Tired of Waiting: My Quest for Significantly Viewed

[riffjim4069]

I recently composed an email asking Dish Network to provide me, and area residents, with SV channels. I hope to hear from them shortly:

I am a Dish Network customer and I have a question, actually a request, regarding Significantly Viewed (SV) channels. First, I live 53 miles from Richmond VA, and 55 miles from Washington DC; I live in Spotsylvania County, but I have a Fredericksburg City mailing address. I am technically in the Washington DC DMA and receive their locals via Dish Network. Adelphia (aka Comcast), Cox, and now Verizon FiOS (recently awarded a Cable TV franchise in the County), provide area residents both the Washington DC and Richmond VA locals, whereas Dish Network does not. According to the FCCs SV channel map (which is based on zipcode) there are a number of Richmond locals that I am eligible to receive since they have been designated as "Significantly Viewed" in my area (again, based on zipcode...not DMA).

I noticed the Richmond locals were recently been moved over the 110 satellite location (from the 105 satellite I believe). Technically, I should now be able to receive these significant by simply adding them to my account. According to FCC-05-187, Appendix C, Significantly Viewed List (see attached), and the FCC Information Sheet on Television Broadcast Channels on Satellite, May 2006, "satellite subscribers who receive local-into-local service may, under certain circumstances, receive individual stations from markets outside their DMA that are deemed "significantly viewed" in their community. It is up to the satellite carrier whether or not to offer significantly viewed stations and a subscriber must be subscribing to local-into-local service in his or her DMA to be eligible to receive significantly viewed stations."

Simply stated, the FCC has authorized Dish Network to provide customers (me) with SV. According to FCC-05-187, Dish Network is authorized to provide me with two (2) Richmond area locals (see the below taken from page #471): WTVR-TV (channel 9386), and WRLH-DT (channel 9388).

Spotsylvania & Fredericksburg City

WRC-TV, 4, Washington, DC
WTTG, 5, Washington, DC
WJLA-TV, 7, Washington, DC (formerly WMAL)
WUSA, 9, Washington, DC (formerly WTOP)
WTVR-TV, 6, Richmond, VA
+WRLH-TV, 35, Richmond, VA

I see no technical limitation why these SV channels cannot be added to my account now that they have been placed on the 110 satellite. Please enable them as soon as possible. In fact, I am further requesting that Dish Network enable these channels, WTVR-TV and WRLH-DT, for all customers in Spotsylvania County and Fredericksburg City as per FCC-05-187, page #471. Here are the zipcodes for all affected customers: 22401, 22402, 22403, 22404, 22405, 22406, 22407, 22408, 22412, 22553

Please reply when my request has been completed.

riffjim4069

 

[riffjim4069]

I received an email reply a short while ago. The bottom line is SV is permitted by the FCC and the local cable companies are currently offering them. It would be a competitive disadvantage for E* not to enable these as quickly as possible.

riffjim4069,


Thank you for your email. I have sent this to our programming department for review. I will let you know what the outcome is. I expect a reply in a day or two. My office hours are also below with my contact information.

Please feel free to contact me with any other questions in the future. My office hours are Tuesday – Thursday & Sunday from 10:00am – 9:00pm MST.


Thanks,
Executive Communications

 

[minnow]

Ah, it seems "TV Freedom/TV Choice" is good for the goose but not good for the gander. Here several hundred thousand potential DNS subs are about to be disconnected from ALL network services and you, whom already get your local networks are complaining that you need multiple feeds of networks given to you. And further you argue in a nutshell "tough luck and too bad" in other posts written by you about us DNS sub's as we await out turn at being disconnected. Excuse me while I try not to choke on your hypocrisy. :river

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Folks no need for personal attacks.

I am interested in the responce Jim gets back.

 

[Greg Bimson]

Without any personal attacks, the license that governs significantly-viewed is the same license that is about to have a permanent injunction place upon it.

In other words, signficantly-viewed is also in danger of being lost on 1 December.

 

[epauladams]

5 Months ago Dish told me to "wait until Oct", This is the email I got Oct 13th when I requested significantly viewed channels again. I have even requested the Local TV stations to write ceo@echostar and tell them they would like to be carried.

"We are aware of the channels that are considered to be significantly viewed in Harmon County. Unfortunately, at the current time we do not have a significantly viewed offering available in the area. We are hoping to begin offering significantly viewed stations on a more widespread basis in the near future and will take the request for Harmon County into consideration as we plan."

 

[Kaydigi]

You don't want Richmond SD locals, they are horrific on E*.

 

[riffjim4069]

Ah, it seems "TV Freedom/TV Choice" is good for the goose but not good for the gander. Here several hundred thousand potential DNS subs are about to be disconnected from ALL network services and you, whom already get your local networks are complaining that you need multiple feeds of networks given to you. And further you argue in a nutshell "tough luck and too bad" in other posts written by you about us DNS sub's as we await out turn at being disconnected. Excuse me while I try not to choke on your hypocrisy. :river

SV and DNS are clearly not the same thing. Plus, everyone who rates DNS should be able to receive them...E* just got caught breaking the rules. I'm just a shocked at the number of E* Puppetheads who cannot, and will not, see this.

