[opendtv] Re: News: ACA To Take Aim at FCC After Sinclair/Mediacom Retrans Deal
- From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 16:42:45 -0800
I'm sorry, but my characterization of your complaint is spot on.
There is no debate possible to your desires. Do I debate that you don't
really need what you think you need?
I give you facts. You don't care. I give you options. No, you want to eat
your cake and have it too.
When I visit a city, just about the first thing I do is to see what tv
service I get and map networks to channel numbers. Did you blindly move to
Gainesville?
Methinks you're unhappy with the choices you've made. Perhaps you didn't
know you were making the choices. Sounds like a personal problem.
John Willkie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Tom Barry
> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 4:28 PM
> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: News: ACA To Take Aim at FCC After
> Sinclair/Mediacom Retrans Deal
>
>
>
> John Willkie wrote:
> > Tom;
> >
> > There is no need for change on this. UPN and theWB had -- and probably
> the
> > CW still has -- cable-only affiliates, and LPTV affiliates in areas
> where
> > they desired coverage and no full service stations were available.
> >
> Well, the CW broadcast Smallville and Veronica Mars in HD but my cable
> company and ABC broadcaster don't carry it. So I personally do see the
> need for change.
>
> > NBC, ABC and CBS WANT affiliates that do local news; they have higher
> > standards, and I've mentioned this on this list to you a number of
> times.
> >
> > IF a cable system really wanted to affiliate with a major network, all
> they
> > would need is to agree to program a channel with local news. None have
> the
> > cojones to do this.
>
> Screw local news. Do you really think NBC prefers we not be able to
> watch it at all? And personally I feel there should be a franchise
> organization providing (minimal) local news to all takers. If it can't
> be done that way then it is probably not profitable anyway.
>
> >
> > EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS DON'T GO MORE THAN 35 MILES FROM THE TRANSMITTER SITE.
> > Anything else is actionable under anti-trust law, and if the broadcaster
> > lost, they would lose their license, either at the next license renewal,
> or
> > earlier by an FCC action.
> >
> > Your whining about this is childish. If you REALLY wanted NBC, you
> would
> > get DBS or a big ugly dish. Since you're in an NBC white area, you
> could
> > get out-of-market NBC. Literally, nobody can stop you.
> >
> > John Willkie
>
> Your characterization of my comments as whining is obnoxious, and not
> really conducive to debate. I stand by my previously stated opinions on
> this one.
>
> - Tom
>
> >
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>On Behalf Of Tom Barry
> >>Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:20 AM
> >>To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Subject: [opendtv] Re: News: ACA To Take Aim at FCC After
> >>Sinclair/Mediacom Retrans Deal
> >>
> >> From a selfish point of view I'd like to see retrans consent laws
> >>changed such that after a few months of failed negotiations and no HD
> >>NBC in my city the cable company would also be free to deal with distant
> >>network sources.
> >>
> >>It is annoying to think that a broadcaster whose distant signal I can't
> >>receive anyway can have exclusive rights to choose to not deliver in my
> >>area.
> >>
> >>Likewise for the CW channel which has cut a deal for SD carriage as a
> >>sub-channel with the local ABC broadcaster. If the HD channel is
> >>available somewhere else the cable company should be able to negotiate
> >>to carry it.
> >>
> >>I realize there are precedents and rationales for all of this but it
> >>still seems unnecessary restraint of trade to me and not really in my
> >>interests as a consumer, voter, and taxpayer. We need to apply some
> >>sort of use-it-or-lose it guidelines to network IP rights.
> >>
> >>- Tom
> >>
> >>
> >>John Willkie wrote:
> >>
> >>>Since the Fed won't go anything about it, I think Congress has to do
> >>>something that requires bankers to hand out money to anybody who asks.
> >>>
> >>>I'm going to call my banker friend and see what he thinks about it.
> >>>
> >>>John Willkie
> >>>EtherGuide Systems
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-
> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >>>>On Behalf Of Craig Birkmaier
> >>>>Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 5:34 AM
> >>>>To: OpenDTV Mail List
> >>>>Subject: [opendtv] News: ACA To Take Aim at FCC After
> Sinclair/Mediacom
> >>>>Retrans Deal
> >>>>
> >>>>http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6413581.html?display=Breaki
> ng
> >>
> >>+N
> >>
> >>>>ews&referral=SUPP&nid=2228
> >>>>
> >>>>ACA To Take Aim at FCC After Sinclair/Mediacom Retrans Deal
> >>>>By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 2/5/2007 4:24:00 PM
> >>>>
> >>>>Look for the American Cable Association to take aim at the
> >>>>FCC and broadcasters in the wake of Friday's retransmission consent
> >>>>deal between Sinclair and cable operator Mediacom.
> >>>>Matthew Polka, President of ACA, which represents smaller and
> >>>>mid-sized cable operators, told B&C the group was preparing to issue
> >>>>a statement expressing its displeasure with the FCC and calling for
> >>>>Congressional action on retransmission consent.
> >>>>
> >>>>"FCC has completely abdicated its public authority to regulate
> >>>>retransmission consent for the benefit of consumers," Polka said,
> >>>>arguing that the deal was a case not of the marketplace working, but
> >>>>of Sinclair leveraging "every benefit of federal rules to the
> >>>>detriment of consumers."
> >>>>
> >>>>The FCC concluded that Sinclair had not bargained in bad faith and
> >>>>that it did not have the power to force the broadcaster to restore
> >>>>stations it had pulled from Mediacom Jan. 6. FCC Chairman Kevin
> >>>>Martin encouraged arbitration, but backed up the Media Bureau's
> >>>>decision that it could not intervene, even though a couple of
> >>>>powerful Congressmen suggested it could.
> >>>>
> >>>>He said that the retransmission consent process unfairly
> >>>>disadvantages his member companies, but more importantly the
> >>>>subscribers to those companies, because they wind up paying more than
> >>>>the subs of big cable companies like Time Warner, with which Sinclair
> >>>>struck a deal just before Mediacom, but without pulling any stations
> >>>
> >>>>from its systems to get the deal done.
> >>>
> >>>>Polka suggested that there appeared to be "no amount of behavior on
> >>>>broadcasters part that amounts to bad faith," adding, "That process
> >>>>is not usable."
> >>>>
> >>>>Saying the Sinclair/Mediacom deal solved nothing, Polka added that
> >>>>there are "millions of other consumers who stand to be harmed,"
> >>>>citing the hundreds of millions CBS's Les Moonves says he expects to
> >>>>get for his stations in the next round of retransmission consent
> >>>>negotiations over the next couple of years.
> >>>>
> >>>>The National Association of Broadcasters declined comment and
> >>>>Sinclair had not returned a call at press time.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >>>>
> >>>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> >>>>FreeLists.org
> >>>>
> >>>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> >>>>unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >>>
> >>>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> >>
> >>FreeLists.org
> >>
> >>>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> >>
> >>unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >>
> >>>
> >>--
> >>Tom Barry trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Find my resume and video filters at www.trbarry.com
> >>
> >>
> >>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >>
> >>- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> >>FreeLists.org
> >>
> >>- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> >>unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
> >
> > - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org
> >
> > - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
> >
> >
>
> --
> Tom Barry trbarry@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Find my resume and video filters at www.trbarry.com
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
>
> - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
> FreeLists.org
>
> - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
> unsubscribe in the subject line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
