[opendtv] Re: UHF reception

  • From: "John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:21:18 -0800

No Dale, you and your comments aren't clueless, but you excited the peanut
gallery into rhetorical excess, and they were heading way into the clouds.

I think we need to disentangle intent from effect.  It's hard to imagine
that the NAB intended to benefit one or more broadcast network at a time
when about zero were NAB members.  

The only prime-time entertainment programming that has been transferred from
broadcast to cable, in my memory, is Law & Order:CI.  And, of course, Friday
Night Lights gets a first run this season on DirecTV, before it resumes in
January on NBC.  I'm not sure that's a good deal all the way around, but
I've never watched it, so I wouldn't miss it if it were to disappear to
cable.

And, I'm sure that you realize that sports programming isn't owned by the
networks; they merely license it for single broadcasts.  So, they haven't
transferred it to cable; they were merely outbid by entities with dual
revenue streams.  

I will note that ABC may have effectively done an ABC to ESPN transfer, but
usually, they end up with broadcasts rights that were previously held by
networks other than ABC.

I think it's safe to say that networks have become very cost-conscious, not
unlike the newspaper industry, and it's well-regarded that you can't scrimp
your way to success in the TV business.  

John Willkie

-----Mensaje original-----
De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En
nombre de Dale Kelly
Enviado el: Monday, November 24, 2008 12:58 PM
Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: [opendtv] Re: UHF reception


John W. wrote:

> And, it's plainly ridiculous to assert that the NAB intended,
> through the transition, to destroy television broadcasting.
> They clearly represent the views and intentions of television
> broadcasters.

My use of the term "complicit" regarding NABs role was clearly inaccurate.
They were/are simply the pawn of Media Company owned Broadcast Networks
plans to control both sides of this board.

The NAB seldom represents the general good of the common broadcaster except
when it is to benefit one or more networks. Call it "trickle down"
representation.

Also, IMO, the transfer by a broadcast networks prime entertainment and
sports programming to subscription networks does devalue that networks O&Os.
Perhaps this is simply part of a longer-range plan to transfer that value to
an even more profitable branch of their company.

Dale (Call me clueless..)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of John Willkie
> Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 7:43 PM
> To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [opendtv] Re: UHF reception
>
>
> It occurs to me that you guys are largely confusing "creative destruction"
> with "destruction."
>
> It was plainly the case that a forced conversion to digital
> television from
> analog (the U.S. implementation of same) was going to change "television
> broadcasting as we knew it."
>
> This is running alongside the accretion of what used to be the whole
> enchilada to the wider selections of cable and satellite.
>
> I would offer that if the transition hadn't been launched, that television
> broadcasting would be in worse shape now than it is.  There is uncertainty
> in the transition, sure.  There is also the power and flexibility
> of one or
> more toolkits to make television something that it could never be in the
> analog world.
>
> And, it's plainly ridiculous to assert that the NAB intended, through the
> transition, to destroy television broadcasting.  They clearly
> represent the
> views and intentions of television broadcasters.  Sure there are
> unintended
> consequences, but the greater risk was doing nothing.
>
> I really think that you folk need to do several "risk assessments",
> including one that includes a world with analog over the air broadcasting
> and a cable infrastructure able to transmit HDTV, and see how that looks
> compared to what we have today.
>
> And, "man up!"
>
> John Willkie
>

 
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: