Cox Media running channel scrolls for Dish Dispute

[osu1991]

I have the local Cox channel KOKI morning news on this morning. They’re running the standard spiel and scroll to call Dish as their agreement is expiring and the 2 local Cox owned channels will leave Dish on Jan 14 if a new carriage agreement isn’t reached.

As usual their annoying spiels are going out on the OTA, cable and YTTV feeds too. I guess the ice and snow warnings are not as important as getting the viewers to call Dish, as the scroll to call Dish is twice as big and on top of the weather warnings.

 

[epokopac]

Doesn't sound like much of an agreement if it was only good for 9.5 months:

Cox Media Group and DISH Network Reach New Agreement

Cox Media Group (CMG) is pleased to announce it has reached an agreement with DISH Network and will renew its contract with the provider. This resolution comes after months of collaboration and dis…

www.coxmediagroup.com

 

[navychop]

Good riddance.

 

[sam_gordon]

As usual their annoying spiels are going out on the OTA, cable and YTTV feeds too.

Probably because there's no way to separate out all the different feeds? Plus, there's a chance Dish picks up the OTA feed anyway.

 

[The Fat Man]

Well, that'll knock FOX programming out in the Boston DMA. Since greed wants to reign supreme bbn on both ends, I'll use my normal tactics to get the programming that I want to watch. If this was a cable channel, like FX, I would not use such tactics. But, considering that these are OTA channels, I'll just get the content my own way.

 

[osu1991]

Probably because there's no way to separate out all the different feeds? Plus, there's a chance Dish picks up the OTA feed anyway.

And that’s not the consumers problem. Putting out their annoying propaganda to everyone when it only affects probably 5% is just another reason retransmission consent is flawed.

FYI in this case they do provide separate feeds to some. Dish gets it OTA via a POP at KJRH. Cox get it’s directly via fiber from the studio, so there was no reason it should have been on screen for the Cox cable customers, which I am one and why it pissed me off seeing this morning. In addition to them making their propaganda more important on screen in larger print and running above the weather alerts and closings

 

[sam_gordon]

And that’s not the consumers problem. Putting out their annoying propaganda to everyone when it only affects probably 5% is just another reason retransmission consent is flawed.

FYI in this case they do provide separate feeds to some. Dish gets it OTA via a POP at KJRH. Cox get it’s directly via fiber from the studio, so there was no reason it should have been on screen for the Cox cable customers, which I am one and why it pissed me off seeing this morning. In addition to them making their propaganda more important on screen in larger print and running above the weather alerts and closings

The separate feeds are separate only in the transmission path. So every MVPD is getting the same content from a distribution amp. Keeping a separate graphics box around for each individual feed on the chance you MIGHT need it every three years isn't a smart financial decision.

Now, I agree with you regarding the retrans crawls vs weather crawls. That's a poor decision by someone.

ETA: I think once ATSC 3.0 comes around, there's a way to do "directed advertising", so maybe that will help.

 

[Joe Capitano]

I guess the ice and snow warnings are not as important as getting the viewers to call Dish, as the scroll to call Dish is twice as big and on top of the weather warnings.

This is where the FCC should have an issue. Those weather crawls, when necessary, are there for a reason, largely to serve the hearing-impaired. Nothing for any reason should be covering them. Certainly NOT a crawl regarding retrans negotiations.

BTW: The "Call dish" garbage needs to stop. You, the end user, should not be responsible for any role in fee negotiations. Anyone who has to call and whine to dish regarding this negotiation must also call the station and whine to them, seeing as they're part of the problem. Speaking of...

Doesn't sound like much of an agreement if it was only good for 9.5 months:

In that time Cox sold itself to a bunch of money hungry "Mr. Wonderfuls". The Apollo mob, if I remember correctly.

Let's just hope all concerned can put a proper deal on the table and get it signed tootsweet.

 

[sam_gordon]

This is where the FCC should have an issue. Those weather crawls, when necessary, are there for a reason, largely to serve the hearing-impaired. Nothing for any reason should be covering them. Certainly NOT a crawl regarding retrans negotiations.

The weather crawls are there for all viewers. They should be run during "normal" programming, so they should inform everyone without a need to break into programming. The audio version of crawls still has me floored (FCC requires stations to provide an audio version of the crawl for the visually impaired).

I agree nothing should cover up the weather crawls. When OP said the crawls were "on top" of the weather info, I had assumed he meant physically higher on the screen, not higher in a "priority" sense. Assuming your read is correct, yes, I would think the FCC would want to know. Might be worth getting some video of it first.

 

[osu1991]

The weather crawls are there for all viewers. They should be run during "normal" programming, so they should inform everyone without a need to break into programming. The audio version of crawls still has me floored (FCC requires stations to provide an audio version of the crawl for the visually impaired).

I agree nothing should cover up the weather crawls. When OP said the crawls were "on top" of the weather info, I had assumed he meant physically higher on the screen, not higher in a "priority" sense. Assuming your read is correct, yes, I would think the FCC would want to know. Might be worth getting some video of it first.

In my opinion it was both. Higher on the screen and meant to be a higher priority. The weather crawl was in small print along the lower part of the screen with a blank space and then the retrans crap above it in a bolder font 2 times larger than the weather information.

I started to record it, but didn’t. There are no weather alerts today, so just the constant annoying call and bitch at Dish crawl is running now.

 

[The Fat Man]

To me this is obvious to be greed at this point. The content providers for OTA stations whined back in the 80s about satellite and cable companies making money off their content. My opinion (just that) is that the satellite and cable companies gave the OTA locals more viewers. But, I get that they felt they should be compensated. However, with this, they became greedy. Their buisness model went from advertising being the main source of revenue, to relying on retransmission agreements, all while keeping revenue from advertising.

My opinion is that they are reaching gauging status. As I said before, I have my ways of accessing all the content I want. I don't need Cox Media or any other crybaby station owner to hold us hostage so that they can be paid more, pushing that charge onto me, all for viewing content that they give away for free OTA. So, that's what I will do. I get it a bit more when it's a cable net. I don't agree when it's something that is originally given away for free.

 

[rvvaquero]

To me this is obvious to be greed at this point. The content providers for OTA stations whined back in the 80s about satellite and cable companies making money off their content. My opinion (just that) is that the satellite and cable companies gave the OTA locals more viewers. But, I get that they felt they should be compensated. However, with this, they became greedy. Their buisness model went from advertising being the main source of revenue, to relying on retransmission agreements, all while keeping revenue from advertising.

My opinion is that they are reaching gauging status. As I said before, I have my ways of accessing all the content I want. I don't need Cox Media or any other crybaby station owner to hold us hostage so that they can be paid more, pushing that charge onto me, all for viewing content that they give away for free OTA. So, that's what I will do. I get it a bit more when it's a cable net. I don't agree when it's something that is originally given away for free.

I agree with you. However, to play Devil's advocate, the networks will argue that they need the extra income in order to compete with the cable channels for new programming and sporting events. I don't believe the cable channels can be let off so easy, they are just as greedy in their demands.

It's a self perpetuating situation, the more each channel demands from the carriers, the more they have to spend on programming, so the more expensive programming becomes, and the more revenue each content provider must produce.

Eventually, the market place will sort this all out. We can only hope that in the end we will still have choices like OTA and cable and satellite, in addition to streaming.

 

[Howard Simmons]

The weather crawls are there for all viewers. They should be run during "normal" programming, so they should inform everyone without a need to break into programming. The audio version of crawls still has me floored (FCC requires stations to provide an audio version of the crawl for the visually impaired).

I agree nothing should cover up the weather crawls. When OP said the crawls were "on top" of the weather info, I had assumed he meant physically higher on the screen, not higher in a "priority" sense. Assuming your read is correct, yes, I would think the FCC would want to know. Might be worth getting some video of it first.

Go to the FCC website and put in a request for them to look into this.

 

[The Fat Man]

I agree with you. However, to play Devil's advocate, the networks will argue that they need the extra income in order to compete with the cable channels for new programming and sporting events. I don't believe the cable channels can be let off so easy, they are just as greedy in their demands.

It's a self perpetuating situation, the more each channel demands from the carriers, the more they have to spend on programming, so the more expensive programming becomes, and the more revenue each content provider must produce.

Eventually, the market place will sort this all out. We can only hope that in the end we will still have choices like OTA and cable and satellite, in addition to streaming.

Then don't your product away for free.

 

[sam_gordon]

In my opinion it was both. Higher on the screen and meant to be a higher priority. The weather crawl was in small print along the lower part of the screen with a blank space and then the retrans crap above it in a bolder font 2 times larger than the weather information.

I started to record it, but didn’t. There are no weather alerts today, so just the constant annoying call and bitch at Dish crawl is running now.

By "higher priority", I meant the retrans crawl physically covered up the weather crawl. I don't think the FCC cares about the size difference in crawls as long as the emergency information is legible.

My opinion (just that) is that the satellite and cable companies gave the OTA locals more viewers.

My opinion (just that) is satellite and cable companies gave the OTA locals more viewers AND people signed up for the satellite and cable companies because they could the locals and the cable networks from one source. Symbiotic.

Go to the FCC website and put in a request for them to look into this.

Not my market.

Then don't your product away for free.

Don't plagiarize my product. I can take a pretty picture, or a picture that's monumental, and post it on my web page for all to see. YOU can't download that picture and sell it.

 

[The Fat Man]

By "higher priority", I meant the retrans crawl physically covered up the weather crawl. I don't think the FCC cares about the size difference in crawls as long as the emergency information is legible.

