End of analog TV transmission in the US is the day after the 2009 Super Bowl, Feb 17, 2009.
http://www.ceretailers.org/consumeradvisory-webcard.pdf
don't get caught moving
- Thread starter mikedz4
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 177
- Views 30K
- Status
http://www.ceretailers.org/consumeradvisory-webcard.pdf
What some of you fail to realize is that not everyone can use an antenna. I live two hours from lexington, two hours from louisville, two hours from knoxville and two hours from nashville -- and in a mountainous area. I wish I could throw up an antenna. But what grates my butt is the government telling me that i have to watch a certain cities locals -- when I am not near that damned city. We should have the FREEDOM to choose. there is an old saying -- let the buyer beware --- in this case - let the seller (locals) beware. They are simply arrogant in this communistic rule forced upon an unsuspecting public. My argument is: define the area by the county that the local is situated in ---- all others should be able to choose. PDS -- pretty damn simple. And for the argument that advertisers would lose revenue -- thats BS --- if that were the case - we wouldn't have an internet.
WOW!!! I just read this whole thread. I'm glad that the newspaper industry didn't get the same protection that the TV industry did!!!
Exactly, the NAB (national association of broadcasters) simply have congress in their pocket. Big money in all this and the broadcasters have figured out a way to stop free enterprise. By controlling the DMA's (designated Market Area's) the tv stations establish their advertising rate cards. In other words they have a monopoly to a degree. Not just anyone can put up a TV station (bandwidth limitations). So in order to have a system in place the Gov. (FCC) hired a bunch of ex-broadcasters to write the rules in favor of the tv stations at the expense of the public. Funny that the TV stations don't have a problem competing against the other stations in their DMA -- but watch em scream bloody murder if another station were to try and encroach upon THEIR protected consuming public. Geez folks this is 2007 -- seems like free enterprise ought to catch up with the damn television industry. I can promise you -- each and every private owner of a local television station is a millionaire and probably a multi-millionaire. Money talks -- and congress has their hand out. Pitiful.
The govt has nothing ot do with determining DMA's...AC Nielsen(the ratings people) does that......And each county IS designated for one DMA or another...
http://echostaruser.com/
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2001/aug01/aug20/4_thurs/news1thursday.html..
Check these links..The first one allows th euser to see all of the counties in each DMA..
The second link is a story that may give some insight as to how AC Nielsen does business...
To your gripe.I agree with you..I think if a person is willing to pay , they should be able to watch channels from the city of their choice...Of course we know that is not going to happen.
It's crap...Ya know what really frosts me?..When cable co's offer locals from two or more DMA's due to "Must Carry"...For example..New Jersey for the most part has overlapping TV signals...Those who live in the central part of the state and are cable subs get chs from NYC and Philly...I had a friend who lived in Ocean County..He had this luxury....And take the Balt/DC area..Those cities are what, 40 miles apart? Each city is DMA...I will bet just about every cable sub in that area gets locals from both ciites...And finally, when I lived in Hilton Head,SC our cable co carried stations form both Savannah,GA and Charleston,SC.....
I cannot fathom a guess as to why satellite is unable to go by the same rules as cable...
Anyone care to take a stab at that?
Sure, let's take my area...dishcomm said:
The largest two counties in Maryland for the DC market are Montgomery and Prince George's Counties. Excepting some parts because of older cable franchise laws, Montgomery and Prince George's County cable systems do not carry the Baltimore local channels, even though there are places in both counties that are closer to Baltimore and that both counties are within the Grade B reception area for the Baltimore stations.
Nevermind that the DC stations cover more about the Virginia and DC government than they do the Maryland government.
Yes the laws are strange. No, it doesn't help matters. Most of the Baltimore stations are locked out of the counties that comprise the DC cable market. However, in reverse, DC channels are available on cable to two of the largest Baltimore market counties: Anne Arundel and Howard.
The laws are squeezing the Baltimore market. If the Baltimore market ever loses Howard or Anne Arundel County, the Baltimore market goes down a couple of hundred thousand in the Nielsen ratings. Those counties would be lumped in the DC market, and again relegated to a third-world status behind the District and Virginia governments. The Baltimore stations cover the state well, but many still align themselves with DC (where I lived next to the Baltimore market for my first 21 years, then lived the next 16 in Anne Arundel County).
This area is a mess, and something like the "New Hampshire - WMUR" exception is needed for the Baltimore channels to be covered within the counties closest to DC and within the Baltimore broadcast coverage area.
It's basically because Sat and Cable companies don't have to play by the same rules. Cable has always had the advantage.
Here is my area, I am in the Toledo, Ohio market, 50 miles from Detroit, Mi.
I CAN get my OTA channels from my antenna if I turn the antenna (no problem) BUT according to D* I cannot get them thru thier service.
IF I was with the local Cable company, you would get both Toledo and Detroit locals with the exception of CBS out of Detroit, for some reason (I really don't care, it's just strange) , but BECAUSE of this resriction, I also cannot get my FSN Detroit in HD, oh btw, I can pay extra and get the SD signal, but they won't give me the HD signal.
However, If I went to cable I would at least have the option to get the Detroit locals, Cable does not have FSN D in HD either yet.
Jimbo
I understand completely what AC Nielsen does and how it does it. My arguement is that the governement, through it's regulatory process has in the FCC restricted satellite companies from offering multiple locals. DMA's simply are the boundaries that the FEDS are utilizing. It all boils down to the fact that the local television industry is a monopolistic industry that simply is afraid to compete in an open market for advertising dollars. To be realistic we are only talking about 10% or less of the existing local market population that would even want to see another local station(s). I mean really -- read my other post -- I live two hours from 4 major cities ---- I shop in all four cities ----- and to be honest --this is nothing more than shady politics. The NAB is the problem -- AC Neilson simply runs numbers --- its what the NAB and the FCC do with them that matters -- as long as the local broadcasters keeps shoving money in congress's pocket ---- you can forget ever having multiple locals. God Save America -- the best government money can buy!
I've been following this thread for a while. You know, I may just be a dumb Canadian, but this seems to contradict the first Ammendment to the Constitution.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.
Seems to me that by telling Americans that they can't watch news of a particular sort, from a particular city for instance, that their freedom of speech, as well as the freedom of the press, have both been abridged by limiting their willing audience's participation in the reception of their speech/news. Seems pretty simple to me, but what do I know, we don't have a first ammendment here in Canada and the government tells us what to watch.
:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.
Seems to me that by telling Americans that they can't watch news of a particular sort, from a particular city for instance, that their freedom of speech, as well as the freedom of the press, have both been abridged by limiting their willing audience's participation in the reception of their speech/news. Seems pretty simple to me, but what do I know, we don't have a first ammendment here in Canada and the government tells us what to watch.
:Interesting.I guess the cable franchises are set differently there...Another example I was going to to use to further expose this absurdity is markets in New York State..The cable co my friend(shame on him for not being a sat cust) is a sub to (TWC) is solidly in the Albany,NY market..Yet the subs in his area still get a few stations. Not the major nets though...That other guy in Sounth Jersey got ALL of ther NYC and Philly stations..Amazing...
Oh here's a laugher...I installed a sat system for these people in Chesterfield County,SC....That is in the Charlotte DMA..This cust was switching from cable..Their cable co offered locals from Charlotte,NC and Columbia,SC....what they didn't know was they wouldn't be getting those Columbia chs thru Dish...Mind you , these people had a room that was a virtual shrine to Univ of South Carolina football..All this guy talked about was how wonderful it was going to be to watch the USC games every Saturday with nice clear picture....What this guy didn't know and I wasn't going to tell him was that Charlotte DMA stations are hooked into the ACC...U of SC is in the SEC. USC games are not normally shown over Charlotte stations....I didn't want to lose the job after driving 60 miles to the customer's home...So I kept my mouth shut....Got the hell out of there before he started asking questions...I guess I could have played dumb as well.....
