If you could get distant networks Would u

[pez2002]

Yes
no

[MikeJ]

yes

[scooper]

No !

[BobFly]

yes

[La Bamba]

Yes - I subscribe to Detroit + Seattle

[Geronimo]

I would but I can't.

[gcutler]

I used to have NY and LA distants, and used it for time shifting. Now I really don't need it as much with a SA TiVo and a 508, but I would still want to get LA Distants if there is rainfade, I can try and record again. Only reason to get NY Distants is to avoid the local affiliates who have a gruge and pre-empt programing so the local News Anchor can interview some B-Movie actors.

[raj2001]

I live in NYC, so for me it doesn't make a difference.

But what's so special about distant nets anyway?

Don't you get the same programming on your local stations?

[Pete K.]

Raj2001;

Local stations often pre-empt network programming to run their own "news" specials or sporting events.
Having distant nets allows the viewer to work around that problem or as mentioned in previous threads
to time shift. Also, many subs enjoy watching local news broadcasts from other cities. I enjoy the LA
nets because I can watch the early evening network newscasts after my kids are in bed. There is no
way I'm able to watch those nightly newscasts at 6:30 EDT because the kids are watching "Rugrats,"
or "Sponge Bob," or some other highly informative or educational show!

[tampa8]

I live in NYC, so for me it doesn't make a difference.

But what's so special about distant nets anyway?

Don't you get the same programming on your local stations?

No not always! (read the post above yours) Our local stations from time to time carry something different - such as a "religious crusade" from 8PM to 9PM, sports, etc.. and our station often does not carry the Bonnie show, and the CBS station sometimes substitutes a different movie from the network one. They might carry them at another time, but you have to find it, usually around 2AM after the late night shows.

But the worst thing they sometimes do is have the rights to a program and not show it, but no one else can either. When the Judge Judy show first came out, the station that had rights to it was not showing it - I know because I had seen the show on vacation and looked up where it was supposed to be shown here. For whatever reason they did not show the whole first year. Granted this is a syndicated show not network, but it was a network station withholding it. And I know that some stations are more prone to breaking into shows than others for "news." For awhile Regis/Kelly was broken into routinely for traffic updates by the ABC station - I am assuming it stopped because of complaints.

[Sparkman87]

Yes

Raj, distant nets allow time shifting, lets you watch the local sports teams from that city and their perspective and allows to watch the local newscasts. Usually, when there is a breaking news story, you can get much better coverage from the local outlets. Also, those network channels will all show the same network shows, but will carry different sydicated shows, etc.
I for one wish we would allow networks to be shown as the Canadian systems allow, with networks from many different cities.

[Randy_B]

Yes!

[mwgiii]

Yes,

I used to have the LA nets. It was neat watching the car chases live.

[HTguy]

Sure.

We had the NY networks years ago & it was often handy to be able to watch the programs 3 hours "early." A lot of the early-to-bedders really liked getting to see Leno or Letterman at 8:30!

[BobMurdoch]

Yes, just in case my PVR burps I can get the west coast feed......

also, since E* doesn't look to get the NFL Sunday Ticket anytime soon, my poor man's Sunday Ticket gets me the LA and Denver Fox feeds to supplement my Sunday viewing.

And kudos to the poster who correctly pointed out how E*'s MultiSports Pak TRULY can be called MLB Extra Innings, as those are the only innings you will see due to blackouts.......

[dfergie]

Yes, I get all but ABC , and as above stated incase of pvr brain lock.

[Jacob S]

Should have had a poll on this. Yes if locals were unavailable, no if they were unless you could get a lot or most the distant networks for one low price.

[gcutler]

I live in NYC, so for me it doesn't make a difference.

But what's so special about distant nets anyway?

Don't you get the same programming on your local stations?

Raj, network owned and operated (like in NY and LA) don't mess around with the programming. Affiliates may remove things because they don't like it or because they wany different rates (Imagine a different Charlie Ergen owning all the local affiliates and playing money games constantly)

In Atlanta

ABC Affiliate: No Jimmy Kimmel Show, local Newscaster has quarterly specials interviewing Movie Stars no one cares about (ask questions that are asked million times).