My opinion (just that) is satellite and cable companies gave the OTA locals more viewers AND people signed up for the satellite and cable companies because they could the locals and the cable networks from one source. Symbiotic.

Not my market.

Don't plagiarize my product. I can take a pretty picture, or a picture that's monumental, and post it on my web page for all to see. YOU can't download that picture and sell it.

I disagree with plagiarism. That's outright incorrect. Plagiarism means that they are taking someone else's work and calling it their own. The satellite and cable companies are redistributing signals that are already distributed for free. I ask for proof that without locals, satellite and cable can't be competitive, or would not draw the subscriptions that they currently draw. This is all based on archaic system where the broadcast networks held greater clout. In the 80s, more people were accustomed to OTA. That was the time when Chicago even held back cable from being allowed to protect broadcast television. It has always been about how they can get their cut. Then, people subbed mainly to get better reception of the big three networks. That isn't the case now. Outside of the NFL and local news, the networks do not have the same clout that they had 35 years ago. In the end, I shouldn't have to pay extra to Cox Media to view an OTA channel in my market that I can receive OTA, just because I'm watching it through my satellite provider.

Your position is based on greed in my opinion. "I want to give this away for free, but if someone else puts it with other channels that are only available for a subscription, then I want to be compensated." How about, pull your station from OTA and make it cable/satellite only? Then I would completely not take issue. It's pure greed on the owners behalf.

Addition
Your comparison about the picture is inaccurate. That would be Dish taking a broadcast of the local news and rebroadcasting it on channel 102. They boost the signal range. And this notion that Dish is selling the signal is inaccurate. They are selling it because, you complained that what you gave away for free was included in a sale with other items. I argue that without retransmission agreements, in theory, cable and satellite companies could charge equipment fees and basically redistribute the signal at no cost. That could be possible in today's day and age.

Look at Locast! They are giving the signals away for free on a streaming service. What happens? The owners complain. What profit is Locast getting? It's the same principal. Its greed. God forbid that people in the market have free access to a station that is given away for free. Superstations I totally get. Channels like USA, TBS, FX, etc, I totally get. But, I shouldn't be held to needing to pay more to watch my local CBS and ABC, just because I'm watching it on my Dish subscription. That's just absurd.

 

[sam_gordon]

My proof regarding MVPDs benefiting from carrying locals? Pick any market. Look at the subscriber base before they carried locals (hard to do with cable since they probably always carried locals) and after they launched LiL in a market. In my area, satellite subscriptions EXPLODED once LiL started. I'm guessing you think that was just a coincidence.

My use of the term "plagiarism" wasn't supposed to be a direct term. Do you disagree with my statement about you not being able to sell a picture I took, even though I posted it on the internet?

Regarding greed? I'm curious if you had the power to get more money from your employer, would you just sit by and say "no, I'm good."? EVERY business and most humans are "greedy". I know I'd like more money.

Everything has a value. Dish has determined what they're willing to pay. Some owners have obviously asked for more. Others they have come to an agreement with. So Dish doesn't think those prices are out of line. Every buyer needs to determine the value of what they pay for.

 

[sam_gordon]

You want an end to retrans negotiations? Simple... through arbitration, come up with a formula that equates ratings to cost. The higher the ratings for a station, the more they get in retrans. Obviously there are details that would need to be worked out, but then EVERY station across the country uses the same formula. AND they have an incentive to produce better programming.

I've also suggested in the past that those who can't receive an OTA signal shouldn't have to pay to get one from an MVPD. Again, details would need to be worked out, you can't just slap a "paper thin" antenna on top of your tv and say "it doesn't work".

As far as the argument "satellite gives them more viewers"... obviously that is true. But if you want to use that argument, how do you explain that it's ok for ESPN, Discovery, Lifetime, History, et al to charge. If it wasn't for MVPDs, those networks would have ZERO viewers. I'd say MVPDs help those networks as well.

I do think satellite, when they started LiL, bit themselves in the butt by charging for the service. But they opened the door and now it's going to be extremely hard to close.

Last but not least, if local programming wasn't important to the consumer, they have the option (at least Dish customers do) of dropping the local and saving $12/month. I thought that was a great move by Dish and have been taking advantage of it for years. And if that programming wasn't important, we wouldn't be hearing people complain when it was taken away.

 

[dare2be]

Symbiotic. Both sides benefit with LiL.

So both sides should split the uplink and distribution costs ONLY, and evenly. Neither side charges for the channels themselves. Simple. Ratings should only matter in what the channels get for advertising rates.

 

[sam_gordon]

Symbiotic. Both sides benefit with LiL.

So both sides should split the uplink and distribution costs ONLY, and evenly. Neither side charges for the channels themselves. Simple. Ratings should only matter in what the channels get for advertising rates.

So what business is going to pay for something and not charge customers for it (especially since the customers are willing to pay to get the product)?