die off and then the Democrats will basically have free run of the place (if they actually do something about it and don't start debating phantoms). If the gridlock does continue beyond that it won't have a chance to last the rest of the century because global warming will destroy civilization first.Joseph_Gallant said:
- Status