Tulsa and OKC Dish customers could once again lose the Griffin stations.

osu1991

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,970
2,394
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
http://keepnewson6.com

Looks like Griffin is once again trying to fleece Dish customers for more money to watch CBS programming on Dish in Tulsa and OKC. I assume it applies to Tulsa CW also. Webpage says loss could occur at midnight December 31st and knowing Griffin they will be pulled and we will have to put up with onscreen scrolls every half hour now on the OTA, Directv, Cox and Uverse feeds too.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

tornado

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 13, 2004
388
98
Tulsa
OSU,
I hate to say this but Griffin can keep their stations (sarcasm). I am able to pick up their stations with rabbit ears. These channels are supposed to be free with antenna. I don't understand how they are able to charge. I wasn't aware of it. If the stations go off Dish they can stay off as far as I am concerned. This is bull. Thanks for posting this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: osu1991

osu1991

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,970
2,394
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
OSU,
I hate to say this but Griffin can keep their stations (sarcasm). I am able to pick up their stations with rabbit ears. These channels are supposed to be free with antenna. I don't understand how they are able to charge. I wasn't aware of it. If the stations go off Dish they can stay off as far as I am concerned. This is bull. Thanks for posting this.

I think my opinions on the Griffin family are well known and what they can do with their retransmission tactics. I don't watch anything on cbs in terms of prime time shows. Just the occasional NFL game and that is about it. I definitely don't watch kotv and their tabloid news style and weather hysteria. CW I do dvr shows M-F from KQCW and that is about all I can take of anything broadcast on a Griffin station. Screen spam and constant scrolls about something.

Save us all $10 a month and drop all the locals from Dish, directv, cox, and uverse. Make the stations put a signal up that covers all the area they claim. They are easy to receive with an indoor antenna if your within 35 miles of Coweta, but of course they all claim areas down to the south of McAlester and north into Kansas along the border and out west to Ponca City. You have to be a nasa engineer to get a decent signal in some of those areas.
 

tornado

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 13, 2004
388
98
Tulsa
I think my opinions on the Griffin family are well known and what they can do with their retransmission tactics. I don't watch anything on cbs in terms of prime time shows. Just the occasional NFL game and that is about it. I definitely don't watch kotv and their tabloid news style and weather hysteria. CW I do dvr shows M-F from KQCW and that is about all I can take of anything broadcast on a Griffin station. Screen spam and constant scrolls about something.

Save us all $10 a month and drop all the locals from Dish, directv, cox, and uverse. Make the stations put a signal up that covers all the area they claim. They are easy to receive with an indoor antenna if your within 35 miles of Coweta, but of course they all claim areas down to the south of McAlester and north into Kansas along the border and out west to Ponca City. You have to be a nasa engineer to get a decent signal in some of those areas.
I agree.
 

docdaddy

SatelliteGuys Pro
Sep 2, 2016
465
277
Birmingham, AL
The only problem with that is that a lot of us do live in areas where it is impossible to get the locals with an OTA. I am in one of those. Some of those even live in large cities; my daughter and son in law live in Grand Rapids, MI, a good sized city, but they can not get two of the networks with an OTA. When we asked the engineers at those two channels about it, they said it is because, in order to serve the greater area, they had to place their transmission towers in a location that is a bit out of town, and because of all the buildings, etc. in GR some people just couldn't pick them up unless they had a very high and large outdoor antenna. The condo my daughter is in doesn't allow this to be put up.

The best answer is one that - once again - Congress won't enact because of the people who put money in their pockets. Just have the FCC create a law that sets guidelines for what local network owners can charge for retransmission: Satellite, Cable, etc. As well as guidelines for when increases are allowed and how much. Include in this law a rule that says no blackouts allowed, as people rely on locals for critical weather, news, etc.

Then none of this every happens again.
 

osu1991

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,970
2,394
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Make locals optional in all packages again.

Paying for locals when I have no need to receive them via a pay service, annoys me as much as having to pay for Lifetime, Disney, Viceland or whatever channels I don't watch and many that have never been tuned to in 20 years of paying for tv service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sam_gordon

tornado

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 13, 2004
388
98
Tulsa
Okay, today channel 6 I receive by off air tuner in Tulsa was left on the screen due to distraction. Channel 6 is now running a ticker tape across the bottom during programming telling people how bad the loss of their channel on DISH will be and to contact DISH. These local broadcasters are supposed to serve the local community. They are supposed to be free. You are supposed to be able to receive them independently with an antenna. For this reason these broadcasters have government help. Does no one understand that these local channels are not pay channels? People who don't have an antenna or even an ability to receive these channels with antenna like I am able to will suffer. The losses of the channels impact the providers who graciously provide them. The providers need to leave the channels off of their systems out of principle, and I hope DISH does. This is BS, just my opinion. On a side note, another channel, Fox, was running a message about the same situation and AT&T.
 

osu1991

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,970
2,394
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
I was just going to say get ready for 23 and 41 to have scrolls too as Cox Media is about to pull Fox and Mynet in Tulsa from Uverse and Directv on the 31st if a new deal isn't reached.
 

