[opendtv] Re: TV Technology: Bypassing the Broadcasters: TV in the Social Age
- From: Craig Birkmaier <brewmastercraig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 07:10:20 -0400
On Mar 18, 2017, at 6:53 PM, Manfredi, Albert E
<albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And what do any of the words have to do with the issue?
Everything Bert.
Local broadcasters do not own the content, Craig. Local broadcasters are not
required, to place TV network content onto MVPD systems. The congloms can
transmit this to the MVPDs via satellite, from their home base, adjusted to
time zones if need be, and the MVPDs can insert whatever number of local ads
as required.
You are ignoring the realities that existed in 1992 Bert. The TV world has
fundamentally changed.
In 1992 the cable industry was challenging the broadcast industry, creating new
networks that were attracting viewers AWAY from the content offered by
broadcasters. Broadcasters were also losing their audience to packaged media in
the form of movies and TV series on videotapes. To get "the genie back into the
bottle," the broadcasters used their political influence, and the public
concerns over rapidly rising cable rates, to push to re-regulate the cable
industry. But this was just an excuse to get PAID for the broadcast signals
that they give away for free via an antenna. President Bush vetoed this bill,
but Congress overrode his veto.
With retransmission consent in hand, the broadcast industry had the tool it
needed to take control of the extended basic bundle that contains all of the
networks causing people to pay for cable. What does this have to do with local
broadcasters?
Retransmission consent gave local broadcasters the ability to either ask for
monetary compensation or in-kind compensation. But local broadcasters had no
say in how retransmission consent was used; that was driven by the congloms
that own the broadcast networks. As I stated yesterday, most of them used
in-kind compensation to create new non-broadcast networks. THe local affiliates
got nothing initially; after the congloms took control of the bundle they
started asking for monetary compensation that is shared with the local
affiliates.
Obviously the congloms could decide to STOP BROADCASTING and require people to
buy their content, either by selling it in (V)MVPD bundles or direct via
services like CBS All Access. Why do they keep up this "pretend game" Bert?
The answer is the political power the congloms wield. This power is entrenched
in the local affiliate nature of our broadcast infrastructure, and all of the
regulations that protect it. It is HIGHLY profitable.
You are incorrigible. The "pretend game" does not exist.
You are incredibly obstinate. In what I described above, tell me why the
local broadcasters are required, why they have to pretend they own the
content, and why the congloms cannot get retrans consent dollars directly
from the MVPDs instead.
See above.
Regards
Craig
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: