News About Dual Cable Must Carry from Skyreport.com

1055 Views 23 Replies 16 Participants Last post by gmclaughlin, Apr 14, 2003

Babula

Discussion Starter · Apr 8, 2003

Fritts, NAB Push for Dual Must-Carry

Edward Fritts, president of the National Association of

Broadcasters, reiterated the broadcast community's call for dual

must-carry of analog and digital TV signals by cable.

Fritts, who addressed the opening ceremony Monday for this

year's NAB convention in Las Vegas, said cable isn't delivering

a majority of digital TV signals from local broadcasters. He

said there are more than 800 digital TV stations on the air,

but only 107 have obtained cable carriage.

"The cable industry is missing at its post and absent without

leave. Cable operators are carrying less than 13 percent of

local DTV broadcast stations that are on the air today," he

said.

He added, "Broadcasters are under federal mandate to build DTV

stations. Set manufacturers are under federal mandate to phase

in DTV tuners. And it is high time the cable industry be

placed under federal mandate to carry local DTV broadcast

signals."

Fritts also called on broadcasters to remain "locally

relevant."

He recalled that Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge put

out a list of essential items needed in case of terrorist

attack, among them a battery-operated radio or TV to get

local stations. He used the list to take aim at broadcaster

competition, saying, "In case of emergency, Secretary Ridge

did not say to take your XM or Sirius satellite radio out

of your car and into your safe room. He did not say to take

your HBO program guide."

"Just as reporters are currently embedded with our military

forces, broadcasters are embedded within our communities,"

Fritts said. "We are part of the unit. This is what

distinguishes us from our satellite and cable competition."

See less See more

Status: Not open for further replies.

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

Kir

· #2 · Apr 8, 2003

So now all cable operators that do not carry DTV broadcasting become terrorists under the Patriots Act?

Kirill

Thebarnman

· #3 · Apr 8, 2003

Quote:

call for dual

must-carry of analog and digital TV signals by cable.

Fritts, who addressed the opening ceremony Monday for this

year's NAB convention in Las Vegas, said cable isn't delivering

a majority of digital TV signals from local broadcasters. He

said there are more than 800 digital TV stations on the air,

but only 107 have obtained cable carriage.

Can anyone explain to me why this is such an issue? Most of these DTV stations are only a SD simulcasts of what's playing on their analog channel.

In the valley where I live, there are about 12 DTV stations however only 5 of them are broadcasting HD content, and most of the rest are SD digital signals with the exception of only a couple that are up-converted to 1080i without any real HD content.

It's one thing to provide an HDTV service via cable or other carrier to provide HD content, but to waist that valuable bandwidth with duplicate channels at least to me is another.

Where would this stop? Would the satellite companies have to start carrying all of the local digital stations too? Maybe the Govt should provide free additional satellite space and equipment to allow for this.

Maybe DirecTV sees something coming that we don't and hence the reason for the survey of if we get our digital channels via antenna or not.

Maybe I am missing something. If anyone has other opinions about this, please ring in.

See less See more

Chezbrgr2

· #4 · Apr 8, 2003

I thought three was something about 85% penetration!

That when that happened a station would have to turn over their analog and broadcast only in digital!

With that being said we know most areas of the country have well over 80% cable penetration so maybe thats why! We have a lets get this thing rolling at the expense of the quality it is supposed to represent!

bobby94928

· #5 · Apr 8, 2003

Keep in mind that DTV does not mean HDTV. If CATV was forced to carry both analog and digital signals it wouldn't mean that they would pass the high definition along, nor the dolby digital.

Thebarnman

· #6 · Apr 8, 2003

Quote:

Originally posted by Chezbrgr2

I thought three was something about 85% penetration!

Man, I hate going out on this one, as I know I'm getting this confused. It's something to do with either 85% penetration of OTA stations or 85% of people who have digital tuners. Either way, the FCC mandate is helping.

I think I read recently that there is now about or just over 50% OTA stations doing DTV.

I do know one thing, I know the switch is not going to happen in the year 2006.

See less See more

Babula

Discussion Starter · #7 · Apr 9, 2003

bobby94928,

Oh bobby, bobby bobby. Ye of little faith! It does not now mean HDTV, but IMHO, when analog is turning over in its grave, it may. I think there won't be any OTA then anyway. Each "local" channel will just be on the cable or DBS. I think probably in HD.

rogo

· #8 · Apr 9, 2003

I generally have a deep dislike for must carry. But I have serious misgivings about cable's commitment to digital television, too.

This is one of those thorny issues where the desire for regulation is there, but the actual implementation that regulation should take is harder to crystallize.

Thebarnman

· #9 · Apr 9, 2003

It does not now mean HDTV, but IMHO, when analog is turning over in its grave, it may.

It wont. The FCC has only mandated that OTA stations switch to a digital station and that has nothing to do with HD. As time goes on, chances are that the major local network stations will be in HD...probably, though it will be many many more years before all of the others switch to HD.

Quote:

I think there won't be any OTA then anyway. Each "local" channel will just be on the cable or DBS. I think probably in HD.

In our lifetime OTA stations will always be here in either HD or SD.

chazcron

· #10 · Apr 9, 2003

Dual must carry enables those with digital cable to be freed from the tyrrany of watching (mildy) snowy analog local affiliates. Admittedly, my box can't scale the 3x4 digital signal, but the crystal clear picture overwhelms my worries about burn in. TWC doesn't pass thru Fox's 480P widescreen claiming it's not compelling enough, but the analog channel PQ on analog cable is dreadful. Go, go dual must carry.

KenA

· #11 · Apr 9, 2003

Probably the only thing holding back dual carry right now is that just about every network wants cable operators to pay MORE for the DTV signal. If they didn't charge more, I'm sure this would be a moot issue.

bfdtv

· #12 · Apr 9, 2003

Quote:

Probably the only thing holding back dual carry right now is that just about every network wants cable operators to pay MORE for the DTV signal. If they didn't charge more, I'm sure this would be a moot issue.

This is just wrong. By law, when a broadcaster invokes must carry rights, they cannot receive any payment for the channel.

Must carry was originally intended for those smaller broadcasters whose channels cable did not want to carry, or that cable wanted to be paid to carry. Must carry forced cable providers to carry these smaller channels. The major networks almost never invoke their must carry rights, because doing so means they can receive no money for the channel; cable subscribers demanded the analog network feed, so the major networks (ABC, CBS, FOX, etc) were able to charge cable companies a small fee for carriage--usually $0.04 to $0.06 per month per subscriber. The situation is different for digital; right now, many cable companies are refusing to carry the digital feeds of the major networks, even when given the right to do so for free.

There are a few instances, as in the case of CBS owned and operated stations, where broadcasters do want cable companies to pay a few cents extra for their HDTV feeds, but this has nothing to do with must carry. If must carry were mandated for digital, these CBS HDTV affiliates would still not be on cable. But the vast majority of broadcasters are not asking cable for additional money to carry their digital feeds; CBS just happens to have made a huge investment in HDTV, so they think they should get a little something back with the stations they own, if cable companies are going to profit from their programming.

See less See more

trbarry

· #13 · Apr 9, 2003

I"m not sure it is just money either. I think it was posted that both CBS and ABC are asking for carriage of other (non-HDTV) channels as part of the terms for allowing the HD channels.

And with CBS at least Comcast seems to be playing hard ball.

I think it is time for the FCC to make some more HDTV saber rattling noises.

- Tom

HiDefSooner

· #14 · Apr 9, 2003

I hope the must carry rules go through. We have an independent station KSBI here in Oklahoma City broadcasting HDNet 16 hours a day OTA. Cox started doing HDTV in December and are carrying 2 local HDTV channels ABC and NBC. However they refuse to pick up KSBI's digital channel because they think the content is not good enough for them to dedicate all that bandwidth to it. KSBI has told me they would get on Cox in a heartbeat if they would let them.

bbullock

· #15 · Apr 9, 2003

Here's a U.S.A. Today article,

http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/...igitaltv_x.htm

gmclaughlin

· #16 · Apr 11, 2003

Quote:

Currently, 809 of the nation's 1,300 broadcast stations beam HDTV channels, but only 75 are carried on cable.

Does anybody here actually believe this to be true (either part)? This guy has been fed a load of &$#% from the NAB, and he assuredly is confusing DTV and HDTV.

Just look at the persistent "HD on Cable" thread. Given the numerous pages of posts on what's available, can we really only count 75 HD signals nation-wide.

I think not.

gkurcon

· #17 · Apr 11, 2003

Quote:

"We believe our (HDTV) signals are valuable" and give cable a leg up against satellite, says Martin Franks, executive vice president of CBS, which owns a third of its local affiliates.

So why is it that if you live in a CBS owned and operated market, that you can get CBS HD from Dish, yet you can't get it on Comcast????? Is Dish paying them extra for the signal, because I know for a fact you aren't charged extra for it by Dish?

bfdtv

· #18 · Apr 11, 2003

gkuron,

Dish was willing to agree to CBS terms, whereas Comcast was not. Originally, Dish got to carry CBS HDTV in good part so that Sears could use it to show the CBS HDTV programming which they sponsored on that network. But I understand Dish Network now has a long-term deal for CBS HDTV carriage, so I'm not clear on all the issues that are involved. I don't know if Dish is paying anything, but even if they are, it's probably a very small amount, well under a nickel per locals subscriber.

Comcost is opposed to paying anything more for the HD feed, based on principle.

gkurcon

· #19 · Apr 11, 2003

Well if that's the case, Comcast, if you are listening, if you only have to pay 5 cents extra, please know I'm willing to splurge that extra five Lincolns to get CBS!

bfdtv

· #20 · Apr 11, 2003

gkurcon,

Of course, if Comcast gives in to CBS, then every network with HDTV (all around the country) will be asking for those few extra cents. Personally, I don't think that's a bad price to pay to gain HDTV locals---which is a competitive advantage over satellite--but Comcast has obviously done the math and they have a problem with it right now.

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

Status: Not open for further replies.