• 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

When will a Rochester station put something worth watcing on a sub channel?

T

therealjm12

I'd like to see the Rochester stations put something on their sub channels that is entertaining. 13 does a pretty good job with the CW but that is all I have been able to find. 10 has that weather channel (or did). How about a retro channel? Maybe 8, 10 or 31 should pick up WBGT for My TV.
 
There's always 21.2 and 21.3...and depending on your make and model of DTV receiver, sometimes "16.7" as well, which is the audio feeds from 280 State Street to the WJSL and WRUR transmitters.
 
therealjm12 said:
I'd like to see the Rochester stations put something on their sub channels that is entertaining. 13 does a pretty good job with the CW but that is all I have been able to find. 10 has that weather channel (or did). How about a retro channel? Maybe 8, 10 or 31 should pick up WBGT for My TV.
Click to expand...


Don't feel too bad... I was in NYC a couple weekends ago, and they don't have an awful lot of variety on their subchannels either.

WNBC 4.2 was a 24/7 features and fluff channel. Seriously, they had a 3-minute package on tips to make sure you don't oversleep in the morning -- no-brainers like putting the alarm clock on the far side of your bedroom so you have to get out of bed to turn it off. They should rename it "Common Sense 4 New York."

WABC 7.2 was perhaps the most useful subchannel, offering a 24/7 weather channel. It was like a combination of Weather Plus (L-bar with various localities' current conditions/forecasts) and that "Local Weather Now" channel Time Warner used to have on channel 210 in the Syracuse area, with lots of stuff fed in from AccuWeather. But the difference is that they interspersed local forecast content provided by WABC talent. But, after 5 minutes, there's not much to see there. Which, in NYC, is probably the point, so I can't complain.

WCBS... I don't even remember what they had on 2.2.

WNYW and WWOR took advantage of their duopoly, putting each other on their respective #.2 channels... not a bad idea for viewers who can bring in the channel 5 signal but not channel 9, or vice versa.

One of the city's many obscure channels had a subchannel which showed random traffic cameras. Neat idea, but they appeared to be older DOT cameras with pretty crappy picture quality (some black-and-white). Basically another neat idea like WABC's weather channel, but the novelty wears off very quickly.

Some channels were merely running wall-to-wall infomercials on their subchannels, including one that was running infomercials dubbed over in Spanish.

WNET and another PBS affiliate seemed to have the most subchannels... I recall one of them going up to #.5. In a major market like NYC where there are plenty of channels to begin with, you almost feel like you have cable when you scan around and see how many subchannels are also out there. And just like cable... all those channels and barely anything worth watching. :)

Wouldn't be a bad idea to see a few cable networks offering themselves up for subchannel use -- could boost viewership. But I'm sure there's tons of legalese protecting the "exclusivity" of the cable industry to provide those channels. Aside from the fact many cable channels are already owned by cable companies... you'll never see Time Warner allowing a local station to put CNN on a subchannel.
 
The station out of Batavia (51) has 4 channels running,... all god squad and crap, though.

Anyone know if 8 or 31 will ever have sub channels? Or is Nexstar too cheap.
 
You don't remember what WCBS had on 2-2 because there isn't a 2-2. CBS O&O stations do not have subchannels. Corporate policy to protect HD quality.

- Trip
 
BobRoss said:
Some channels were merely running wall-to-wall infomercials on their subchannels, including one that was running infomercials dubbed over in Spanish.
Click to expand...

Quiero una Bala Mágica, por favor.

Wouldn't be a bad idea to see a few cable networks offering themselves up for subchannel use -- could boost viewership. But I'm sure there's tons of legalese protecting the "exclusivity" of the cable industry to provide those channels. Aside from the fact many cable channels are already owned by cable companies... you'll never see Time Warner allowing a local station to put CNN on a subchannel.
Click to expand...

I doubt that will ever happen. OTA broadcasters in Canada have been complaining they can't make the same money on OTA stations as they can on specialty channels; once networks like CNN and ESPN are made available over-the-air, including in HD, viewers will have even less reason for cable - and these channels won't be able to make the same money as before. I assume viewers pay directly for these channels (including ones they don't watch) through their cable bills in the U.S., as is the case in Canada.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom