THe only problem with adding the rest of the locals in the country is that many dmas have only one or two stations and they don't have a full set of networks. IF they allowed Dish to do significantly viewed channels from nearby dmas to add the other networks it would be work.
Still, anyone subject to that is largely out of luck when it comes to syndicated programming. For that, you need all of the stations from a large market. Realisitcally, one with at least seven full-service commercial stations such as LA or SF (a lot of shows don't clear NYC). As for alternatives, are the wild feeds of syndicated shows even still readily available on C-Band?
What Charlie should have done on December 1st is cut off LIL to all subscribers in white areas where cable is unavailable. Not that the NAB has any regard for the public interest, but at least it would clearly illustrate that DBS does far more benfit than harm to local broadcasters and will do so on their (the satellite industry's) own terms.
I don't know the figures, but it's a safe assumtion that those effected would far outnumber the allegedly illegal DNS subscribers, which seem to be merely grandfathered customers on whom paperwork was not maintained. Grandfathered, might I add, from before LIL became prominent, and DNS privledges were resultingly further restricted.
Satellite has helped local broadcasters by enabling their signals to reach where they never could before. Congress responded by restricting the choices of the consumers in play.
LIL, as it stands, exists primarily as a selling point for satellite services, whose basis for operation is to offer nationally distributed channels for a fee. The existance of LIL is of little value if the same channels are available by cable or over the air for free. The only justification for the existance of LIL is for such stations to be available to viewers in other markets, without discrimination, to the extent satellite capacity will allow, as E* offered (to "eligible" customers) when they began the service. In such context, perhaps "LIL" is not a correct expression, as such service would exist more effectively as DNS.
The only circumstance in which the burden of distributing actual LIL can be justified is in cableless white areas, but in such a case, DNS, as always, will be preferable to some, and the DMA's locals likely provide little content relevant to such viewer's particular area (generalized weather reports and commercials for car dealers hundreds of miles away, presumably).
My point is, if satellite or cable are going to be used to redistribute broadcast stations, it should be to expand the consumer's choices, not diminish them. As it stands today, with legal use of LIL, any choices a consumer is offered are scarce.