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,388
1,217
Lexington, ky
Okay, today channel 6 I receive by off air tuner in Tulsa was left on the screen due to distraction. Channel 6 is now running a ticker tape across the bottom during programming telling people how bad the loss of their channel on DISH will be and to contact DISH. These local broadcasters are supposed to serve the local community. They are supposed to be free. You are supposed to be able to receive them independently with an antenna. For this reason these broadcasters have government help. Does no one understand that these local channels are not pay channels? People who don't have an antenna or even an ability to receive these channels with antenna like I am able to will suffer. The losses of the channels impact the providers who graciously provide them. The providers need to leave the channels off of their systems out of principle, and I hope DISH does. This is BS, just my opinion. On a side note, another channel, Fox, was running a message about the same situation and AT&T.
OK, here we go again. Let's see...
1) MOST (granted, not all) people CAN receive the channels with an antenna. MANY just refuse to go through the work/expense of setting up an antenna correctly. Those that do can get them free.
2) The providers are not "graciously" providing the locals. They do so because it's good business sense. Customers want the locals. Don't believe me? Go back and look at Dish's subscribers before and after LiL came about. I know in my area satellite use exploded after LiL came about.
3) Dish doesn't care about you and being able to see the locals. If they did, they would allow subscribers who use OTA to utilize the PSIP data that is included in the OTA signal.

The above are facts. The below is my opinion...

I do agree channels can ask for too much per subscriber. Unfortunately none of us will know how much the stations are asking for. Yes, people will guess based on "pennies a day" or "increasing 300%" or something. I also agree those who legitimately can not receive an OTA broadcast should not be charged to get the signal over satellite.
 

tornado

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 13, 2004
388
98
Tulsa
OK, here we go again. Let's see...
1) MOST (granted, not all) people CAN receive the channels with an antenna. MANY just refuse to go through the work/expense of setting up an antenna correctly. Those that do can get them free.
2) The providers are not "graciously" providing the locals. They do so because it's good business sense. Customers want the locals. Don't believe me? Go back and look at Dish's subscribers before and after LiL came about. I know in my area satellite use exploded after LiL came about.
3) Dish doesn't care about you and being able to see the locals. If they did, they would allow subscribers who use OTA to utilize the PSIP data that is included in the OTA signal.

The above are facts. The below is my opinion...

I do agree channels can ask for too much per subscriber. Unfortunately none of us will know how much the stations are asking for. Yes, people will guess based on "pennies a day" or "increasing 300%" or something. I also agree those who legitimately can not receive an OTA broadcast should not be charged to get the signal over satellite.
I know this is rambling. All I am saying is the local network affiliates shouldn't be able to extort providers over re-transmission. These local providers had laws written so they could have their exclusive businesses that are meant to serve the communities they exist in. Then they want to have their cake and eat it too by having payment so they can be transmitted in the most commonly used method, not OTA, to those areas they had the laws written so that they could exist in and serve. I don't think cutting the cord is the answer. Without a cord you cannot get all the things you are able to get with one. These local channels want compensation like they are national pay channels. I remember the history about locals on satellite. I don't disagree too much with your rendition. In my opinion I don't think it is necessary for Dish to put much effort into OTA if they are carrying locals to local. Since I am not using DISH for OTA, I don't care if DISH allows subscribers who use OTA to utilize the PSIP data that is included in the OTA signal. Locals are available OTA to those willing to take the necessary steps to obtain. Only trying to say this re-transmission nonsense is BS in my opinion.
 

osu1991

Thread Starter
SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,970
2,394
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
They need to quit claiming areas they can't adequately serve. Go to Ponca City and try to get a decent signal OTA. OKC claims the Ponca area and Tulsa hounds us with weather alerts for that area. 110 miles to the OKC transmitters, 120 miles to the Tulsa transmitters and 85 to the Wichita transmitters. My brother in laws family says it's so nice being held captive.
 

tornado

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 13, 2004
388
98
Tulsa
I forgot what name they call the national laws regarding local television broadcasting, but I know another name for them, BULL.
 

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,388
1,217
Lexington, ky
I know this is rambling. All I am saying is the local network affiliates shouldn't be able to extort providers over re-transmission. These local providers had laws written so they could have their exclusive businesses that are meant to serve the communities they exist in.
Since the majority of markets have more than one television station, what gives a station "exclusivity"?

In my opinion I don't think it is necessary for Dish to put much effort into OTA if they are carrying locals to local. Since I am not using DISH for OTA, I don't care if DISH allows subscribers who use OTA to utilize the PSIP data that is included in the OTA signal. Locals are available OTA to those willing to take the necessary steps to obtain.
The reason I bring up PSIP is because whenever these retrans disagreements come up, Dish will use the line "we're looking out for our customers". Now THAT'S BS. IMO, if they were looking out for the best interest of the customers, they would actually do something that benefits the customer, even if it doesn't help their bottom line.
 

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,388
1,217
Lexington, ky
They need to quit claiming areas they can't adequately serve.
I honestly don't know... do stations actually "claim" areas or are the areas assigned to the market? Who does the assigning?

For this reason these broadcasters have government help.
What government "help"? Just to put another fact out there... stations don't get free use of the airwaves. They pay the government yearly license fees in order to operate on a specific frequency at a specific power.
 

tornado

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 13, 2004
388
98
Tulsa
Since the majority of markets have more than one television station, what gives a station "exclusivity"?

The reason I bring up PSIP is because whenever these retrans disagreements come up, Dish will use the line "we're looking out for our customers". Now THAT'S BS. IMO, if they were looking out for the best interest of the customers, they would actually do something that benefits the customer, even if it doesn't help their bottom line.

I honestly don't know... do stations actually "claim" areas or are the areas assigned to the market? Who does the assigning?

What government "help"? Just to put another fact out there... stations don't get free use of the airwaves. They pay the government yearly license fees in order to operate on a specific frequency at a specific power.
Sam
When I said exclusivity I mean exclusive distributor of a particulr network.
I think Dish benefits the customer by providing a satellite television. To me this is a different delivery method from OTA. I don't use Dish for OTA. I don't care how much Dish equipment supports OTA. I use Dish for satellite.
When I said government help I meant the government prevents us from receiving distant networks.
Sorry if I sound ridiculous. It is just me. I am ready for the scorn to come.
 

sam_gordon

SatelliteGuys Pro
May 21, 2009
2,388
1,217
Lexington, ky
Sam
When I said exclusivity I mean exclusive distributor of a particulr network.
I think Dish benefits the customer by providing a satellite television. To me this is a different delivery method from OTA. I don't use Dish for OTA. I don't care how much Dish equipment supports OTA. I use Dish for satellite.
When I said government help I meant the government prevents us from receiving distant networks.
Sorry if I sound ridiculous. It is just me. I am ready for the scorn to come.
There's no scorn from me. I'm just trying to educate with how things are. As far as "exclusive distributor", that's not unusual in a business world. There are items you can buy at Wal*Mart that you can't get at Meijer (and vise versa). It's not just network programming either. When a station purchases Jeopardy! (for example), they are also buying the rights in that viewing area. They don't want another station to show Jeopardy! because it then dilutes the show. That's one reason why importing a distant network isn't an easy solution. Another problem with importing out of market stations (so I was told) is some commercial content is produced with area limitations. For example, the voice talent may have a contract that their voice is only used in 'x' market or 'y' region. These are also reasons why local stations don't stream 24/7.

I agree Dish (and Direct) help the customer and the stations by providing the feed to those who couldn't otherwise receive it. At the same time, Dish (and all MVPDs) also benefit because without having the local stations, they wouldn't have as many subscribers.
 

tornado

SatelliteGuys Pro
Pub Member / Supporter
Jan 13, 2004
388
98
Tulsa
There's no scorn from me. I'm just trying to educate with how things are. As far as "exclusive distributor", that's not unusual in a business world. There are items you can buy at Wal*Mart that you can't get at Meijer (and vise versa). It's not just network programming either. When a station purchases Jeopardy! (for example), they are also buying the rights in that viewing area. They don't want another station to show Jeopardy! because it then dilutes the show. That's one reason why importing a distant network isn't an easy solution. Another problem with importing out of market stations (so I was told) is some commercial content is produced with area limitations. For example, the voice talent may have a contract that their voice is only used in 'x' market or 'y' region. These are also reasons why local stations don't stream 24/7.

I agree Dish (and Direct) help the customer and the stations by providing the feed to those who couldn't otherwise receive it. At the same time, Dish (and all MVPDs) also benefit because without having the local stations, they wouldn't have as many subscribers.
Sam.
Thanks for helping. There is a lot to remember and many things are easy for me to forget.
The original distribution method for local television was OTA. When it comes to local networks, re-transmission is relatively new.
There were never any charges for re-transmission when the only delivery method was OTA. There still is no charge for receiving OTA. That is the model I base everything on.
I think government grants licenses to local TV stations with the idea that the stations have a responsibility to provide benefits and service to the viewers. Re-transmission has turned into just a way for them to make money and costs are passed down to the consumer. It never used to be that way when only OTA existed.
Broadcasters are not looking out for anybody else, but their bottom line. They want to make money. That makes OTA a better deal (free) for consumers that are able to receive it.
I don't want to have to pay somebody for something I can get free somewhere else even though I know it is law. I don't know what is charged, but I think it is too much.
I want distant networks.
I am just rambling.
 
Top