NBC: Every Time Billy Graham comes to town primetime is pre-empted.

All affiliates...And every once in a while a movie of the week will be replaced with some other movie...

[razorbackfan]

Yes.

My locals preempt all the time for weather. The latest time was during Dateline when they were interviewing the soldiers Iraq captured. It's frustrating to have all 3 networks show 4 hours of weather radar of a storm in Oklahoma or someplace else in their viewing area I have no interest in. Also, with distant nets I can get a BETTER picture and STEREO sound.

[Pete K.]

Yep. The weather bulletins for locations up to 100 miles from my house drive me nuts. I know the stations
must broadcast these warnings but must they put their "Chief Meteorologist" on camera every time? Just
run a crawl...I'll get the message.
Of course, the distant nets also interrupt for "weather bulletins." It is strange seeing a crawl for a thunderstorm
warning in Rockland County, New Jersey or wherever while sitting in the den of my house 900 miles away!

[Bill R]

Yep. The weather bulletins for locations up to 100 miles from my house drive me nuts.
Same here. Between that and the pre-empts I would definately subscribe to the out of area nets if I (legally) could (and I'm not going to "move" to get them).

[jrbdmb]

Distant NETs are good for sports fans. It enables you to get more NFL games as already mentioned, plus FOX regional baseball games, ABC regional college football games and CBS regional college basketball games. I personally get the LA NETs to see Pac-10 football games that are almost never shown on the east coast ABC stations.

[RichW]

Yes. I get the Chicago and Denver stations as well as the Portland "locals".

Time shifting using a PVR is great for you east coast folks but I cannot find a PVR that will record a local station for playback three hours BEFORE it is broadcast. :) :)

Besides time-shifting, distants are great for local news, NFL games, and a different mix of sydicated shows not carried locally.

[cj9788]

Yes main reason was my city did not have locals on E*. I got locals from city I used to live in it was weird for the first year it was like I hadn’t even moved then the spot beams came and ruined that party. I still have my distants from LA/NY more for the time shift. Crossing Jordan And csi Miami are on at the same time so I watch one and record the other when it is replayed in LA. Also to spite my local nets now they are available on E* but when they denied my waivers I got nothing but the major run around from them and the general manager of the fox station laughed at me dared me to do something about it and hung up on me. That’s when I "moved".

[notme]

I live in NYC, so for me it doesn't make a difference.

But what's so special about distant nets anyway?

Don't you get the same programming on your local stations?

different children's programs
different regional sports
different local news
different viewpoints
different ads
different times for syndicated shows
different syndicated shows
different national sports
different pbs have different documentaries and local content
and can help you plan vacations

most people with dbs satellite and cable have no idea
what they're missing by not getting distant networks.

one of the great crimes done to the american tv viewer was the
shutting of of distant locals by the fcc/congress

[Mike Richardson]

I'd like to have LA locals for time-shifting (I live in Houston) and the different news and syndicates. Plus I think most of the LA big channels are owned by the networks so they wouldn't mess around with network programming. Here in Houston, only the ABC channel is owned by ABC, and the FOX is owned by FOX. The other channels sometimes preempt things with specials about sick kids or something.

[Mike D-CO5]

Just "moved" to Mena, Arkansas and I now receive Little Rock locals and I added the east coast N.York distant locals and west coast L.A. distant locals and the superstations. I live in Beaumont, Texas and my Dad loves the Arkansas Razorbacks so he can't wait for football season to watch the games for the first time in like 25 years. So my answer to would I add them ifI could: YES I WOULD AND DID.

[Greg Bimson]

Originally posted by notme:
one of the great crimes done to the american tv viewer was the shutting of of distant locals by the fcc/congress
The FCC and Congress did not shut off distant locals. The law for distant locals has been relatively intact since 1989.

It was the networks, filing suit under the provisions of the law, that shut off distant locals. So, if you lost distant ABC, NBC, CBS, or Fox stations, you must blame ABC, NBC, CBS, or Fox, the networks, for stripping you of your distant locals. You can also blame Dish Network and DirecTV for providing distant locals when they didn't qualify customers to receive distant locals correctly.

