Hearst Television Inc. blacks out DISH customers in 26 markets

[Santinelli]

My wife has informed me that she is done with DISH. We lost both ABC channels with this as well as local news in NH.

Needless to say, the hopper 3 that I Love is being replaced with a Tivo and Spectrum. It makes me sad, but I don't see any other way around it.

I even bought a local antenna to try and get around it, but that didn't work either, we are just to far away and in a valley.

 

[The Fat Man]

Here's what Hearst is pushing through their side of this dispute. I originally thought about adding my opinion, but in the end, who cares what some jackass like me has to say. In the end its this, both sides are greedy and wants to make the most amount of money.

The one area where I did laugh was their analogy with water service. They actually justified Dish's reason for carrying locals and charging subs. Then states that Dish should be paying them. By this analogy, Poland Spring should be paying the weather for taking the water that it originates. I don't do it any justice, just read their point. To me, it doesn't follow logic.

http://wcvb.com/article/the-truth-about-ongoing-negotiations-with-dish/9173552?src=app



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[Santinelli]

Honestly, I never felt that OTA TV stations should get paid at all. They are OTA for Free. They get their money from advertisers. The have Basically Free airwaves, worth billions.

But I also do not believe customers should be held hostage. Since it is the FCC rules that allow the blackouts then the FCC should step in and referee a settlement.

Instead, we get NO local channels in NH. Except NH1. And they fired the news staff because they turned in there OTA frequencies for Millions of Dollars....

 

[Tampa8]

....... but in the end, who cares what some jackass like me has to say.....

That list is full I see little chance of you getting on it.

 

[bluegras]

Day 26: Dish vs. Hearst
Yes, it's day 26 of the fee fight between the two mega-huge companies that have left Dish viewers without broadcast affiliates in 26 Hearst markets. And there's no end in sight for the dispute that gets a little nastier with each passing day.

Dish actually has been quiet in the last several days, but Hearst this week posted a scathing attack on the satcaster at its station web sites under the headline, "The Truth About Ongoing Negotiations With Dish."

https://tvanswerman.com/2017/03/29/day-26-dish-vs-hearst/

 

[Voyager6]

If Hearst is getting vocal that must mean the loss of retrans fees is beginning to hurt.

 

[Joe891]

If Hearst is getting vocal that must mean the loss of retrans fees is beginning to hurt.

I was beginning to think the same thing

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[dishburgh]

If Hearst is getting vocal that must mean the loss of retrans fees is beginning to hurt.

Funny, I don't recall during any of these disputes with local channels the station owners offering to provide or install an OTA antenna to receive their valuable programming that I'm being deprived of by DISH. At least Charlie sent out some (while supplies lasted) last year. It's the thought that counts, right ?

Aren't they also the ones who sued Aero out of existence?

 

[primestar31]

Funny, I don't recall during any of these disputes with local channels the station owners offering to provide or install an OTA antenna to receive their valuable programming that I'm being deprived of by DISH. At least Charlie sent out some (while supplies lasted) last year. It's the thought that counts, right ?

Aren't they also the ones who sued Aero out of existence?

YES! Because Aereo wasn't paying them at all, as Aereo was using the excuse that "they had an individual antenna for each subscriber", therefore there was no difference between a user using a home antenna, OR using their Aereo service instead.

 

[sam_gordon]

Funny, I don't recall during any of these disputes with local channels the station owners offering to provide or install an OTA antenna to receive their valuable programming that I'm being deprived of by DISH. At least Charlie sent out some (while supplies lasted) last year. It's the thought that counts, right ?

Aren't they also the ones who sued Aero out of existence?

Actually one of our locals offered a free OTA antenna to anyone who requested one during a dispute. They didn't offer the install, probably because they're not staffed to do that.

 

[sundude90]

My wife has informed me that she is done with DISH. We lost both ABC channels with this as well as local news in NH.

Needless to say, the hopper 3 that I Love is being replaced with a Tivo and Spectrum. It makes me sad, but I don't see any other way around it.

I even bought a local antenna to try and get around it, but that didn't work either, we are just to far away and in a valley.

You'll loose channels because of disputes with Spectrum as well. They had several last year


Sent from my iPhone using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[yelraek]

I have filed a complaint with the FCC about Hearst media blacking out the stations. Maybe if some of you will do the same we may make a difference. It's easy to do on their complaint web site.

 

[Santinelli]

I have filed a complaint with the FCC about Hearst media blacking out the stations. Maybe if some of you will do the same we may make a difference. It's easy to do on their complaint web site.

I filed with the FCC as well. But then again, it no longer matters. When my wife realized she couldn't watch Dancing with the stars (Yeah, I know, but I still love her), we were done with dish. Finishing up Tivo install today

 

[gatekeeper]

Hey,

This is for WVTM local NBC station in Birmingham Alabama.
It amazes me that your company Hearst is keeping this dispute on going.

You are only hurting yourself ,and in the long run you will lose viewership to other local news and broadcast stations in your area.

You get paid from your advertisers , and your signal is free OTA.
I dont watch your station, or plan to in the future.

Just my 2 cents

 

[The Fat Man]

Just read Hearst's statements about Dish being full of it, and watch their clock, and you might feel about 0.01% bad for them. They mean buisness. From my perspective (getting my locals via OTA on my Dish Hopper), I say screw them, let them be without the money. But, I'm not one for collateral damage.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[Juncti]

Saw this while looking around for news about the blackout, from some affiliate somewhere (here's their site)

2. DISH says it has offered to pay Hearst Television the rates paid by DirecTV.

FALSE. DISH is clearly attempting to mislead its customers. As DISH knows too well, it is customary for companies to protect against the disclosure of confidential information included within their agreements to competitors. As such, we cannot disclose the terms of our DirecTV deal to DISH.

Very odd statement. Instead of saying "DISH never agreed to pay the recently negotiated rate with DirectTV" they say they won't disclose what they paid.

This reads to me that DISH did offer those terms but Hearst wants more and are hiding behind not wanting to disclose rates to shift blame and keep pushing for a higher payment.

 

[mwdxer1]

Honestly, I never felt that OTA TV stations should get paid at all. They are OTA for Free. They get their money from advertisers. The have Basically Free airwaves, worth billions.

But I also do not believe customers should be held hostage. Since it is the FCC rules that allow the blackouts then the FCC should step in and referee a settlement.

Instead, we get NO local channels in NH. Except NH1. And they fired the news staff because they turned in there OTA frequencies for Millions of Dollars....

I feel the same way. An engineer friend calls these commercial channels "double dipping". They make money off ads, and yet they charge a fortune to providers to carry them. There is so much competition out there that the TV services are not making the money when we had only the 3-4 nets, so they have to get the money elsewhere. I am surprised OTA TV is free in this day. Also streaming is really cutting into the revenue, as so much is free on the internet,.

 

[sam_gordon]

I feel the same way. An engineer friend calls these commercial channels "double dipping". They make money off ads, and yet they charge a fortune to providers to carry them. There is so much competition out there that the TV services are not making the money when we had only the 3-4 nets, so they have to get the money elsewhere. I am surprised OTA TV is free in this day. Also streaming is really cutting into the revenue, as so much is free on the internet,.

OTA is double dipping as much as ESPN, Disney, History, etc. The only difference is ESPN, Disney, History, etc MUST rely on MVPDs to get ANY viewers. But they still show ads.

 

[The Fat Man]

Yes and no. On the surface, you're right. Disney, ESPN, etc are charging providers to pick up their content, then also charging revenue from the ad time. But, that was their design from the onset.

In the case of OTA stations. They give their signal away for free. For many of these stations, their signals are nowhere near the strength as the reach of the satellite/cable providers. So, in essence, the satellite and cable providers enhance their reach.

Although I have argued this in years past, with much more emphasis on argue, some say that local stations help drive up subscriptions for satellite and cable. I can't argue that, but I can argue the following. I'm given an endless supply of free baseball's, and I choose to sell them to a person each month. The person who gave them away for free has two options. Either stop giving it away for free, or shut up! The locals seem to think that they can have the cards stacked in their favor, and such is not the case.

Hearst is saying "Dish is on the clock." Well so aren't you, mother-------! You aren't meeting Dish half way either!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using the SatelliteGuys app!

 

[sam_gordon]

In the case of OTA stations. They give their signal away for free. For many of these stations, their signals are nowhere near the strength as the reach of the satellite/cable providers. So, in essence, the satellite and cable providers enhance their reach.

Although I have argued this in years past, with much more emphasis on argue, some say that local stations help drive up subscriptions for satellite and cable. I can't argue that, but I can argue the following.

You can't argue it because it's the truth. Satellite subscriptions exploded when they added LiL.

I'm given an endless supply of free baseball's, and I choose to sell them to a person each month. The person who gave them away for free has two options. Either stop giving it away for free, or shut up! The locals seem to think that they can have the cards stacked in their favor, and such is not the case.

Using your analogy, wouldn't the foolish person be the one complaining about paying for a baseball when he could get it free?

Hearst is saying "Dish is on the clock." Well so aren't you, mother-------! You aren't meeting Dish half way either!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using the SatelliteGuys app!

Of course, we don't know who isn't meeting whom halfway. You (and most on here) believe it's the broadcaster simply because that enforces your belief. Personally, I think both sides are being greedy. There are lots of possible solutions (arbitration, cost based on ratings, govt mandated, etc). Of course, what we say here doesn't matter one bit.