By the way, I receive all SV stations with an OTA antenna. My request is for those in the area who do not wish to install an OTA, do not have cable, or simply refuse to take action; I gain nothing from this action; in other words...I merely gain the satisfaction of helping others legally receive these services. Again, I don't see how SV and DNS are in any way related. If you can shed some light on how the two relate then I would be happy to listen.

Finally, I'm sure DirecTV will gladly provide DNS to those who are legally entitled to receive them. People do have choices: signup with a provider that doesn't violate the law (business ethics 101), work within the legal and political constraints to bring about favorable change, or subscribe to cable. However, I do believe the current laws are on the books for a reason...the lawmakers have always sided with localism.

Other solutions include Slingboxing, and subscribing to Canadian provider. Iceberg runs an excellent Canadian Satellite Forum, but it's up to members to use the forums and ask questions...and not blame Congress for taking away their DNS.

 

[riffjim4069]

Without any personal attacks, the license that governs significantly-viewed is the same license that is about to have a permanent injunction place upon it.

In other words, signficantly-viewed is also in danger of being lost on 1 December.

I did not know this...E* really backed themselves into a corner on this one.

 

[kresston]

Ok, I'm confused. Are they only doing SV for certain areas right now? Currently at my home (I'm away at college) my folks get the designated locals from Roanoke, VA, but they also get two stations from the Winston Salem, NC locals pack. I would assume that being a remote area it would be the last place for SV.

 

[jhamps10]

I am very interested in the response that is recieved. quick question, did you send the e-mail to the ceo address?

Because I have sv stations from 2 different markets that are on cable, and are mentioned in the FCC list, that I would like to see added to my area ASAP.

 

[Chris Walker]

I just called Dish's executive office and PLEADED that they NEVER add significantly viewed channels and if they did I will cancel my service. I will call every day until they promise me they will never add them. I will also write my local congressional reps to see if they can make it illegal for Dish to add SV.

 

[riffjim4069]

I just called Dish's executive office and PLEADED that they NEVER add significantly viewed channels and if they did I will cancel my service. I will call every day until they promise me they will never add them. I will also write my local congressional reps to see if they can make it illegal for Dish to add SV.

Good for you...

 

[jhamps10]

it's dumb people like you who only care about those who are losing the dns channels that really nag dish network. You must live in LA or work for fox. you may not want more choices for programming, but I do. In my opinion more options the better.

 

[jhamps10]

Good for you...

umm, riff, notice that he put in NEVER add sv in there!
Just checking.

 

[Mr Tony]

Ah, it seems "TV Freedom/TV Choice" is good for the goose but not good for the gander. Here several hundred thousand potential DNS subs are about to be disconnected from ALL network services and you, whom already get your local networks are complaining that you need multiple feeds of networks given to you. And further you argue in a nutshell "tough luck and too bad" in other posts written by you about us DNS sub's as we await out turn at being disconnected. Excuse me while I try not to choke on your hypocrisy. :river

Folks no need for personal attacks.

I am interested in the responce Jim gets back.

Scott I dont see this as an attack. minnow has a good point. riffjim has said in pretty much any thread that concerns DNS to the tune of "oh well, tuff luck. Charlie should have followed the rules and not given you extra channels" yet he is whining about SV channels which is pretty much the same thing. A way to see other network stations.

The fact he lives in an area that he can get locals and could (if Dish does SV) get a choice of different stations should give him the privilege to choose which CBS (as an example) to watch yet people who don't have locals on Dish and live too far away from the transmitters so they have to rely on distants are getting those taken away?

What is wrong with this picture?

Yes Charlie screwed up by giving distants to people who do not qualify, and the people who don't qualify shouldn't be the ones who should be whining. The ones who really have something to lose are people in the rural areas where there are no towers and the only way to get any type of reception is via satellite.

 

[Chris Walker]

Riff - Just so you know, if the injunction you support stands, no significantly viewed as well. So good thing you sent in those e-mails to your reps asking them not to do anything!

 

[Chris Walker]

Scott I dont see this as an attack. minnow has a good point. riffjim has said in pretty much any thread that concerns DNS to the tune of "oh well, tuff luck. Charlie should have followed the rules and not given you extra channels" yet he is whining about SV channels which is pretty much the same thing. A way to see other network stations.

.

:up Riffjim is basically just trolling and trying to create arguments. To ask people not to attack him is laughable

 

[jhamps10]

hey, does anyone have some proof that this injuction on dns effects any subs who have sv locals.
Actually iceberg, in the terre haute, IN dma sv channel lineup, it gives them yes one additional nbc station, but it gives them the Indy abc station, which in the terre haute market there is no ABC station. So yes for some folks it gives them the option to choose which network station to watch, but in some cases, it gives them a network station without getting the NY or LA station, and one that is more local to them.

 

[Mr Tony]

jhamps
I am fully aware of how SV works

There is one county (Aitkin County) in Minnesota (where my dad's cabin is) that if DIsh did SV I would get all the Mpls stations and the Big 3 from Duluth (this county use to be in the Duluth DMA)

The issue here is riffjim is saying that people losing their distants (which may give them a choice) is "too bad, so sad" yet he is wanting more channels for choices.

Something wrong with this picture