[mainedish]

I would rather get the out of town independent stations if we have anymore. TV38 in boston was a good one but when they switched to upn they became another clone.

[cj9788]

For me it is all about choice.

I want to be able to receive as many cities as I want and I am willing to pay for them.

If the local broadcasters were smart instead of getting their panties in a bunch they should create a corporation call it locals Inc and sell either ala carte or in packages as many cities channels people want to have.

Dish can make money the locals can make money.

Wait never mind that would mean stations would actually have to compete and provide a quality broadcast so the crappy stations would have to improve so people would want them.

Sounds capitalistic to me.

I am just to honest to hack my system but jeepers I have thought about it.

[razorbackfan]

I agree with cj9788. We're such a mobile society, many people would sub to out of market locals just to see their old hometown local news and programs. I would sub to LA locals to see Dodger games. The Arkansas Razorbacks have fans all over the country. If you lived in Utah and were a Razorback fan you could sub to the Little Rock locals and watch the games.

It's CHOICE.

[Greg Bimson]

Originally written by cj9788:
For me it is all about choice.
Originally written by razorbackfan:
It's CHOICE.I am glad we can all agree it is about choice.

The LA Locals, the Dodgers, Major League Baseball, the University of Arkansas, the SEC, the NCAA, the Little Rock locals, the networks, and other programming distributors have the choice to serve or not to serve you.

Those of you complaining don't seem to understand that you want programming from a company in a way the company does not want to provide it to you.

[cj9788]

Those of you complaining don't seem to understand that you want programming from a company in a way the company does not want to provide it to you.

That is 100% correct. But why should anyone be denied a new medium? The technology is there and now I have the ability to watch sports and news telecasts from many different cities. But the broadcast networks have a monopoly on their specific region. And because they choose not to see the potential growth for their industry we the hungry consumer suffer. Did you know there are tons of dvr devices some the size of a pocket calculator with built in LCD screens? But because of fierce resistance from MPAA and The various Guilds the release of such technology is not happening in America. Go figure. When will music movies and broadcast television figure it out? Times they are a changing. People refuse to be held hostage. I just wish enough people cared to make a difference.

[Mark Holtz]

IMHO, it is not worth my money to purchase East and West Coast feeds. I only had the superstations because at the time I got the Dish system, WB and UPN wasn't available.

Geez.... Dish and DirecTV both offer distant locals, and the know people want them. The law just prevents them from doing so. There is no compromise.

A nice compromise would be that you have to purchase your locals in your own market in order to purchase a neighboring market in the same spot or distant networks. The stations want to be to pre-empt network programming to air their own local programming. I'm sure that there are some ABC viewers in Sacramento who don't want to watch Kings games.

[Mike D-CO5]

I agree with cj9788. We're such a mobile society, many people would sub to out of market locals just to see their old hometown local news and programs. I would sub to LA locals to see Dodger games. The Arkansas Razorbacks have fans all over the country. If you lived in Utah and were a Razorback fan you could sub to the Little Rock locals and watch the games.

It's CHOICE.


My Dad loves the home town team of the Arkansas Razorbacks and that's why I recently "moved" to Mena in order to get Little Rock locals so he could see his old team. In the 71945 zipcode you can get both east and west distant locals with superstations and get locals from Little Rock, all of which I now have. I didn't know how the spotbeam could reach this far in Tx but it does. I must comment on the picture quality of these Little Rock locals though, they are not that good. Thank Goodness I have the New York locals for picture quality . :D

[Greg Bimson]

Originally Posted by Greg Bimson:
Those of you complaining don't seem to understand that you want programming from a company in a way the company does not want to provide it to you.Originally Posted by cj9788:
That is 100% correct. But why should anyone be denied a new medium?Because interested parties must come to an agreement to use a new medium?The technology is there and now I have the ability to watch sports and news telecasts from many different cities.And you can watch the sports. There is a market, and there is a protocol for people to receive it. Most of those are packaged, though not the way some here wish to pay for it, such as Sunday Ticket, Extra Innings, League Pass, Center Ice, Shootout, Game Plan, and Full Court.

However, when it comes to news, there isn't a market for it, yet. If there were, you'd see an "out of market local news package".Times they are a changing. People refuse to be held hostage. I just wish enough people cared to make a difference.Again, it is being done the wrong way.

Think about the amount of Emmy nominations this year. The top three nominated programs came from cable and premium channels. The paradigm is changing, again. If you really want NBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox to suffer, don't watch 'em. Because that is exactly why "Sex and the City", "The Sopranos", "Six Feet Under", and "The Shield" have become so popular with the critics.

[razorbackfan]

I just think if I want to SUBSCRIBE to any station (I'm not talking about hacking or stealing here) and pay for it I should be able to. I grew up in southern California, I can watch Fox 11 and KTLA on E* but not KABC, KNXT or KNBC. That's crazy. I have a friend who does a morning show in Philadelphia, I would love to be able to watch her.

People who live in LA and New York have no idea what it's like to live in a small market with horrible picture quality and sound and have a network show interrupted every 5 minutes with weather bullitens from a storm 100 miles away.

The network rules are silly. And if I have to "move" to get a distant network, then so be it. What's the HARM? I'm watching a network I am not supposed to watch? I am on the "slippery slope" to what? If I'm willing to pay for it, then what's the big deal?

[cj9788]

I didn't know how the spotbeam could reach this far in Tx but it does. I must comment on the picture quality of these Little Rock locals though, they are not that good. Thank Goodness I have the New York locals for picture quality . :D

Little Rock is on CONUS. E8 tp 5 @ 110

I love that channel list.

http://ekb.dbstalk.com/dishlist.htm

I thought about moving to Mena also.

Time zones would have confused me.

[John Walsh]

Yes I would get all the locals I can.

I love college football and living in the south it is difficult to get my favorite college football team each Saturday, um nevermind they their own network ;)

[oblio98]

Yes - Had them, then lost them due to last years "purge". Loved the time shift and ability to watch shows preempted by local car shows..........

[music_beans]

Nope. My local channels are good and all, but they do pre-empt programming once in awhile.

CBS: Same thing with the Billy Graham specials, and beginning of summer, they interrupt regular programming for 1 1/2 days for Childrens Miracle Network telethon.

ABC: Does not show Daytime programs on Labor Day because of the Jerry Lewis MDA Telethon. (which I watch though.)

Here is a good thing on KELO (CBS) though, If there is an outbreak of severe weather out east, the DISH feed of KELO gets interrupted with wall to wall coverage. But, I also get one of their repeater stations OTA. (KPLO ch 6) KELO does not interrupt the 3 other repeaters with weather coverage out east, as they make it 'localized', and so KPLO Ch 6 has normal programming. KSFY could do this too, but they don't.

[RichW]

Because interested parties must come to an agreement to use a new medium?.

But as I have said before, one of the parties is the PEOPLE of the USA who lease the use of spectrum. The only rerason the PEOPLE cannot exercise their won property rights (terms and conditions for use of broadcast spectrum) is because the NAB and its lobbyists are powerfull entities in Congress - just look at how the NAB derailed McCains bill, for example. Congress can and will open up distant stations to comsumers if there is enough of a grass roots support for it. It almost happened last time (SHVIA). It all depends upon how much pressure the people apply to their Congressional reps.

In the meantime we have the hypocritical stand of the NAB on "must carry" laws whiel they prohibit distant nets.

[Greg Bimson]

But as I have said before, one of the parties is the PEOPLE of the USA who lease the use of spectrum.Sure, the use of the spectrum. Not the use of the programming on the spectrum.

People that want WNYW, the Fox affiliate on channel 5 in New York, over satellite, are not receiving channel 5 from New York. Remember this:

Channel 5 is simply a frequency assignment. Satellite companies are receiving, relaying, reclassing, redistributing, and retransmitting the channel. The only remaining article that resembles channel 5 after that process is the programming that is on it.

My point? Retransmission of locals is only a retransmission of content, and the content has copyright protections.The only rerason the PEOPLE cannot exercise their won property rights (terms and conditions for use of broadcast spectrum) is because the NAB and its lobbyists are powerfull entities in Congress - just look at how the NAB derailed McCains bill, for example.

[...]

Congress can and will open up distant stations to comsumers if there is enough of a grass roots support for it. It almost happened last time (SHVIA).These two statements are mutually exclusive. The NAB derailed McCain's bill, but grass roots support never came close to making the bill consumer friendly.

[Brett]

But as I have said before, one of the parties is the PEOPLE of the USA who lease the use of spectrum. The only rerason the PEOPLE cannot exercise their won property rights (terms and conditions for use of broadcast spectrum) is because the NAB and its lobbyists are powerfull entities in Congress - just look at how the NAB derailed McCains bill, for example. Congress can and will open up distant stations to comsumers if there is enough of a grass roots support for it. It almost happened last time (SHVIA). It all depends upon how much pressure the people apply to their Congressional reps.

In the meantime we have the hypocritical stand of the NAB on "must carry" laws whiel they prohibit distant nets.

SHVIA had more restrictions. A DBS provider can offer fewer TV stations (to a customer) than cable by federal regulations. I blame the NAB (who helped draft the SHVIA law), and the FCC bureaucrats for not helping adopt a SHVIA on terms similar to cable's regulations.

With cable, a cable customer in Fairfield County, CT has local stations from both New York and Hartford/New Haven.

For the satellite customer in Fairfield County, only the NY stations are local, the Hartford/New Haven CT would be distant . Cable companies are required to sell local channels, but they are less restricted to offer more stations, (however cable systems are choosing not to).

[Gunnyman]

I Think I would rather have Network LIVE feeds
you can see some funny stuff on there
Tom Brokaw cussing someone out for example.
I remember seeing stuff like that on my uncle's big ole dish.

[FTA Michael]

Yes!

The wife wants an RV now just so we'll qualify for National PBS.

[cj9788]

I Think I would rather have Network LIVE feeds
you can see some funny stuff on there
Tom Brokaw cussing someone out for example.
I remember seeing stuff like that on my uncle's big ole dish.

God I forgot about those live feeds.

Love your avatar.

It applies very well to this and alot of other posts and threads.

[ARKDTVfan]

The network rules are silly. And if I have to "move" to get a distant network, then so be it. What's the HARM? I'm watching a network I am not supposed to watch? I am on the "slippery slope" to what? If I'm willing to pay for it, then what's the big deal?
What's even sillier is that Mena's in the LR DMA even though Mena is only about 80 miles south of Ft Smith but probably at least 130 from Little Rock :p I still don't understand how they draw the DMA boundaries, I know most viewed has a lot to do with it but I'd bet most people in my home county (Howard) watch KATV [in cable) than any of the Shreveport channels.It sucks having to watch out of state news, they only seem to tlak about stuff that takes place in NW Louisiana & NE TX. Of course the primary reason I want the LR locals are for the Hogs games.Of course one good thing about the Shreveport locals is if ABC is showing an 11 am collgee fottabll game I don't ahve to worry about that not being shown so they can show a lousy JP game (ie Tenn/Vanderbilt) like KATV does sometimes. :nono: If I could get both cities it wouldn't be a problem here :)

[Bob Haller]

YES! Some folks move to get them.:)

Second chance of recording shows when your box malfunctions.....

[GWMontee]

Yes San Francisco/Oakland

[minnow]

"network owned and operated (like in NY and LA) don't mess around with the programming. Affiliates may remove things because they don't like it or because they wany different rates..."

That's not necessarily true as WCBS - New York carries the Yankees games which pre-emt Letterman. So I PVR Letterman off of the LA CBS.

[Peter Wilson]

The Denver and LA feeds are how I was able to keep watching Futurama in spite of Football running over... Frickin' Fox! I hope Cartoon Network starts producing new shows.

[Joe Capitano]

Local stations often pre-empt network programming to run their own "news" specials or sporting events.
...and sometimes infomercials. That happens to us in Western WA way too much. KIRO-TV often pre-empts CBS' sports programming for repeat visits from that dope "Chef Tony", et al.

"Distants": the great equalizer.

[bendor]

Yes, I live in Colorado, but due to obsolete 50+ years old boundries, my DMA is Albuqurque,New Mexico. Would much rather get Denver news, weather, sports etc.