That is an example of why we have three branches of govt..Executive, Legislative and Judicial....That latter, is the arbiter of disputes between the majority and the minority...or govt vs the individual or group...We use the courts to challenge laws if and when our legislative branch does not listen to us or we believe a law or regulation ot be unjust...I've been following this thread for a while. You know, I may just be a dumb Canadian, but this seems to contradict the first Ammendment to the Constitution.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.
Seems to me that by telling Americans that they can't watch news of a particular sort, from a particular city for instance, that their freedom of speech, as well as the freedom of the press, have both been abridged by limiting their willing audience's participation in the reception of their speech/news. Seems pretty simple to me, but what do I know, we don't have a first ammendment here in Canada and the government tells us what to watch.
That said, possibly in the future soemone or a some group will think this issue is important enough to use the courts to challenge the existing regualtions..Until then, nothing will change..
IMO, technology will get there first..In other words, we may be able to view other cities local channels through other technologies besides cable of satellite..Heck I can go on the web and find a website to just about any major tv station and watch their entire news casts right now...
Dish Network tried to take this argument to the Supreme Court back in 2001. No dice.bertbarndoor said:
Look, there is no federal law that states you cannot get TV from a different market. If you live in the middle of Washington, DC, and you want the local news from the major network affiliates in New York to be offered by Dish Network, all that would need to be done is for the New York network affiliates to come to an agreement with Dish Network. None of the New York network affiliates want to do that, so they've exercised "editorial control" by not selling their station out of market. Just because there is a law that allows for the selling of New York stations outside of the market doesn't change the fact that there would still need to be agreements in place.
My ZIP Code is in two counties that are also two different DMAs (FtSmith/Fayetteville, AR & Springfield, MO). When you order DirecTV service in our ZIP code, D* asks you what county you're in. You just tell them the county of the DMA you want to watch.
Sorry, but don't buy your argument about "editorial control". Locals operate on public airwaves - the public owns them. Locals offer thier programming - FREE OF CHARGE - to those with an antenna. The problem that occurs is that antenna's are limited due to the curvature of the earth. But with satellites that problem no longer exists. Ergo - a satellite is simply a bigger antenna. Once a local tv station, licensed by the feds (FCC) it is obligated to operate for the "public good" since there is only so much bandwidth. Based on this limitation - it would appear that the locals are actually violating their agreement with the public -- and that this is being supported by Congress - who receive substantial bucks from the NAB to keep thier little kingdoms from competition.
Here's one for you. My Zip code (48872) is in 3 counties. Each one, a different DMA.
Livingston (Detroit), Ingham (Lansing) and Shiawassee (Flint/Saginaw).
That isn't a "problem"; that is how we have the network/affiliate system. Because of the controls put in place in the late 1940's and 1950's regarding ownership and because of the FCC's desire to not see the television market littered only with big network-owned stations as they were in the radio market, that is why there are so many ownership groups within network television, yet no one can own affiliates which reach more than 38 percent of the nations households.veeper2006 said:
What limitation? I ton't recall WABC, WCBS, WNBC or WNYW receiving license to operate in the DBS space. Those licenses belong to Dish Network and DirecTV. And if Dish Network and DirecTV wish to obtain a carriage agreement with those station to retransmit to their subscribers, they should pay those stations for carriage, just like ESPN or HBO are paid.veeper2006 said:
I don't care about this issue about picking something up for free. I am fairly certain if you made CD's of the Howard Stern show and resold them that Sirius would be coming at you with a lawsuit. As a matter of fact, if you did made copies of any terrestrial radio station and sold them, the music companies would come demanding their royalties.
It is exactly the same issue. If you wish to frame it otherwise, go right ahead. But to simply suggest the existence of satellite companies should trump the rights of broadcasters and their networks - to relinquish control of their distribution method because the technology exists (but they don't own any licenses for it) - is foolhardy.
At one point 2 years ago I met a guy in Cincinnati that liked the browns and Indians, and I like the reds and the bengals, we both had premier pack, so I gave him one of my boxes and he gave me his, worked fine til he had to move to chicago for business. Now I need to find another friend like this in Cincinnati lol.
- Status
Similar threads
