I subscribe, so I'm not sure if it shows up for everybody.
Here are the parts I found interesting:
"Industry experts said the sticky issue of network reverse retransmission payments
was behind the station switch. WISH's owner
had been renegotiating its affiliation contract with CBS and was apparently unwilling to ante up the kind of affiliate payments that CBS demanded
, according to several industry sources."Lin was kind of playing hardball on how much they were willing to pay and perhaps did not take seriously" CBS' demands, said Rick Gevers, an Indianapolis agent for on-air TV talent.
In the past, networks would pay local affiliates to broadcast their national programming
. Instances of networks switching to another station were rare, Cochrun said.
But "we're now in a digital age where people are watching on demand in their own time. Those old models just don't have the same clout they used to," he said.
Networks are demanding that affiliates pay more for expensive national programming. The fees are coming out of increasing payments that affiliate stations receive from cable companies.
"They're asking for more money (from affiliates) every year,
" Smith said.
"They're fighting over pretty good revenue," said Kevin Finch, a former Indianapolis TV news director who teaches journalism at Washington & Lee University in Virginia.
He said he thinks CBS is using WISH as an example to other local TV stations of what might happen if they resist CBS' demands for higher reverse retransmission payments."
So my layman's assessment is that the networks are demanding payment for their programming, programming which the local franchises are (in essence) re-selling to the cable companies. Have I got that right?
Feel sorry for the day to day folks at WISH, not so sorry for their bosses, who apparently aren't very good poker players.
COZI TV, MeTV, ION, anyone?