I’m watching I Love Lucy over here with my morning coffee (well, afternoon coffee - I’m a bit of a night bird) when I came across a commercial from some political group called keepmytv.org claiming that “Pay-TV companies, such as cable and satellite, are seeking new rules in
Congress that could jeopardize the free, local TV service that nearly 60 million Americans rely on each day to stay safe and informed.” … Sounds kinda ominous, but I can’t seem to find any information on what exactly the Pay-TV companies are trying to do!
Has anyone heard of this or know what the heck is going on?
I’m getting those commercials too. I meant to research it today, but I got too busy at work. Interested in this as well though.
Here’s some additional reading:
Can’t say, but let’s face it… apart from the excellent quality re-run shows (esp. sit-coms)… the big OTA HD networks have pulled 90% of “good” content off of OTA leaving a mess of infomercials and other filler in its place. Of course, this can vary by area/region as well.
In short, those awesome strangely named OTA channels with reasonable content are ultimately owned (most of the time) by the big HD providers that have moved most (and I do mean most) of their content to purely subscriber/paid services. Meanwhile, they still make you sit through several minutes of advertising and I believe you will find that advertising fees have not gone down.
So… there is certainly a very evil agenda going on. And I imagine it’s more evil than you or I can imagine. End result? Probably the eventual death of OTA… but realize they will pump something out because there’s no way they’ll surrender their frequencies… it’ll just be whatever the cheapest thing they can find is (e.g. the brick channel… 24hrs of non-stop motionless brick for your viewing pleasure).
Who’s to blame? Oddly, making HDTV a gov’t mandate probably started this snowball down the hill…
With that said, it’s possible that your TV station was observing at least the attempt to shut down things like Dish Network after Aereo was successfully shutdown (Aereo was nothing more than a cloud backup provider… well… with extra security to prevent sharing). The networks want it all shutdown except for expensive premium cable/fibre. To which I say, let’s bring back live theatre and live sports with athletes instead of spoiled rich prima donnas…
So even things like TabloTV (talking about the USA) might not be worth too much if all content is turned to “BrickTV” in order to force people to pay big bucks.
Ok so… Clash of The Titans which spawned an alarmist campaign to drum up support for future battles with the evil Pay-TV cartels that resulted in confusion among uncaffeinated individuals catching up on their favourite shows and likely scared the pants off of senior citizens nation wide. … I dare say these NAB guys need a new PR guy. @.@
OK---Who pays who, and for what?
Cable and Satellite operators should be able to re-broadcast local OTA channels to satisfy their customers. No money should be changing hands. The local OTA channels would receive their compensation by the increased advertising costs because of the added numbers in their audience, via cable and satellite.
All I know is that if there are commercials, I shouldn't have to pay to see it; whether it's over the air or on cable or satellite. As a viewer, I'm part of the reason they can charge the advertising rates they charge. The more viewers, the higher the rates to advertise on their programs. So, providers should choose whether they want money from advertisers, or from the viewing public---not both.
The next thing to change would be the ability to purchase channels, al a carte, instead of wasteful bundles. But, until enough couch potatoes get up and tune out, things probably won't improve.
I just posted a topic about this, before seeing there was one already going....sorry.
I remember when cable TV was new and in it's infancy, and their 'hook' to get people to pay subscriptions was NO ADVERTISING. Didn't take long for that to disappear. I'm with geeWibz....if they're collecting ad money, there shouldn't be subscriptions. Makes me wonder how much longer it will be before satellite radio music channels begin (softly) sliding ads into the programming. If a channel on any medium is worthy, it's ratings should dictate how much money it makes by the business ads it can sell. This is precisely why I dumped satellite TV. I got sick and tired of my money going to propaganda and garbage channels that shouldn't even exist.
@Diligent - I have to admit they really are getting downright obnoxious with the content and quantity of advertisements in general lately. Years ago I ended my trial subscription to Hulu in an hour of signing up with a nasty letter to their support department after their system forced me to watch an anti-smoking ad which featured a rather graphic autopsy of a diseased lung that would play several times in a row during each of their many commercial “breaks”.
Thank goodness Tablo lets me skip through the commercials otherwise by now I’m sure I’d have been brainwashed into thinking I’ve somehow in my 35 years on this earth had been forced into having an unnecessary radioactive metal hip implant installed that’s managed to go bad while contracting mesotheleoma while waiting for the mechanic to finish replacing the break pads on my car, at the same time getting hypnotized into whistling a bad rip-off of the Ghost Busters song each time I passed by a car dealership. >.<
@OrionFL79 That's hilarious!
I listen to AM radio a lot, and the propaganda advertisements from the Ad Council and other government affiliated and/or paid ads that get aired are making me feel the same way. On one hand, I'm angry that my hard-earned money gets used to pay for schite like that, and even more, insulted by the (you're an idiot and need to be taught a lesson) arrogance they possess.